Abstract

To analyze Climate Change (CC) in films, this study uses Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to examine the film "How to Blow Up a Pipeline". It is based on the book "How to Blow Up a Pipeline: Learning to Fight in a World on Fire" by Andreas Malm, suggesting violent approaches to address CC. Based on Van Dijk’s concept of CDA, the study examines the use of vocabulary and pragmatic contexts by focusing on lexical choices, rhetorical devices, syntax, intertextuality, the identities and goals of the filmmakers, the intended audience, and the socio-cultural and historical contexts that influence audience understanding. The analysis is conducted across the film's three acts. Findings reveal the portrayal of violence as a means to draw attention to the urgency of CC. Filmmakers do not explicitly endorse such actions but the film intends to spark conversation on the violent actions.

Key Words

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), climate change, vocabulary, pragmatic Hollywood film

Introduction

Problem statement 

Climate change is one of the most pressing issues of contemporary times and the media plays a significant role in shaping public perceptions and attitudes towards it. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) can provide insights into how language and discourse are used to form a public opinion via dominant elites. Several studies have been conducted but they have mainly focused on news media rather than the films. This study will analyze the Hollywood film "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" using CDA in order to understand how Vocabulary and Pragmatic Context conveys meanings via elite dominance, on micro and macro levels, respectively. The study will help to better understand how public opinion around climate change is shaped. It can guide the level of public awareness regarding the issue.

Hence the research analyzes the micro-level meanings that have been communicated through the use of vocabulary conveyed via Elite dominance, and with the help of CDA, it comprehends the implications inferred or deduced on the basis of pragmatic contexts to understand the macro-level meanings in the Hollywood film "How to Blow Up a Pipeline".




Critical Discourse Analysis

CDA has specific requirements that must be met to achieve its aims. As per Fairclough and Wodak (1997), the main concepts of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) are discussing political as well as social problems, analyzing erratic power relations, recognizing discourse as a form of society and culture, understanding discourse's ideological function, recognizing discourse as historical and mediated by society, interpreting and explaining discourse, and recognizing this analysis as a form of “social action”.

According to Van Dijk (2001), CDA “focuses on social problems, and especially on the role of discourse in the production and reproduction of power abuse or domination” (van Dijk, 2001:96). Pendidikan builds upon from that and stresses that “Critical Discourse Analysis not only talks about the semantic meaning of the discourse itself but also focuses more on power and social issues” (Pendidikan, 2013)




Micro versus Macro Codes

Van Dijk (2003) elucidates that communication, social order; language use, discourse, and verbal interaction are analyzed at the micro level. While at the macro level; dominance, power structures, and inequalities between the social groups are more relevant. According to Van Dijk (1995), in order to uncover “patterns of elite dominance or manipulation” in texts, the analyst must primarily explore the structures and strategies of text and talk that need to be examined.




Objectives

? To analyze what the micro-level meanings communicate through the use of vocabulary conveyed via Elite dominance.

? To understand the implications inferred or deduced on the basis of pragmatic contexts to understand macro-level meanings




Research Questions

RQ1: What micro-level meanings have been communicated through the use of vocabulary conveyed via Elite dominance?

RQ2: What implications can be inferred or deduced on the basis of pragmatic contexts to understand macro-level meanings?

Literature Review

Climate change is a serious concern amongst countries across the globe. Its key impacts include varying temperatures, ocean acidification, and harmful effects on biodiversity (Sharma & Ravindranath, 2019). Additionally, climate change also has comprehensive societal implications which include extreme economic strain, severe health threats, and other political ramifications (Dryzek & Norgaard, 2011).

The significance of media communication on climate change has long been acknowledged by researchers which is why several studies have been conducted since the early 1990s that discuss how media portrays climate change and influences public opinion. The number of these studies has increased significantly which calls for a systematic review of this field. Some major work includes a historic review of climate change communication (Moser & Ekstrom, 2010), a detailed account of the political aspects of media coverage (Carvalho, 2010), and an analysis of mediated climate change (Anderson, 2009).

