Thesis Final Draft

Twitter’s Changing Climate

Knowledge Production in a Changing Media Landscape;

Twitter’s Influence on Environmental Ideologies

Margaret CahillFall 2014 Senior Thesis

Saint Mary’s College of California

Abstract: This research seeks to provide a snap shot of popular opinion in regard to changes in environmental legislation. This was achieved through a content analysis of the top tweets that featured the hash tag “fracking” during the November 2014 US elections, in which a record seven measures to ban hydraulic fracturing were proposed on local ballots throughout the country. This study was conducted in order to demonstrate the ways in which social media is changing the traditional model of knowledge production in our society. Since climate change is an issue that has been especially mishandled in mass news media by those in power, the research of this study will focus on the ways in which Twitter has the potential to enable the education and prevention of environmental problems in order that we may utilize this capability to the fullest extent and enable social participation.

Keywords:

TWITTER’S CHANGING CLIMATE

Hydraulic fracturing, knowledge production, Twittershphere, Global Village, The German Ideology, monopoly of knowledge, discourse and power.

Just as those in power control the natural resources of the earth,

so have they also historically occupied the “cultural commons,” or the

space of ideas shared by all members of a culture. Although this

control often goes undetected, the effects of this governance of the

mind are contributing to the development of every individual’s

understanding of current events and issues of public concern such as

the current ecological crisis. This, in turn, has a great impact on the

importance we place on enacting legislation to remedy these

problems. As the bleak foreseen consequences of our indifference are

becoming our reality, the ultimate fate of the earth rests on our

access to valid information that would allow us to combat climate

change.

Despite scientific evidence, to this day, the reality of climate

change remains a question amongst the American public, whereas it

is commonly accepted in most other parts of the world. The

explanation to this phenomenon lies in the reporting of this issue in

mainstream American news media where reporters are required to

use terms that do not affirm the existence of this crisis.

In this paper, it is hypothesized that the advent of social media

networks like Twitter has loosened the grip of higher powers on our

shared consciousness by enabling the dissemination of information by

2


the millions of internet users that do not have political power in the

media. In this way, this paper will demonstrate Twitter’s potential to

create an equal platform that will inevitably result in the shift of

commonly held ideologies on climate change and, therefore,

ultimately put decisions regarding environmental policy in the hands

of a more informed public. In order to do so, this paper will focus on a

relevant environmental issue that has been a part of the widespread

discussion of climate change on social media: hydraulic fracturing.

Knowledge Production & the Media

It is widely accepted among the authors referenced in this review

that the media is the primary source of knowledge production in our

society. Two of the first thinkers to theorize this effect were Karl Marx

and Frederick Engels. Marx and Engels referred to this theory, which

asserts that the ruling class is in control of the intellectual force of

society, in The German Ideology (Engels & Marx, 1845).

Inspired by the work of Marx and Engels, influential philosophers,

Stuart Hall and Michel Foucault proposed their own groundbreaking

theories on the relationship between power and the production of

knowledge. In The West and The Rest: Discourse and Power Hall

defines discourse as, “A group of statements which provide language

for talking about –i.e. a way of representing- a particular kind of

knowledge about a topic” (Hall, 1989, p.200). Hall’s theory of

discourse will be useful in examining the commonly used terms that

3


permeate news coverage compared to those used on Twitter in

relation to climate change.

The foundational theories of discourse and ideology are vital in

understanding how commonly held perceptions of environmental

issues come to be. According to Hall, many of these discourses

together comprise an ideology, which he defines as, “A set of beliefs

which produce knowledge that serves the interest of a particular

group or class” (Hall, 1989, p.201). This concept of the production of

ideologies serves as an example of how discourses have the power to

shape our broader understanding of environmental issues while also

demonstrating how this process reinforces the views of the ruling

class.

Framing Climate Change in The News

With this understanding of how knowledge is spread through the

media, many researchers have focused their attention on the ways in

which issues of climate change are framed in the news, and how this

contributes to forming commonly held ideologies about the

environment. Most commonly, researchers approach this task through

methods of qualitative content analysis in which they analyzed

content from numerous news sources in order to find patterns in the

ways these issues are discussed.

Commonly, these analyses have focused on the comparison of news

coverage between different countries. Shehata and Hopmann’s (2012)

study featured a multinational content analysis that compared the

4


news coverage of climate change in the US and Sweden by

performing a content analysis of 1,785 articles over a period of 10

years. These two countries were selected specifically for their

contrasting beliefs on climate change in order to determine the extent

to which news coverage on climate change is influenced by the

political discussion of the elite members of a society or the scientific

consensus in regard to the issue. (Hopmann & Shehata, 2012). This

study is of particular interest because it highlights the influence that

discourses in the US media have had on citizen’s opinions of climate

change as well as the failure of the United States media to

acknowledge a scientific consensus as factual information.

