Climate Feedback: Bringing the Scientific Community to Provide Direct Feedback on the Credibility of Climate Media Coverage

Abstract:

While most scientists recognize climate change as a major societal and environmental issue, social and political will to tackle the problem is still lacking. One of the biggest obstacles is inaccurate reporting or even outright misinformation in climate change coverage that result in the confusion of the general public on the issue.

In today’s era of instant access to information, what we read online usually falls outside our field of expertise and it is a real challenge to evaluate what is credible. The emerging technology of web annotation could be a game changer as it allows knowledgeable individuals to attach notes to any piece of text of a webpage and to share them with readers who will be able to see the annotations in-context –like comments on a pdf.

Here we present the Climate Feedback initiative that is bringing together a community of climate scientists who collectively evaluate the scientific accuracy of influential climate change media coverage. Scientists annotate articles sentence by sentence and assess whether they are consistent with scientific knowledge allowing readers to see where and why the coverage is –or is not– based on science. Scientists also summarize the essence of their critical commentary in the form of a simple article-level overall credibility rating that quickly informs readers about the credibility of the entire piece.

Web-annotation allows readers to ‘hear’ directly from the experts and to sense the consensus in a personal way as one can literaly see how many scientists agree with a given statement. It also allows a broad population of scientists to interact with the media, notably early career scientists.

In this talk, we will present results on the impacts annotations have on readers –regarding their evaluation of the trustworthiness of the information they read– and on journalists –regarding their reception of scientists comments.
Several dozen scientists have contributed to this effort to date and the system offers potential to scale up as it relies on a crowdsourced process where each scientist only makes small contributions that get aggregated together. The project aims to build a network of scientists with varied expertise and to organize their efforts at a global scale to efficiently peer-review major news coverage on climate.