GoodGeist
A podcast on sustainability, hosted by Damla Özlüer and Steve Connor, brought to you by the DNS Network. Looking at sustainability issues, communications, and featuring global guests from a wide variety of sectors such as business, NGOs and government.
GoodGeist
Broadcasting Climate, with Josh Wheeler
In this episode we talk to Josh Wheeler, the founder of BeBroadcast and author of a recent report that has tracked an astonishing 45,000 mentions of climate change in the UK broadcast media over six months, uncovering patterns that help explain why public engagement remains challenging despite growing climate impacts.
We talk to Josh about climate coverage that employs alarmist language, audience disengagement and tactics to create the sustained attention and action climate issues need. Drawing from his extensive experience in broadcast media, Wheeler proposes solutions that challenge conventional approaches. Rather than simply amplifying alarming messages, he advocates for integrating climate themes into mainstream entertainment and everyday contexts. "We have to make climate part of the story, as opposed to the story," Wheeler suggests.
Listen in to hear Wheeler's roadmap for sustainability communicators seeking to move beyond fear-based messaging toward narratives that connect with audiences on personal levels.
Follow GoodGeist for more episodes on sustainability, communications and how creativity can help make the world a better place.
Good Geist, a podcast series on sustainability hosted by Damla Özler and Steve Connor, brought to you by the DNS Network.
Speaker 2:Hello, hello everyone, you are listening to Good Guys, the message on sustainability which is brought to you by the DNS Network, the global network of agencies dedicated to making the world a better place. This is Damla from Mira Agency, istanbul, and.
Speaker 3:This is Steve from Creative Concern in Manchester. This podcast series explores global sustainability issues, how they're communicated and what creativity can do to make positive change happen.
Speaker 2:So in this episode we're going to talk to Josh Wheeler, the founder of BeBroadcast, a specialist UK-based PR agency, and the author of a new report on how the UK media have been covering the climate crisis.
Speaker 3:So Josh's fascinating report, which we're going to dig into, tracked 45,000 mentions blimey of climate change in six months of UK broadcast coverage and starts to reveal the narratives, frames, metaphors, sentiments that you can find in these pieces and the contemporary events that led to the coverage in the first place. And for those of us regularly working on climate communications, it's probably safe to say it's required reading, josh. So thank you so much for taking time to talk to Dalla and myself.
Speaker 4:Thank, you so much for having me. I'm genuinely really glad. As people in the agency world, you'll know the challenges of tackling an issue like this, so thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 3:No, brilliant. It's really good to have you here and, obviously, given that we're all about communicating sustainability, you couldn't be a better fit. Basically, josh, we always like to get a bit of a personal take on our guests and their journey, so tell us about how you started Be Broadcast and what led to what led eventually to this focus on climate coverage in the media.
Speaker 4:So Be Broadcast, I think, is actually a story 15 years in the making. I first started out and I was working corporate PR. I worked for accounts where I was looking at, effectively, the leaseholds for retailers and brands for major banks. I know I scream that straight away when you look at me, but I also worked on an awful lot of effectively newsjacking clients, and one of them was the Economist, and it was around the time of the Arab Spring. The Irish financial crisis turned into one of our global financial crises and I was working on the Arab Spring and I was placing voices and experts that were trying to explain what was happening in each nation as it developed.
Speaker 4:And I just I remember being in the office I think it was four in the morning and it was when people were gathering in Tahrir Square in Egypt and celebrating and I just realised that I was playing a role in something. I'm not saying I played a role in change of regime or anything like that, but it felt like I was doing something that was helping people. Uh, ultimately I was just placing a spokesperson. But you know, in my head at age 21, um, and over time, I just I just fell in love with broadcast. I love the pace of it. I weirdly I thrive on the like stress of it, um. And I found that you can do it for a career.
Speaker 4:So I went off and specialized in it and during the pandemic, where we were all at home watching TV and radio more than ever before, our workload actually increased and towards the end of the pandemic I realized that actually I just sort of got on a wheel and I was just doing a corporate job and really what I got into the industry for was I wanted to kind of do things that helped people and at the end of it I realized that I needed to go off and do something else, and that's where Be Broadcast was born. So we have a couple of different things that try to help. We work with some amazing brands and we have things that are set up to work with small brands, charities, but we keep things like social purpose right at our front and center.
Speaker 2:Wow, I mean, when I'm listening to you, I was just thinking that there are different types of addictions and you have adrenaline, change and connecting to human junkies.
