Safeguarding Climate Science: New BU Study Exposes Risks of Misleading Native Ads

In a new study, experts investigate how to mitigate climate misperceptions, highlighting the urgency of responsible and informed science outreach.

• Native ads often mimic reporting, confusing readers about sponsorship
• BU-led research tested disclosures and inoculation against misleading content
• Findings highlight the need for transparent communication of complex climate issues

A careful approach to communicating scientific data is crucial for maintaining public trust, particularly when research addresses topics like climate change. A study published in npj Climate Action by Boston University (BU) researchers, in collaboration with colleagues at Cambridge University, explores how ‘native advertising’ can obscure the truth about fossil fuel activity. In this study, the authors tested two interventions—disclosures and inoculations—to determine the best way to combat misperceptions caused by ads mimicking legitimate news content.

Recognising the Challenge

Many established news outlets now allow corporations to sponsor articles that look much like standard editorial pieces, causing readers to overlook that they are paid promotions. Fossil fuel companies have taken advantage of this trend, spending millions of pounds on campaigns aiming to sway public perceptions of the climate crisis. “Because these ads appear on reputable, trusted news platforms, and are formatted like reported pieces, they often come across to readers as genuine journalism,” said the study’s lead author Michelle Amazeen, an associate professor of mass communication and director of the Communication Research Center at BU’s College of Communication. “Research has shown native ads are really effective at swaying readers’ opinions.”

The researchers used an ExxonMobil campaign as a test case. Titled “The Future of Energy,” the advert reportedly cost over £4 million (converted from $5 million) and adopted the look of a regular news article on The New York Times website. Readers would have seen the usual formatting and masthead, making it easy to miss the subtle banner identifying ExxonMobil’s sponsorship. The ad promoted algae-based biofuels but omitted details about the company’s overall carbon footprint, prompting lawsuits in several US states for what they consider “false and misleading” communications.

After showing participants a simulation of this native advert, the BU-led team found that simple disclosure messages helped people recognise that they were viewing paid content. However, identifying the ad as sponsored was not enough to reduce the likelihood of believing its claims. When researchers combined that disclosure with an ‘inoculation message’—a pre-emptive warning about how advertisers might mask their intentions—participants proved less likely to accept ExxonMobil’s portrayal of its sustainability efforts.

Empowering Responsible Communication

These findings point to a broader need for responsible science outreach. Complex data presented under the guise of editorial content can be hard to parse, leaving audiences vulnerable to misperceptions that may ultimately affect public policy and research funding. Benjamin Sovacool, a professor of earth and environment in BU’s College of Arts & Sciences, noted: “As fossil fuel companies invest in disguising their advertisements, this study furthers our understanding of how to help readers recognize when commercial content is masquerading as news and spreading climate misperceptions.”

By demonstrating that warnings (inoculation) and clear labelling (disclosures) help guard against misinformation, this research highlights the urgency for scientists and media outlets to maintain clarity and transparency. “Disclosures helped people recognize advertising. However, they didn’t help them recognize that the material was biased and misleading,” Amazeen said. “Inoculation messaging provides general education that can be used to fill in that gap and help people resist its persuasive effects.”

For those working in research and policy, the lesson is that even credible platforms can host content aimed at advancing narrow interests. Ensuring that readers are alert to potential biases is an essential part of communicating complex science responsibly. By boosting the public’s ability to distinguish fact from promotion, such studies could help reinforce trust in scientific findings—an outcome that becomes ever more vital in addressing challenges like climate change.