According to the latest meta-analysis of approximately 130 relevant publications (Schäfer & Schlichting, 2014), the field has seen significant growth. In the 1980s and 1990s, only a few analyses were published, but research activity increased progressively and remained at a moderate level until the mid-2000s. However, from that point onward, there was a sizeable increase in the annual publication numbers. As a result, the study of media representations of climate change has become a dynamic and expanding field. This growth is accompanied by a broadening of research approaches and subjects. Primarily, there were a large number of single-country case studies (e.g., Boykoff, 2008), which have increasingly been complemented by comparative and longitudinal research. The theoretical foundations of these studies encompass an assortment of perspectives, ranging from politically oriented agenda-setting approaches to critical discourse analysis, and utilize quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method research designs.

Despite its enormous impact on the environment and society, climate change is quite a complex term to comprehend for most audiences (Moser, 2010). People often come across this issue via news media (Newman et al., 2020). If enough media attention is brought to it, news media can eventually persuade audiences to consider climate change as an issue of imminent significance. (Sampei & Aoyagi-Usui, 2009). Journalists, in this regard, also have a very effective role to play through their content in the news (Painter & Schäfer, 2018; Schäfer, 2015).

Despite the growing number of analyses that examine online and social media, other forms of media receive comparatively less attention. Specifically, television, which serves as an important source of climate change information, has not received an equally strong level of scholarly inquiry regarding its portrayal of climate change. Moreover, not all aspects of the communication process are given equal consideration. Many studies primarily focus on the media's presentation of climate change, such as the amount of attention dedicated to the issue or how it is evaluated and framed. In contrast, there is a scarcity of analyses that explore the production processes, including how different stakeholders position themselves within media coverage, as well as investigations into media consumption and its effects.

Apart from news media, climate fiction literature and movies have also increased over the last decade. Such literature and media are believed to have a positive eco-political impact on readers and viewers which enables them to imagine potential threats and also convinces them of the urgency of the situation (Schneider-Mayerson, 2018)

The successful communication of climate information can encourage a positive response via a realistic approach, which can be achieved with the use of films. Movies, in general, play a fundamental role in shaping society. This includes creating awareness, diversifying peoples’ views regarding the world, changing habits and lifestyles, and providing information along with entertainment (Riley, 2017).

Meaningful depiction of climate change in movies can aid in simplifying the issue for viewers, making it more relatable to their individual interests and enabling them to engage in debates leading to much-needed actions (Cortese, 2018). Hence, this specific approach has become a crucial part of the environmental debate as stakeholders acknowledge the effectiveness of media communication in increasing awareness regarding the lethal consequences of climate change (Harris, 2014).

Research has shown that video is a powerful aid for attitudinal shifts in various fields (Ryvola & Suarez, 2014). Munoz and Sommer (2011) believe that movies have the ability to connect with people at a variety of levels. These levels could be emotional or refer to their overall belief system.

Ho and Budescu (2019) state that climate change communication is still evolving and hence has many missing links. Bilandzic and Sukalla (2019) suggest that this very missing link or gap can be filled with the correct portrayal of climate change. In this regard, a study was conducted by Sakellari (2015) on cinematic representations of climate change. A direct and powerful link between climate change movies and favourable behaviour toward the issue was found as a result of this study (Sakellari, 2015). Additionally, numerous other studies have examined the relationship between movies and behavioural change (O'Neill & Nicholson-Cole, 2009).

The interest of Hollywood in environmental issues dates back to the 70s which resulted in the production of many environments and nuclear war-related movies. The Day After (1983), Planet of Apes (1968-1970), The China Syndrome (1979), and some others could be regarded as some of the popular movies that focused on such subjects. These movies also became quite successful at the box office as the viewers enjoyed these themes enormously.

As far as the production of such movies is concerned, Deaton (2018) is of the opinion that creating a villain for such stories is an immensely tough job. Deaton (2018) elaborated his ideas using these words: "There is no masked villain lurking behind the rise in temperature—we are all, to varying degrees, part of the problem. Climate change is also slow, driving up the temperature by a couple of tenths of a degree each decade. There is no Death Star waiting to vaporize our planet at the push of a button. Lastly, while climate change is a profoundly moral issue, it does not stir moral outrage like a legion of space Nazis bent on galactic domination."

However, Hollywood has addressed this particular problem and produced some remarkable movies in this regard. Some of these movies include The Day After Tomorrow (2004), Interstellar (2014), Geostorm (2017), etc. All these movies begin by addressing the disasters and impact of global climate change. What is interesting to observe is that a lot of climate scientists have actually criticized these stories and accused them of creating a certain sort of indifference amongst viewers. However, Rose (2017) believes that such movies have been getting a lot of popularity and creating a keen interest in moviegoers.

