https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/twitter-bots-are-a-major-source-of-climate-disinformation/ Skip to main content SubscribeLatest IssuesMenu Scientific American * Cart 0 * Sign In Email *:[ ]Password *:[ ] Forgot password?LoginLoading Not yet registered? * |Stay Informed SearchSubscribe Close [ ]SearchClose Search Advanced Search * Coronavirus * The Sciences * Mind * Health * Tech * Sustainability * Video * Podcasts * Opinion * Publications * Subscribe * Current Issue * Cart0 * Sign In * Stay Informed * Share * Latest * * * * Advocate for Science Subscribe Advocate for Science Subscribe Climatewire Climate Twitter Bots Are a Major Source of Climate Disinformation Such accounts can distort online conversations and potentially diminish support for climate policies * By Corbin Hiar, E&E News on January 22, 2021 * Share on Facebook * Share on Twitter * Share on Reddit * Share on LinkedIn * Share via * Print Twitter Bots Are a Major Source of Climate Disinformation Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey testifies remotely during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing titled, "Breaking the News: Censorship, Suppression, and the 2020 Election" on Capitol Hill on November 17, 2020 in Washington, DC. Credit: Hannah McKay Getty Images Advertisement Twitter accounts run by machines are a major source of climate change disinformation that might drain support from policies to address rising temperatures. In the weeks surrounding former President Trump's announcement about withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, accounts suspected of being bots accounted for roughly a quarter of all tweets about climate change, according to new research. "If we are to effectively address the existential crisis of climate change, bot presence in the online discourse is a reality that scientists, social movements and those concerned about democracy have to better grapple with," wrote Thomas Marlow, a postdoctoral researcher at the New York University, Abu Dhabi, campus, and his co-authors. Their paper published last week in the journal Climate Policy is part of an expanding body of research about the role of bots in online climate discourse. The new focus on automated accounts is driven partly by the way they can distort the climate conversation online. "Twitter bots have been this growing force of evil over a half a decade now," said John Cook, a professor at George Mason University's Center for Climate Change Communication who was not involved with the study. Unscrupulous actors "have realized how powerful and influential misinformation can be," he said. "Twitter bots have been a part of that." Marlow's team measured the influence of bots on Twitter's climate conversation by analyzing 6.8 million tweets sent by 1.6 million users between May and June 2017. Trump made his decision to ditch the climate accord on June 1 of that year. President Biden reversed the decision this week. From that dataset, the team ran a random sample of 184,767 users through the Botometer, a tool created by Indiana University's Observatory on Social Media, which analyzes accounts and determines the likelihood that they are run by machines. Researchers also categorized the 885,164 tweets those users had sent about climate change during the two-month study period. The most popular categories were tweets about climate research and news. Marlow and the other researchers determined that nearly 9.5% of the users in their sample were likely bots. But those bots accounted for 25% of the total tweets about climate change on most days. The bots were also more prevalent in discussions on climate research and news. Other areas of focus for the bots were tweets that included the term "Exxon" and research that cast doubt on climate science. One such tweet highlighted a Nobel laureate in physics who falsely claimed "global warming is pseudoscience." "These findings indicate that bots are not just prevalent, but disproportionately so in topics that were supportive of Trump's announcement or skeptical of climate science and action," the paper said. The proportion of bot tweets was smaller on the days immediately surrounding Trump's decision on the Paris Agreement, the researchers found. That's because, they believe, people who don't often tweet about climate change did so at that time and the bots were unable to quickly respond to the flood of climate chatter. The researchers weren't able to determine who deployed the bots. But they suspect the seemingly fake accounts could have been created by "fossil-fuel companies, petro-states or their surrogates," all of which have a vested interest in preventing or delaying action on climate change. Other researchers who study climate conversations on Twitter have found an even greater prevalence of bot-like accounts. A paper published last year in the Proceedings of the International Conference SBP-BRiMS 2020 estimated that 35% of the accounts that tweeted about climate during the 2018 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Poland were bots. But that paper, from researchers at Carnegie Mellon University, found there were an equal number of bots that both supported and cast doubt on climate science. Regardless of which side they're on, bots are an impediment to curbing the flow of climate misinformation, said Cook, the George Mason professor. "It is important to shut bots down," he said in an interview. "It's really just a matter of social media platforms taking responsibility and aggressively taking down what are flagged as definite bots. To me, that's the bare minimum that Twitter should be doing." The reason Twitter and other platforms haven't taken that step, Cook said, is because there are financial incentives to ignore the problem. "Generally speaking, misinformation is good business," he said. "Misinformation is more likely to be clicked and liked because it tends to be more sticky," Cook explained. "And the business model of social media platforms are likes and clicks and shares: The more an item gets interaction, the more money a platform makes." False claims about the coronavirus and the presidential election were some notable exceptions to that rule. Only public pressure will change the calculations social media companies make around bots and climate misinformation, he added. Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2021. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals. ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S) Corbin Hiar Recent Articles * Natural Disasters May Push Global Finances to the Brink E&E News Recent Articles * Here Are All the Climate Actions Biden Took on Day One * Biden's First Climate Actions Include Rejoining Paris Agreement * Biden's Pick to Lead FEMA Signals Urgency on Pandemic and Climate Change Read This Next Policy & Ethics Premature Freakouts about Techno-Enhancement 5 hours ago -- John Horgan | Opinion Public Health Southern California Ambulance Crews Are Running Out of Oxygen--and Gas 5 hours ago -- Carolyn Barber | Opinion Public Health Coronavirus News Roundup, January 16-January 22 January 22, 2021 -- Robin Lloyd | Opinion Climate Twitter Bots Are a Major Source of Climate Disinformation January 22, 2021 -- Corbin Hiar and E&E News Space December's Total Solar Eclipse as Seen from Space January 22, 2021 -- Leslie Nemo Public Health The Physician Who Presaged the Germ Theory of Disease Nearly 500 Years Ago January 22, 2021 -- Ewan Morgan | Opinion Advertisement Newsletter Get smart. Sign up for our email newsletter. Sign Up Support Science Journalism Discover world-changing science. Explore our digital archive back to 1845, including articles by more than 150 Nobel Prize winners. Subscribe Now!Support Science Journalism Follow us * instagram * soundcloud * youtube * twitter * facebook * rss Scientific american arabic l`rby@ * Return & Refund Policy * About * Press Room * FAQs * Contact Us * Site Map * Advertise * SA Custom Media * Terms of Use * Privacy Policy * California Consumer Privacy Statement * Use of cookies/Do not sell my data * International Editions Scientific American is part of Springer Nature, which owns or has commercial relations with thousands of scientific publications (many of them can be found at www.springernature.com/us). Scientific American maintains a strict policy of editorial independence in reporting developments in science to our readers. (c) 2021 Scientific American, a Division of Springer Nature America, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Scroll To Top * You have free articles left. Temp Paywall Img Support our award-winning coverage of advances in science & technology. See Subscription Options Already a subscriber? Sign in. Subscribers get more award-winning coverage of advances in science & technology. Sign In See Subscription Options