论文标题：Discrepancy in scientific authority and media visibility of climate change scientists and contrarians

期刊：Nature Communications

作者：Alexander Michael Petersen,Emmanuel M. Vincent,Anthony LeRoy Westerling

发表时间：2019/08/13

数字识别码：10.1038/s41467-019-09959-4

微信链接：https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/9S_gnQlSWVaKbF90j6n80g

《自然-通讯》发表的一项研究Discrepancy in scientific authority and media visibility of climate change scientists and contrarians通过分析2000-2016年期间数字媒体和纸质媒体的报道后发现，与支持气候变化有人为来源这一共识的科学家相比，一群气候变化异见者在媒体报道中的出现频率要高49%。不过，如果只比较两个群体在主流媒体中的能见度，差异则降至1%。

图1：气候变化（CC）相关的研究产出和媒体报道的增加情况。图源：Petersen等

美国加州大学美熹德分校的Alexander Petersen和同事考察了气候变化异见者的能见度和权威树立。作者追踪了386位气候变化异见者（包括学者、科学家、政治家和商业人士）以及386位支持气候变化有人为因素的气候科学家的数字足迹。通过分析发表于2000-2016年期间、主要来源于北美和欧洲的约10万篇关于气候变化的媒体报道和博客文章，作者发现，整体而言，气候变化异见者的媒体能见度比气候变化科学家要高49%。不过，如果只看30家主流媒体（参照传统编辑标准实行质量控制）的报道，两个群体的媒体能见度几乎持平。

作者认为，知名异见人士的观点表达或得益于新媒体的可扩展性，尤其是一些新出现的媒体和博客可能并不会严格执行信息质量评估标准。

摘要：We juxtapose 386 prominent contrarians with 386 expert scientists by tracking their digital footprints across ∼200,000 research publications and ∼100,000 English-language digital and print media articles on climate change. Projecting these individuals across the same backdrop facilitates quantifying disparities in media visibility and scientific authority, and identifying organization patterns within their association networks. Here we show via direct comparison that contrarians are featured in 49% more media articles than scientists. Yet when comparing visibility in mainstream media sources only, we observe just a 1% excess visibility, which objectively demonstrates the crowding out of professional mainstream sources by the proliferation of new media sources, many of which contribute to the production and consumption of climate change disinformation at scale. These results demonstrate why climate scientists should increasingly exert their authority in scientific and public discourse, and why professional journalists and editors should adjust the disproportionate attention given to contrarians.

（来源：科学网）