Özcan (2017) suggests that a new genre of “a global ending” developed by the film industry became successful in drawing the right kind of attention from the masses on the issue of climate change. He also discusses the success of documentaries that focus on this issue. Al Gore who lost the elections of 2000 against George W. Bush used political discourse on climate change in his speeches that he delivered all around the globe. He later compiled his ideas in the form of a documentary. The documentary went on to become the second most-watched film in the history of the US. Researchers interested in working on the theme of climate change and even the IPCC (The International Panel on Climate Change) have benefitted immensely from the popularity of this concept (Özcan, 2017). Nolan (2010) also states that watching Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" increased audience knowledge about climate change and the consequent concern for its impact. Franzen & Mader (2020) found that films can enhance environmental concern, even among climate sceptics. However, Dunn et al., (2020) found no noteworthy impact of the documentary "Blue Planet II" (2017) on plastic use behaviour, despite anecdotal reports of its influence on public consumption and policy.

Sengupta (2013) discusses the difference between films that deal with climate change directly and the ones that discuss the issue rather in an indirect manner. The research papers and studies that have been conducted in this regard emphasize the former category and not the latter. Consequently, these papers examine the scholarly discussions regarding the creation, substance, and how viewers perceive these extensively analyzed full-length movies.

On the other hand, Hulme (2009) & Perkowitz (2007) are of the opinion that if climate change films cannot fully offer a clear view of the issue owing to the unique nature of the film, then the films are quite flawed. Even so, insights from the philosophy of science entail that these films possess the capacity to be beneficial, despite not always portraying science with complete precision. According to Thomas Kuhn (2012), accuracy is just one of five essential traits of a sound scientific theory, alongside consistency, scope, simplicity, and fruitfulness.

Methodology

Research Design

It is a descriptive study employing the qualitative method of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). Through a nonrandom sampling technique of purposive sampling, the film with the highest IMBD Ranking has been chosen with the keyword Climate Change. The film has been chosen from the top 10 results with the most relevant to the theme of climate change. This sample will ensure that the content chosen answers the objectives of the study in a meaningful and comprehensive manner.

 

Population

Hollywood movies of the past decade (2012-2022), as listed on IMDb (Inter Movie Database).

Sampling technique

Non-random Purposive sampling has been carried out (film on climate change theme from contemporary times)

 

Sample

The movie How to Blow Up a Pipeline (2022) with a 7.2 IMBD ranking stands at the second number having a plot around climate change where a group of Climate change activists plot a daring plan to blow up the oil pipeline to teach people a lesson on fossil fuel usage.

 

Unit of analysis

The unit of analysis is the ‘scenes’ of the film where dialogues will be assessed at the micro and macro level for the structures and strategies they depict through the use of vocabulary and pragmatic contexts. The analysis is presented Act wise i.e., Act I, At II, and Act III

 

Variables

Vocabulary & pragmatic contexts

Conceptual Definitions

Amoussou & Allagbe in 2018 pointed out several questions to guide text analysis, that have been raised by Van Dijk (1997) and others who have contributed to the CDA. The researcher focuses on the following two of them for the present study:

 

Vocabulary

How words are used to showcase ideology? What aspects of reality are overworded? And how is it used to construct ideology? Usage of euphemisms and metaphors and what are the relevant connotations?

Implication: Which implicit information can be deduced or inferred from discourse on the basis of pragmatic contexts to understand macro-level meanings?

In Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) by van Dijk (1997), pragmatic context refers to the social and cultural factors that influence the use and interpretation of language in a specific context.

Pragmatic context is essential to understanding how meaning is constructed in discourse.




 

Operational Definitions

Table 1

Vocabulary to understand micro-level meanings

Ser Vocabulary		Guidelines (How Elites(filmmaker) refers to the following)	CDA (Dialogues, scenes)
1	Lexical choices	Euphemisms or metaphors to make their actions seem more positive or benign, such as referring to climate protests as "peacekeeping missions."
2	Rhetorical devices	Repetition or rhetorical questions can reveal their attempt to manipulate the audience's emotions or beliefs.
3	Syntax	Construction of sentences to obscure meanings or responsibilities
4	Intertextuality	Religious references, texts, or historical or future events lend authority to their arguments

 

