How we will cover the climate emergency at KPCC/LAist

Human-centered design guided us toward a new set of principles for covering the climate emergency, a deeper understanding of who is seeking out climate information and why, and a list of things we will stop doing.

Climate change is one of the most wicked problems our communities face — and for too long we’ve been throwing the standard journalism playbook at it: alarming headlines, beautiful data visualizations, and expert sources, all written for mass consumption.

The result: We are burning out the people who do care about the climate emergency, alienating the people who don’t, and promoting the idea that there is little most people can do to change our trajectory toward a dystopian future.

When you write for everyone, the result is general climate emergency coverage that resonates with no one and fades from memory within hours of being published. We don’t have time for that.

At KPCC/LAist, climate change is not up for debate. We are living in a climate emergency, and our coverage needs to equip people to understand, cope, and prepare for the changes we face and the decisions we need to make. We’re past the moment when we will give space to climate change skepticism.

That’s why in 2022, KPCC/LAist set out to redesign its coverage of the climate emergency through human-centered design research. Hearken CEO and cofounder Jennifer Brandel describes human-centered design as “a way of understanding the needs of the people you’re building a solution for and testing that solution with them before creating it.” It’s a method we’ve successfully employed in the past to redesign our early childhood beat, cover the 2020 census, and launch the college pathways beat, a two-year intervention to interrogate what stands in Californians’ way when seeking post-secondary education.

We started with a few key questions: How do Southern Californians experience climate change, how can we lower barriers to understanding, and what type of information is most relevant and useful in their daily lives? We’ll share here what emerged from those questions.

• A really brief overview of what we did
• Our new framework
• What now?

A really brief overview of what we did

Design consultant Tran Ha guided us through the research process. We conducted 20 interviews, each with an interviewer and a notetaker. Senior editor Rodrigo Cervantes, climate emergency reporter Erin Stone, assistant engagement producer Caitlin Biljan, and I took turns being interviewers and note takers. Engagement administrative assistant Nubia Perez also assisted with one of the interviews.

We recruited for a variety of perspectives, including:

• Works in an industry affected by climate change
• Works in an industry that contributes to climate change
• Young parent
• Entrepreneur running a climate adaptation business
• Lives in a place affected by wildfires
• Science teacher
• Farmer
• Immigrant from country experiencing adverse effects of climate change
• Someone who is housing insecure
• Indigenous person
• Homeowner who has invested in solar power or other conservation methods
• Climate change activist
• Conservationist
• Someone in their late teens or early 20s

We also considered the demographic makeup of Southern California and ensured that the group that we recruited using these perspectives reflected that.

You can see a copy of our interview guide at the bottom of this post. We asked people to set aside 45 minutes, but these conversations often ran over—even though we rarely got through all the questions in the guide in a single interview. Most interviews were done over Zoom in February 2022, but a few happened in person.

We offered all research participants $75 as a thank-you for their time.

Each interview included this fill-in-the-blank exercise. We would put this slide on the screen and ask people how they would complete the sentence.

It’s important to note that these insights that follow are specific to Southern California. There are likely some commonalities with the needs in your own community, but we discourage trying to copy and paste these insights into your newsroom’s coverage of the climate emergency. Politics, policies, demographics, and the specifics of how the climate emergency is felt all influence community members’ needs and responses. However, we do share our complete interview guide at the end so that you can interview people in your community and build your own understanding.

Got more questions about the process? Email me at azirulnick@scpr.org.

Editor Rodrigo Cervantes and assistant engagement producer Caitlin Biljan, walking us through one of the interviews they conducted.

Our new framework

We emerged from 20 interviews with:

• A new mission statement (more on that below)
• A set of principles to help us decide how to approach the stories we take on
• Four types of climate change information seekers to focus on serving

Mission statement

Beginning in 2019, KPCC/LAist journalists have crafted individual mission statements to make clear the communities and issues they cover — and why. We believe it’s important to be transparent about our work and to also create a framework to make choices about what we will or won’t cover.

The climate emergency is a global challenge that is experienced locally. Erin Stone aims to equip Southern Californians with the information and connections they need to understand, cope with, and prepare for the changes caused by the climate emergency — and take effective action here at home.

Our guiding principles:

When deploying human-centered design research, there is often a focus on developing archetypes—aka types of audience members with common characteristics and common needs. We are doing that, and I’ll share more about that next.

