We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
View our privacy policy
Are climate protesters liked? Trusted? Seen as ‘out of touch’?
In general, looking across a range of polling, people tend to support or agree with the aims of activists (even the most extreme activist campaigns like Insulate Britain have a very widely supported ‘ask’: ramping up insulation is supported across the political spectrum).
But – and especially for more disruptive and controversial protests – people typically don’t support the means.
Opinion on climate protests and climate protesters varies according to people’s values and political persuasion. The Britain Talks Climate toolkit shows that Extinction Rebellion and Fridays For Future activists are trusted to talk about climate change by Progressive Activists only. The wider UK public is more likely to see protesters like these as annoying, or else simply ineffective. Progressive Activists also represent the segment of the population that most strongly agrees with the tactics of environmental activists, as well as the aims.
Climate protesters are generally seen by the public as mostly genuine in their efforts.
Whereas other groups (such as politicians and celebrities) are often met with scepticism, amidst suspicions of trying to maintain a positive image rather than generating real action on climate, the intentions of climate change protesters are typically presumed to be genuine.
However, climate change protesters are not seen as ‘one of us’ by most of Britain. One polling deep-dive found the majority of the British public (68%) say that they care about the environment, but do not see themselves as environmental activists. Only 17% do see themselves as environmental activists. Younger people are slightly more likely to identify as environmental activists than older people, with a quarter (26%) of 18-to-24-year-olds saying they care about the environment and see themselves as environmental activists, compared with 14% of those 65 and over.
The picture on whether people perceive activists as relatable is mixed: the latest Climate Barometer tracker data shows a split in whether people see activists as ‘out of touch’ with ordinary people or not.
Understanding trust and identification with climate activists is important, as social identity can be an important part of social resistance. One analysis found that the success of mobilisation may lie in local residents being perceived as ‘regular citizens’ rather than as activists, because communities often see ‘activism’ as something that outsiders do. There is also evidence of ‘divide and rule’ strategies being employed at local protest sites to create divisions between residents and incoming campaigners in efforts to delegitimise action.
What impact do visual representations of climate protesters in the media have on audiences? A new study has addressed this in light of the recent media trend towards depicting more young and female protesters in news stories.
By comparing audience responses to 10 different images (photo-edited to make comparisons in the study), the researchers found that images showing climate protestors and the police together, as well as images of younger protestors, tended to lead to more negative emotional responses amongst audiences. This included feelings of guilt and shame about climate impacts affecting future generations.
The content of the protest images did not deeply influence audiences’ broader climate attitudes and behaviours after viewing them. But the researchers did find that feelings towards protest images were influenced by a range of factors, such as the audiences’ gender, and suggest that the viewers’ worldview may play a role too.
What’s in a name? The question of what the best – most persuasive, or least polarising – term for climate change is, has a long history.
On the one hand, small tweaks to individual words or short phrases are unlikely to be driving big differences in perceptions one way or another. People’s values, worldviews, political ideology and increasingly the perceived fairness of different climate policies, are what drives public engagement.
But whether its the editorial choices made by leading international newspapers, to the framing of campaigns that drive media coverage of climate activism, linguistic choices do carry some weight. Previous research has argued that some terms (e.g. ‘global warming’) are more emotive; campaigners have criticised ‘climate change’ as a term for lacking urgency.
In a new open-access paper, researchers tested a wide range of different terms, including ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’, ‘climate crisis’, climate emergency’ and ‘climate justice’, in a survey of over 5000 US residents and concluded:
Overall, “climate change” and “global warming” were rated as most familiar and most concerning, and “climate justice” the least, with ratings for “climate crisis” and “climate emergency” falling in between.
Moreover, we find no evidence for “climate crisis” or “climate emergency” eliciting more perceived urgency than “climate change” or “global warming.”
We therefore recommend sticking with familiar terms, conclude that changing terminology is likely not the key solution for promoting climate action, and suggest alternative communication strategies.
The ‘alternative communication strategies’ might include identifying tangible ways in which audiences with different moral and political values could benefit from specific climate policies, or ensuring communities impacted by new energy infrastructure, or changes to urban travel systems, feel adequately consulted.
Confirming previous research around the general lack of familiarity with the term ‘climate justice’, the paper also noted that willingness to support climate-friendly policies and eat less red meat were lowest for ‘climate justice’ (which was the least familiar term tested).
This isn’t an argument for downplaying the importance of the issues the term refers to, which are central to both international climate governance and the implementation of specific in-country policies. But it does underscore the lack of recognition of the phrase among many public audiences, a finding which has also been observed in UK research.