Table 2

Pragmatic Contexts to Understand macro level meanings

Ser	Codes under Pragmatic	Guidelines	CDA (Dialogues, scenes)
1	Identities, goals, and intentions of filmmakers (Political and environmental identities)	Filmmakers (Director and Producer) political and environmental identities, their intentions to raise awareness about climate change
2	The intended audience	Individuals/societies with varying levels (more or less) of knowledge and attitudes towards climate change.
3	The physical setting (locations and footage)	For instance, footage of melting ice caps and endangered species can evoke emotions and help to illustrate the impact of climate change
4	Broader socio-cultural & historical contexts that shape the audience's understanding of climate change	The dominant cultural beliefs and values. For example, in societies where nature is considered sacred, the destruction of the natural environment is viewed as a violation of cultural values as compared to societies that prefer economic growth via industrial development and have less urgency to respond to climate change.

Results And Findings

Table 3

Results-Vocabulary to understand micro-level meanings

Ser	Vocabulary	CDA (Dialogues, scenes)
1	Lexical choices	“Divest Now” (referring to the Climate Change situation), the pamphlet that Xochitl opened refers to the grave situation of Climate change with the connotation of "urgency" to do something explosive w.r.t. Climate Change.
		Michael refers to those who work in the industrial area as “cowards”. Those who are not taking prompt action against climate change or are leading 9 to 5 hours of normal work life are showcased as antagonists.
		“We feel like terrorists. Or no, they are going to call us revolutionaries” The group labels themselves as revolutionaries who are about to challenge the authorities.
		“Demolish, and destroy the properties that are responsible for “mass death”, In the endnotes of the film, people are following the lead of the group who blew the pipeline, get caught, and came out as “heroes”. They put explosives in the ship with the message that we “sabotage” your property because the “law will not punish you unless we will”. All these words stress the urgency and violent solution to the problem.
		The word “Fossil fuel” is just used once in the film. Otherwise, they talk about the oil pipeline that is causing climate change.
2	Rhetorical devices	The film uses the words “Blow the pipelines”, and “sabotage” to showcase that it is the only and “legitimate” way of fighting climate change and there “is no slow and steady solution”. The public relations around climate change are labelled as “of no use” as it can’t make up to the people “who have lost their properties or lives or health to the industries”   When Dewayne’s wife sends him on the mission to blow up a pipeline, she tells him not to come back in “handcuffs”, pointing out the opposition the climate change activists face.   When they decide to blow up the pipeline to “teach people a lesson” on climate change effects, they know nothing about bombs but then when they are preparing to blow up the pipeline, they have all the technical support. It refers to easy access to the destruction gadgets just in case anybody plans to follow the lead.
3	Syntax	Xochitl’s friend tells her that “the fucking world we live in now” is not concerned about climate change referring to the lack of concern for climatic change conditions like the heatwave in which Xochitl’s mother died.
4	Intertextuality	The blowing up of the pipeline is to increase the oil prices for the people and the pipeline work will take ages to be rebuilt.
		In Act II, Theo is talking to Alisha and the background wall has a painting of ecosystems, plants, and clean water in the background but when they leave home, it is an industrial area.  She is diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukaemia “(rare but is in the people who are grown in the places with chemical plants and oil refineries)”,
		A dead bird outside the pipeline refers to the haphazard impact of setting up huge pipelines of oils.

 

Table 4

Results-Pragmatic Contexts to Understand macro-level Meanings

Ser	Codes under Pragmatic	CDA (Dialogues, scenes)
1	Identities, goals, and intentions of filmmakers (Political and environmental identities	Michael refers to the conservatives as those who “only make the white lives” better but do nothing about climate change
2	The intended audience	Governments with a focus on their inaction towards climate change.   It also mainly focuses on the people who criticize those taking steps for climate change. For example, Alisha tells Xochitl that you are just a college student “who read a book and now wants to change the world”. But Xochitl turns out to be the hero at the end of the film behind bars as she intended to be. This spearheads others to take the same path at the end of the film.
3	The physical setting (locations and footage)	It took 22 days for “How to Blow up a Pipeline” to be filmed and the filmmakers actually created a structure of a pipeline with cardboard and wood. And the blast was shot on screen. This was to intensify the need for such an action.   An industrial area in the background of Xochitl when she is mourning her mother showcases the smoke coming out of the factories while they discuss the heatwave that took her mother’s life.   Theo is diagnosed with a disease caused by chemical industries. She refers to the acid rain due to the industries around. She tells her girlfriend that the only revenge is blowing up the pipeline so that those who are setting up all this learn a lesson.
4	Broader socio-cultural & historical contexts that shape the audience's understanding of climate change	Xochitl says that we “need no market solutions” but we need to “destroy the things that are causing climate change because if we will wait for these solutions, billions of people will die of climate change”
		When the person from an activist organization comes to interview Dwayne and his wife on the crisis of the government trespassing on their property to build up the pipeline which as per Dwayne “was to kill cattle and spread toxicity”, they deny the aspect of “giving a human face to the crisis” and say that these types of tactics cannot do something in reality anymore.
		Climate change activists are shown as enthusiasts who look crazy and rowdy due to their rough nature and extreme emotions.
		Michael is shown as unruly and extreme when it comes to the defence of climate change. He even tries to insult an industrial worker by spitting on his jacket saying “Let me return it to where it came from”.
		Shawn, the interviewer, later joins Dwayne in his plan to blow up the pipeline as they think that “making stories and movies on the climate crisis won’t change anything”.