Another multinational study compared newspapers from The

United States, Brazil, Argentina, and Columbia in order to observe the

nuances in the international coverage of climate change. The study

found that the US and Brazil presented the issue in economic terms,

while coverage from Argentina and Columbia presented the

catastrophic consequences and a sense of urgency (Zamith, R., Pinto,

J., & Villar, M., 2013). The observation that climate change coverage

in the United States is presented in more economic terms reveals

possible agendas and motives behind this representation of the crisis.

The History of Environmental Discourse

If we are to begin to evaluate the impact of social media on current

attitudes toward the environment, we must first understand the

progression of

5


environmental discourses from their earliest forms. Evans (2006)

developed an overview of attitudes towards the environment that

dates back to the industrial revolution. In order to gather an accurate

representation of the history of public opinion, Evans drew on poll

results from the last few decades that showed the public’s priorities

have shifted from the environment to the economy (Evans, 2006). In

accordance with recent literature, this struggle between the economy

and the environment is still present in our society (Zamith et al.,

2013). Similarly, Carvalho and Peterson (2009) explored numerous

reports published on various environmental issues in an attempt to

compare the past and present discourses surrounding climate change.

Considering Twitter’s history is comparatively brief, the attitudes

towards the environment conveyed through this platform thus far may

be insufficient for drawing overarching conclusions. Nevertheless, the

sooner we begin to analyze the rhetoric present on this site, the better

equipped we will be to commence further analyses.

Journalistic Style in News

In accordance with the deconstruction of the presentation of

environmental issues in the news, Parratt (2014) critiqued the

journalistic approach as a whole in regard to covering issues of

climate change. Parratt concluded that standards of journalistic

fairness are not sufficient when it comes to accurately delivering news

on environmental issues (Parratt, 2014). The proposition that

environmental issues require different treatment in the news in order

6


to be truly valid is a central dilemma in the accurate reporting of

these issues. Twitter users, on the other hand, interact with

information regarding climate change in a more straightforward

manner, without concern for sponsoring affiliates or other political

agendas that may convolute the information they chose to spread.

The Media’s Flawed Call to Action

While journalists are criticized for their indifferent reporting on

climate change, the approach of those who choose to pose the issue as

a call to action is also debated. For instance, in Communicating

climate change: Public responsiveness and matters of concern, Potter

and Oster (2008) came to the conclusion that these calls to action

have focused too heavily on the individual as the starting point, thus

highlighting the difference between individual awareness and

collective action. According to Potter and Oster, there is a need to

deconstruct the philosophical assumptions that underlie the

traditional approach to environmental change, which separates

humans from the natural world and in turn contributes to the

mentality behind the exploitation of nature (Potter & Oster, 2008).

The problematic separation of the self from nature is considered one

of the most detrimental facets of the modern discourse on

environmental issues.

Another multinational study, which focused on the portrayal of

responsibility in television news coverage of the 2009 UN Climate

Change Conference in Copenhagen, used data from the US, Canada,

7


and China in order to draw comparisons across countries. To do so,

researchers categorized references to responsibility during the

broadcasts into “causal” and “treatment” references and then

developed frames to test Cerutti’s conceptualization of responsibility

attribution (Cerutti, 2010). The results supported Cerutti’s theory by

confirming that news from the three different countries portrayed

treatment responsibility differently (Xuan, L., Jiun-Yi, T., Mattis, K.,

Konieczna, M., & Dunwoody, S., 2014). The examination of the

media’s underlying sense of accountability sheds light on the

problematic structure of news media that pressures journalists to omit

whatever he or she believes to be opinion when, in fact, climate

change is a scientifically proven reality.

Twitter Redefines the Media Landscape

Noguera -Vivo (2013) discusses the impact that Twitter has had on

traditional forms of journalism, claiming the journalistic process has

become more collective. Through the content analysis of 1,125 tweets,

this study revealed ways in which influential Spanish journalists have

adapted to social media. Noguera -Vivo refers to this new form of

reporting as “ambient journalism,” which is defined by (Herminda

2010) as an awareness system that is enabled by social media

networks. Noguera-Vivo referred to Twitter’s potential as “A

harbinger of a future technology that is likely to capture and transmit

the sum total of all human experiences of the moment” (Noguera -

Vivo, 2013, p.95).” This study makes valid observations on the

8


evolution of the modern-day journalistic approach to reporting in the

age of social media. Specifically, this article offers an in-depth

analysis of Twitter’s effect on the future of journalism.

