First of all, it was a beautiful novel, a beautiful story, as Michel Fugain said. At the very beginning, for climate scientists, Twitter (now X) allowed exchanges with a community of researchers around the world, to discover new ideas. And then, especially from 2022, the strong resurgence of climate skeptic discourse, or even the appearance of climate conspiracy, could make them targets in France.
Last summer, climatologist Christophe Cassou decided to take a break, after suffering raids on X which invaded even his mailbox. “It’s the barrel of Danaïdes, trolls attract trolls,” he testified this week to the World. So when the attacks ad hominem became widespread and began to spill over into my life, I said stop. » At the start of the school year, he resumed his publications. At the Weather and Climate Forum, which takes place until this Saturday at the Cité des Sciences, in Paris, we went to meet researchers so that they could tell us about their relationship with social networks and their reaction to climate-sceptical posts, to insults or threats.
A network that is less attractive
“Twitter was a fantastic scientific monitoring tool, with the ability to interact with people from different backgrounds, who shed interesting light on subjects that are not mine,” explains paleoclimatologist Valérie Masson-Delmotte, former co-president of group 1 of the IPCC. And I’m losing that,” regrets the one who is very active and followed on the social network. An opinion fairly shared by climate economist Céline Guivarch and climate change researcher at Météo-France-CNRS Aurélien Ribes.
“It’s less useful to me,” says Céline Guivarch, who points out that probably due to a change in algorithm, her feed is less relevant and her posts less seen. The balance between time spent and negative comments versus what it brings is less good. So I reduced my presence. » The takeover of Twitter by Elon Musk a year ago changed the situation: they both questioned their presence and tested Mastodon or Bluesky.
2022, a year of structuring of the climate change community
The year 2022 is also pivotal in terms of structuring the “climate-denialist” community, as the mathematician David Chavalarias called it. In a study published in February 2023, he and three colleagues showed that there were 30% climate deniers among Twitter accounts addressing climate issues.
“What struck us most was the intensification of denialist activism in recent months, particularly in France,” he explained to 20 minutes at the beginning of the year. In 2019, this community was almost unstructured, had no hard core of activists, apart from 300 or 400 people. In 2022, around 10,000 very active accounts relay denial content.
“I don’t want to see myself dragged through the mud”
You only need to take a look under recent posts from researchers to read a certain number of contemptuous and denialist responses. Under a column calling on France to support a treaty on the non-proliferation of fossil fuels signed by Valérie Masson-Delmotte or Céline Guivarch, we find this type of comments: “you are really starting to break us with this scam”, “the scrology will bring more misery”, “rubbish, find out about the percentage of co2 on the earth”, “the scientific truth is elsewhere, but the followers of lies have a field day”, etc.
How to react to this? “On social networks, I block,” says Valérie Masson-Delmotte. At first, she tried to have a dialogue while remaining on the substance of the questions, which takes time. Today she questions the way in which X is managed by Elon Musk and the functioning of the algorithms, “which makes the multiplication of hate attacks recurrent”. “So, I don’t want to open a social network and see myself dragged through the mud,” she continues. For now, the paleoclimatologist is trying to better control the time she devotes to it.
“it remains a minority”
Céline Guivarch does not seek “to answer everything”. “There are always negative reactions, even insulting, but for me, it remains a minority,” she believes. And my faith, it doesn’t matter. » Last year, in a short format broadcast on YouTube, she projected herself in seven minutes into 2050, to talk about solutions to climate change. Although it received a majority of positive comments, “the radical nature of the all-out transformations has not necessarily passed, I have received very critical feedback, even insults. Not live, but afterwards, saying “but that’s naive, she’s crazy, she’s hysterical” or even “that’s not at all scientific”. It’s not very serious,” replies the economist with a laugh.
“That’s not the subject,” she even believes. We have arrived at a moment where the effects of climate change are evident and the need for radical transformation is beginning to emerge. Finally, there are interests that are visible, losers of this transformation and who are fighting against it. » Because despite denialism, researchers insist on this presence on social networks to continue to reach a wider audience, to explain the effects of climate change.
The choice not to be present on X
Less known, therefore “perhaps less exposed”, Aurélien Ribes indicates that he has also “observed the rise in power of this type of comments”, especially in the summer. But networks can be “a very distorted view of reality,” he says. I tend to be cautious about what that really means about society.” He is more concerned about recent studies carried out in France which show an increase in the influence of climate skeptics. No desire to give up at home either, but “rather the desire to work again”, he says.
To talk about the climate to the general public, some have chosen another arena: that of the stage. Eric Chaumillon, professor of marine geology at La Rochelle University, has a minimal online presence on Linkedin and does not have an account on X, an assumed choice. In 2018, with an actor and a designer, he created a “scientific show”, a show where instead of being “blatant” about the climate, he decided to laugh about it.
“We play a lot on the fact that they don’t understand anything, we make fun of the figure of the scientist, it makes people laugh,” he laughs. We try to break away from complicated speeches. » The professor of marine geology prefers to inform in this way. After the shows, “there are really almost friendly exchanges, since people clearly saw that the scientist on stage was someone normal, who could be destabilized, who could laugh, who could be wrong, etc. . A relationship of trust is established, with very engaged discussions. I’m looking for that more,” he admits.
Laughter as an outlet
Her thinking inspires Valérie Masson-Delmotte, who has long received climate skeptic attacks by email, post and on social networks. Faced with aggressive comments, she says that with her colleagues or her husband, she selects from time to time the best extracts and that they joke about them together.
“Sometimes it’s distressing what people can afford to do under cover of anonymity,” she says. And so the best thing is to laugh about it. “, But, notes the paleoclimatologist, since the media coverage of the “loads of unpleasant insults received”, people are taking the time to thank her and other scientists for their work, which can happen, even on the RER! A more “pleasant” appearance.
Éric Chaumillon’s conferences, “where he makes 1,000 people laugh by talking about serious subjects,” she continues, “is what made me think about what can be a strength to sometimes overcome frustrations, anger or the hatred present. Playing more on laughter, I think it’s much more positive,” concludes the researcher.