 




Findings

The film is based on the book "How to Blow Up a Pipeline: Learning to Fight in a World on Fire" by Andreas Malm. The book talks about violent ways of dealing with climate effects. But the filmmakers claim that they are not advocating for people to blow up pipelines. The film explores the fictional story of a group of young activists who decide to sabotage the West Texas Intermediate oil price system to draw attention to the environmental impacts of the fossil fuel industry. The filmmakers have stated that the film is not a "how-to" guide, and they do not endorse or condone violent or illegal actions. Rather, they are using the film as a means to spark conversation and bring attention to the urgency of the climate crisis.

The film is divided into three Acts inspired by the chapters of the book where in the first Act the characters criticize the modern climate movement's commitment to "absolute non-violence" and argues that "strategic pacifism" is ahistorical. They plan to bomb the oil pipeline.  In the second Act, they actually blow up the pipeline giving a message that it is the only way forward. In the third one, they become successful and come out victorious.

 

Act wise CDA of the film is given below: -

Act I

Lexical choices

Use of the word "pipeline" instead of "oil pipeline" or "fossil fuel pipeline." This choice of words helps to downplay the environmental impact of pipelines and to make them seem more benign. The word "Fossil fuel" is just used once in the film. Otherwise, they talk about the "oil pipeline" that is causing climate change. The film uses the words "Blow the pipelines," and "sabotage" to showcase that it is the only legitimate way of fighting climate change, and there is no slow and steady solution. The pamphlet that Xochitl opens refers to a "grave situation" of climate change. Michael refers to those who work in the industrial area as "cowards" who are not taking prompt action against climate change. The group labels themselves as the "revolutionaries" who are about to challenge the authorities.

 

Rhetorical devices

To persuade the audience, the filmmaker uses repetition of the phrase "we need to do something" to create a sense of urgency. They also use rhetorical questions, such as "What are we waiting for?" to challenge the audience to take action.

 

Syntax

Use of short sentences like the fight between characters and factory workers where they tell the workers not to destroy their land. Also, Theo who has contracted cancer due to chemicals around her calls this world a place that is “not concerned” about climate change anymore.

 

Intertextuality

To lend authority to their arguments, intertextuality is used. For example, they reference the Bible in the scene where the activists are praying for guidance. They also reference the film "The Matrix" in the scene where the activists are trying to decide whether or not to sabotage the pipeline. The film references real-life events, such as the blowing up of the pipeline, to reinforce the idea that such actions can make a real impact. The use of these events also adds credibility to the film's message and shows that the filmmakers are well-informed about the issue.

 

Identities, goals, and Intentions of Filmmakers

Clearly motivated by a desire to raise awareness about climate change, they want to show the audience the destructive impact of pipelines and encourage them to take action to stop them. Filmmakers portray themselves as activists committed to fighting climate change.

 

The intended audience

The intended audience for this film is likely to be people who are already concerned about climate change. The filmmakers hope to inspire these people to take further action, such as protesting pipelines or contacting their elected officials.

The physical setting (locations and footage)

The physical setting of the film uses footage of pipelines, industries, smoke, dead animal, and bad air to show the audience that there is a growing movement to stop pipelines.

 

Socio-cultural & historical contexts

Refers to the inaction on CC and how it’s okay to blow up the pipeline. Refers to the governments who would label climate change activists as terrorists.