Reactions to Environmental Policy on Twitter

Comprehensive Twitter studies that focus on a particular

environmental-related event or a poignant moment of environmental

news through the qualitative analysis of tweets are useful for

collecting vast amounts of data over short periods of time. Several

studies focus on Twitter’s immediate reaction to newly released

environmental policy.

In 2014 Pearce, Holmberg, Hellsten, & Nerlich (2014) analyzed the

public’s reception of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change,

which published the first complete evaluation of climate science since

2007. The study attempted to analyze responses to the debate

through coding 152,893 tweets for the acronym or the hashtag

“IPCC.” The most prominent themes that emerged from this statistical

analysis were related to science, geographical location, and social

issues related to climate change. Interestingly, this study also

detected emerging Twitter communities that arose from the

discussion (Pearce, et al., 2014). From this study, I will borrow similar

means of collecting data, particularly the researchers’ decision to

omit re-tweets that might skew the data.

The Potential Power of Social Media to Influence Politics

9


Multiple studies have strengthened the debate over the power of

new social media technologies, such as Twitter, to influence politics.

In Social media and the organization of collective action; Using

Twitter to explore the ecologies of Two Climate Change Protests,

Segerberg and Bennett (2012) focused on the Twitter Revolutions of

2009, particularly the UN Climate Summit in Copenhagen, that

strengthened the debate over the power of new social media to

influence politics. The goal of this study was to uncover how

communication technologies enable certain protest ideologies. This

type of studies involves looking at social media as a mode of

organization rather than simply information technology in order to

understand its impact on broader organizational structures (Bennett

& Segerberg, 2011). The potential of social media to influence politics

would challenge Karl Marx and Stuart Hall’s traditional models of

knowledge distribution.

Public’s Response to Climate Change on Twitter

Recent studies have also focused on the receiving end of the

information spectrum, instead attempting to analyze the responses to

issues of climate change rather than the initial reports from the

media. A study conducted by Molodtsova (2014) used public salience

data from Twitter, which included hashtags and trending themes, in

order to measure whether or not changes in weather conditions

influenced the level of public concern for climate change. The study

results showed that people did, in fact, use local weather to guage the

10


impacts of climate change (Molodtsova, 2014). Most importantly, the

success of this study supports the use of social media platforms for

research on public opinion.

The Issue of the Moment: Hydraulic Fracturing

The Computers in Human Behavior journal offered a detailed

description of the process of hydraulic fracturing as well as the

recorded environmental impact of the practice. Specifically, this

article focused on the harmful chemicals used in fracking and

consequent water contamination. The contamination levels were

examined through highly scientific processes and the data shared in

this document appears to be of the upmost reliability (Computers in

Human Behavior, 2013).

Public Perception of Hydraulic Fracturing

The recent push to develop unconventional sources of oil and gas

both in the U.S. and abroad via hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) has

generated a great deal of controversy. Effectively engaging

stakeholders and setting appropriate policies requires insights into

current public perceptions of this issue. A study conducted by in 2013

examined public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing from a nationally

representative U.S. sample (N=1061) for familiarity with the issue;

levels of support/opposition; and predictors of such judgments. Their

findings suggested that less familiarity with fracking impacted

uncertainty about whether or not to support it. In addition, it found

that women, those holding egalitarian worldviews, those who read

11


newspapers more than once a week, those more familiar with

hydraulic fracturing, and those who associate the process with

environmental impacts are more likely to oppose fracking. In contrast,

people more likely to support fracking tend to be older, hold a

bachelor's degree or higher, politically conservative, watch TV news

more than once a week, and associate the process with positive

economic or energy supply outcomes (Boudet, et al., 2013). The

findings that indicate a correlation between consumption of TV new

and a support of fracking are helpful in comparison to the study of a

social media participants.

Literature Review Conclusion

Although significant research has been conducted on the nuances

of news media’s coverage of climate change, these studies are

becoming increasingly outdated as millions of people now look to

Twitter as their main news source. While there has already been an

influx of literature published in recent years on the potential that this

social media platform has to forever alter the traditional model of

knowledge production, little research has focused on climate change

specifically. Since climate change is an issue that has been especially

mishandled in mass news media by those in power, the research of

this study will focus on the ways in which Twitter has the potential to

enable the education and prevention of environmental problems in

order that we may utilize this capability to the fullest extent.

