DATA MONITOR JUNE 2025: Attacks on Greta Thunberg Expose Right-Wing Disinformation Tactics
Shipped in, shipped out. The Madleen’s (named by some the “Freedom Flotilla”) unsuccessful voyage to deliver a symbolic amount of aid to Gaza made global headlines.
The event added even more kindling onto a very combustible online conversation surrounding the Israel Palestine conflict. CAAD collected data* primarily from accounts known for spreading climate disinformation online, andfound content heavily criticising the Madleen’s mission and those on board; including a lot of abusive and discriminatory language aimed at Greta Thunberg, the Swedish activist most famous for catalysing global climate strikes from age 15.
This is part of an ongoing strategy from much of the right and far-right to discredit climate action by talking about it in the context of other, often populist, issues. Read on for our analysis.
*Reach out if you would like to see a full version.
Content warning: offensive language, discrimination and abuse, including attacks on protected characteristics.
WHAT WE FOUND
Keen to use the global story as a talking point, right-wing voices were openly and loudly critical of the voyage, amplified by media and platforms, peaking once the Madleen was intercepted by Israeli border forces (see chart below).
In terms of the narratives we saw, many painted the whole voyage – or Thunberg specifically – as “anti-semitic”. This was especially the case after the activists’ refused to watch a video of the October 7 Hamas attack, with accusations that they were “turning a blind eye to murder”. This misses the important context that, while rightly condemned, that Hamas attack has been followed by Israel’s ongoing assault on Gaza, named by numerous human rights organizations as genocidal.
A second narrative set to simply downplay the activists, echoing communications from Israel that the whole thing was simply for publicity. But Thunberg in particular received thinly-veiled attacks on her characteristics as a young woman with autism, including “freak”, “obnoxious brat”, “doom goblin” and “Scandinavian weirdo woman”. This kind of language is, sadly, nothing new for Thunberg, no matter what activism she engages in.
Figure 1 – Online conversations on the Madleen, filtered for climate disinformation terminology, using the tool Brandwatch. Note that Brandwatch is heavily skewed towards the platform X, but this chart helps give an indication of overall volume of online conversation between the Madleen setting sail on June 1 to the safe return of its inhabitants on June 12. Conversation was high as the Madleen headed to Gaza, but then rose by a further 400% when the boat was intercepted, tailing off 3 days later.
These hateful comments were, like many online right-wing conversations of late, catalysed by comments by US President Trump. Right-wing voices delighted in his calling Thunberg “strange … certainly different”.
Another narrative sought to connect the actions of Thunberg and her fellow wayfarers as extremist and dangerous. Posts called her “far left”, and accused her of “playing footsie with terrorists”.
Finally, a handful of posts, some of which gained a lot of reach, criticised the voyage for its carbon emissions, including that the boat was unnecessarily run on diesel – a claim which will be familiar to many (see below).
ANALYSIS – THREE WELL WORN TACTICS
Smearing climate activists as extremists – or even terrorists – is unfortunately commonplace. It is a calculated move to shift the Overton Window, the invisible fence between mainstream and unthinkable, to the right. If those shouting loudest for a 1.5C warming target are extremists, then why not the target itself, or anyone trying to achieve it? Indeed, politicians implementing minimum standard policies to achieve net zero by 2050 are regularly painted as such.
Secondly, we have documented for years the impact of the ‘hypocrisy’ framing on the global psyche. This appears annually at the COP conference as a way to downplay the importance of the event. Most notably, at COP26, the event was falsely accused of running electric vehicles on diesel generators. This is a common rhetorical technique in science denial – the emissions of a small diesel boat is a red herring, given a false equivalence to, say, the huge carbon emissions of conflict and the defense industry.
Finally, amplifying misinformation of any kind is an increasing part of the far right playbook. It’s working: the reach of far-right accounts appears to be higher during European elections, even when factors like the political preference of the user or the overall popularity of that far-right account are controlled.
