Climate doom may discourage climate action, but there's a way to counter it

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Every summer is getting hotter. Wildfires are blazing, and the worst is yet to come.

There's nothing to be done—we're doomed! This "climate doom" narrative can dominate the news cycle, particularly on social media, which is known to attract negativity. Climate doom can be a powerful argument for doing nothing.

If people believe the climate crisis is already beyond repair, they may conclude that efforts to cut emissions or adapt to a changing world are pointless. We should be wary of climate doom for two reasons. First, although the facts about climate change, heat waves and wildfires are real, there's still plenty to be done to reduce the consequences of climate change.

Although some people use climate doom to spur action, it can have the opposite effect. Feelings of hopelessness and fear may cause people to switch off from the issue rather than act on it. Second, fear-based terminology such as "climate apocalypse" may be perceived as manipulative, especially among right-leaning audiences who may consider it a way to stir up panic.

In our recent study, we showed 521 participants, who were broadly reflective of the UK population, a simulated social media feed filled with climate doom headlines to better understand how manipulative they thought it was and how it related to climate action. We also explored the possibility of "inoculating" people against climate doom across the political spectrum. The research is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

We found that doom content is indeed perceived as more manipulative than other climate content, and the more manipulative people find doom content, the lower their pro-climate intentions. Fortunately, we were also able to "prebunk" climate doom by inoculating people against it beforehand. The standard approach to fighting misleading information is to debunk it afterward.