The phrase that has come to define the Trump administration’s message on climate change was born in Durham, New Hampshire, on December 16, 2023.
Flanked by flannel-clad supporters carrying signs reading “Live Free or Die,” Trump, then the candidate, wished the crowd a Merry Christmas before launching into what he viewed as the current administration’s biggest blunder. He has swung against President Biden himself (“Crooked Joe”) and the state of the economy (“Pedium Economy”). About 10 minutes later, he got to Biden’s climate policies, which he said “waste trillions of dollars on Green New Deal bullshit.”
But Trump was unhappy with his choice of insult, perhaps aware that chanting the “Green New Deal” helped amplify cries for pro-climate action from his opponents. So, in front of the public, he began looking for ways to undermine her in real time.
“They don’t know what they’re doing, but you’re going to be in the poor house financing his big government’s Green New Deal, which is a socialist scam. And you know what? You’ve got to be careful. It’s going to get us all in big trouble.” He said. “The Green New Deal that didn’t work. It’s a green new scam. Let’s call it, from now on, a green new scam. It’s a green new scam.”
The crowd cheered as they shook their signs in approval. “I love that term, and I just came up with it,” Trump said. “The New Green Scam. It will forever be known as the New Green Scam.”
Scott Eisen/Getty Images
There has been a lot of interest in Trump’s purge of climate change language, and for good reason: public servants are scrutinizing vocabulary they previously used freely. “Clean energy,” “climate science,” and “pollution” are on the list Lyrics “I woke up”. Federal agencies have told employees to avoid it. newly, A memorandum was circulated The Department of Energy’s Office of Renewable Energy advised staff to remove or reword key terms including “climate change,” “emissions,” and “green.” But the administration does more than just hide these statements. It also introduces new language designed to undermine the foundations of trust in climate science and policy.
In the nine months since Trump assumed his second presidency, the phrase “New Green Scam” — always capitalized — has appeared in White House Fact Sheets Press statements were echoed throughout Federal agencies And by Republicans in Congress.
“It is very effective at creating sticky phrases and using repetition to amplify them,” said Renee Hobbs, a communications professor at the University of Rhode Island who wrote. A book on modern advertising. “That’s the classic propaganda strategy, isn’t it? You repeat statements you want to stick to, and you downplay, ignore, belittle, or censor concepts that don’t meet your agenda.”
It’s part of a broader effort to erase information about how the planet is changing. In recent months, the administration has fired Full pages About climate change and how to adapt to it, said Gretchen Gehrke, who monitors federal sites with the Environmental Data and Governance Initiative. The 400 experts working on the government’s next official climate report were fired, and then all previous reports disappeared as well. Management has suggested Stopping long-term projects Which monitors carbon dioxide levels, and the EPA no longer collects greenhouse gas emissions data from polluting companies.
You can see it as a three-pronged strategy. First, erase the language around climate change. Second, dismantling the scientific basis that supports it. Third, fill in the blank with a message that aligns with Trump’s policy priorities — such as the “new green scam.”
“We have always understood that language shapes reality, and that language can create unreal realities,” Hobbes said. “And I think that’s what Trump is doing with his climate change language.”
In Trump’s growing arsenal of anti-climate phrases, “the new green scam” remains the weapon of choice. The Green New Deal concept was a ready target for Trump because it serves as a catch-all for progressive positions, said Josh Freed, senior vice president for climate and energy at the Third Way think tank. “That was the goal that I think Trump honed in on and flipped the script, turning it into a weakness and an emblem for what he felt the public would view as extreme positions,” he said.
Trump took the idea to an international audience. In his country Speech before the United Nations General Assembly Last month, he spent a full 10 minutes talking about climate policy, mocking renewable energy sources and international efforts to address climate change. “If you don’t get away with this green scam, your country will fail,” he told the world leaders in attendance.
In the same speech, he went on to call climate change “the greatest scam ever perpetrated in the world.” He also claimed that “the carbon footprint is a hoax created by people with evil intentions.”
Conspiracy theories are a common tool in propaganda, according to Hobbes. “Conspiracy theories are catnip because they assume this malevolent actor is secretly doing something to hurt people, and humans are hardwired to care about things like that,” she said. Studies have shown that fake news about climate change is more convincing to people than scientific facts.
However, Trump is fighting an uphill battle trying to portray climate change as fake. on 70% of Americans Recognize that global warming is happening. Meanwhile, recent polls find that most Americans don’t trust Republicans on the environment, if only so 23 percent Favoring the party’s plan to address environmental issues.
Why is the federal government hiding climate data?
But if the phrase is repeated too often, it may begin to distort reality, even if it is inaccurate. It is a rule that Trump understands intuitively, and a driving force behind his linguistic prescriptions. “I have a standing order in the White House – never use the word ‘coal,’ just use ‘clean, nice coal,'” Trump said in his speech to the United Nations. “Sounds a lot better, doesn’t it?”
The coal may be basically dirty Every scale People use it to decide whether something is clean, but the phrase “clean coal” can still change people’s association with the fuel. “If you can control vocabulary, you control thought,” says Kathleen Hall Jamison, a professor of communications at the University of Pennsylvania who has spent decades studying campaign messaging. Once we embrace a new set of terms, she said, those words begin to do the thinking for us. People internalize assumptions hidden within themselves, often without even noticing it.
Jamieson says it’s part of a broader strategy to promote fossil fuels over renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. The Trump administration has canceled it Billion dollars to finance clean energy projects At the same time, accelerate permits for new pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure. Last month, the Department of Energy announced it would do so For $625 million In saving the coal industry, which was dying with the rise of natural gas and renewable energy sources.
“The administration is trying to align the vocabulary in which we talk about the environment with policies that are compatible with increased drilling,” Jamieson said. “You don’t have to do a lot of work to see the relationship between policy and language.”
As for how to respond to propaganda, Hobbs said resorting to facts — as scientists and journalists often do — is not the most effective strategy. Research has long shown that feelings are more important than facts in changing people’s minds. “You fight propaganda with propaganda, don’t you?” she said. Climate advocates are increasingly linking climate change to inflation and rising costs of living, in an attempt to reach Americans struggling with high electricity bills.
On a micro level, Hobbs said she has seen success in this area Online experiences Where people engage in real, open conversations about various advocacy topics, from free speech rights to the role of social media influencers. This format prompted people to talk about which conspiracy theories they encountered, which emotions those stories evoked, and which ones were harmful. Participants were encouraged to be open about their doubts and where they came from – and in doing so, they often came to the realization that their beliefs might be influenced by propaganda. People have less fear of others who think differently and have become more critical of the information they receive, Hobbs said.
“We can’t help but be exposed to publicity, but how we respond to it is up to us,” Hobbs said.