Conclusion

People behave based on what they believe, which is based on what they understand. What they understand is based on the information they are exposed to.
The horizontal nature of the internet has opened up society to so much valuable information. But the limitless and unregulated nature of social media means that we are not only receptive to valuable truths, but also damaging falsehoods. As a result, it becomes more difficult to distinguish between fact and fiction, especially as even important information becomes trivialised. Not only this, but since “it is the most improbable things that are the most striking”(Bon, 1896) social media tends to favour fiction over fact. Consequently, social media platforms become a place where even valuable news is undermined as we become less trusting in the information that we see.

Meanwhile, it can be impossible to distinguish the genuine efforts to help fight global warming from the agenda-driven, greenwashed publicity ploys in which little significant progress towards combatting climate change is actually made. As a result, social media becomes a place where pseudo-environmentalism can thrive.

In a culture obsessed with appearances, very often the factual information, that somehow succeeds in cutting through the sea of spectacles, can be received with an emphasis on its aesthetic value, rather than its original informative purpose. However, appearances can be utilised as a vehicle through which a positive message can be communicated. Just as Greta Thunberg’s “child skipping school” status raised her profile(Watts, 2019), Extinction Rebellion’s strategy of “non-violent, disruptive civil disobedience”(Extinction Rebellion, 2019) demanded recognition and Alexis Ren’s provocative and sensationalised social media posts captured attention; a focus on the messenger, not the message, can sometimes be used for good.

However, even though social media provides the opportunity for positive messages to be heard and big brands to be held accountable for their harmful actions, it is the attitudes that social media breeds that determines how these efforts are received. And these serious efforts to help fight global warming are often not received with the gravity that they deserve, meaning that people are less likely to take sufficient action to help combat climate change.

In conclusion, social media is a medium upon which efforts to combat climate change can be both heard and undermined; helped and hindered. For the sake of the warming planet, we must

do our best as individuals to distinguish facts from the fiction and take informed action. Upon doing this, we can only hope that the positive impacts of the efforts to combat climate change are enough and in time.