SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Climate activists tossed cans of tomato soup on Vincent van Gogh's "Sunflowers" at the National Gallery in London on October 14, 2022. (Photo: Just Stop Oil/Twitter)
Climate Actions Like Throwing Soup at Art Dampen Support for Cause: Survey
Researchers found that "overall, the public expresses general disapproval of nonviolent, disruptive protests to raise attention to the dangers of climate change."
Nov 14, 2022
In the wake of high-profile climate protests that target priceless works of art or block streets and other public infrastructure, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania on Monday published a survey showing such actions broadly decrease support for addressing the climate emergency.
Shawn Patterson Jr. and Michael E. Mann of the University of Pennsylvania Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media wondered if acts like last month's soup-splashing of Vincent van Gogh's famous glass-protected painting Sunflowers in London by Just Stop Oil activists helped or hindered the cause of boosting support for climate action.
The survey team set out to answer three questions: "First, does the public approve of using tactics like shutting down traffic or gluing oneself to Vermeer's Girl with a Pearl Earring to raise attention to climate change? Second, do these tactics affect public beliefs surrounding human-driven climate change? And third, do the framing of these tactics influence that support?"
The researchers found that "overall, the public expresses general disapproval of nonviolent, disruptive protests to raise attention to the dangers of climate change."
\u201c@MichaelEMann @APPCPenn @PennCSSM @stp_polisci Very interesting results, and they should/could be useful for helping activists choose the kind of actions most likely to help raise awareness and promote action on climate change.\u201d— Prof Michael E. Mann (@Prof Michael E. Mann) 1668434219
"A plurality (46%) report that such efforts decrease their support for their cause," Patterson and Mann noted. "However, these efforts have minimal effects on people's perceptions of the dangers of climate change."
"Moreover," they added, "the framing of the actions appears to also have a small impact--respondents did not differentiate 'damaging' and 'pretending to damage' pieces of art in their appraisal of such actions."
The survey team did find that Democrats are "significantly more likely" to say that these disruptive tactics increase their support for climate action compared to Republicans or Independents.
The researchers also found that "Black and Hispanic respondents are more likely to report increased support than white respondents."
On social media, Mann said the "key finding" of the survey data in his mind was that independent voters "who might be critical in establishing majority support for aggressive climate policies express strong disapproval of the tactics."
Among independents, 43% of such voters reported decreased support compared to just 11% who reported an increase.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
In the wake of high-profile climate protests that target priceless works of art or block streets and other public infrastructure, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania on Monday published a survey showing such actions broadly decrease support for addressing the climate emergency.
Shawn Patterson Jr. and Michael E. Mann of the University of Pennsylvania Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media wondered if acts like last month's soup-splashing of Vincent van Gogh's famous glass-protected painting Sunflowers in London by Just Stop Oil activists helped or hindered the cause of boosting support for climate action.
The survey team set out to answer three questions: "First, does the public approve of using tactics like shutting down traffic or gluing oneself to Vermeer's Girl with a Pearl Earring to raise attention to climate change? Second, do these tactics affect public beliefs surrounding human-driven climate change? And third, do the framing of these tactics influence that support?"
The researchers found that "overall, the public expresses general disapproval of nonviolent, disruptive protests to raise attention to the dangers of climate change."
\u201c@MichaelEMann @APPCPenn @PennCSSM @stp_polisci Very interesting results, and they should/could be useful for helping activists choose the kind of actions most likely to help raise awareness and promote action on climate change.\u201d— Prof Michael E. Mann (@Prof Michael E. Mann) 1668434219
"A plurality (46%) report that such efforts decrease their support for their cause," Patterson and Mann noted. "However, these efforts have minimal effects on people's perceptions of the dangers of climate change."
"Moreover," they added, "the framing of the actions appears to also have a small impact--respondents did not differentiate 'damaging' and 'pretending to damage' pieces of art in their appraisal of such actions."
The survey team did find that Democrats are "significantly more likely" to say that these disruptive tactics increase their support for climate action compared to Republicans or Independents.
The researchers also found that "Black and Hispanic respondents are more likely to report increased support than white respondents."
On social media, Mann said the "key finding" of the survey data in his mind was that independent voters "who might be critical in establishing majority support for aggressive climate policies express strong disapproval of the tactics."
Among independents, 43% of such voters reported decreased support compared to just 11% who reported an increase.
In the wake of high-profile climate protests that target priceless works of art or block streets and other public infrastructure, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania on Monday published a survey showing such actions broadly decrease support for addressing the climate emergency.
Shawn Patterson Jr. and Michael E. Mann of the University of Pennsylvania Center for Science, Sustainability, and the Media wondered if acts like last month's soup-splashing of Vincent van Gogh's famous glass-protected painting Sunflowers in London by Just Stop Oil activists helped or hindered the cause of boosting support for climate action.
The survey team set out to answer three questions: "First, does the public approve of using tactics like shutting down traffic or gluing oneself to Vermeer's Girl with a Pearl Earring to raise attention to climate change? Second, do these tactics affect public beliefs surrounding human-driven climate change? And third, do the framing of these tactics influence that support?"
The researchers found that "overall, the public expresses general disapproval of nonviolent, disruptive protests to raise attention to the dangers of climate change."
\u201c@MichaelEMann @APPCPenn @PennCSSM @stp_polisci Very interesting results, and they should/could be useful for helping activists choose the kind of actions most likely to help raise awareness and promote action on climate change.\u201d— Prof Michael E. Mann (@Prof Michael E. Mann) 1668434219
"A plurality (46%) report that such efforts decrease their support for their cause," Patterson and Mann noted. "However, these efforts have minimal effects on people's perceptions of the dangers of climate change."
"Moreover," they added, "the framing of the actions appears to also have a small impact--respondents did not differentiate 'damaging' and 'pretending to damage' pieces of art in their appraisal of such actions."
The survey team did find that Democrats are "significantly more likely" to say that these disruptive tactics increase their support for climate action compared to Republicans or Independents.
The researchers also found that "Black and Hispanic respondents are more likely to report increased support than white respondents."
On social media, Mann said the "key finding" of the survey data in his mind was that independent voters "who might be critical in establishing majority support for aggressive climate policies express strong disapproval of the tactics."
Among independents, 43% of such voters reported decreased support compared to just 11% who reported an increase.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.