Too much negative news?

It’s hard to escape news about climate change and while there are regular positive breakthroughs, most of the news people see about the climate is negative.

What is more useful to the world: positive news about climate change or negative news about climate change? This week we want you to make a difficult decision by answering the question:

Whose opinion do you agree with most?


Comments (384)

You must be logged in with Student Hub access to post a comment. Sign up now!

  • I believe that balance is the key to this matter. Currently, I mostly see negative news about weather and almost no positive news. Because of that, I often prefer not to watch anything of the kind. It makes me feel like everything is going downhill.
    However, it isn't true. There are a lot of people who are actually working hard to solve this problem. I feel like they are not being talked about enough. They need to get the credit they deserve for it. Also, if more successful campaigns were presented on TV, then maybe more people would watch them and think that there is still a chance. They might feel empowered by such positive facts and start helping too.
    On the other hand, if people only hear positive facts, then they are very likely to believe everything is alright, so they don t have to put any effort into it. That's why, from my point of view, people should have access to information about the actual situation, with the good and the bad.

    1. A well thought-out comment. If they've got access to everything, what measures can be put in place to ensure that they don't become overwhelmed?

      1. I believe that in order not to get overwhelmed with information, the news should present some facts, both good and bad, but not get into too much detail. As there are more than just a few news publishers, I think that each article should be divided into three categories.
        1. The main one that only presents the headlines
        2. The second one talks about what has been done, who participated and maybe some information about future campaigns.
        3. The third one which gives the most detail.
        Most likely, people won't read the third one unless they are really passionate about the subject. This way, they can read as many articles as possible without getting overwhelmed, due to the fact that they don't need to get into much detail. For some, just the first category will be enough. Students, for instance may need to do a project, but they may not need the whole detailed article.
        From my point of view, another way of not getting overwhelmed by the news is self-control. If you feel like all the information is too much, then I suggest you take a break. After some fresh air, you might be ready to read the news again and analyse. You can ask yourself: Is this information true? How will it affect me and how will it affect others? An important aspect about this is that while we might be doing our best to help others, we shouldn't destroy our own mental health. If we only help somebody once or twice and then we are forced to give up because we overworked ourselves, then we haven't done much, have we?

        1. A great explanation for your opinion with some sound advice. Well done!

        2. I just wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your approach to managing news consumption. I think it's really thoughtful and practical to categorize articles and emphasize self-control and mental health. By structuring news articles into different levels of detail, readers can engage with the information at their own pace and according to their needs. Plus, your reminder about the importance of self-care and avoiding burnout while staying informed is so crucial in today's fast-paced media environment. It's all about finding that balance between staying informed and maintaining mental well-being, and I think your approach is spot on!

    2. I agree because... Yes, seeing positive news will comfort people but showing too much of it will make them feel too comfortable. Showing bad news will make people stand on their toes but showing too much bad news will make them feel worried. At this point we can all agree that balance is the key. A mixture of the good and bad news will help people know all the bad things that happen in our climate but keep them encouraged with the good news. The bad news will keep them vigilant and the good news will keep them positive about the future.

      1. Balance is key - good point.

    3. Hello!
      I strongly agree with you when you say that people should be shown every angle to the story both the good and the bad and as you have rightly pointed out if the right balance is not struck it could lead to uninformed decisions but I don't think we have talked enough about the role of the wider society.
      I believe that most of the pressure of climate change and global warming has been put on our governments, its agencies, and other global organizations rather than focusing on the uninformed population which also contributes greatly to the effect of global warming.
      People in rural areas don't have access to the internet and other news sources as such they make no effort to change the patterns of their daily lives to one which is conducive to the environment. For instance here in Africa in the rural areas, people cook by burning things such as firewood and coal thereby releasing harmful substances like carbon dioxide which is a major contributor to global warming.
      In essence, I am trying to say that yes the topic is whether positive or negative news should be shown I think it is beyond this and we have to understand this before we can fully curb climate change and global warming and profer informed decisions and solutions.

    4. Hi ! , i agree with your points watching news and seeing these bad things happening does make me feel like everything isn't working out, but it also exposes me to the reality of the events that are occurring and shows me that this is a topic that isn't covered enough or needs to be talked way more. I also agree with you on there needing to be balanced because people need to see these people that are actually working to make a change and give credit where credit is due but i also think when they launch campaigns they should also include videos, images, and interviews from places where climate change is affecting communities so that people know what the activist are actually fighting for and so that they can also get inspired to join the act and help.