Speaker 4:that's a great combination to make positive change happen, I think I probably should mention, you see, that lots and lots of people have been, have been, diagnosed with adhd. I've been diagnosed with adhd, so maybe that, maybe that plays a function in it. But there is a thing thing in there of social justice and kind of chasing social justice, and I do feel that, you know, when something happens, I do feel kind of most things that I do are kind of driven out of the fact that I'm annoyed about a situation, and that's usually, usually the driving force.
Speaker 2:That's wonderful. There is a lot to cover in your report. But before we get into the details, you gave me one answer to this question, the ADHD. But maybe we could cover the methodology and look how one actually analyzes 45,000 pieces of coverage. It sounds a huge task and I think ADHD is not the only answer here.
Speaker 4:Well, it's not just me doing it, thankfully, and I'm really glad you pointed it out, because it is a big undertaking to look at. We basically we take the terms of kind of the terms, the phrases, the sayings, the names for things and we start to search for in what way are they being discussed? Then we start to categorize them and connect them up, but effectively it sounds like a big undertaking. It is a big undertaking, but when you really break it down, actually when you're starting to pull apart things like the outlets, very quickly, you can see there's only a finite number of outlets, so there's only a finite number of types of media. Where it comes into its own is is what those people are saying, and so there's a uh, quite literally the, the detail is split up, and we do this for for the brands that we work with, it's called mission control, um, and it allows whoever it is that's receiving the report to get an insider view of what is going on in their sector. But effectively it's broken up, and I'm loathed at this stage to bring in AI into this. I don't think we ever will, because as PRs, I think there is a real skill and there is real nuance in reading something. I'm a fan of reading the papers, watching something, listening to something and pulling out your own insights and your own deductions. I'm sure ai is great in that space, but ultimately the 45 000 the content is split up into packs and we go through it and we're asking the team to pull out.
Speaker 4:What are the themes? What is it you're finding? You know we're there with highlighter pens and stuff like that. What is it that you're seeing and why? Ultimately, it's taking transcripts of stuff that's out there.
Speaker 4:We're then breaking down and looking at things like segments. Is it segmenting? Things like sentiment? Is it hopeful, is it neutral, is it alarmist? Is it? You know, what is it? That's what's happening is you're almost digesting it as an audience and as a presenter and producer at the same time, like what, what is happening in that, in that mix, and then we're matching it all together and actually we're starting to look for peaks, we're starting to look for trends, and where this was really born from was a number of years ago I worked for I won't say the brand, but I worked for a brand where actually it was.
Speaker 4:We were working on the kids toys for Christmas, right, and the core thing within that, maybe I'm giving away a trade secret here, but the core thing within that and maybe I'm giving away a trade secret here, but the core thing within that world is that, ultimately, that it really boils down to who goes first. Who goes first? And so I would spend my time kind of analyzing over the last years did that, when did that brand release and what did they do? And so I kind of pick it out as war games. You know, if you can plot and pick out what the strategy might look like, then that gives you an indication of what they're going to do. And actually you can go here.
Speaker 4:And that, ultimately, is mission control. How can you steal a march step into a gray area or an area of untapped potential? And that's what this is trying to do. And hopefully this report will give brands a bit of an indication as to what they could do in the world of green green's probably a terrible word to use in this, but in the world of sustainability, um, and and actually having a bit of conscience when it comes to to climate, that really, hopefully this would be a good starting point, but but really it's just it's. It's got to be about picking out what is currently the state of play, what are the gaps and where can we? We then play a role brilliant.
Speaker 3:So damn, it's not ai.
Speaker 4:What a relief I probably, I'm probably, you know. Uh, setting myself up for a fall, because there was one that we did last year. We did a series each month where we analysed the month when it came to Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak to decide. We gave a bit of an indication as to who we thought was going to win the general election each month. There was a point where 45,000 seemed like a walk in the park, should we say, and that that was painful well, listen, just the um.
Speaker 3:And, by the way, green is perfectly acceptable. I mean, I've I've literally I've been batting this for 25 years. So, whichever way you cut it, you'll end up saying green, green, green. So, um, sometimes you just have to go with people's desire lines and so, overall um, so keeping it sort of quite a high level um, on the overall tone of our climate conversation. Uh, here in the uk, I mean, obviously we reach out across europe with this podcast, but, but, for example, alarmist phraseologies that it used. I mean, what can we learn about how climate is relayed in the media? What are your immediate findings?
