Introduction
This essay examines the defining features and impacts of genre and medium in shaping audience understanding of climate change, focusing on a specific scholarly article by Leiserowitz (2006), accessed via ProQuest. It explores the components of the genre (scholarly article) and medium (written text), their informative and persuasive advantages, and their limitations. Furthermore, it evaluates how these choices influence audience perceptions and considers the broader implications of engaging with certain genres and media over others in forming opinions on climate change. Through critical analysis, this essay aims to provide a nuanced perspective on communication strategies within this pressing global issue.
Defining Features of Genre: Scholarly Article
The scholarly article, as a genre, is defined by its structured format, rigorous peer review, and reliance on empirical evidence. Leiserowitz’s (2006) piece, titled “Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect, Imagery, and Values,” exemplifies these traits through its detailed methodology and data-driven arguments. Typically, scholarly articles prioritise objectivity, aiming to contribute to academic discourse with verifiable claims. This genre targets an audience of researchers, policymakers, and informed readers, expecting a high level of engagement with complex ideas. In this case, Leiserowitz uses statistical analysis to link emotional responses with policy support, a hallmark of academic depth that ensures credibility but assumes prior knowledge from its readers.
Defining Features of Medium: Written Text
The medium of written text, as employed in Leiserowitz’s article, facilitates precision and permanence. Unlike transient formats such as social media posts, written text allows for extended argumentation and reference to detailed evidence, crucial for conveying the nuances of climate change perceptions (Leiserowitz, 2006). However, this medium lacks the immediacy of visual or audio elements, relying solely on language to evoke imagery or emotion. For an academic audience, this is generally effective, as they are accustomed to processing dense information, yet it may alienate broader, less specialised readers who might struggle with jargon or lengthy exposition.
Informative and Persuasive Advantages
Using the scholarly article genre and written text medium offers distinct advantages. Informatively, Leiserowitz (2006) provides a robust framework for understanding how affect and values shape climate policy preferences, backed by empirical data that persuades through logic and authority. For an academic audience, this approach is compelling, as it aligns with expectations of evidence-based reasoning. Moreover, the written format allows readers to revisit complex arguments at their own pace, fostering deeper comprehension—an advantage over, say, a fleeting documentary clip. Indeed, the article’s detailed discussion of risk perception directly informs policy debates, an impact less achievable in more casual genres like memes.
Limitations and Compromises
Nevertheless, this genre and medium have notable shortcomings. The scholarly article’s formal tone and complex language can exclude non-specialist audiences, limiting its reach. Emotionally, it struggles to inspire action; unlike a documentary, it cannot harness powerful visuals of melting glaciers to evoke urgency. From the audience’s perspective, especially for those outside academia, what is lost is accessibility and emotional resonance. Leiserowitz’s (2006) focus on data over narrative compromises the ability to connect with individuals who prioritise personal or visual storytelling over statistics, arguably reducing the piece’s persuasive impact on public opinion.
Conclusion: Shaping Understanding Through Genre and Medium Choices
In conclusion, the analysis of Leiserowitz’s (2006) scholarly article reveals how genre and medium shape the communication of climate change. The scholarly genre ensures credibility and depth but sacrifices accessibility, while the written medium offers precision yet lacks emotional appeal. From an audience perspective, engaging predominantly with scholarly articles over more emotive genres like documentaries or social media posts risks fostering a detached, analytical understanding of climate change, potentially downplaying its urgency. Conversely, over-reliance on visual or casual media might oversimplify the issue, missing critical nuances. Therefore, a balanced consumption of diverse genres and media is arguably essential to grasp both the stakes and depth of climate change, encouraging a more informed and empathetic position.
References
- Leiserowitz, A. (2006) Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect, Imagery, and Values. Climatic Change, 77(1-2), pp. 45-72.