      1. I agree because... Negative news will actually spread more awareness and important information than positive news. Positive news will show them the good side, the side that shows that everything is working out, but it isn't. Negative news however will make it known that if something is not done, there will be consequences. But in this situation, balance is paramount. Positive news is important if we want to keep people optimistic but negative news will also be needed if action is needed.

    5. In my opinion, I think you are completely right, but a problem arises from this solution. It is hard to get that balance on speaking the fact that everyone is different. Some people find it more motivating to help the planet when they hear more good news and others vice versa. So, it is hard to really balance it out. It is a good idea, but it is hard to enforce it.

    6. I agree because yes we should all listen to both the positive and negative news about the eco-climate change.
      Let me start with the positive facts as you said marvellous_hedgehog that "if people listen to the positive facts, they are likely to believe everything is alright" actually that is true so yes, I agree with your comment on that which is good. Now down to the negative news of the climate change, I actually will say something about it but before that let me say something about what you have said, not forgetting, that yes for some people if they listen to the negative news they will actually feel discomforted and also sad, now concerning the climate change people may start to become worried about which is true,but the climate change towards the negative news being listed to, some of us will sincerely take it as though we are not doing enough that we should do more so as to secure the climate change for the better of the future. Thanks.

      1. I agree because we are supposed to listen to two sides both the positive and negative. When people listen to the positive side the tend to think that they are safe and everything is all right and this makes them more willing to engage in climate action and to encourage others to do the same. I’m not the only one who experiences this effect: Research has shown that positive news framing of climate change minimizes fear and anger, while increasing hope and the likelihood of people fighting against climate change,while the negative news on climate change can make people feel more threatened by other social groups it also makes people to be more concerned for climate change and it increases people’s intention to act pro-environmentally.

    7. I agree with marvellous hedgehog because spreading bad news about the climate change it makes/helps to create self awareness about the environment. ,any people has lost their lives and properties because they fell so reluctant when they continue hearing the good news about the climate change without them knowing about the upcoming earthquake or tsunami that is about to happen in their environment.

      When people continue to hear only positive news about the climate or eco-system, they will think everything is alright, and so they will also fell there is nothing to do than to relax.

      From my own point of view, I think people should have access or be aware of informations about the climate change and always stay updated whether the news is good or bad in other to be in a safer place.
      Thanks.

      For example, if an earthquake begin to happen, people will say the government did not inform them about it and they will start blaming the government for what is not true.

    8. I totally agree with you. Having a balance is the best that could happen. We can not say that ONLY negative or bad news can be shown.
      I also agree with you we need more successful campaigns on TV. We are mostly shown the bad consequences the climate change brings like flooding, ice melting.... but we they are not offering practical solutions to specific environmental problems. I think that a lesson about environment should be exclusively taught at our school and be part of the basic curriculum.

    9. You raise a valid point. Balancing news coverage can inspire positive action and acknowledgment of those working towards solutions. It's crucial to present a realistic view of both challenges and successes. 👏
      Certainly! Achieving balance in news reporting involves showcasing not only the problems but also the efforts and solutions. By highlighting success stories and the hard work of individuals addressing issues, media can inspire a sense of hope and empowerment. This approach can encourage collective action and engagement from the public. Striking this balance fosters a more informed, motivated, and proactive society in addressing challenges like climate issues.

    10. Yes! I totally agree! There is hardly any good news here in Georgia, USA. Every time I go watch the news, some crime was committed in Atlanta or Dekalb. People are slowly losing hope in the world because they're used to seeing someone passing or someone robbing a store! It's horrid that we are used to seeing things as it's a strange day for me if a crime wasn't committed in North or South Dekalb!

      This is exactly what we need to live by and I am so happy more people realize that we need to have hope in the world if we want to see it change for the better. You are definitely getting a thumbs up for me!

    11. I fully agree with this statement as constantly seeing only bad news makes alot of people feel like everything is going downhill.
      It was great how you explained both sides to the argument in great detail and then came to your own point of view/conclusion.
      I also agree with your final point that people should have access to both the good and bad. I agree with this as to find out the full image and scale of the situation everyone needs the good and bad to form the best outcome.