Methods

12


The research in this study aims to provide a snapshot analysis of

the public’s immediate reaction to a change in environmental

legislation, in order to gain an understanding of the popular attitudes

towards the environment that are present in our society. Twitter, a

widely used social media platform, provided the chosen means of

content for this purpose, as millions of users continue to turn to

Twitter as a primary news source alternative to mainstream news

media (Pew, 2014).

In order to gauge the public’s response to environmental

legislation, and thus gain a general understanding of popular attitudes

toward the environment, this study desired to focus on a relevant,

timely environmental issue that was affecting the highest number of

people possible at this time. Fortunately, this study coincided with the

U.S. fall 2014 elections in which a record number of anti-fracking

measures appeared on the ballots. were proposed on seven different

ballots throughout the country. Seven of these measures passed,

while six were unable to gain approval (Smith, 2015).

The most frequently used hash tag to emerge in relation to

hydraulic fracturing during the time of the elections was #fracking.

Therefore, this study narrowed down the “top” Tweets in the day after

the election results were announced that used this hash tag.

According to Twitter, the top tweets are those with the most shares,

re-tweets, likes, and replies (Twitter, 2015).

13


Because Twitter is a global sphere, this study chose to include

Tweets from all over the world. This decision was further supported

by the fact that a number of countries are also facing widely disputed

fracking regulations such as The United Kingdom, Spain and Australia

(King, 2012).

In total, 112 top tweets with the hash tag “fracking” were coded,

through methods of content analysis, for various information including

key terms, links, hash tags, and nationality of the tweeter. These

tweets were also classified according to their apparent sentiments

toward fracking and the type of user (i.e. concerned citizen,

corporation, politician etc.). Together, these codes provided the basis

for our analysis on the discourse of fracking in the Twitersphere.

Discussion

Before dissecting the Tweets for meaning, we must first

understand the complex system of knowledge production in which

they are participating and in many ways re-defining. Some of the

principle theorists on this matter include Karl Marx, Michel Foucault,

Marshall McLuhan, and Harold Innis. It is generally accepted among

these thinkers that knowledge is socially constructed. The technology

through which this information is delivered, however, makes all the

difference. Through these theories, we will be able to better

understand Twitter’s significance in modern day society.

In The German Ideology, Marx and Engels theorized that the ruling

class is in control of the intellectual force of society (Engels & Marx,

14


1845). In recent history, this can be seen in the correlation between

mass media reports and public perception. Inspired by the work of

Marx and Engels, influential philosophers Stuart Hall and Michel

Foucault proposed their own groundbreaking theories on the

relationship between power and the production of knowledge. In The

West and The Rest: Discourse and Power Hall defines discourse as, “A

group of statements which provide language for talking about –i.e. a

way of representing- a particular kind of knowledge about a topic”

(Hall, 1989). According to Hall, many of these discourses together

comprise an ideology, which he defines as, “A set of beliefs which

produce knowledge that serves the interest of a particular group or

class” (Hall, 1989). This concept of the production of ideologies serves

as an example of how discourses have the power to shape our broader

understanding of environmental issues.

Another Marxist approach, referred to as historical imperialism,

looks for the causes of development in society, specifically looking at

how humans collectively produce their own necessities for sustaining

their own lives and the lives of others, which differentiate them from

animals and raises the question of whether humans have a need to

engage in open discourse and free inquiry. Universalists like Noam

Chomsky would argue that humans do have this need, and they fulfill

it by working towards a just society (Edgley, 2002).

However, it must be noted that Foucault disagrees with

universalism, on the grounds that he does not claim that there are

15


universal facts or understandings, such as justice and human nature,

which exist independently from history and society. Foucault writes,

“It seems to me that the real political task in a society, such as ours, is

to criticize the working of institutions which appear to be both neutral

and independent (Foucault, 1974).”

Decades before the advent of the internet, media theorist Marshall

McLuhan predicted the kind of social organization permitted by

Twitter, which he referred to as the “global village,” or a

conceptualized society in which all thought and knowledge could be

shared instantaneously (McLuhan, 1968). Along with this theory,

McLuhan believed that technology was in fact a literal extension of

man’s thought, consciousness, and perception and, in turn, one may

say he would assert that Twitter is a tool that profoundly shapes an

individual's and, by extension, an entire society's self-conception and

realizations.