But the common themes that emerged from interviews with people with very different vantage points into the climate emergency also really stood out to us. We’ve adopted these as guidance for how we should shift our coverage going forward.

• CENTER EQUITY AND JUSTICE: The climate crisis cannot be addressed separately from the broader struggles against inequality and racism, and neither can our coverage of the climate crisis.
• REDEFINE EXPERTISE: The climate emergency’s overlap with inequality and racism is why we will elevate non-scientists and people with lived experience as climate experts as well.
• BRIDGE THE RURAL-URBAN DIVIDE: Rural and urban California cannot effectively respond to the climate emergency independently. Our coverage will highlight the interplay between them.
• SHOW THAT NATURE IS HERE: Nature is not just far-off, pristine environments. Beginning in our busy backyard, we will examine the impact of the climate emergency on the environment, how we experience nature, and the solutions we can find there.
• DEMONSTRATE THAT ADAPTATION IS GOOD FOR BUSINESS: Economic success doesn’t have to be at odds with environmental stewardship. The booming EV and climate tech industries prove that, as do what we heard from farmers about the benefits of shifting to sustainable agricultural practices. We will show how addressing the climate emergency brings opportunities and benefits for businesses, investors, governments, and individuals.
• CENTER HUMANS: Climate is not just a big-picture issue tackled by big institutions and scientists. We will highlight how individuals are taking action.
• HELP PEOPLE FIND THEIR LANE: No one can do everything to address the climate crisis, but everyone can do something. We will help people find the type of action that clicks for them — and show them ways that others are doing the work, too.
• CONNECT THE PAST TO THE FUTURE: We will look as much to past movements, ancient wisdom, and historic knowledge as new innovations when seeking examples of success and potential solutions.
• ALWAYS ACKNOWLEDGE THE BIG PICTURE. Adapting to the climate crisis is not just a decision made today but countless decisions made over decades. Our coverage will help Southern Californians of all generations contextualize and navigate major life decisions, despite uncertainty about what our world will look like decades from now.
• PREPARE PEOPLE EMOTIONALLY AND PRACTICALLY: From self-care and spirituality to the nitty-gritty of how to be more green in daily life, we will help Southern Californians prepare and build resilience in order to cope with the change that is already here and the change that is coming.

Questions we’re asking: How might we…

• Push storytelling to be more engaging and creative?
• Humanize and redefine key aspects of climate, such as the meaning of nature and who the experts are (such as immigrants and indigenous communities)?
• Shift the timeline to bring the past into the context of climate coverage while looking at the present and future?
• Enter into climate conversation through the lens of L.A.’s most pressing issues?
• Make climate science more accessible and create space for skepticism and confusion?

March in Southern California means doing synthesis outside!

Our climate change information seekers

When you report and write for everyone, you risk producing journalism that resonates with no one—and the severity of the climate emergency makes that an unacceptable outcome. That’s why we identified four archetypes of climate change information seekers who we will focus on serving.

Clockwise from left: Visual representations of the Community Connectors, the High-Information Connectors, the Stuck, and the Practically Minded.

The Community Connectors

Who they are: They are information nodes and relationship builders within their communities and want to help people in their community live more sustainably, build resilience, and adapt to the changing climate. They are tuned in, but not burnt out. They believe in the power of the collective to address the climate emergency and they have found their lane in that collective response. They trust that others have, too.

• Knowledge: They have limited access to and understanding of climate info; may have relevant lived experience.
• Emotion: They are motivated and energized because they have clarity about their role.
• Role: They are nodes and connectors in their communities and leverage that to share climate information.

In their own words:

• “If I had something that was like…a fact sheet that I can get when I’m speaking to [my neighbors], then that would really help me out. And plus, that will build up my confidence [in the information].”
• “We can put door hangers on the door. That’s something I would invest in myself…because we’re all working on this together.”
• “I feel empowered in a small way to educate and teach them, the young minds, to clean as you go or the trash will follow you.”

Opportunities:

• How might we identify target communities and the connectors who can help us reach them in order to collaborate?
• How might we equip these community connectors with accessible, easily shareable information to help build the resilience of their communities?
• How might we build a two-way information exchange between community connectors and high-information connectors?