    12. I agree with you. Balance is the key. And you are right. If you only hear good news then we may believe that everything is OK . This can make us feel relieved and ignore the real problems our planet has. Nature has changed during the years and is still changing. We need to know all the real facts so as to be prepared for the future.

    13. Hello marvellous hedgehod,
      I agree with the point you are making on striking the balance on the positive / negative news on climate change and other related environmental news. I notice you stated that if more successful campaigns were presented on TV, then maybe more preople would get involved in pro-environmental actions. How important do you think the role of media is in setting people's opinion and minds on a specific topic?

      1. I believe that news have maybe one of the biggest influences on our lives. We take most of our information from the media. We also tend to believe many things that are written in the news. So they have quite an impact on us. For example, if we read something negative about a certain person online, it changes our opinion about them entirely. The news have the power to control people's point of view. And it is normal, given that people need a source in order to form an opinion. In history class, I have learned that in Middle Eve, the church had the biggest influence in a kingdom. The church could even cause a revolution, only by telling something to the population. It was their decision to listen to it or not, but they mostly did. After all, they had no other way of knowing the truth. I think that the media nowadays has a pretty similar purpose. As the church used to inform the people about what was happening, so are our current "News". Thankfully, it is now easier to check if the information is accurate or not. We have the possibility to read more than one source. It is also known which big news providers are to be trusted and which have lied in the past. There will always exist the possibility of being wrong, but at least now we have more options. From my point of view, we should constantly be aware of what some news can make of us. Sometimes, we don't even realize that we are being influenced.

        1. Thank you for sharing your opinion on the impact of news on our lives. I agree that news may greatly influence how we see the world and create ideas. You raise exciting comments and similarities with the role of the church in the Middle Ages.
          I have two questions for you if you don't mind.
          -How do you determine which news source to trust and which to avoid.
          -I s there a way to determine whether or not a news source is influencing us?.

    14. I strongly agree with you because news is to make people know what is happening around the globe so it will not be fair to lie to people by giving positive news because as you said, climate change itself is negative. I also think that people should be credited when they make a move about climate change so that they can continue to strive harder to halt climate change.

    15. that's a vivid point there, the new reports have to talk positively too, I mean you can't tell me that a person will get encouraged if they get only bad news about the climate especially those who have contributed to reducing the effects of climate change, for example, as students we have some subjects that we are weak and your teacher complains a lot about you, then you decide to put in the effort and your teacher keeps giving you an earful of how bad of a student you are instead of encouraging you then obviously you will stop putting effort because it will seem like there is nothing you would do to secure a good grade so you just stop. This also applies to those people who have tried to improve our climate and they keep getting bad news after all the efforts they have put in. At some point, they might just give up cause it seems like all their effort just went down the drain.

    16. Hello marvellous_hedgehog,

      I agree with a majority of what you are saying since the things you are stating are wonderful when placed the contexts of how much the different kinds of news can affect people's mental health as well as how their mental health can severely affect their actions. Since a majority of the world's population knows about climate change, but many people either could care less about what people do to help or they know nothing about how an abundance of people try for weeks on going to months try to solve this problem. As you said of how balance is key especially when it comes to spreading information via news, social media, or website articles. When people hear these terrible stories of how glaciers are breaking, ocean levels rising, and continents eventually ending up smaller having can have and have had people freaking out about when the world will end and having them question their life expectancy. While if people hear the positives along with the negatives, people can have these ideas conjure up in their heads that if I recycle more than I can help stop this much plastic pollution in the ocean, if I go to this protest with this large group and post on my story people can see how people need to help the Earth by taking public transport more than driving, or even just people always taking up their trash wherever they go they can help us have less pollution on the streets.

    17. I agree the statement because as we all consider that "Life is like a riding bicycle, which needs to be balanced".So while making this decision that which news is better regarding climate change - good news or bad news? The answer comes here that the news should be balanced. They both should be balanced, which should make a difference in people's thinking. As we can read these days bad news about climate change getting flashed in bold letter through news channels or newspapers. We can rarely see, any good project news, flashed again and again, or an outcome or result, which make us feel enthusiastic towards nature and make them feel proud amongst themselves.
      But an important point comes here, to read a balanced news : Negative or Positive ?
      If we excessively read negative news, it would make us over think and think in a pessimistic way. An aggrandized negative exposure can make feel people that world is inescapably bad, which would lead to emotional distress in our mind. It would be really difficult for the people to concentrate on a particular topic, and bad thoughts or dreams would wander in their mind. It can also cause them mental health related problems such as anxiety which would make them difficult to face the real world. It would also cause us fear, of facing the world in its problems.
      Positive - A positive news is good on other side, but if people would get news in over-elaborated form which would make person think positive and relieve their stress which can make them think that everything is going in a smooth way, and they do not need to pay attention around the world.It would make them stress free, which can make them lazy in their routine habits and they wouldn't add any efforts to the world.