 

Act II

Lexical choices

Words such as "threat," "danger," and "crisis" as well as "resistance," "obstacles," and "conflict" are used to justify what climate change activists are doing. Words like "blowing up" and "setting a new example" also point out the extreme steps that are justified.

 

Rhetorical devices

The filmmaker uses repetition to emphasize the importance of the activists' mission. They also use rhetorical questions to make the audience think about the consequences of inaction. Logan and Rowan try to stop the industry workers, they refer to themselves as "not murderers," using a metaphor that implies that blowing up the pipeline would be equivalent to killing people. The activists also use emotive language to describe the impact of chemicals on the environment, such as when they express pity for the dead crow lying outside the pipeline. The filmmakers also use a number of techniques to make the audience feel empathy for the activists. They show the activists' struggles and their determination to make a difference.

 

Syntax

The short, punchy sentences used by the activists and the industry workers create a sense of tension and conflict, e.g., When Michael tells the worker to go away from their land and to stop destroying it.

 

Intertextuality

Intertextuality is evident in Act II when the dead crow is shown lying outside the pipeline. This image invokes associations with the 1962 book "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, which was a groundbreaking work on the environmental impact of chemicals. The inclusion of this image suggests a connection between the current environmental crisis and the historical context of the chemical industry.

 

Identities, goals, and Intentions of Filmmakers

The filmmakers are clearly motivated by a desire to raise awareness about climate change. They believe that the activists in the film are heroes who are fighting for a just cause. The filmmakers position themselves as advocates for environmental activism, while the characters represent different approaches to achieving this goal.

 

Physical setting

The focus is mainly on the area surrounding the pipeline. The use of close-ups and fast-paced editing creates a sense of discomfort pointing out the sense of urgency and danger.

 

Broader Socio-cultural/historical contexts

The use of the dead crow image and the references to the chemical industry connect the current CC crisis with broader societal and historical issues of broadscale negligence among the working class.

 

Act III

Lexical choices

The filmmakers use words like "victory," "success," and "change" to describe the activists' actions. They also use words like "arrest," "hailed," and "forced" to describe the reaction of the authorities. The use of words such as "prohibition," "damage," "destroy," "pick them apart," "demolish," "burn," and "blow them up" emphasize the urgency and radical nature of the actions that the filmmakers are advocating for in the fight against climate change. "Warrior" and "hero" are used to give an impression of heroism.

 

Rhetorical devices

The repeated use of phrases like "blow them up" and "pick them apart" highlights the radical and destructive nature. Moreover, the use of metaphors such as "let the capitalists who keep on investing in the fire know that their properties will be trashed" paints a vivid image of the destruction to combat climate change.

 

Syntax

The use of imperatives such as "announce and enforce the prohibition" and "put them out of commission" stresses the candour of their message.

 

Intertextuality

The film references real-life events and movements such as the protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline and the actions of environmental groups like Greenpeace. It talks about the non-effectiveness of non-violent protests.

 

Physical setting

Extreme heat and bad air around the background depict climate change effects and frequent and common heat waves.

 

Socio-cultural and historical context

The film tries to challenge the inaction of climate change by highlighting the need for drastic steps.

Discussion And Conclusion

Discussion

To understand the micro-level meanings communicated through vocabulary and pragmatic contexts, the findings contribute to the existing literature by conducting a CDA of the film "How to Blow Up a Pipeline". This research intended to uncover the implications and messages rooted within the film at both the micro and macro levels.

Films play an important role in communicating perspectives on climate change and its impact on public opinion (IPCC, 2014; Dryzek & Norgaard, 2011). It emphasizes the significance of media communication in addressing the complex issue of CC and highlights the growing body of research dedicated to understanding how media portrays it, consequently affecting public opinion (Moser, 2010; Carvalho, 2010; Anderson, 2009). The CDA revealed significant findings that align with the broader literature on CC communication. Firstly, the usage of vocabulary in the film exhibited a clear focus on the issue of urgency and how the pipelines are posing life-threatening risks to the public (Sakulla, 2018). Invoking emotional responses and creating awareness of the issue (Riley, 2017), the film's choice of vocabulary and imagery effectively conveyed the harmful effects of pipelines on the environment.

The CDA pointed out the use of language and discourse in the film that reflected a critique of elite dominance and the influence (Sakulla, 2018) of powerful entities in perpetuating climate change. The film employed vocabulary that highlighted the role of elite groups in promoting and benefiting from the fossil fuel industry. This finding aligns with the existing literature on elite dominance and the portrayal of powerful entities in media narratives related to climate change (Deaton, 2018).