The High-Information Connectors

Who they are: The High-Information Connectors are people with expert-level information on and understanding of climate issues, whether through lived or professional experience. They are well-connected in their elite communities of activists, policy makers, etc, but are limited in their sphere of influence because they lack connections at the community level. They are active on climate issues and have a clearly defined lane. They are likely to collaborate with other High-Information Connectors.

• Knowledge: They have good access to information and understanding of climate issues. They might have lived experiences, such as living in a highly polluted community, that makes them an “expert.”
• Emotion: They are active and clear about their lane in climate adaptation.
• Role: They are information nodes and connectors within their more elite scientific and policy making communities but limited in their sphere of influence.

In their own words:

• “Ninety-eight percent of scientists say we’re in deep caca. I’m listening to that. How can you not? I go to a doctor to be healed. I don’t go to my mechanic — he works on my car.”
• “The Green New Deal is not, ‘Let’s save the trees and hug polar bears.’ It’s about getting to the root causes, restructuring of our economy, of our political system, of society.”

Opportunities:

• How might we expand the definition of climate experts and narratives so that the work feels less out of touch?
• How might we help them make their knowledge more accessible?
• How might we build a two-way information exchange between community connectors and high-information connectors?

The Stuck

Who they are: They are people who have good access to information on and understanding of climate issues — maybe too much. They are filled with dread, despair, anger, and/or frustration — and overwhelmed by their negative emotions, with nowhere to take them. They are burnt out and skeptical or even certain that there is little that they can do. They used to believe in the collective, maybe, but don’t anymore. They’re disengaged or on their way to being disengaged as a form of self preservation.

• Knowledge: They have good access to and understanding of climate issues, primarily from media coverage.
• Emotions: Their climate knowledge is overwhelming and dread-inducing.
• Role: They feel helpless, hopeless, and/or frustrated because of how little they can do. They are disengaged.

In their own words:

• “When something you spiritually care about is being destroyed, it’s painful.”
• “It’s messed up that we’re offered a world that’s already broken.”

Opportunities:

• How might we increase their individual resilience and help them envision a future that is realistic but not dystopian?
• How might we help them find their lane and engage in an emotionally sustainable way?

The Practically Minded

Who they are: They are pragmatists who don’t give the climate emergency much thought, either because they are skeptical or because the idea that they can or should do something feels impractical or idealistic. Typical coverage of the climate emergency feels irrelevant or out of touch. They are individualistic and are unlikely to be compelled to do something unless it’s good for them, especially their wallet.

• Knowledge: They have mixed access to information and understanding of climate. issues
• Emotions: They are skeptical, dismissive, fatalistic about climate change.
• Role: They haven’t thought about their place in adaptation because the idea that they can/should do something feels impractical and/or idealistic.

In their own words:

• “We’re getting mandated with [electric vehicles] too. Let this thing happen over time. Let economics guide it.”
• “Here in California we had a cold winter, to me. What happened with climate change? To me, that’s normal. I don’t worry about that. I worry about the environment. We’ve created too much trash.”
• “There’s this huge need…but most importantly there’s this huge opportunity to give people space to earn money. There’s stupid money in climate tech right now. It’s ridiculous and it’s only going to a certain group of people. Economic development opportunities are always #1 for me.”

Opportunities:

• How might we help the Practically Minded understand how the climate emergency will affect their livelihoods, financial stability, and lifestyles?
• How might we help Southern Californians understand climate adaptation as good for their wallet?
• How might we help residents and business owners thrive as they adapt?
• How might we elevate expertise that the Practically Minded respect, such as businesspeople?

What now?

Well, now the hard part begins: ensuring that these insights actually change the way we cover the climate emergency at KPCC/LAist.

This summer we brainstormed some prototypes — from an event series with psychologists to help the Stuck cope with the emotional impact of living through the climate emergency to a contest where Community Connectors can apply for funds to launch a climate adaptation effort in their neighborhoods and High-Information Connectors help them make those projects happen to a series highlighting business owners who have made climate adaptations in their business that have helped their bottom line (that one’s geared toward the Practically Minded).

We’re working on culling that list and identifying some ways that we can get started. Our guiding principles are already changing the way that Erin Stone, our climate emergency reporter, approaches her reporting. She’s asking herself at every turn, “Who is this for, and what do they need from us?” We’re excited to combine that with our commitment to solutions journalism.