      A balanced news may contain all of the news, whether it may be positive or negative in an adequate manner. The negative news can make us worry about the nature world, which would make us aware of the daily news. It may also make us eager, to know about the current updates, which would increase our knowledge and make us think of new ideas! Which would be for the betterment of the environment of our world. Positive news may help us in giving a helping hand towards nature. The positive news could make us know about the positive results or outcomes of the project tested by government and the people. Positive news may curious us to help our nature, and contribute through new ideas towards nature, which would embrace all the citizens of our nation.

    18. l argee with marvellous hedgehog because most parents don't want their chlidren to worry so much about climate change and they can be scared easily .But the only age you can hear about climate change is 9 and over. People are suffering because of climate change ; we need to come together to stop it or it will get worse and worse .
      THANK YOU FOR READING MY OPINION !!!!

      1. I disagree because... I think parents would like children to know about climate change so that they don't repeat the same mistakes they made and don't grow up having eco anxiety. And you are trying to say children below 9 years are the only ones going to get frightened about climate change. Do you know that even adults have eco anxiety? They care way more than the children do.

    19. Hello,
      I strongly agree with you. A balance between good and bad is for the most part beneficial. To be able to fix this problem as soon as possible it is important to give the right amount of good and bad news to not discourage or get people to think that the problem is resolved. When I hear positive news it warms my heart, but when I hear negative news I suddenly get worried. This is why, it is very important to show the good side of fixing our environment so we don't lose hope, and can get as many people as possible to contribute to the solution, increasing our chances of saving our planet, thank you.

    20. I totally agree It should not just be black and white . A balance of good an bad news is key for a motivated population. In our debate today in class was about too much bad news and too much good news and it was really fun.

    21. Wow, I couldn't agree more with marvellous_hedgehog! You've raised such an important point about how we tackle climate change. It's crucial to provide a balanced view of the situation. Yes, we need to acknowledge the challenges and potential negative impacts, but we must also highlight the positive efforts and solutions being implemented. When we provide a comprehensive view of both successes and obstacles, it empowers people to take action while also maintaining a realistic understanding of the situation. Balanced reporting can inspire individuals to contribute to solutions without feeling overwhelmed or complacent. It's all about finding that perfect balance between awareness of the issues and hope for positive change.

    22. Balance in media coverage of environmental issues is crucial to acknowledge progress while highlighting challenges, inspiring informed action.

  • This decision was a tough one. I voted that people should only be shown bad news about climate change.
    It was hard for me to choose because sometimes when one continually receives bad news, they begin to lose hope. But sometimes even the slightest bit of good news can cause someone to try harder and inspire them to do better.
    But I chose only bad news because I felt that if a lot of people begin to realise that their activities are hurting their habitat, it will stir them to act, to do something about it. I felt that if all we receive is good news, then nobody will actually realise the direness of our situation and our earth's situation. We need to be aware.

    1. I agree with you, this is because when someone hears good news over and over again, it causes them to relax, and not to fully analyze the situation, to see what's actually going on behind the scenes. Most times, we actually need bad news to cause us to pay attention and see our faults and make us correct them. For example, in areas were technology and telecommunication is scarce, such as rural areas, they may not even know what is happening to our planet. They may notice that the place is getting warmer, or that their land is receiving less rain and other adverse effects of climate change, but they may not know the cause, and so continue in ignorance to engage in activities that hurt our planet, such as burning of fossil fuels and deforestation.
      In conclusion, hearing bad news can prompt us to put in more effort to save the planet. Like invigorated anteater said, we need to be aware.

