IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v172y2025ics1389934125000267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Calling into the void? German forest dieback 2.0 debate on Twitter. A case study to operationalize the analysis of discursive power in hybrid media systems

Author

Listed:
  • Mack, Philipp
  • Wallin, Ida
  • Zwickel, Mariella Susann
  • Pfistner, Jonas
  • König, Lena
  • Kleinschmit, Daniela

Abstract

Forest dieback 2.0 is the common term for describing climate change-related forest damages that sparked a nation-wide debate in Germany starting in 2018. Referring to the “first” forest dieback in the 1980s that inspired environmental movements and policy changes, raises questions concerning today's mobilization potential. Political communication has been profoundly transformed, mainly through the spread of digital media. To understand the current debate, it is thus crucial to consider the complex entanglements in hybrid media systems. We contribute to the operationalization of analyzing discursive power in hybrid media systems, through Twitter-actor-networks as well as tweet-hyperlink-networks, representing a communication space where older and newer media logics blend. Results suggest a scattered debate characterized by insulated communication networks of few central actors. Whereas forestry frames dominate original tweets, nature conservation frames are more likely to be amplified through retweets. Despite having largest number of followers, legacy media actors show low centralities in the Twitter-network. However, their influence must be seen in regard to the referred hyperlinks. Interactions between tweets and hyperlinks revealed different mechanisms for how frames are introduced and amplified. Besides mainly following the cleavage between forestry and nature conservationists, alternative frames instrumentalize forest damages to call for climate action or climate change skepticism. Despite these controversies and insulated communication, the forest dieback 2.0 debate on Twitter does not appear to be destructively polarized. Nevertheless, further research needs to carefully examine the polarization potential. Due to the limited outreach, however, the Twitter debate largely seems like a calling into the void.

Suggested Citation

  • Mack, Philipp & Wallin, Ida & Zwickel, Mariella Susann & Pfistner, Jonas & König, Lena & Kleinschmit, Daniela, 2025. "Calling into the void? German forest dieback 2.0 debate on Twitter. A case study to operationalize the analysis of discursive power in hybrid media systems," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:172:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125000267
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103447
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934125000267
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2025.103447?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:172:y:2025:i:c:s1389934125000267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.