Here one example of how we’ve expanded our understanding of who the experts are:

Erin has done a series of solutions-oriented stories on local responses to the climate emergency that center people doing work at the community level. Gone are the talking heads drowning readers with statistics and in their place are people like Leimert Park resident Lynetta McElroy, who taught us about gray water recycling, and Pacoima Beautiful’s Painted Pavement Project, who talked with Erin about how painting the asphalt a different color can help combat extreme heat. How to L.A. podcast host Brian De Los Santos joined in that effort with the episode “How to Make L.A. Greener.” All of these stories elevate people as experts other than the climate scientists you’re used to seeing.

“We need to meet people where they’re at. The research really shows that, convinced me of that,” Erin told me when I asked her how the research has changed the way she thinks about her beat. “This is really an opportunity to get creative and rebuild society in different ways and break from past patterns.”

The research underscored for her that our audience members are not a monolith, and we couldn’t write to them like they are, either.

“I feel like the research really shows that, how people from all different backgrounds know that [the climate emergency] is happening and they really want to understand how it is going to change my life, how do I deal with it?

“There’s these people that want to be in their backyard, want to serve their community, want to make a difference where they live, and maybe there are people who don’t feel that sense of community, they want to really understand the larger situation we’re in and what is actually happening to address it.…You never want to be completely fixated on one aspect of a problem. Journalism is about looking at all different facets and experiences and sources of information.”

Ways to further this work

• Does your organization want to financially support work like this? Email grants@scpr.org.
• Empower more community-focused journalism by becoming an LAist member today at LAist.com/join.

Thanks to Tran Ha, for guiding us through the research process; the 20 Southern Californians who set aside time for interviews; and to Ryan Pitts, who helped us present this research at SRCCON 2022 and in doing so, helped us understand its utility for other newsrooms, too.

Interview guide

Below is the interview guide we used, which you are welcome to steal and use for your own research. We never asked all of these questions in an interview. The interviewer and notetaker usually prioritized seven to 10 of these questions and fit in others if there was time. Often the participant ended up naturally answering several questions at once.

Intro (5 minutes)

• Tell us a little about yourself.
• Personal history? What do you do for work?
• What are you passionate about/what are some hobbies?
• Take us through your day yesterday. It’s ok if yesterday wasn’t a typical day.

Los Angeles (5 minutes)

• How long have you been in Los Angeles? What brought you here?
• Tell me a little bit about your neighborhood/community. How did you come to live in this area?
• What do you love about living here?
• What’s the most challenging part about living here?

Important issues (10 minutes)

• With so many causes, issues and problems in the world, how do you determine which ones to pay attention to or take action on? Take us through your thought process.
• What are those top 1–2 causes, issues or problems for you? Why those?
• How are you engaging with those causes/issues/problems?
• Where are you going to learn more about them? (Look for specific examples)
• Tell us about a time when you felt empowered to take action or make a difference.
• What about the opposite — when you felt really disempowered to do anything about a particular issue or problem.
• Are there causes, issues or problems that you care about but feel like don’t have a way to do anything about? Tell us more — why does it feel like you can’t make a difference?
• What haven’t we talked about that keeps you up at night?

Climate attitudes (15 minutes)

• When you hear the phrase “climate change,” what comes to mind for you?
• And how does it make you feel when you hear that phrase? Why?
• What do you think is wrong with the way people currently talk about or think about climate-related issues?
• Can you take us through how YOU think about or make sense of climate-related issues?
• Where in your life do climate-related issues feel most important or relevant to you?
• Tell us how you think about climate, and how you think about the environment. How are they related, and how are they different for you?
• Can you tell us about a recent time when you sought out information related to a climate issue or incident?
• What sparked it?
• Where did you go, and why that source?
• How does trust factor into how you think about climate-related issues and information?
• What type of information are you particularly hungry for related to climate? What do you seek out?
• Can you think of a time that was particularly frustrating?
• What do you wish you knew about climate change and climate-related issues?

Activity (2 minutes, fill in the blank, put up a slide with the sentence if on Zoom)

• Climate change is like ___(WHAT)_______________ because ______(WHY)__________.

Custom perspective-related questions (5 minutes)

This is where we asked about questions specific to the reason we recruited them for the research

Wrap-up (3 minutes)

• What haven’t I asked you about that I should have?