SPOTLIGHT EDITION

Welcome back to COP, LOOK, LISTEN: the first of our special editions. Today’s deep dive looks at the escalating threat faced by climate activists worldwide. In recent years, climate protest groups in the Global North - such as Just Stop Oil, Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future and Last Generation - have raised the profile of climate action and advocacy. They have also sparked controversy about their methods and messaging.

Whether disruptive protests are effective or alienating is a reasonable debate to have. However, violence against activists cannot and should not be accepted. Activists are increasingly being labelled as "extremists", “lunatics” or even "terrorists”, while allusions to violence on social media appear to be increasing, particularly in comment sections.

WARNING: Some examples presented below and in the full report may be distressing to readers. They include reference to violence both real and imagined. 

Read on for more detail, or access the full report here. 

FINDING OF THE DAY

What was once a narrative dominated by right-wing media and influence groups has now entered mainstream discourse. Normalised by political figures and law enforcement, government language around environmental protests is increasingly 'securitised' (calling protesters “extremists” or “terrorists”). This is reflected in a tightening of anti-protest laws in the Global North, including the United Kingdom and 18 U.S. states. The landscape for environmental advocacy is increasingly fraught.

• On X (formerly Twitter): Over 220,000 posts included ‘loaded’ language such as “climate cult” and over 90,000 posts and replies contained ‘securitised’ language such as “eco terrorist”. While the overall volume of posts remained stable over the past two years, we found that replies containing ‘securitised’, ‘dehumanising’ or ‘othering’ language have more than doubled. Specifically, references to "climate cultists" and "eco-terrorists" feature prominently in high-traction posts about protests. 

• On Facebook and Instagram: Posts containing denigrating language were shared a cumulative 1.86 million times in the timeframe. Language like “climate lunatic”, “eco extremist”, “green zealot” or “Net Zero terrorist” features in over 68,000 posts across both platforms.

• On TikTok: TikTok's relatively stringent moderation has led to a culture of coded violence that uses devices like dog whistles and irony to evade detection. For example, one post with over 80,000 likes shares footage of climate protesters alongside a clip of the video game Grand Theft Auto - a game well-known for allowing players to run over pedestrians. Even ostensibly ‘neutral’ content around climate activism or protests sees violent rhetoric emerge in the comments, often receiving thousands of likes.

On Twitter, high-traction content denigrating climate protests stems from a small group of accounts, including users like "End Wokeness" (1.9 million followers). Comments underneath frequently suggest or condone violence.

In November 2023, two people protesting a copper mine were fatally shot in Panama, with both images and footage of the murder circulating widely online. High-profile accounts have generally stopped short of condoning the act, instead using 'anodyne' language or the 'just asking questions' rhetorical device to prompt their followers. The comments underneath show no such restraint, with many posters lionising or meme-ifying the shooter as shown in the right-hand screenshot.

For more examples and a full case study on the Panama shooting, visit our full report.

Unfortunately, violence against protesters is nothing new in many parts of the world - nearly 2,000 land and environmental defenders have lost their lives in the last decade. As human rights experts in the Global North are sounding the alarm on the “criminalisation, harassment, stigmatisation and negative rhetoric” surrounding protests, there is growing concern about the pipeline from dehumanising rhetoric to actual violence.

Action 1

There is an urgent need to safeguard space for environmental protest, and social media companies play a vital role. Platforms already have clear rules on removing content that contains hate speech or incitement to violence, but far too many posts and comments are falling through the cracks. This is no surprise to us, as we regularly catch platforms failing to enforce their own policies. This shows the importance of legislation like the EU Digital Services Act in increasing transparency around platform harms and holding companies accountable for their decisions.

Action 2

Examples on X and TikTok with coded language or ‘memeified’ content show that keeping on top of hateful or violent rhetoric is an evolving challenge. This challenge multiplies when you factor in  local contexts and reference, as well as languages with minimal coverage from platforms’ internal teams. It is essential for companies to work with affected communities and those researching violence to understand the threats activists face and ensure a proportionate, meaningful response.

That’s all from us today: do read the full report here.

In solidarity,

The CAAD team.

If you have any investigative leads CAAD should explore, or want to find out more about our research and intel during the summit, please email contact@caad.info. We also have team members on the ground in the UAE who are available for interviews and side-events as useful.

Click here to unsubscribe | Sent to: donlon@un.org

CAAD, www.caad.info, United Kingdom