      1. At first, I thought when one is given constant bad news it helps them get into action.Where as, when they are given good news about the effort other people have made and the positive impacts, they are motivated to start doing something.For instance, when I am scolded on my constant failure in a subject, I feel scared and examination fever comes in. But when I am applauded, I am pushed to exceed my limits .The same occurs when there is constant bad news on climate change and could prompt people to turn a deaf ear to the direness of our situation.Because, they have lost all hope and given in to fear.In some cases, certain people might feel suicidal.Yes good news help us to relax but ,those who are relaxed always analyze situations better and look for best ways to make the planet a better place.That is not a weakness rather a strength.
        Thank you

        1. Before seeing your comment I think I forgot that a coin has two sides; for I made myself believe that if people are shared with bad news about the reality of this ravaging situation then only will they take the desired actions. But you made me realise that such bad news might just be the root for eco anxieties. If a person is introduced to a much optimistic side of a situation, they proceed with a subtle patience and understanding. It underscores the importance of maintaining a balance in communication to inspire positive actions without causing undue distress.

      2. I disagree because when people are only being shown bad news constantly, it can discourage them and make them to lose hope. But when they are show news, it can also motivate them work harder in order to make the society a better place for everybody

    2. I agree because...
      Although bad news is not something we all want to hear, but let's face it we are in dire need of a good, long-lasting, and efficient solution to save our planet. Despite all the excitement of the digital age and its technological advancements, I think this is where it really counts, I mean the discovery of good technology is meant to find efficient solutions to our ongoing problems rather than creating greater problems such as the one we are discussing right now right?
      Simply we need to find solutions to solve our ongoing climate conditions and we need to act fast

      1. I think it is important to find a middle ground between being exposed to too much negative news and positive news. Positive news can make us feel relaxed and complacent, and not motivate us to take action to improve our environment. Negative news can make us feel frustrated and hopeless, and not appreciate the progress we have made. Therefore, I believe we should balance our news consumption and be aware of both the challenges and the opportunities we face.

    3. I agree because we can only change the wrong we are doing if we are aware of it. People would not make efforts to be better if the keep hearing good news, when people hear bad news it challenges them and helps them to be more innovative and think of new ways to solve the problem they are facing.

      1. I agree because... I believe that informing people about the negative aspect of climate change is crucial. When individuals are aware of the changes the climate is facing they are more likely to engage with their communities in finding solutions to address and mitigate climate change

        1. I agree because... Hearing only bad news is really crucial to the people around you, so you can learn about your mistakes and find new ways to solve thier proplems. And if you only hear good news you won't know about your mistakes and keep doing those mistakes. And that's why I think you should only hear bad news.

        2. I strongly agree with you polite_king to an extent because negative aspects of climate change is crucial for individuals to know and develop ways on curbing this negative effects.
          My question for you here is do you think too much of these negative news can affect individual's health?

        3. Actually, what you have said can be true but I disagree with you because, remember that some people whenever they hear negative news about the climate change it can affect them mentally or otherwise so probably sharing more negative news about can do more harm than good to the health of the people.
          So in conclusion what I am trying to say is that negative news about climate change can actually do more harm but, I still go with what you have said but don't forget that it can damage to the people of the negative news of the climate change. Thanks.

      2. When a person continuously hears negative things, two changes can occur in their life. They can either try to make a positive change to it or give up entirely. I'll leave you to think which one society is doing today. I believe good news encourages people and give them hope and resilience to make a change.

        1. I absolutely agree with you original Robin. Around us, rarely do we hear good news about climate change. Most times, they edit the positive impacts making us feel like we are not even doing anything which tend to make people give up entirely.

        2. I agree because... Many individuals grapple with sadness when confronted with negative news about climate change. This emotional response often arises from the perception that not everyone is sufficiently caring for the climate. Moreover, many people struggle to communicate effectively within their community, fostering a sense of helplessness and a desire to disengage.

        3. I agree because... only hearing bad news makes those two thing happen very frequently but knowing the kind of people we are we will not give up but we will find more ways to reduce climate change and allow us to feel good knowing that we had a positive impact in the society.

    4. I agree with you because when people continually hear good news only, they tend to relax and no get bothered about the bad things going on around them. But with the bad news some may let reality dawn on them and realize what they've done and what they can do to correct their bad ways and make the world a better place.

      1. I strongly agree with you because more frequent and intense drought, storms, heat waves, rising sea levels, and warming oceans can directly harm animals, destroy the places where they live, and wreak havoc on people's livelihoods, communities as well as countries. As climate change worsens, dangerous weather events are becoming more severe ,so if this is not made known to people the will sit in the comfort of there home

    5. I like the what invigorative_anteater said about using bad news to motivate people to care for our planet is not a good idea because according to Graham Davey a professor of psychology in the University of Sussex said that reading bad news causes acute stress reactions and sore symptoms of post traumatic stress that can be quite long lasting.