Speaker 4:Yeah, so the I mean hopefully, to people who are in this world already, this probably won't seem like a big revelation, but the kind of the big finding from this is that I think it's over half about 55% of the content was entirely alarmist language. Now, on the one hand, alarm grabs your attention straight away, but I think to an extent, it also risks disengagement. So, as an agency, we veer away from words like crisis in the content that we're putting out for, because actually we think that media are hyper aware of the constant omni-crisis of news that we're waking up to and to some extent, that might be useful, but actually I think when we're talking to journalists, they need to make that decision as to whether it's a crisis rather than us. I think the big thing that is really key is that during the six month period that we looked at, we had the floods in Spain, the terrible floods in Spain, and we had the fires in America. So we had two really, really key, horrendous moments of shock, horror, where we looked at people. You know we were quite literally looking at people who've lost everything. On top of that, we had political movements, you know, the withdrawal of the Paris Agreement in the US.
Speaker 4:Again, I don't know if shock is the right word, but horror perhaps is still in there, but in a sense just big moments and it's like a roller coaster. So if you see in the report, it goes up and it drops, it goes up and it drops and ultimately what's happening is that the media is hitting us with this shock moment and then they move on straight away. Another shock moment of something bad and then they move on straight away Another shock moment of something bad happening and then they move on straight away. And I think what has happened it'd be good to get your thoughts as you're closer to this stuff is that actually the media is kind of propagating that it's all just about shock and horror and then we'll move on to something else else and we won't think about it again until the next time.
Speaker 4:And I think that the alarmist language is somewhat problematic in a way, because it's coming and it's catching our attention, but it's not giving us any real purpose, it's not giving us any hope. And my I've given quite a lot of crossover into, if we look at, say, how mental health has been discussed. You know I've done lots and lots of mental health campaigns equally a difficult subject to kind of grapple with to begin with, but actually we were able to make it really really clearly about how this connected to you at home, whether you, you know, had those challenges or not. You were able to link into it and I think that climate is somewhere in a bit of a no man's land of discussion.
Speaker 2:That's very interesting and what you said was very important. That shock and then go on to the next moment. It kind of creates a callous, I think, so apathy and disengagement. You are always hit and that part of your emotions and reactions are being very, very how do you say it in English? Colluded, Collusted.
Speaker 3:I think that's a new word you just made up there, Dan.
Speaker 2:I like it. Sometimes I do it, so we don't react, we just get shocked. Yes, and this is a fascinating thing to discuss and we do love it, but I'm going to stay on course and not get distracted, because I really want to talk about the glamour part too, which we don't usually associate with climate change not glamour I think we had just one guest before. We talked about glamour and climate change and how these topics come together, so that's another very interesting thing we want to talk about. A standout part of your report is that the fact that the Oscars proved a high point for mentions, and what can that peak tell us? How can those of us who communicate about climate change learn from it?
Speaker 4:Yeah, when you started talking about glamour thought you were talking about me, but it makes sense, you were talking about the oscars, the um, what we were looking for was, uh, so we started, we talked about the 45 000. Now over a six month period. My um suspicion was that that was quite low for this topic. Um we? So when we explored it, it didn't feel right. You know, we were looking and saying, well, at least is this in the right, is this the right ballpark? Have we got the right terms? Are we using saying the right stuff? And we were, um, the reality is, is that it's not discussed? And, uh, we were then looking to say, ok, well, let's look at other things that are impacting all of us, right, so we looked at things like public health significantly higher. We looked at the economy significantly higher. We looked at mental health significantly higher, and it's possibly you know, this might be an indication, but we were thinking this should be elevated, this should be in a higher realm, and this is pointing us towards a path that, realistically, this isn't being discussed in the right format. So then we pivoted to look at, ok, well, what is it in line with and how are we taking? You know how are we looking at this, and one of the things that we found was that the Oscars I think it received 65% of the total number of mentions that climate change did over that entire six-month period.
Speaker 4:Now, I'm not taking away from the Oscars. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have the glitz and the glamour. I think people love to talk about the clothes that people are wearing. They love to talk about the films. It's entertainment, right. The big thing about that media loves to have spectacle, star power, simplicity there's all of that built into it. But what it showed to me was the Oscars, which is is effectively, it's a it's a one night event. There will be people you know talking in and around the build-up or a specific film that you know has got oscar buzz around it, but realistically, I don't know if you can remember many of the films that won or the people. I can't right. So it's a one night event.
Speaker 4:Climate, climate change, is an ongoing thing. I think, regardless of where you sit on the debate and the debate in quote terms and the discussion of it, it's an ongoing thing that's going to affect more of us. So the fact that a one night event gets 65 percent of the entire mentions of climate change to me is quite shocking. Mentions of climate change to me is quite shocking. But maybe what this points towards is that the activity and the um, the content around climate change and how it's being put forward, needs a repackaging. Um is it? Is it an opportunity to better use things like pop culture and entertainment? The proof is in the pudding, like the oscars works. I'm not saying that you need to give climate change the red carpet treatment, but maybe we need to look at the packaging and I you know this is perhaps not a great example, but I think it gives a good indication.