Calling for collective action, at the macro level, the film's discourse and messaging conveyed a resistance against the dominant forces contributing to climate change (Özcan, 2017). By presenting alternative perspectives and promoting activism, the film aimed to inspire viewers to question the status quo to address climate change (Nolan, 2010).

These findings contribute to the understanding of how films can effectively convey messages and meanings related to climate change (Sengupta, 2013), highlighting the importance of critical discourse analysis in uncovering these nuances. The results align with previous research indicating that films can enhance environmental concern and encourage attitudinal shifts (Franzen & Mader, 2020; Ryvola & Suarez, 2014).




Limitations

It focuses on a single film, which limits its scope and generalizability. Further research should explore a wider range of films and media sources to gain a more comprehensive understanding of how climate change is portrayed and communicated.

Additionally, future studies could investigate the effects of media communication, including films, on public attitudes, behaviours, and policy outcomes related to climate change.




Conclusion

The critical discourse analysis of the film "How to Blow Up a Pipeline" reveals its effective portrayal of the urgency of climate change, highlighting the destructive impact of pipelines along with urgency on CC action and critiquing elite dominance in perpetuating the crisis. These findings contribute to understanding how films can convey messages related to climate change and underscore the importance of further research to explore a wider range of films and media sources for a comprehensive understanding of climate change communication. 