    6. I totally get where you are coming from. While it might is important to highlight the positive actions being taken to address climate change, it is equally important to inform people about the negative impacts. By raising awareness about the negative impact like extreme weather event, habitat destruction and rising temperatures people can be motivated to take action and make necessary changes in their lives. It is not about focusing solely on the bad things, but rather providing a balanced perspective that encourages people to be proactive in addressing climate change. Sharing the bad things about climate change raises awareness about potential consequences it helps people realize that urgent action is needed to mitigate these effects. by understanding the challenges, we can work together to create a sustainable and resilient future for ourselves and future generations

      1. That's a superb idea radical_black_bear! I really like the way you explained both the negative and positive actions to be taken...How about diving into renewable energy as it plays a vital role in addressing climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and dependence on fossil fuels.
        The benefits of renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and hydroelectric power, highlighting their environmental sustainability and potential for long-term energy security. It emphasizes the need for transitioning to renewable energy systems on a global scale to mitigate the impacts of climate change and create a more sustainable future.

    7. Your concern for raising awareness through the direness of situations is valid, but it’s important to consider the potential impact of incorporating positive news into the narrative. While constant exposure to negative news can induce anxiety, and encourage feelings of helplessness, integrating positive narratives into the conversation can inspire hope and champion pro-active engagement.
      Ever thought about how bad news affects mental and physical health? What if balancing negative news with positive stories alleviates stress and inspires change?
      Additionally, examples of positive developments in climate change, like affordable technologies and efforts to assist vulnerable nations, provide hope amidst challenging news.
      Insight from a study shows that positive news stories motivate individuals to take proactive steps, challenging the belief that scaring people into action is most effective.
      In order to annul the negative impact of bad news, strategies like taking breaks, listening to better news, and setting boundaries on news consumption are effective ways to maintain a balanced perspective on climate-related issues.

    8. Yes ,I support your opinion . If person hear bad news daily it made him/her realize the situation around them and bad news create negative impact in human mind . But good news motivate and inspire them to do progress in their livelihood



      That's from my opinion

      1. I disagree because if we keep are hearing bad things about climate change soon we would lose our hope and stop trying to prevent it. If awareness should be speard among people we can use positive and negative news so that they know there is something that they can do about it .

        1. Exactly, I believe there should be a balance of both good news and bad news so people can see both the pros and cons in order to motivate them by them weighing their options. Thereby reminding them of the urgency of the situation and monitoring their lifestyle e.g recycling

        2. I disagree because I because the constant reminders of the unstable effects of climate change can influence a person to do more because the unpleasant feeling about the boundless threat of climate change present, they are able to persuade themselves into thinking they have control over the situation which conveys into greater effectiveness in the belief that their actions will make a difference.

    9. Hello invigorated_anteater
      I agree with you alot as hearing only bad news will make us lose hope but even if we hear a slightest bit of good news it will make us have a little amount of hope so we will try even harder.
      But if we only hear good news, we will only be relaxing as we will think there are only good news and no bad news about any topic so we won't think much of it and start being a bit lazy and like reasoning_knowledge said bad news will make us see our faults and we can pay attention to them so we can correct them.

    10. I agree because nowadays people migrate from the country due to problems like this, symptoms of climate change are all around us: extreme weather, year after year of record-breaking warmth, fires, and stress to ecosystems. Many of these consequences will create hardship for humans.
      The effects of climate change on human health are increasingly quantified. Rising temperatures and changes in weather patterns are increasing the frequency and severity of heat waves, droughts, floods, landslides, hurricanes, and other causes of injury as well as illness. It has made a big difference in the lives of so many people

      1. Migration due to climate change is a great topic and a really big issue. What is your opinion on this?

        1. Climate migration is the moving of people from their habitats due to climate change. Hotter temperatures can threaten agricultural livelihoods, sea-level rise can make floods more severe, and desertification can foster conflict over water access.
          To reduce the rate of climate migration, we must cut greenhouse gas emissions, by;
          - Renewing energy (bioenergy, geothermal, solar and wind)
          - Waste reduction (recycling)
          - Increase of fuel efficiency (transportation)

    11. I agree with you because if people are aware of the bad news of the climate they tend to take steps to avert it. This is due to fear of the damage it could cause to the future, in the poll it was said that 75% of people are frightened of the future, such people who are scared will go any length to avert the apocalypse they are scared of. This doesn't mean people shouldn't be told good news about the climate, because when told they still tend to work towards improving the climate.