One of McLuhan’s contemporaries, Harold Innis, believed that,

“The centrality of communication media to both culture and social

structure implies that the principle axis of change, of the rise and fall

of the empire, will be alterations in the technologies of communication

upon which society is principally reliant” (Innis, 1999). Evidently,

Innis understood media as a tool that enables the individuals of a

culture to express and promote their unified sentiments. Indeed,

Twitter provides the ultimate means for social participation and a

platform for global discussions.

16


Like those before him, Harold Innis argued that the mass media’s

distribution of information has changed the course of history by

structuring society to align with the ideologies of those in power. This

“monopoly of knowledge,” as Innis refers to it, is dominated by those

in control of the favored means of communication at the time (Innis,

1999). With Twitter, the favored means of technology has been placed

in the hands of every individual with access to a computer, smart-

phone, or public library. Although this remains only a fraction of our

global society, it is a dramatic shift of power nonetheless.

In relation to this power struggle, Innis proposed a competitive

model of communication based on his observation that historically,

the motivation behind developing new communication technology

comes from the oppressed groups in society that are looking for a way

to create a social organization to challenge the influence of the

higher-ups (Innis, 1999). Therefore, when a new form of media is

introduced, the change results in a shift in authority. One of the most

dramatic shifts in history accompanied the invention of the printing

press, which undermined the monopoly of the medieval church and

enabled politics and science to replace religion as the dominant forms

of knowledge at the time (Carey, 1967). Today, this process continues

to repeat itself, as new forms of communication technology, like

Twitter, are being used to challenge the set establishments and

change the course of history.

17


Although few of these theorists lived to compose a Tweet, their

theories provide the basis of social media analysis, as their insight

remains relevant to the technological world we will be forever

plugged-in to. These theories urge us to raise questions such as

whether or not social participation on Twitter a human need, or a

literal extension of or sensory capacities of man.

Recently, Twitter has become the center of social media research

attention as it has proved be an invaluable resource for social

mobilization, most notably during the Arab Spring protests.

Researcher Noguera-Vivo described Twitter as, “A harbinger of a

future technology that is likely to capture and transmit the sum total

of all human experiences of the moment” (Vivo, 2013). She refers to

the emerging journalistic style in the wake of social media as

“ambient journalism,” which turns news into a dynamic and collective

process rather than a product (Vivo, 2013). This type of citizen

journalism, which has re-defined the way we gather information and

spread knowledge on the internet, was actively present in the Tweets

about fracking during the November 2014 elections.

Twitter as a Political Sphere

Nearly one in ten (8%) U.S. adults get their news from Twitter, and

growing, as Twitter adds an average of 500,000 users a day (Pew,

2013). Over 500 million Tweets are sent daily by the 284 million

active users on Twitter (Twitter, 2014). With these statistics, the

cumulative content on Twitter provides a valuable insight into pubic

18


opinion in a way accessible to researchers like never before. Truly,

the information shared on twitter, between people from all reaches of

the earth, is unprecedented.

Not only is Twitter providing its users with the ability to consume a

wider variety of information, but it is also allowing them to actively

participate in the spread of information and contribute their own

opinions. Essentially, twitter is the ultimate tool of democracy. Every

moment, Twitter is becoming a centralized component of the

networked political sphere, in which political issues are publically

negotiated (Trottier, D. et al., 2015). This study presumes that the

patterns of public discourse present in these conversations can reveal

emerging social movements as well as power-struggles between

opposing ideologies. With this in mind, the coded content of this study

was examined for inklings of other emerging movements related to

hydraulic fracturing.

What is Hydraulic Fracturing?

Hydraulic fracturing, commonly referred to as “fracking,” is the

process of drilling and injecting fluid into the ground at a high

pressure in order to fracture shale rocks to release the natural gas

inside. This practice produces over 300,000 barrels of natural gas a

day in spite of its known hazards to environmental, safety, and health

(King, 2012). To start, each gas well requires an average of 400

tanker trucks to carry water and supplies to and from the site. In

total, it takes 1-8 million gallons of water to complete each fracturing

19


job (Arthur, J., et al., 2012). This is particularly concerning in areas of

the US that are currently effected by a severe drought, including

Santa Barbra, California, where the proposed legislation to ban

fracking failed after big oil and gas companies such as Exxon Mobile

and Chevron spent $5.6 million in advertising to promote the benefits

of natural gas (Smith, 2015).

Water contamination is an inevitable consequence of fracking, as

up to 600 chemicals are used in fracking fluid, including known

carcinogens and toxins such as radium, methanol, hydrochloric acid,

formaldehyde, lead, mercury, uranium, and ethylene glycol.

