I’m a visual person.

For most of my adult life, I have worked in the art and design industry, and have always considered myself somewhat of an artist. 

I consume social media primarily through Instagram – I use it to market my business and to engage with fellow designers and friends. In the past few years, I have noticed a heavy push towards information-sharing via Instagram, which, as a visual media space, makes for an interesting challenge. On this platform, not only must your ideas be conceptually interesting and limited to what will fit within a 1080×1080 pixel square, you must present them in a visually appealing way for your audience, lest they scroll right on past. 

As I sit today, I muse on the concept of performative environmentalism and the ways in which “influencer culture” has dominated social media and with it the realm of climate communication; belonging previously only to climate scientists and a perhaps few passionate Twitter users. 

The advent of social media and “influencer culture” has bred a new type of climate communicator; one who relies heavily on beautiful imagery and other communication aids such as short videos or sound-bites. Only after those have drawn their audience in do they get down to the (plant-based) meat of the issue at hand. 

The use of communication aids such as these has been proven to greatly improve the effectiveness of communication, especially within the climate realm, and has been shown to change the very way people interact with the topic being presented (Hodsen, 2019). Currently, a very narrow visual representation frames the climate emergency: think “polar bears, melting ice-caps, smokestacks and…images of environmental protesters” (Corner et al, 2018).  Studies have shown that this type of representation is detrimental as it leads to information fatigue and can even undermine the effectiveness of the message one is attempting to spread (Corner et al, 2018). In fact, in their paper titled “Interpersonal communication about climate change: how messages change when communicated through simulated online social networks,” Connor et al discuss research that shows we are so conditioned to relate to the negative consequences of climate change, that any narrative that challenges that – say, focuses on a positive climate change story such as a species saved from extinction – is more likely to stick with us longer, and be shared more often, than a negative narrative (Connor et al, 2016). 

Anyone who uses social media, especially Instagram, is aware of the importance of what Connor et al have termed ‘gain-frames’ – the concept of focusing on the benefits of, in this case, climate change mitigation, rather than the harms of non-mitigation (a ‘loss-frame’) – even if they couldn’t explain the psychology behind it. Simply put, the Instagram algorithm prioritizes beauty and positivity.

I have no doubt the clean-up initiative of the Gorge in the 1990s (as discussed in my last blog) was facilitated through ‘social media’ of sorts. Not in the viral way we might see today – more local publications, less Facebook posts, obviously – but I am sure photos of oil-slicks, dead fish, and garbage washed up on the shores of the Gorge were circulated throughout the community as a way to inspire locals to invest their time, attention and money into this piece of property. These days, the CRD and Burnside Gorge Community Centre host an annual cleanup with photos of proud garbage collectors “doing their part” posted throughout the process – like any good social-media user knows: pics or it didn’t happen. 

I don’t mean to sound cynical. I actually believe that performative environmentalism such as this plays a large part in inspiring real environmentalism, real change. As Connor et al discuss, focusing on the ‘gain frames’ has been proven to better motivate and inspire climate action in individuals, especially if those messages come from trusted sources such as friends, family, or members of your own ‘ingroup’, including, I would argue, trusted influencers. 

When it comes to social media, the “new” climate communicators have a unique opportunity to change the narrative around the climate crisis by sharing ‘gain-framed’ information with a community who trusts them wholeheartedly and who will share their message widely.  If they stick to the algorithm and prioritize the positive, influencers could be primed to spread more information about climate adaptation and mitigation than ever before.  

References:

Connor, P.; Harris, E.; Guy, S.; Fernando, J.; Shank, D.; Kurz, T.; Bain, P.; Kashima, Y. (2016). Interpersonal communication about climate change: How messages change when communicated through simulated online social networks. Climatic Change 136(3-4), 463–476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1643-z

Corner, A., Shaw, C., & Clarke, J. (2018). Principles for effective communication and public engagement on climate change: A Handbook for IPCC authors. Climate Outreach: Oxford, UK. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2017/08/Climate-Outreach-IPCC-communications-handbook.pdf

Hodson, J. (2019). An ecological model of climate marketing: A conceptual framework for understanding climate science-related attitude and behavior change. Cogent Social Sciences 5(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2019.1625101

Cover Image: The Tampa Bay Estuary Society. (2021). Retrieved from https://unsplash.com/photos/RjKgSCUOMHA