    12. You are right about the fact that says people should be shown bad news. Good news can also be shown to people to encourage them to work and persevere harder in order to make their environment a better place for everybody to live happily without any problems and challenges that are around us like flooding and global warming.

    13. I also voted on showing people bad news because when people see what is happening around them they will try to avoid that particular thing for instance when ignorant people are told to not put dirt in drainages so that it will cause the drainages to be blocked, resulting to flooding they will get scared and decide to stop doing such act .

    14. I agree with you that showing bad news increases the level of Eco-anxiety among bad people. Still, I chose to look at it from the angle of a Doctor not telling the client the gravity of his or her sickness thereby leading to sudden death.

      The weight of the effect of climate change must constantly be placed before the global community so that we all know the import of our activities on our environment. Perhaps, just perhaps, this will influence our activities that negatively affect the earth.

    15. I agree with invigorated_anteater because climate change affects the world. It can lead to some places in the world being destroyed and it can also cause a suffocating sensation or even depression. Among the latter group of people, it is quite common for them to feel a strong sense of guilt about the situation of the planet, which can be aggravated among those who have children and making them worried for their children’s future and the effect climate change will have in the nearest future.
      There are many negative aspects of climate change, including increasing sea levels, global warming, greenhouse gas emissions, and more, that endanger human health, welfare and the planet Earth. It is crucial that people are informed about the negative effects of climate change in order for them to understand how human activities such as urbanization and industrialization are impacting the planet Earth and putting not only the human race but the entire planet and everything on it in grave risk.

      1. I see you feel that the negative news will yield better results in the stabilization of our climate. Yes, negative news will trigger guilt which will make people work towards a stable climate for their family but if you should weigh the benefits of positive warnings over the negative, you'll find out that the positive warning is a more effective way to face this issue. The reason being that, the pressure that the fear of catastrophe happening will likely cause panic and will even result to people following the wrong method towards achieving the goal, it may even raise dark emotions like dislike towards those who don't share their goal. But with positive news, they are more likely to act calmly but at the same time, think clearly for a solution to the problem and instead of developing dark emotions, they try to convince those who don't share their goal to aim towards a better climate, therefore, increasing the people who are working towards a stable climate.

    16. I agree also because it was also so hard for me to decide whether to say "people should listen to negative or positive news about climate change" but at last I chose to say people should listen to negative news, for some people, they might ask me why my reason for why I chose to say that, in the eco-anxiety poll is my reason is cause of people should listen to positive news of such it might make us the humans not to care about the negative aspects which may be higher or even more dangerous to us who stay on the place we call Earth, but listen to the negative it will make us to be aware or rather have awareness of the negative aspects which will make us to sit up and be aware and to make us to keep the earth safe from the dangerous event reoccurring again.
      So I say yes we humans should be more aware of the negative aspects of climate change in the world and also don't forget KEEP TODAY CLEAN FOR THE FUTURE OF TOMORROW. Thank you.

    17. I agree but it was a tough one. I voted that people should only be shown bad news about climate change.
      Why I chose it because we citizens hear good news everytime without even hearing the negative side of news. And if we hear bad news we will not have the zeal to know more about the climate change.
      Citizens get sad when the are about to go to work and rain fall today and the will pros pond their activities for that day and the will lose 2% of their salary. Even the go to work under the rain the will fall sick. Same if you are working under the sun working to.
      And that is why we need climate scientist to tell us when a rain or sun will happen today.I felt that if all we receive is good news, then nobody will actually realise the direness of our situation and our earth's situation. We need to be aware.

    18. I disagree because I get worried whenever I hear negative news since climate change poses a major risk to human health and can have an impact on the food we eat, the water we drink, the air we breathe, and the weather we experience, which increases the risk to agriculture. There are too many negative stories about climate change, to the point where the news alone has alarmed a lot of people. Negative news is a good way of waking up the people and alerting them of the dangers of climate change but too much of it is counter effective. Therefore, in my opinion, we should all be informed of positive stories about climate change so that it will motivate people to work improve their habits so that they will reduce their carbon foot prints

    19. I agree with you! It was a tough decision. The best would be to balance good and bad news. However I chose good news. I think that a lot of bad news can cause too much stress to people about the environment. Of course they need to be aware but staying positive is the key. We need to know and all the good that happens and this will keep us motivated to make it even better.

    20. I agree with you on the fact that bad news should be only shown regarding climate change, though if one loses hope they may feel as if something needs to be done and attempt to solve the problem. Furthermore, hearing slight good news as I've seen and experienced instead causes people to believe that maybe there is no problem whatsoever, which can begin misinformation being spread that there is nothing wrong, in other words constant good news can change a narrative to something untrue. Not only would people believe nothing is wrong, but they'll also feel calm and not so persistent about this situation and later on try a lot less because things start to feel almost resolved.

      Although my thinking differed from yours in other aspects, I do agree that receiving bad news will stir people to act on change. As you've suggested that people will soon realize they themselves are harming the environment, they'll feel more obligated and guilty about climate change. When one feels guilt they'll soon at least try to fix things.

    21. In my perspective, people should be shown only good news. So, i strongly disagree with your view. To illustrate my point, although negative informing can make people perceive that their actions have detrimental implications to the environment, urge them to try to make a change for the future and transmute the way they see the world, positive informing is much more essential. For this purpose, positive news offer people a slight sight of hope and optimism that their world isn' t falling apart and there is still time to make a difference. So, i believe that negative news should be limited and only shown at several situations!

      1. Does this mean that the world should not be told about climate disasters that are happening at all, educated_revolution? How might the people who are experiencing the disasters feel about this?

        1. When I say that people must be informed about positive news, i don't mean that they should not be told about negative ones. I believe that people should be aware of the consequences their actions have and feel compelled to take steps in order to save the planet. Moreover, negative news can make people realize that there are other people who are in difficult situations and suffer from disasters. They have to put themselves in their position and try to understand how they feel. For example, a person who is experiencing climate disasters, feels knackered and agitated and stressed about whether they will manage to survive.

    22. I agree, I too voted to let people know only bad news as I think that it us better for people to know the reality, realize it and move on carefully rather then under only comfort, good news which is like living under fake hope.

    23. I agree
      Let's look at a business scenario. when things are ambiguous in a , it can be hard for workers to focus, and employees can spend a lot of time in presumption. This can distract workers from productivity, reduce engagement and lesson employee satisfaction (after all, worry and satisfaction generally don’t go together).Rumor gives people an opportunity to brainstorm. Eventually. When you’re straight with people and share more about what’s happening, they can stop spreading rumors and hypothesizing. It makes people to assume less and engaging more.

    24. I also chose that people should be shown bad news about climate change, because I believe the more people watch bad news, the more it will raise awareness that it is important to take care of the environment and then we will be able to save people and also be able to save our world. There are lots of things we can do to save our planet for example we can help our environment when we drive less and bike or walk more to reduce the fumes from our cars as these fumes posses health hazards like irritation of the eyes, affect respiratory organs when people breath in. Walking is a form of exercise that give strength to our muscles and bones, manage weight gain and reduce risk of illness and disease.

    25. I also voted for people should only told bad news about climate change because if they are only told good news about climate change,they will not really take preventive measures that will fight against climate change,while on the other hand,if people are only told bad news about climate change,they will put/make efforts to prevent climate change and save our planet earth.

    26. This is a well-reasoned choice, invigorated_anteater. Do you think it's possible to show people bad news in a way that doesn't make them lose hope?

      1. Yes, I do. It all depends on the way that the news is being laid down. When dealing with people, you have to let them down slowly. I feel that if one has to share bad news, they should do it in a way that people realize the gravity of the situation without being discouraging. Being able to deliver bad news is a key communication skill that needs to be employed in situations like this.
        Let me relate this to bad news about climate change. Imagine you wanted to tell people that due to climate change, temperatures may continue to rise until some places are no longer habitable. Instead of being pessimistic and delivering the news flatly, say, " Climate change will soon destroy the earth's habitats", be positive, calm and collected but honest. For example, " If we don't do anything about climate change, a lot of ecosystems may become uninhabitable due to increase in temperature. But, if we try, we can fix this together." You can decide to deliver some positive news alongside the negative news. When breaking bad news, we must consider people's feelings. I feel it will go a long way in reducing people's eco-anxiety.
        Thank you!