Unfortunately, Methane concentrations are 17x higher in drinking

water wells near fracturing sites than in normal wells. Already, there

have been over 1,000 documented cases of water contamination next

to areas of gas drilling as well as cases of sensory, respiratory, and

neurological damage due to ingested contaminated water (King,

2012). Currently, the 500,000 active gas wells in the US will use 72

trillion gallons of water and 360 billion gallons of chemicals before

they are tapped (Whalen, 2014).

Results

The 112 Tweets were coded three separate times for various

emerging patterns. Some of these patterns were sought out

purposefully while others revealed themselves upon closer analysis of

the content. The Tweets were coded three consecutive times in order

to prevent error as well as discover and record new coding categories,

20


because with each series of Tweets new codes presented

opportunities for other in-depth research angles.

First, the users responsible for writing the Tweets were

categorized with labels. These labels were determined by the user’s

public biography as well as the content of their other visible tweets.

Ultimately, these categories included; concerned citizens, news media

outlets, politicians, oil and gas companies, and oil and gas sponsors.

Next, the Tweets were coded as being positive (in support of

fracking), negative (in objection to fracking), or neutral. This process

concluded that, in total, there were 94 tweets published that were

outwardly against fracking. Of those tweets, 47 were from concerned

citizens, 35 were from grassroots environmental organizations, 10

were from independent environmental news media outlets, and one

was from a politician in British parliament. Therefore, the majority of

Tweets (84%) were in objection to fracking.

On the other hand, there were 14 pro-fracking tweets, which came

from 7 organizations and only 2 citizens. This process concluded that

the 7 pro-fracking Tweets were published by user profiles that either

identified as oil and gas companies or sponsors of the oil and gas

industry. Of these 7, two had more than one tweet in the top 100, and

those were “Shale Gas Now” (2 tweets) and Energy Tomorrow (5

tweets). Essentially, all but one Tweet in support of fracking came

from big oil corporations.

21


Lastly, Tweets were defined as neutral if they failed to qualify an

outright opinion on the issue. All four of these Tweets came from the

following news media outlets; The Sierra Sun Times, State Impact

Texas, Shorpshire Star, KBAK/KBFX. Thus, reinforcing the ways in

which journalistic standards have prevented journalists from

acknowledging climate change.

In addition, both positive and negative Tweets were evaluated for

their reasoning for or against fracking. Overall, those in favor of

fracking wrote or attached articles that cited fracking’s alleged

potential to lower gas prices, stimulate the economy, and create jobs.

On the other hand, Tweets in opposition to fracking listed air

pollution, health problems, earth tremors and climate change as their

primary concerns.

Finally, the Tweets were also coded for the content they shared

with other users, which showed that the majority shared articles (12),

followed by infographics (3) and videos (2).

Of the positive Tweets, one tweet explicitly demonstrated hope,

four outwardly blamed the oil and gas industry, seven called to action

and one outwardly spoke of implications. For this purposes, a “call to

action” is defined as anything that explicitly urged others to

participate in efforts to combat fracking, for instance, the four tweets

that shared links to online petitions. Tweets with a call to action

demonstrate Twitter’s potential as a platform for social organization.

22


Next, the tweets were divided by the location from which they

were sent, or the locations listed by the users on their profiles. This

showed that the majority of tweets (44) came from Texas, followed by

the United Kingdom (25), miscellaneous US (13), California (9),

Massachusetts (4), Colorado (2), Canada (2), Spain (1), Turkey (1),

and Australia (1). The location of 10 Tweets were untraceable. The

location of the users reflects the

The Tweets were then coded for the frequency of hashtags that

accompanied them in order to discover traces of emerging concerns.

These are included in the following comprehensive hash tags, in order

of frequency, Denton (5), Texas (3), environment (3), shale (3), GLA

(2), climate (2), oil (2), natgas (2), facesoffracking (2), science,

YesAlliance, indyref2, drought, ballot, election, Frackban, green,

Democracy, freedom of speech, sustainability, PussyRiot,

NOToursands, frackingwaterchallenge, nokx2, shalefail, and cali.

Hash tags help to categorize what is important to the tweeters as well

as other words or subjects they associate with fracking.

Conclusion

The findings of this study demonstrate the implications of

successful interactive social organization on social media platforms

such as Twitter. This was demonstrated through the success of the

grassroots campaigns in Texas, Ohio, and California that passed local

regulations on fracking in spite of the billions of dollars spent by big

23


oil companies to silence their efforts. These efforts were apparent in

the “top” tweets selected for this study, in which users from the

victorious communities were featured more frequently than those

from anywhere else in the world.

