On November 11, the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication (4C) published a new report, “Local News and Climate Views: What Americans Want to Know About Climate Change in Their Communities.” Based on a July 2026 survey of 1,015 adults across the United States, the report examines American’s relationship with local news sources, their differing attitudes to information about climate change (using 4C’s “Six Americas” framework which categorizes people’s attitudes from “Alarmed” to “Dismissive”), and the kinds of local climate stories of interest to them.
The report finds that while a large majority of those surveyed (80%) say they follow local news at least “somewhat” closely, only 1 out of every 4 Americans surveyed hears about climate change in their local news often (weekly or more), and only 20% feel they are very informed about the local impacts of climate change. People are most likely to hear about local climate impacts from local TV news–yet those who were rated “Disengaged,” “Doubtful,” or “Dismissive” of climate change were more likely to say they had no local source of information on that topic.
AMS Headlines spoke with noted climate communicator and AMS Honorary Member John Toohey-Morales, CBM, CCM, for his thoughts on the report and advice for meteorologists about discussing climate change. Morales is the founder of ClimaData and award-winning former chief meteorologist for WTVJ NBC6-TV in South Florida, where he was known for his coverage of hurricanes, climate change, and other key local issues. He was not involved in producing the 4C report.
AMS Headlines: What is your overall reaction to the GMU climate and local news report?
Morales: It doesn’t surprise me. While years ago we were seeing an increase in climate coverage, environmental coverage, and climate context in the news, now that has been reversed. The phenomenon of climate hushing has come about because of fear of repercussions from the weaponization of government against everything from nonprofits to corporations to individuals, and yes, to elected politicians. This has led folks to simply not talk about climate in the face of an administration in Washington that is completely hostile to the subject.
AMS Headlines: Why is it important that people understand the local impacts of climate change?
Morales: A study I participated in a few years ago, led by Ed Maibach and Bernadette Woods Placky, amongst others, and published in Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, shows that in an experiment where we provided weather segments with and without climate context, the climate context made a difference for audiences. Those audiences that received climate context when watching a weather segment were, independent of their worldview and political leanings, more likely to internalize and even personalize that information. And that’s where you bring it home: when people realize that the symptoms of climate change aren’t distant, that they are indeed going to be felt locally. And by locally, I don’t just mean your country, your state, your county, or your city. I mean your house. I mean your family. I mean your budget. When you get down to that level, that’s when people really start to pay attention.
AMS Headlines: According to the report, people who believe local news to be very important are more likely to be “Alarmed” about climate change. Those who are “Doubtful” or “Dismissive” of climate change are more likely to say that local news is not particularly important—perhaps because they are less likely to have a local news outlet. Overall, 24% of those surveyed had no local TV station, 20% had no local radio station, and 13% had no local newspaper. How does the lack of local news affect our ability to communicate local climate impacts?
Morales: The demise of local news is a national tragedy. When local communities don’t have a way to scrutinize what their leaders are doing, because they simply don’t know what is happening, it leads to inaction, or even corruption. Because climate impacts everything, from insurance to grocery prices to deadly heat waves and extreme weather, being able to see what its local impacts are is crucial.
AMS Headlines: Weather is rated one of the highest priority news topics by survey respondents (nearly 75% say it is “extremely” or “very” important). Do you have any tips for broadcast meteorologists and other weather reporters about communicating climate impacts along with their weather reporting?
Morales: I have so much to say about this. Remember, the meteorologist is the station scientist. By that I mean that nobody else in the newsroom is trained in the sciences. Therefore, weathercasters are often asked to talk about volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, meteor showers and shooting stars, and all kinds of other astronomical phenomena. If that is considered part of our purview, then how can we not include climate change context in our weather segments?
I’ve been asking weathercasters to be courageous for a quarter century. Oftentimes, at conferences and on panels, I would state, “This is a time like no other to be courageous.” Broadcast meteorologists are so trusted. Of all the scientists out there, folks trust meteorologists more because we’re the ones they see almost every day, in their living rooms, even in their bedrooms when they watch the news at night. There is therefore great power among broadcast meteorologists to leverage that trust to communicate on climate. And by communicate, I don’t mean throwing books or textbooks at people’s heads. I mean meeting people where they’re at, relating what’s going on with a changing climate to how it’s impacting folks’ everyday lives. It’s a true disservice to an audience to not include climate context in your weather segments.
AMS Headlines: Are people more likely to tune in during a crisis—and if so, is that a good time to address climate change?
Morales: Oh, for sure, people tune in more when there is a crisis. With weather warnings, people will oftentimes wait for confirmation that the warning is real before they take action, and that confirmation could come from the local news. So viewership is going to increase dramatically when crises arise. And if these are weather threats linked to the changing climate, which more often than not they are, then that context needs to be provided every time. Every time.
AMS Headlines: Those surveyed most frequently get local news from other local residents or from online forums. Meanwhile, family, friends, neighbors, first responders, and health professionals are the most trusted sources of information. Should climate communicators be attempting to reach people through those channels? If so, how?
Morales: It may be simpler than it sounds. This is where efforts like the one from Dr. Katharine Hayhoe, along with Bernadette Woods Placky, on getting more people talking about climate are so important. We need to normalize talking about the climate so that when folks go to family, friends, neighbors, first responders, and health professionals, those people have been talking about climate often too. The subject then ranks higher in folks’ minds, and people are eager to discuss what truly touches us every day, and sometimes, unfortunately, threatens us as well.
AMS Headlines: The report lists some climate-related topics of interest to local news viewers. What are your thoughts, and which topics have you found most effective?
Morales: The topics people seem to rank higher, the ones they’re interested in hearing about, rub up against a lot of the environmental challenges as well. And you’ll notice that they’re often the environmental challenges or climate topics that hit closer to home. Affordability, for instance, is a great way to pry open the blockade that might keep people from listening to the subject of climate. Talk about affordability, whether it’s insurance or grocery prices or gas prices. Talk about how clean energy is cheaper than old forms of energy. And I think you’ll see that folks are indeed interested in greener forms of energy, cleaner water, and cleaner air. It impacts them, it impacts their children, and they certainly worry about those subjects when they hit closer to home. In summary, I feel that it is very smart to find the subjects people are most interested in, tie them to the changing climate, and make folks realize how the changing climate is impacting those subjects. It’s how you meet people where they’re at.
AMS Headlines: Local news is one of the most trusted sources for information. Yet climate change can be a controversial topic. Is there a danger of losing trust if local journalists discuss climate impacts?
Morales: Despite sensational stories about death threats to meteorologists who present about climate change, I think those are the exceptions to the rule. Even Chris Gloninger, the meteorologist in Iowa who got death threats for reporting on climate, will tell you that the overwhelming majority of the people he ran into, and who emailed and called him, were supportive and grateful to be given climate context in a place where they had never heard much about it. My own experience in South Florida was similar. When I was out and about, folks thanked me for being the one broadcast meteorologist in Miami discussing the climate challenges the region was facing. To me, the subject is much less controversial than it’s played up to be. All you have to do is look at Yale’s Six Americas surveys to see that those who don’t care, those who might send a nasty email, are about 1 in 10 Americans. It’s just not worth staying silent on climate because 1 in every 10 Americans is going to have a negative reaction.
Read the George Mason University report on “Local News and Climate Views.”