References

• Amoussou, F., & Allagbe, A. A. (2018). Principles, Theories and Approaches to Critical Discourse Analysis. International Journal of Studies in English Language and Literature, 6(1).
• Anderson, A. (2009). Media, Politics and Climate Change: Towards a New Research Agenda. Sociology Compass, 3(2), 166–182.
• Anderson, A. (2009b). Media, Politics and Climate Change: Towards a New Research Agenda. Sociology Compass, 3(2), 166–182.
• Beyond the Film, Innovations in the Participatory Use of Film at International Conferences on Climate. (n.d.). The Communication Initiative Network.
• Bilandzic, H., & Sukalla, F. (2019). The Role of Fictional Film Exposure and Narrative Engagement for Personal Norms, Guilt and Intentions to Protect The Climate. Environmental Communication-a Journal of Nature and Culture, 13(8), 1069–1086.
• Bilandzic, H., & Sukalla, F. (2019b). The Role of Fictional Film Exposure and Narrative Engagement for Personal Norms, Guilt and Intentions to Protect The Climate. Environmental Communication-a Journal of Nature and Culture, 13(8), 1069–1086.
• Boykoff, M. (2008). Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of anthropogenic climate change, 1995– 2004. Climatic Change, 86(1–2), 1–11.
• Boykoff, M. (2012). Who speaks for the climate?: making sense of media reporting on climate change. Choice Reviews Online, 49(10), 49–5681.
• Carvalho, A. (2007). Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: re-reading news on climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 16(2), 223–243.
• Carvalho, A. (2010). Climate change as a “grand narrative.” JCOM, Journal of Science Communication, 09(04), C03.
• Cortese, M. (2018). Reconsidering Fictional Films for Communicating Climate Change Issues: An Analysis of the Filmmaking Strategies Behind Sustainable Energy Narratives. In Climate change management. Springer Nature.
• Deaton, J. (2022, July 20). Why are there no good movies about climate change? Quartz
• Dowling, J. E., & Wald, G. (1981). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Nutrition Reviews, 39(3), 135–138.
• Dunn, M. E., Mills, M., & Veríssimo, D. (2020). Evaluating the impact of the documentary series Blue Planet II on viewers’ plastic consumption behaviors. Conservation Science and Practice, 2(10).
• Emmett, R. L., & Nye, D. E. (2017). The Environmental Humanities. In The MIT Press eBooks.
• Fairclough, N. (2001). Critical Discourse Analysis. ResearchGate.
• Franzen, A., & Mader, S. (2020). Can Climate Skeptics Be Convinced? The Effect of Nature Videos on Environmental Concern. Sustainability, 12(7), 2972.
• Going to the movies can help you at school: the impact of Queen of Katwe on students’ educational attainment | Mind & Behaviour. (n.d.).
• Harris, U. S. (2014). Communicating climate change in the Pacific using a bottom-up approach. Pacific Journalism Review, 20(2), 77.
• Ho, E., & Budescu, D. V. (2019). Climate uncertainty communication. Nature Climate Change, 9(11), 802–803.
• Manzo, K. (2017). The usefulness of climate change films. Geoforum, 84, 88–94.
• McCormack, C., Martin, J. H., & Williams, K. R. (2021). The full story: Understanding how films affect environmental change through the lens of narrative persuasion. People and Nature, 3(6), 1193–1204
• McCormack, C., Martin, J. H., & Williams, K. R. (2021c). The full story: Understanding how films affect environmental change through the lens of narrative persuasion. People and Nature, 3(6), 1193–1204.
• Moser, S. C., & Ekstrom, J. A. (2010). A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(51), 22026– 22031.
• Moser, S. C., & Ekstrom, J. A. (2010b). A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(51), 22026– 22031.
• Muñoz, M. (2011). Perceptions of climate change: the role of art and the media.
• Newman, N., Fletcher, R. R. M., Schultz, A., Andi, S., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Reuters Institute digital news report 2020.
• Nolan, J. M. (2010). “An Inconvenient Truth” Increases Knowledge, Concern, and Willingness to Reduce Greenhouse Gases. Environment and Behavior, 42(5), 643–658.
• O’Neill, S., & Nicholson-Cole, S. (2009). “Fear Won’t Do It.” Science Communication, 30(3), 355–379.
• Oxford handbook of climate change and society. (2011). Choice Reviews Online, 49(09), 49–5078.
• Özdenb, A. T. (2021). The Role of Climate Fiction Movies and Documentaries in Development of Awareness and Critical Thinking of Planning and Design Students. Online Journal of Art and Design Volume, 9(2).
• Painter, J. (2013). Climate Change in the Media: Reporting Risk and Uncertainty.
• Painter, J. A. M. E. S., & Schäfer, M. S. (2018). Global similarities and persistent differences: a survey of comparative studies on climate change communication. Climate change and the media, 39-58
• Perkowitz, S. (2007). Hollywood Science. In Columbia University Press eBooks.
• Perrow, C. (2010). Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction, and Opportunity. Contemporary Sociology, 39(1), 46–47
• Rose, S. (2018, December 3). ‘I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe’: what Blade Runner 2049’s dystopia tells us about 2017. The Guardian.
• Sakellari, M. (2015c). Cinematic climate change, a promising perspective on climate change communication. Public Understanding of Science, 24(7), 827–841.
• Sampei, Y., & Aoyagi-Usui, M. (2009). Mass- media coverage, its influence on public awareness of climate-change issues, and implications for Japan’s national campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Global Environmental Change- human and Policy Dimensions, 19(2), 203– 212.
• Sampei, Y., & Aoyagi-Usui, M. (2009b). Mass- media coverage, its influence on public awareness of climate-change issues, and implications for Japan’s national campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Global Environmental Change- human and Policy Dimensions, 19(2), 203– 212.
• Schäfer, M. S., & Schlichting, I. (2014). Media Representations of Climate Change: A Meta-Analysis of the Research Field. Environmental Communication-a Journal of Nature and Culture, 8(2), 142–160.
• Schäfer, M. S., & Schlichting, I. (2014b). Media Representations of Climate Change: A Meta-Analysis of the Research Field. Environmental Communication-a Journal of Nature and Culture, 8(2), 142–160.
• Schmidt, A., & Schäfer, M. S. (2015). Constructions of climate justice in German, Indian and US media. Climatic Change, 133(3), 535–549.
• Schneider-Mayerson, M. (2018). The Influence of Climate Fiction. Environmental Humanities, 10(2), 473–500. https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-7156848
• Sharma, J. D., & Ravindranath, N. H. (2019). Applying IPCC 2014 framework for hazard-specific vulnerability assessment under climate change. Environmental Research Communications, 1(5), 051004.
• Sharma, J. D., & Ravindranath, N. H. (2019b). Applying IPCC 2014 framework for hazard-specific vulnerability assessment under climate change. Environmental Research Communications, 1(5), 051004.
• Thompson, M. (2012). Understand the philosophy of science
• Tobing, R.O. (2013). A Critical Discourse Analysis Of 8 Mile Movie..
• Uncertainty. London: Tauris. Medien- & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 63(1), 90– 91. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x- 2015-1-90 URL
• Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283.
• Van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), Handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 352-371)