Fundamentally, these Tweets proved that Twitter’s 160 character

user-generated messages are enough to alter popular discourse on an

environmental matter or even produce a new discourse by means of a

hash tag. Most important were the Tweets that included not only links

to informative articles on the environmental dangers of fracking, but

those that shared petitions for other users to sign. Furthermore, the

hashtags that accompanied many of the Tweets demonstrated

Twitter’s ability to merge movements and raise awareness to other

fracking debates present in the Twittersphere. If people continue to

discuss these matters openly and spread truthful scientific

information, they will stand a chance at combatting those who have

continuously succeeded in controlling the political sphere with money.

Hours after the ban on fracking passed by a landslide vote in

Denton, Texas, the birthplace of fracking, the local senate had already

begun pushing to veto it. Just days later, the hard-earned victory was

repealed on the grounds that the citizens of Denton do not have

authority over drilling activity in the state, and the efforts of the

citizens of Denton have been overturned by state and industry officials

who have pledged to contest it in court and state lawmakers who plan

to pass legislation to block it (Menchaca, 2014).

24


Although the public relations efforts of big oil were apparent, the

fact that they were vastly outnumbered by grassroots organizations

and citizen environmentalists proved that conversations on the

Twittersphere are indeed being dominated by those with much less

money behind their efforts. In this sense, Twitter has triumphed in

challenging traditional forms of knowledge production, which were

extrapolated by the theorists cited in the previous discussion. Indeed,

Twitter is a space where the collective voice of the people can

overcome the billions of dollars spent trying to oppress them.

In a time when governments are bending laws to satisfy the greed

of big oil corporations and the citizen’s right to participate in

government is being violated, the issue of hydraulic fracturing has

risen beyond the concerns of environmentalists to the state of

democracy in the United States. At this moment, like every moment

before it, the dissemination of ideas and the mobilization of social

movements through technology, is the only force strong enough to

challenge the grip of higher powers on our collective consciousness.

In areas of the globe where Twitter is not censored or permitted, the

tribal beats of the global village drum are growing louder, and they

sound a bit like Tweets.

While this study was able to successfully prove Twitter’s ability to

interactively alter popular discourse, and consequently demonstrate

Twitter’s potential to influence environmental policy, there are some

ways in which this research could be strengthened. For instance,

25


although this study recorded the types of linked material such as

inforgraphics and articles, and whether or not they opposed or

favored fracking, the content of the linked material leaves room for

further analysis. For instance, narrowing down the most re-tweeted

informational resources would also be helpful in breaking down the

viral spread of environmental related knowledge. Similarly, while this

study focused on fracking, it could be applied to any other

environmental issue and yield different results.

26


REFERENCES

Arthur, J. D., Bohm, B., Coughlin, B. J., Layne, M., & Cornue, D. (2012).

Evaluating the environmental implications of hydraulic fracturing in

shale gas reservoirs. ALL Consulting. http://www. all-llc.com/publicdownloads/ArthurHydrFracPaperFINAL. pdf.

Bailey, A., Giangola, L., & Boykoff, M. T. (2014). How grammatical choice shapes

media representations of llimate (un)certainty. EnvironmentalCommunication, 8, 197-215.

doi:10.1080/17524032.2014.906481

Bell, A. A. (1994). Climate of opinion: public and media discourse on the global

environment. Discourse & Society, 5(1), 33-64.

Bugden, D., Boudet, H., Clarke, C., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Leiserowitz, A.,

(2013). “Fracking” controversy and communication: Using national survey

data to understand public perceptions of hydraulic fracturing. Energy

Policy, 65, 57-67. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.10.017

Carey, J. W. (1967). Harold Adams Innis and Marshall McLuhan. The Antioch

Review, 5-39.

Carvalho, A., & Peterson, T. (2009). Discursive constructions of climate change:

practices of encoding and decoding. Environmental Communication, 3(2),

131-133. doi:10.1080/17524030902935434

27


Chomsky, N., & Foucault, M. (1974). Human nature: Justice versus power.

Edgley, A. (2002). The social and political thought of Noam Chomsky (Vol. 24).

Psychology Press.

Engels, F., Marx, K. (1845). The German Ideology. London.

Evans, K.M. (2006). The state of the environment—an overview. Environment: A

Revolution in Attitudes. (1-16).

Greenberg, S. E. (2013). Impact of social media as an instructional component on

content knowledge, attitudes, and public engagement related to global

climate change. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. 170.

Hall, S. (1989). Ideology and communication theory. In B. Dervin, L. Grossberg,

B.J.