Speaker 4:It was very of its time.
Speaker 4:But I think about, you know, when I was growing up and I would see um direct action from animal rights groups and animal testing, and then you look at, well, they also had things like they had celebrities that were dressed up. Sometimes it was like clothing, sometimes I think it was makeup where they would be, you know, endangered species, and actually I think that's a good example of like light and shade, light and shade, and what we haven't had perhaps within the world of climate change for some time is the light to the shade, and maybe this is kind of pointing in that direction. So it could also be on the flip side that we are just too scared and we are just hiding and we'll kind of masquerade and stay in the masked ball of the oscars. I it could be one or the other, but my hope is that actually we can take something from the oscars and that learning and make um more of a focus in a way that the media are digesting it oh, my goodness me, there's so much uh to get into there there.
Speaker 3:Well, it's fascinating, isn't it? The masked ball? There is a third. I've got a third prong for your fork there, john. Yeah, yum. It might be that the media industry itself is slightly broken, and I'd love your take on this. Actually, it's somebody that's clearly fascinated by it. But I was going to ask about climate scepticism because it's in the report and you do mention it, and I think there is an inbuilt inability for professionally trained media professionals to actually do justice to a story like climate. Um, because, for example, the fact that climate skepticism, um, a good 40 years after climate change was scientifically proven to be a massive issue for humankind kind of fries my brain a little bit. That we're still having to debate whether it's real or not, whether it's human induced or not, and and you've you know the there is the obvious influence of right wing fossil fuel backed think tanks in Tufton Street doing their dastardly things. But what's your? You've read all these pieces. I mean, is it still the case that the media can't help but see climate as a debate rather than a fact?
Speaker 4:I think I think I'm stumbling over my own tongue, because the very beginning of it is depressing, right, and I think we're seeing this in lots of different issues and different areas. I think that you're absolutely right. There are forces at play across lots of areas of humanity where this is happening. I think that if I were to and I even, in this conversation, have used the word debate and then gone okay, debate in quote terms, because to me it's not a debate you know me as Josh Wheeler, disconnected from everything, but officially, you know, is it? Is it a debate? Is it? And I think that that is probably a good indication of where people are at. I think that there is so much information, and we have possibly, unfortunately, so much information in our hands and so many people's opinions in our hands that actually the science and fact is very often lost. You know, we've seen that in major political movements over the last 10 years. Right, the are often um, disappear and and actually it's what people think and feel, and I think that is, it is important and it it does play a role. I think that there is also um, a big part of this that's about complexity and confusion that allows, uh, for doubt. I think that when you talk about media, I think that does play a role. I think there's there's research that points to, in particular, with radio, over and above tv and other media, that we we identify and we connect with our presenters. So if you think about your local uh bbc steve, you know there are probably people that you you can. So if you think about your local BBC Steve, you know there are probably people that you can. Even if you've never seen them, you can picture what they look like and you can probably imagine, like them, what shops they go to, and you know because you hear their voice. And so suddenly there is actually a role for them to play on issues like this. But are they experts? Do they know which sources to trust and do they want to face that battle when it comes to going up against those things? I think to kind of round that out, because I think it is, to begin with, it feels very hopeless, and I don't want to be a hopeless person.
Speaker 4:I think that the, the, the antidote isn't about thinking about what they're doing. I think the antidote has to think about what we're doing and I think it isn't just about shouting louder. I think it has to be about. The story has to be better. I think we have to find ways. I was talking about this the other day as I was rambling on about the report to someone. You know, a lot of the stuff that we do and the advice that we give to clients that are, um, you know, might just be creating a consumer story, a lovely, fluffy story. That's just, you know, a bit of fun. Uh, as an antidote for for skills, we're pushing them to okay.
Speaker 4:Well, how are you? I was talking about Mrs Miggins in Wigan how are you reaching Mrs Miggins in Wigan? And Mrs Miggins can be the CEO of a company, she could be a housewife, she could be, you know, whatever, right, whoever, it is your stakeholder. But how are you reaching her? And how are you making this story hit her and hit her heart and mind? How are you making her go? You know what?
Speaker 4:This is something I need to pay attention to. This is something that I need to, you know, take a bit of action on, and that action doesn't have to be I'm going to write to my MP, I'm going to do this, and that action could be. I'm going to, I'm know that, I'm gonna know that thing, and so when I'm talking to someone, I'm gonna go, but you know, and that, I think, is it. I think I think climate feels so big and so bold that it's it's not hitting mrs miggins. It will hit m Miggins. It will hit Mrs Miggins whether she likes it or not, but ultimately, at the moment, we're not seeing or I'm probably speaking out of turn here, but Mrs Miggins probably feels like she isn't seeing the direct impacts of climate change.
