Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures
The contentious nature of certain forms of climate activism has led to a proliferation of hate comments targeting activists in online news forums. This study examines the ‘Nasty Effect’—the impact of uncivil language—on attitudes towards climate protection news. Specifically, we investigate how vari...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2024-12-01
|
| Series: | Cogent Social Sciences |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311886.2024.2367092 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849339167391088640 |
|---|---|
| author | Andreas Schulz-Tomančok Florian Woschnagg |
| author_facet | Andreas Schulz-Tomančok Florian Woschnagg |
| author_sort | Andreas Schulz-Tomančok |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The contentious nature of certain forms of climate activism has led to a proliferation of hate comments targeting activists in online news forums. This study examines the ‘Nasty Effect’—the impact of uncivil language—on attitudes towards climate protection news. Specifically, we investigate how various types of hate speech within user comments influence the credibility of articles on climate protection and activism. Employing a between-subject design (7x1), we conducted an online survey in Austria during autumn 2023 (N = 486). Our findings reveal that as the hate speech intensity increased, the perceived credibility of related news articles declined. While overall means did not yield significant differences, individual assessments compared to the control group were significant. Explicit hate speech exhibited a more pronounced negative impact on article credibility. The absence of a significant ‘Nasty Effect’ underscores the intricate nature of this phenomenon and its nuanced influence on public attitudes towards climate protection measures. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-db71c316bb854bcb877fbc6d78ce79e7 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2331-1886 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2024-12-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cogent Social Sciences |
| spelling | doaj-art-db71c316bb854bcb877fbc6d78ce79e72025-08-20T03:44:11ZengTaylor & Francis GroupCogent Social Sciences2331-18862024-12-0110110.1080/23311886.2024.2367092Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measuresAndreas Schulz-Tomančok0Florian Woschnagg1Institute for Comparative Media and Communication Studies, Austrian Academy of Sciences and the University of Klagenfurt, Vienna, AustriaDepartment of Media and Communications, University of Klagenfurt, Klagenfurt, AustriaThe contentious nature of certain forms of climate activism has led to a proliferation of hate comments targeting activists in online news forums. This study examines the ‘Nasty Effect’—the impact of uncivil language—on attitudes towards climate protection news. Specifically, we investigate how various types of hate speech within user comments influence the credibility of articles on climate protection and activism. Employing a between-subject design (7x1), we conducted an online survey in Austria during autumn 2023 (N = 486). Our findings reveal that as the hate speech intensity increased, the perceived credibility of related news articles declined. While overall means did not yield significant differences, individual assessments compared to the control group were significant. Explicit hate speech exhibited a more pronounced negative impact on article credibility. The absence of a significant ‘Nasty Effect’ underscores the intricate nature of this phenomenon and its nuanced influence on public attitudes towards climate protection measures.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311886.2024.2367092Hate speechnews credibilityclimate protectionbetween-subject design‘Nasty Effect’Guangchao Charles Feng, School of Communication, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong |
| spellingShingle | Andreas Schulz-Tomančok Florian Woschnagg Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures Cogent Social Sciences Hate speech news credibility climate protection between-subject design ‘Nasty Effect’ Guangchao Charles Feng, School of Communication, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong |
| title | Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures |
| title_full | Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures |
| title_fullStr | Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures |
| title_full_unstemmed | Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures |
| title_short | Credibility at stake. A comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures |
| title_sort | credibility at stake a comparative analysis of different hate speech comments on journalistic credibility and support on climate protection measures |
| topic | Hate speech news credibility climate protection between-subject design ‘Nasty Effect’ Guangchao Charles Feng, School of Communication, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong |
| url | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311886.2024.2367092 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT andreasschulztomancok credibilityatstakeacomparativeanalysisofdifferenthatespeechcommentsonjournalisticcredibilityandsupportonclimateprotectionmeasures AT florianwoschnagg credibilityatstakeacomparativeanalysisofdifferenthatespeechcommentsonjournalisticcredibilityandsupportonclimateprotectionmeasures |