Hall, S. (1997). The problem of ideology: Marxism without guarantees. In S. Hall (Ed.), Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp. 30-46). London: Sage/The Open University.

Hansen, A. (2011). Communication, media and environment: Towardsreconnecting research on the production, content and social

implicationsof environmental communication. International Communication

Gazette.73, 7-25. doi:10.1177/1748048510386739

Hermida, A. (2010). Twittering the news: The emergence of ambient journalism.

University of British Columbia School of Journalism, 4, 297-308.

Hires, B. (2012). Framing contention: A content analysis of how U.S. newspapers

report on the policy solutions of climate-change. ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses. 130.

Hoyos, G. (2014). No more great expectations: Media response to Obama's

28


climate action plan. Interactions: Studies In Communication & Culture,

5(1), 93-106. doi:10.1386/iscc.5.1.93_1

King, G. (2012). Hydraulic Fracturing 101: What everyrepresentative environmentalist regulator reporter investor

universityresearcher neighbor and engineer should know about estimating frac risk and improving frac performance in unconventional gas and oil wells. SPE Hydraulic Fracturing Technology Conference. Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Lopera, E., Moreno, C. (2014). The uncertainties of climate change in Spanish

daily newspapers: content analysis of press coverage from 2000 to 2010.

JSCOM: Journal of Science Communication. 13, 1-18.

López, A. (2010). Defusing the cannon/canon: An organic media approach to

environmental communication. Environmental Communication, 4(1), 99

108. doi:10.1080/17524030903516522

McLuhan, M., Fiore, Q., & Agel, J. (1968). War and peace in the global village

(Vol. 127). New York: Bantam books.

Molodtsova, T. (2014). Linking local weather to climate change: One year of

Twitter in the US. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 84.

Menchaca, K., & Colson, N. (2014). United States: Texan community beats the frackers.

Noguera-Vivo, J. (2013). How open are journalists on Twitter? Trends towards

the end user journalism. Comunicación Y Sociedad, 26(1), 93-114.

O’Keefe, & E. Wartella (Eds.), Rethinking communication: Paradigm issues, 40

51.

Parratt, Sonia. (2014) Public media and climate change: Ethical standards and

29


codes in the BBC treatment of environmental information. Interactions:

Studies in Communication & Culture, 5, 127-140. doi: 10.1386/iscc.5.1.127_1

Pearce, W., Holmberg, K., Hellsten, I., & Nerlich, B. (2014). Climate change on

Twitter: Topics, communities and conversations about the 2013 IPCC.

Plos ONE, 9(4), 1-11. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094785

Pew Research Center, (2013). Twitter News Consumers: Young,Mobile and Educated.

Potter, E. E., & Oster, C. C. (2008). Communicating climate change: Public

responsiveness and matters of concern. Media International Australia

Incorporating Culture & Policy, 127116-126.

Segerberg, A., & Bennett, W. (2011). Social media and the organization of

Collective action: Using Twitter to explore the ecologies of Two Climate

Change Protests. Communication Review, 14(3), 197-215. doi:10.1080/10714421.2011.597250

Shehata, A., & Hopmann, D. (2012). Framing climate change. Journalism

Studies, 13(2), 175-192. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2011.646396

Smith, S. (2015). Crude Justice: How I Fought Big Oil and Won, and What You

Should Know About the New Environmental Attack on America. BenBella

Books, Inc..

Trottier, D. & Fuchs, S. (2015). Social media, politics and the state: Protests,

revolutions, riots, crime, and policing in the age of Facebook, Twitter and

YouTube. 132-153.

Ungar, S. (2014). Media Context and reporting opportunities on climate change:

2012 versus 1988. Environmental Communication, 8(2), 233-248.

30


doi:10.1080/17524032.2014.907193

Whalen, C. (2014). The environmental, social, and economic impacts of hydraulic

fracturing, horizontal drilling, and acidization in California. Claremont

McKenna College Senior Theses. Paper 969.

Xuan, L., Jiun-Yi, T., Mattis, K., Konieczna, M., & Dunwoody, S. (2014).

Exploring attribution of responsibility in a cross-national study of TV news

coverage of the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in

Copenhagen. Journal Of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58(2), 253

271. doi:10.1080/08838151.2014.906436

Zamith, R., Pinto, J., & Villar, M. (2013). Constructing Climate Change in the

Americas: An Analysis of News Coverage in U.S. and South American

Newspapers. Science Communication, 35(3), 334-357.doi:10.1177/1075547012457470

31

TWITTER’S CHANGING CLIMATE 32

Documents

Thesis Final Draft