Speaker 4:What I think is really interesting, if you look at things like mental health and I keep coming back to this right things like mental health, and I keep coming back to this right 20 years ago we wouldn't talk about mental health in the terms that we do today, and I think a lot of that is down to the conversations that we've been having right, and a lot of that has been created through things like PR campaigns where brands have talked about.
Speaker 4:You know, actually this is what we do, this is how we support people, but it's also been shown in entertainment. Okay, so east enders, coronation street soap is in a different place, but you probably could list off reams and reams of stories that they've shown on east enders that have been related to mental health or the cost of living crisis or, uh, the economy or things that are impacting and hitting people, and then people at home can go. That's me. I'm having that problem. We haven't seen that with climate change and I wonder actually you know it's almost a challenge out to producers of entertainment shows Could we have Love Island set in a destination, rather than the current plush locations? Could we have it set in a destination for a series current plush locations? Could we have it set in a destination for a series that you know actually is feeling the impacts of climate change, so that it's part of the story you know, that's what we need but quite quite, literally, why not?
Speaker 3:yeah, so, um, we're gonna have to direct you back to one of our earlier podcasts where we spoke to steve smith, who's the producer of the gra Graham Norton show. Oh yeah, he has a whole narrative around how we need to be programming sustainability into everyday shows. Exactly what you're saying. That's amazing.
Speaker 4:I mean great. I mean I'm glad I'm my next job. I'm going to be working at the Graham Norton show. I would love that job, but I think it's, I think it's true, I think we have to make it about. Yeah, you know, it's part of the story, as opposed to the story, and I think that that becomes, you know, the natural step for it brilliant and I loved that quotation.
Speaker 2:I think I'm gonna take it in one of the promotional materials, but the action can be. I'm gonna. Deciding to know something is a huge action and this is what we need right now, I think.
Speaker 3:Well, danle, I know you're going to wrap us up with a final question for Josh, but we haven't had our pretentious peak for the podcast, and I think Josh's epistemological challenge there, beyond sort of didactic narratives of what one should do rather than what one should know, should give us all pause for thought later in the day.
Speaker 2:There we go, okay so we're out of time. I'm so unhappy about it, but we're out of time. I'm so unhappy about it, but we're out of time, so I have to ask you the final question. Our network is ironically called Do Not Smile, because we need to make sustainability a subject that brings happiness into the world. What object, place or person always makes you smile?
Speaker 4:Oh, oh, my goodness, can I be honest? The thing that always makes me smile object, I'm trying to, I'm trying to place it because I don't fully know. The thing that makes me smile the most is is kind of a crossover of radio and Spotify. Genuinely, I it's. Music really is the thing that makes me smile. I can be in the worst mood possible I really can and I all I really need to do is just disconnect for 10 minutes and just put on a playlist or listen to somebody, just talk about things that I was about to say don't matter, but they do matter. But you know things that are just outside of this world. That's the thing that makes me smile.
Speaker 4:You know, the thing I always find interesting and I learned this at uni if I need to concentrate, lots of people put on classical music. I put on hardcore trance, hardcore trance music. It's a's a revelation. You know, try to avoid words and you will literally you'll sit there and it's like that scene from um. What was that film where he could, where he was god, oh, jim carrey, that film where he was just typing up that hardcore trance. If you never need to do anything or you ever need to just step out of it.
Speaker 3:Music, for me, is the is the absolute thing, and it's the thing that will keep you smiling throughout everything amazing, and for those listening who uh haven't got the benefit of josh on screen, you also have a disco microphone, uh I scream it disco, dance lights thing, as you mentioned, hardcore trance, which is just about as perfect as it gets.
Speaker 3:Um, josh, we're gonna have to wrap it up. The um. That's been fascinating, I do. There's so much more. I people need to read the report because you've also got a bit in there about calls to action, which, for those of us who are climate communicators, always the delicate bit. We didn't get a chance to get into that, but, um, but there's so much in there and it's been an absolute pleasure talking to you. So thanks so much, josh. Brilliant, no thank you both.
Speaker 3:So thanks to everyone who has listened to our Good Guys podcast, brought to you by the Do Not Smile network of agencies and make sure you listen to future episodes, where we'll be talking to more amazing people about how we can work together to create a more sustainable future. So, Josh Damla, see you soon. Bye, sustainable future. So, josh Damla, see you soon. Bye.