At CAAD, we constantly observe disinformation and misinformation overlap with other forms of harmful rhetoric – often in the same messages – which we call ‘issue stacking’. In the case of the Madleen, disinformers stacked divisive content during a conflict, abusive rhetoric and climate disinformation. The level of vitriol accompanied by such content serves to not only spread falsehoods, but simultaneously shrink civic space. Part of the reason this issue stacking has become so common is because platforms reward content that prioritises engagement over truth; so content creators of all kinds are encouraged to talk about whatever the current most popular issue is.
FAR-RIGHT MESSAGES, BROUGHT TO YOU BY FOSSIL FUELS
Did you know that most climate disinformation messages originate in some way from the fossil fuel industry? In the case of hypocrisy this framing evolved from a fossil fuel promoted frame of personal responsibility, as opposed to the responsibility of the industry that spent decades artificially extending the demand for their planet-wrecking products.
We are also seeing more right-wing activity on the climate because of money flows to these actors from the fossil fuel industry or other vested interests. For example, a recent investigation covered in Atmos and HEATED has revealed the extent to which fossil fuel money is funding anti-trans activity in the US. Of 45 groups working against trans rights, 80% had received fossil fuel funding.
“Climate and trans rights seem unconnected, but because anti-climate rhetoric is quite unpopular, the industry turned to “hate-bait” to build support”, said CAAD’s communications co-chair Philip Newell.
Researcher Vivian Taylor, who also appeared on the Attitudes! Podcast to discuss the research, said:
As the evidence of the climate crisis mounts, the fossil fuel industry is increasingly desperate for support from an ever-dwindling pool of the public, so it pours more support into far-right authoritarianism to maintain its lock on economies, despite overwhelming public demand for clean energy
ROAD TO BELEM (LITERALLY)
Did you see that BBC story earlier this year, about the tens of thousands of acres cut down to make a highway to Belem? How has the deforestation of an 8 mile stretch of road become one of the most talked about COP30 stories this year, when every year 486.5 square miles of rainforest is destroyed in that same Brazilian state alone? Take a look at the latest Oii newsletter to find out.
IN OTHER NEWS
France and Brazil urge other countries to uphold information integrity on climate change. In a joint press release, Brazil and France explicitly called on other countries to join efforts to “combat climate disinformation”. Read more in our briefing.
Climate misinformation turning crisis into catastrophe. The International Panel on the Information Environment (IPIE) systematically reviewed 300 studies, and found fossil fuel companies, rightwing politicians and some nation states are the source of the misinformation. Dr Klaus Jensen of the IPIE said “If we don’t have the right information available, how are we going to vote for the right causes and politicians, and how are politicians going to translate the clear evidence into the necessary action?”
Long tail to blackout disinformation. Last month we shared insights on disinformation spread following the Iberian blackout. Unfortunately, following the release of the official Spanish government report on the incident, another spike in disinformation blaming renewables occurred. Meanwhile in Spanish-language, broader corruption narratives surrounding the government interplay with smaller criticisms of clean energy. In France, following similar misinformation, Parliament approved a moratorium on new solar and wind projects. This was overturned two days later, but shows the power of disinformation during times of crisis.
Social media users are more likely to engage with climate misinformation than reliable climate sources. A new study in Nature finds that, although unreliable sources of information are lower in volume on social media, these sources still have greater relative engagement on most platforms. The authors say that this highlights a “persistent challenge in the online discourse”. That’s putting it lightly.
Who is attending the COP negotiations? A deeper dive. Want to know who you’ll be rubbing shoulders with this year in Brazil? Behind the Badge, the new working paper by Transparency International, provides a data-driven analysis of who is gaining access to COPs, from negotiators to lobbyists.
If you have any investigative leads CAAD should explore, want to find out more about our research and intel, or interview one of our members, please email [email protected].
Header image adapted by CAAD, original image from: Kushal Das, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons
