Perspective Chapter: Sustainability and Media Influence – The Role of Global Media in Creating a New Environmental Culture

Abstract

Media in today’s world, particularly those that disseminate information through digital platforms, are one of the most influential sources of impact on people and society. The chapter is an attempt to review some basic points about the role of media—traditional and digital—in creating a new environmental culture within the context of the environment and environmental crisis. The chapter explores issues about the origin and development of environmental crisis as cultural phenomena, as well as some ideas about the moral assessment of media influence in informing, presenting and forming a position toward the problems of the environment. The concept of sustainability is changing both its content and its ground, becoming associated not only with the development of the natural and social environment, but also with attempts to build a new environmental culture. The role of the global media is to inform and motivate all members of society, especially young people for sustainability. More important conclusions are that media, ethics, and environmental knowledge must be developed in cooperation in order to explain and form specific moral consciousness, a new type of culture that does not allow indifference to the environment.

1. Introduction

The problems of the development of the environment, man’s attitude to it, his interference in its functioning, and—unfortunately—its exhaustion and even ruin takes up an increasingly important place not only in the studies of biologists, ecologists, geographers, physicists but also in those of philosophers, sociologists, cultural scientists. And more recently, along with the digital change of media and the resulting global and decisive media influence on politics, worldview, culture and morality—also by media and media environment researchers. The concept of sustainability is changing both its content and its rationale, becoming associated not only with the development of the natural environment but also with attempts to build a new environmental culture, i.e., ways of thinking and behaving of contemporary societies and people in them that respect the principle of preserving and conserving natural diversity and impose norms of reverence for living and non-living nature, for ecosystems as sustainable natural systems that support and reproduce life on the planet, as well as for the environment created by humans—cities, towns, cultural heritage, etc. In this sense, education, public debate, and the media as an increasingly established social phenomenon of mass influence, play a major role both in preserving the heritage of previous generations as a material culture and in persuading society about the meaning of a sustainability policy. Moreover, in the contemporary social situation of digitalization and the technological revolution it has triggered—online platforms, social networks, and media pervasiveness—the latter is becoming a global tool for social impact. The digital change of society’s media architecture crosses national borders and creates a global community, a global audience, which is daily subjected to media influence. For example, one of today’s major environmental issues—climate change—is widely discussed and commented on in the media. The basic idea—a developing view that culture and environment are inseparable and arise from/within each other [1, 2]—can be complemented by the observation that global impact is needed to reinforce the norms and values of this culture, and this is what modern global media is capable of. One of the main objectives of our research is to investigate the role of global media influence on audiences successfully and with good consequences in order to promote the ideas of sustainability as development, anticipation, and trends of building a new environmental culture of respect and care for both natural and man-made eco-social systems. In order theoretically and methodologically to ground the process of influence of the media on the new environmental culture, we refer to ideas, studies, and authors who work in the field of ecology, environmental science, culture, and media and their impact on the formation of new values and norms of human attitude toward the natural and cultural environment. Thus, the methodological basis of our research are scientific publications of scientists who study not only ecological problems but also investigate their connection with the sociocultural activity of people, part of which is the media as an institution and as public communication. As well as those that explore the value dimensions of these issues.

2. The concept of sustainability

The idea of such an attitude toward the natural environment and its resources, which allows for the preservation of its diversity and protects it from destruction, has existed for a long time in human culture. There are various documents and prescriptions in which we can read on how to limit the use of natural resources to a reasonable extent and to enable the natural environment to renew itself as a natural ecosystem without losing any of its diversity. This also applies to the culture of the human social environment, with the idea that it should not be built at the expense of the natural environment, let alone destroy it. Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring (1962) and her formulation of “the obligation to endure” is an important theoretical step in this direction. “Only within the moment of time represented by the present century [20^th century – V.V.; N.M.] has one species – man – acquired significant power to alter the nature of his world” [3, 4]. The idea of this obligation according to R. Carson is based on the fact that we develop deadly pesticides much faster than natural processes of adaptation [3, 5]. Sustainable development concerns not only the treatment of the natural environment, but also that which man builds for himself and which must meet conditions that do not threaten or endanger his residence in it. In both aspects, the concept of sustainability has been questioned due to the numerous and frequent environmental, social, or health-epidemiological crises widely reported and interpreted by the media.

Although various scholars and researchers have drawn attention to the possibility of development without depletion of natural resources [2], the concept of sustainability has gained wide publicity and started to be used in everyday discourse notably actively since the so-called Brundtland report [6], which in a special section called The Concept of Sustainable Development describes the different requirements and positions to ensure the maximum satisfaction of human needs in harmony with man and nature. In a broader sense, this concept has great significance to human culture, to the way we think about and perceive the world, and of course to the way we act or make sense of the natural world within the framework of cultural heritage.

2.1 Environmental culture: culture and environment

The problems of the human relation to the environment—physical, natural, social, cultural—that surround people and in which they socialize and realize themselves as individuals have long been the focus of sociologists, anthropologists, philosophers and social ecologists. In today’s world, media, especially “new media”—disposed on digital online platforms—have become an integral part of the environment of human habitation and communication. This is the way they enter into what we define as culture. Regarding the interaction of culture as a specific human identification and presence in the world, which differs from the natural (a place of habitation unaffected by human’s intervention) environment—there are different positions among the authors dealing with this problem. For example, the well-known Norwegian philosopher Arne Naess writes that there is a process of increasing ecological unsustainability, which is global in scope. The point is that it is hard to change the process into one of “decreasing unsustainability”. We need to shift our point of view in ways of thinking from that of ecology to that of environment, according to Naess. “The … term [environment] suggests that we have to do with something outside humanity, something we regrettably are dependent upon” ([4], p. 143). It is man’s living in the world in a way, connected with nature, and its “rules” create sustainability, thinks Prof. Naess. According to his observations from his stay in Himalayas the specific and based on traditions of Sherpa culture in Nepal define strict rules regarding how to make use of trees and other raw materials for heating. Sherpa people live very high in the mountains—up to 4000 meters in the Himalayas with really cold and long winters. So, the vital need for heating is clear, but only dead trees were used ([4], p. 144). Prof. Naess argues that there are also ethical dilemmas, i.e., questions about values and choices concerning the natural environment. Traditional ethics is anthropocentric, i.e., it takes only human beings as being capable of moral choices and therefore subject to the moral responsibility of agency as beings possessing reason and therefore, the possibility of free choice. Environmental culture, according to Prof. Naess, creates another ethical system—that of the treatment of natural objects—plants, animals, ecosystems—to which man must also have responsibility. The ethics and practice in relation to forests and vegetation, as a rule, had been local in the sense of protection of natural reserves and materials, not in general ([4], p. 144). Professor Ness argues that this type of ethics—i.e., rules of human behavior toward nature—is at least local at present and does not have general acceptance or global reach and is therefore only inherent in some local cultures. According to Prof. Naess, delectable ecological ethics with moral practice in many non-industrial countries are valid and dominant in primarily local areas ([4], p. 144).

The idea about the environment is linked to the one about the nature. Nature and culture are interconnected. In different cultures nature means something that exists, we do not have uniquely vision of it animate or inanimate, and this carries a strong meaning, writes the Norwegian philosopher.” Nature exists as a material and conceptual reality… different human groups understand and define nature according to their cultural traditions…” ([4], p. 42]. The notion of nature and the way to interact with it is therefore not universal and may be shaped by a cultural context through which individuals or societies view its elements—animate or inanimate. It is through culture that man forms his relationship to nature, either as a source of raw materials and resources or as an important part of the environment he inhabits, rather than perceiving it directly. And the preservation of the sustainability of this environment also means the preservation and conservation of the human presence in the world—its culture, achievements, progress. In other words, the attitude toward nature, the awareness of its inseparable presence and impact on people, depends entirely on them. Different cultures around the world have different ways of perceiving their environment and its dimensions. Examining the Andean vision of nature, the Spanish University of Santiago de Compostela lecturer German Vargas Callejas describes it as an ecosystem where humans, flora, fauna but also supernatural or spiritual beings constitute a whole (social and spiritual) which attaches purpose and meaning to everyday life, the things we find in it and the actions we take. “A global and holistic reality where human beings represent only one more element in the whole” ([5], p. 43). Similar ideas about the environmental worldview of different cultures, which includes not only natural but also supernatural elements, can be observed in different countries around the world. The main understanding that connects them is that it is this wholeness that creates stability, becomes a guarantee of it and “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations”, which is also the accepted definition of sustainability. However, there is another type of culture for which Prof. Arne Ness, we think, correctly notes that the small minority of people around the world (about 500 million) are responsible for most of the decline and even for the degradation of conditions for maintenance of life on Earth and allow and support patterns of culture that favor irresponsible reproduction ([4], p. 148).

2.2 Media and media influence: global media

Media in today’s world, especially those that disseminate information through digital platforms, are one of the most influential sources of impact on people and society, including in shaping their political, moral, economic, or worldview culture [7]. There are also different theories dealing with media influence, which can be described with the term media effects. One of the first studies of this effect, also known as magic bullet theory, claimed that “ideas from the media were in a direct causal relationship to behavior…the media could inject ideas into someone the way liquids are injected thorough a needle” ([8], p. 295). Marshall McLuhan also developed influential ideas about media impact with his concept of the crucial importance of communication and the technological nature of media in shaping the culture of societies. The Canadian thinker accepts that the visual sense is capable of creating the forms of space and time. These forms are continuous, uniform, and connected. That is why Euclidean space is the prerogative of visual and literate man, writes McLuhan. With the appearance of electric circuity and the immediate move of information a change occurs. “The Euclidean space recedes and the non- Euclidean geometries emerge…. The printed word created the Public. The Public consists of separate individuals each with his own point of view. Electric circuity…. creates the mass… [It] consists of individuals profoundly involved in one another” ([9], p. 112).

One of the most influential books to date that explores the specifics, mechanisms, and trends of media influence is personal influence: the part played by people in the flow of mass communications, by Elihu Katz and Paul F. Lazarsfeld. The authors thoroughly analyze the nature of media, the phenomenon of public opinion, and the one of mass communication. They consider media of communication as “a new kind of unifying force – a simple kind of nervous system – reaching out to every eye and ear, in a society characterized by an amorphous social organization and a paucity of interpersonal relations” ([10], p. 16). Both researchers with one mind emphasize the role of the media in contemporary society not only to inform but also to build common perceptions and attitudes toward important events, facts or processes in politics, worldviews, history, and most of all—toward the general social environment. The media, which convey information, sense, meanings, become that mechanism that connects people in the contemporary technologized and global societies and create a common notion, evaluation, attitude toward something that is not possible for individual or immediate observation by individuals. In other words, they build culture. In fact, many things in the world are inaccessible to direct empirical observation. So people must to rely on each other for making sense of and rationalize things ([10], p. 55).

In a more general theoretical perspective, journalism today is not always associated with the notion of broadcasting—the classical understanding of the dissemination of audio and video content, but also with online impact, multimedia or interactive implementation, or direct digital contacts with the audience. Professional communication in this always important and sometimes risky profession is going through significant changes that can be called fundamental. “Much of this change is experiential (in this case – from experience): media audiences are experiencing media convergence in the situations they find themselves in while connecting to network infrastructures” ([11], p. 6).

Media influence will continue to be the subject of various studies and even measurements. Indeed, as media change, and especially their technological nature—analog, electronic, networked, digital—so does the scope and significance of their influence and impact. The more the reach of the media expands by changing the way it is disseminated, the more influence it shows in society, and the more decisively it has the potential to change its culture. The emergence of what we will call global media has been driven by the technological Internet revolution and digital technologies, changing both the way media is used and the scope of their impact. But perhaps most important in this process is the emergence of a new culture virtually across the entire world—the culture of digital information and of technological media influence, culminating today in the emergence of AI in such systems as ChatGPT. This decisive change imposed by the development of technology raises an important question for journalists—about what important concepts mean in their professional work and whether a source based on artificial intelligence can answer questions concerning important moral, political, or even personal choices. “All this will raise questions about censorship, objectivity, and the nature of truth” [12].

The emergence of global media is associated with the ever-expanding influence of the Internet and digital communication technologies, as well as the emergence of increasingly sophisticated and increasingly compact devices for offering and perceiving information and media content. It is also part of the process of globalization—a large-scale transformation of the social, political, economic, cultural, and communication order, which affects the entire world. The way in which information, with the help of digital technologies, is distributed globally and there are no obstacles (except political or ideological) to reach every corner of the world is called by some authors the information highway ([13], p. 41). This creates conditions for global media influence and forms a new social culture of attitude and perception of media content. Including through the media, to perceive and realize events and processes affecting the future of the whole world, not only at the local level. In this regard, the problems and processes that affect the global environment of humanity play a major role. Among them, one of the first places is the one related to sustainability and development.

2.3 New environmental culture: the role of media

The problems related to the concept of nature (natural environment) and people’s attitude toward it are finding more and more space in the media all over the world. Some researchers even talk about environmental journalism, i.e. for such a genre and specialization in professional journalism that engages in work in the field of creating sustainability in the environment—current and future state, current and pressing issues, policy decisions related to it, etc. Important issues in this regard are those about the state of the climate and biological diversity and, for example, related ideas about the European Green Deal and the subsequent European Climate Pact, as well as the EU biodiversity strategy for 2030, which affect not only one separate country. Climate change is a phenomenon that transcends national boundaries. It is pointed out very often as a symbol of a “world risk society”. We can observe climatic changes all over the world, on all continents. Climate change also shows social, economic and political impacts around the globe ([14], p. 39). In addition to all this, people are responsible for something on which their present, and even more so, future depends. In this sense, any particularization and prioritization of private interests in the field of the natural environment carries an extremely serious risk. “When the British colonized Australia, they considered it ‘no man’s land’ (terra nullius), refusing to recognize the validity of any claims to ownership of this land by the local population. In the same way, people living today dispose of the resources of the planet Earth, treating the future as ‘no one’s time’ (tempus nullius), as if this time will not be inhabited by people of future generations” ([15], p. 419). People’s general concern for the climate is becoming one of the new and important moral norms and values of the culture. And it is no surprise that “climate change has received a considerable amount of media coverage globally since the mid-2000s” ([14], p. 40). On the other hand, though, the authors note that “media coverage [of climate change – V.V., N.M.] is strongly event driven and episodic, and it focuses on similar events across countries” ([14], p. 44). This inconsistency of coverage of environmental issues affecting all people can be observed in other respects, in coverage of environmental risks, for example, or in the media presentation of scientific articles and studies dealing with the state of the climate, natural resources, biodiversity, and the future of generations living in a polluted environment with depleted resources. The conclusions of Painter and Schaefer are based on the idea of paying attention to exploring the difference in media coverage of climate change (and other environmental issues) in different countries, as well as the implications of the emergence of digital media (according to the authors, traditional media are in crisis in many countries) in reporting on the global nature of climate change—“climate change has become a global media issue…in many countries, a “societal turn” seems to have occurred in which coverage turned away from the scientific aspects of climate change toward the political and social ones” ([14], p. 52). This is also one of the important characteristics of media influence: making society aware of the social problems that it faces and that require a common solution, providing facts, but also insisting on a clear journalistic position—social, political, moral—through which to point the way to solving various contradictions and social risks.

According to a worldwide study by the Reuters Institute for Journalism from 2020, online news sites of the biggest and most influential media organizations in the world are the second most popular news source across all markets [16]. In the survey cited respondents mention specialized publications covering climate issues (13%). Also they pay attention to alternative sources of information about the topics such as social media and blogs (9%). By comparison analog media such as printed newspapers and radio are pointed out as less important as a source of information and news than dialog with friends and family. Research points out that on average, 7% of respondents across all media markets expressed opinion that they do not pay attention to climate change news [16]. The research also shows a difference in the use of sources and media influence according to the age of the respondents. Young people tend to use digital online platforms much more, including because of the possibility of being followers of famous figures there—actors, athletes, activists, intellectuals, or they consider them more independent of political and economic dependencies and in this sense—for “more transparent”. The ubiquity of online media platforms enhances interest and engagement in the communication process through their networked nature. This, on the one hand, predisposes the users of these platforms to a greater engagement with environmental issues. The ability to share content on social networks and platforms related to environmental issues is an undeniable new hallmark of environmental culture. On the other hand, this is undoubtedly an example of the affirmation of this environmental culture, of a new, active attitude toward the natural environment, reflection on and sharing of information about its problems related to care for its sustainable development. In the research, we find some examples. In the United states, those who individuals who accept that climate change is not serious threat are as likely to share news about climate change online (by social media or email) as those who are notably disturbed about climate change. By contrast, in Chile, where the researchers record the highest degree of care for climate change and its consequences for the environment, most of the online sharing comes from those with the highest levels of concern. This is the picture that researchers observe in most other countries [16].

The power and the influence of the media in the contemporary society, as well as the professionals working in them—journalists, editors, managers, etc., to educate in the spirit of environmental culture and achieve sustainability is very significant. We must note that sustainability does not refer to the surrounding natural environment (nature) only, nor only to the human and social one, but is related to the education of specific values and ideals as part of the new culture. This undoubtedly includes such activities as influencing and informing through the media of new educational, informational, and political initiatives that support the affirmation of the new environmental culture. An important observation is that a large number of articles and publications on the topic are mainly concerned with the economic and business aspects of the risks of overconsumption. As some authors indicate the economic dimension seem over—dominant in the way the sustainability is used and discussed. Also very often there is predominant emphasis on economic growth and consumerism when we deliberate human development, to the detriment of its other forms and manifestations ([17], p. 6). The interest in the heritage of the ancestors, the commitment to preserve it for the future and for generations to come is also part of what could be called sustainability, because without it such concepts as identity, memory, cultural heritage, political continuity, linguistic and moral culture. Heritage can be material or intangible assets, cultural artifacts that are part of one’s memory and identity (in our country—Bulgaria, the statue of The Madara Rider or Madara Horseman is famous, a monument left from the Early Middle Ages) or ideas that identify the spirit and culture of a given nation. “Sustainability means including the living community in the heritage process and taking into account the cultural vitality of population…and finding ways to ensure…that the past contributes quality of life…” ([17], p. 13).

3. Conclusion

The role of the media in the building and development of the culture of the modern technological world will increasingly grow. This process is determined both by the maximizing sensitivity of societies to the problems of the environment, by the general concern for sustainable development in all respects, and by the need to anticipate and, if possible, avoid crisis situations that threaten the natural and cultural environment, which we live. For the modern world, all types of crisis—environmental, techno genic, and health, political, economic—seem to have become something natural, even according to some—almost inevitable. The need for a new environmental awareness and a new culture with values aimed at stopping the depletion of natural resources and preserving cultural heritage and wealth is obvious. In this regard, in conclusion, we can share the idea that the social and technological power of the global media, specially trained journalists with actual materials and columns, and with today’s decisive media influence regarding the formation of values and worldview positions should be directed to the preservation and protection of the environment, biodiversity, and cultural diversity. Along with this, more in-depth work and even more research related to the influence of the media on the achievement of sustainability and the formation of a new environmental culture is needed. Similar research is needed both for the purpose of studying the mechanisms and most effective ways of impact, especially through digital media platforms, and for determining the most important topics and positions that need public discussion and analysis. They will help to explain why, in different countries, the attitude toward the environment—natural and that of culture—is not unambiguous—sometimes positive, but in places—with mistrust and whether this phenomenon is a consequence of an inadequate media environment or other factors.

Acknowledgments

This article/research was funded by the Bulgarian National Science Fund, contract number № КП-06-Н65/9 from 12.12.2022, within the project “Transformation and convergent models of journalism in the process of digitalization and in digital society in a communicative context: a dispositive analysis.”

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.