Humour and sarcasm: expressions of global warming on Twitter

The study investigates how Twitter is used in Turkey to discuss environmental change, focusing on global warming. It situates the research within rising polarization and the politicization of science, where right-wing populist narratives challenge scientific credibility and promote alternative or counter-knowledge. The paper aims to map public understandings and everyday expressions of global warming on Twitter during a random week, exploring how affect, echo-chambers, humour, and sarcasm shape discourse. It argues that networked publics online mirror offline polarization and that emotions and identity-building processes are central to how climate change debates unfold in Turkey's highly polarized political context.

The paper reviews scholarship on networked publics and affect (Castells; Papacharissi), emphasizing how digital platforms foster communities and mobilizations infused with emotions such as hope, solidarity, anger, and frustration. Research on echo-chambers shows that algorithmic and social dynamics intensify polarization, leading users to engage primarily with like-minded others and to encounter opposing views mainly through conflictual interactions (An et al., 2014; Garimella et al., 2018; Williams et al., 2015). Studies of climate discourse on social media identify frequent use of sarcasm, irony, and incivility, particularly around skepticism (Anderson & Huntington, 2017), with sarcasm functioning as a rhetorical attack and language intensifier. The Turkish context is reviewed: mainstream media control and censorship by the ruling AKP have pushed many users toward digital platforms like Twitter for information and activism (Bulut & Yörük, 2017; Ural, 2021). Prior surveys indicate mixed public concern and relatively low awareness on climate issues in Turkey (Pew; EDAM, 2015). The literature collectively frames expectations of polarized, affect-laden, and humour-inflected climate debates on Turkish Twitter.

Data collection used simple random sampling of a random week of tweets containing the Turkish hashtag küresel ısınma (global warming) via NCapture (a Google Chrome-based plugin for NVivo). The approach follows Kim et al. (2018), who found simple random sampling efficient and representative for Twitter content. Tweets were captured from Twitter, exported by NCapture, and imported into NVivo. After removing duplicates, 1295 tweets remained. To ensure anonymity, all identifying information (usernames, locations, bios) was removed prior to coding. After coding, tweets were translated into English; only paraphrases are presented in the paper to avoid traceability to original posts. Content analysis was conducted in NVivo 12 guided by Clark’s framework of tweets as expressions of movement goals, coding for pro- and anti-environmental expressions, construction of political enemies, and thematic frames. Thematic analysis yielded two primary categories (supporters vs. deniers) and their interactions, including polarization dynamics and use of humour/sarcasm.

• Two primary discourse landscapes emerged: (1) environmental change supporters and (2) climate change deniers.
• Supporters relied on scientific evidence and references to research (e.g., ocean temperature increases, extreme weather projections, AI as an aid in climate solutions). They often paired scientific messaging with positive affect (e.g., hope) and used humour and sarcasm to engage audiences and diffuse fear, aligning with findings that positive emotions can promote prosocial engagement.
• Deniers expressed deep distrust of science, frequently invoking conspiratorial frames linking climate science to foreign or elite influence, portraying scientists as biased or corrupt, and elevating lay interpretations and alternative “evidence” over peer-reviewed research. Some framed climate as divine will, minimizing human agency; others credited the government with resolving environmental threats or cast global warming as a hoax or media fabrication.
• The clash between groups commonly involved sarcasm and humorous reframing. Supporters used irony (e.g., celebrating year-round summer weather) to highlight the seriousness of warming, functioning as a language intensifier to attract attention and persuade. Deniers used sarcasm to mock shifting scientific messages or to deride scientific authority.
• Polarization mirrored Turkey’s broader political divides: users skeptical of the government called for stronger climate action, whereas pro-government users were more focused on hoax narratives, undermining trust in scientific authorities.
• Overall, interactions demonstrated echo-chamber dynamics and identity-based polarization, with emotions amplifying positions and reducing cross-group persuasion.
• Data scope: 1295 tweets captured via a random week sample using the hashtag küresel ısınma.

Findings indicate that Twitter discussions on global warming in Turkey reflect and reinforce offline political polarization, particularly between AKP supporters and opponents. Networked publics are sustained by affect and identity, and both views and emotions reverberate through echo-chambers, intensifying positions. Supporters disseminate scientific information and often deploy positive affect and humour to encourage engagement, while deniers promote counter-knowledge and conspiratorial frames that delegitimize scientific expertise. Sarcasm functions as a rhetorical intensifier across the divide, often exacerbating conflict. The study underscores how emotional dynamics and echo-chambers shape climate discourse online, making shifts in opinion difficult once climate issues are tied to political identities.

The study maps narratives of global warming on Turkish Twitter, showing how the platform facilitates both awareness-raising and counter-narratives that question or deny climate science. An analysis of 1295 tweets from a random week reveals that supporters of climate action rely on scientific evidence and positive affect, including humour, while deniers deploy conspiratorial and anti-science frames, often aligned with pro-government rhetoric. The research highlights the significance of Twitter as a communicative arena where emotions and identity processes structure climate debates, contributing to literature on affect, polarization, and digital discourse in the climate context.