Chapter 1. Introduction

Climate change is no longer a distant threat — it’s a present reality reshaping our planet.

The scientific basis for this crisis is overwhelming: about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening​ (1). There is near-unanimous agreement that burning fossil fuels and other human activities are driving up global temperatures. The consequences of this warming are already unfolding: rising sea levels, more intense heatwaves and wildfires, severe storms and floods, and disruption of ecosystems and agriculture. Scientists warn that climate change is causing “dangerous and widespread disruption” to natural systems and human lives, already affecting billions of people around the world​ (2). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) describes it as a “grave and mounting threat to our wellbeing and a healthy planet”​ (2). Some changes – from melting glaciers to vanishing species – may be effectively irreversible. And those who are least equipped to cope with these changes (often poorer communities and developing nations) are being hit the hardest​ (2). In short, the climate crisis is the defining challenge of our era, with stakes that couldn’t be higher.

Climate News and Its Impact on Mental Health

Reporting on climate change isn’t just about facts and figures — it also involves real human emotions. The way climate news is delivered can inspire people to act, but it can also leave them anxious or overwhelmed. Many readers and viewers today experience climate anxiety (sometimes called eco-anxiety or eco-distress) when faced with constant news of droughts, disasters, and an uncertain future. The American Psychological Association defines eco-anxiety as “the chronic fear of environmental cataclysm” resulting from observing climate change and worrying about the future​ (5). In simpler terms, it’s a profound sense of dread about where the planet is headed. And this feeling is on the rise. In one recent poll, 53% of adults said that climate change is already affecting their mental health​ (6), a number that has grown over the past few years.

It’s not surprising that people feel this way. For many, the news media is the primary source of information about climate threats. Stories about collapsing ice sheets, devastating wildfires, or climate refugees can understandably trigger strong emotional responses. Climate coverage often elicits feelings of fear, sadness, anger, and helplessness​ (7). Among these, worry and anxiety are especially common reactions​ (7). Psychologists note that this response is rational — anxiety is a natural reaction to a looming danger, and climate change does pose real dangers​ (5). However, if people are bombarded with catastrophic headlines without any sense of agency or solutions, that anxiety can tip into paralysis.

As a media professional, being aware of climate anxiety and related emotions is part of responsible reporting. Constant doom-and-gloom coverage can inadvertently feed a sense of despair that makes audiences shut down. There’s a fine line to walk: it’s critical not to downplay the seriousness of climate change, but an onslaught of dire news without context or hope can harm mental well-being. Presenting only worst-case scenarios may foster a public narrative of inevitable doom.

Conversely, journalism that acknowledges these anxieties and offers constructive angles can make a difference. People tend to cope better when they see that there are solutions in progress and actions they can take. In fact, some research suggests that a moderate level of climate worry can motivate engagement, especially if individuals feel there are ways to address the threat​ (7).

The key is balance. Audiences should come away informed about the risks and aware of efforts to combat those risks. If news reports cover not just what’s wrong, but also what’s being done (or could be done) to fix it, they can inspire hope instead of hopelessness. Without that balance, “doomism” can take hold — a sense that catastrophe is inevitable and nothing we do matters. Indeed, experts have observed that when media coverage lacks attainable solutions, people may lose hope and simply accept a disastrous future as fate​ (3). That’s the opposite of what we want. We want an informed public that feels empowered, not paralyzed by fear.