Fall 2025: Lydia B. Cohen

Neighboring the Eye of the Storm:
How News Headlines of Hurricane Helene Challenged Climate Perceptions in Central North Carolina

Lydia B. Cohen

Strategic Communications, Elon University

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements in an undergraduate senior capstone course in communications

Abstract

This study examined how media headlines about Hurricane Helene shaped public perceptions of climate change among residents of Central North Carolina. Although the storm’s most severe impacts occurred in Western North Carolina, widespread news coverage drew significant attention statewide, and headlines shaped how residents interpreted the event. Through qualitative, semi-structured interviews with eight participants aged 35 to 64 from Alamance and Guilford counties, this research explored how headlines presented the hurricane and how that presentation influenced emotional responses and climate-related attitudes. Guided by theories of media framing and agenda-setting, interviewee reactions were grouped into three emotional categories: confusion, apathy, and motivation. Participants’ responses were closely tied to prior beliefs, levels of media trust, and perceived proximity to the storm. While the headlines did not lead to major shifts in individual perceptions of climate change, they played an important role in sustaining public conversation about a changing climate and extreme weather events. These findings emphasize the importance of thoughtful headline framing that encourages constructive engagement with climate issues.

Keywords: climate change communication, Hurricane Helene, media framing, news headlines
Email: lcohen16@elon.edu

I. Introduction

In September 2024, Hurricane Helene charged through the southeastern United States leaving behind more than just physical destruction. The storm affected Western North Carolina in a particularly harsh way, sparking widespread media coverage. The state is no stranger to hurricanes, particularly on the eastern coast, where fierce weather frequently damages the fragile environments of the Outer Banks. However, the increase of media headlines marking western North Carolina as a target for Hurricane Helene may have had broader impacts beyond the major physical damages.

In recent years, hurricanes have become more frequent and intense, with climate change increasingly identified as a contributing factor, according to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (2023). Additionally, research shows that media coverage of natural disasters often influences public concern about climate change, particularly in the affected areas (Arias & Blair, 2024).

Central North Carolina, defined by the Piedmont Region, lies adjacent to the effects of Hurricane Helene. This research examines how media headlines about the storm shaped residents’ perceptions of climate change. Specifically, this study seeks to understand how local news coverage, both through the content of the headlines and the framing of the storm, impacted the level of public awareness and concern regarding climate change, in an area that was close but not adversely affected by the storm. Research indicates that when natural disasters occur closer to home, people are more likely to change their attitudes about climate change (Arias & Blair, 2024). This research further investigates the role that news outlets play in either reinforcing or challenging preconceived notions about climate change, and whether the phrasing of media headlines altered community members’ mindsets of the storm itself, if at all.

II. Literature Review

Emotions Created by Headlines: Motivation, Confusion and Apathy

Headlines of news articles play a major role in shaping the public’s understanding of complex issues. Research has found that headlines often contain intentionally more emotionally charged language than the articles themselves, playing an impactful role in hooking audience engagement and perception (Xu et al., 2022). Readers who only skim headlines may not receive the full picture of the article, which may lead to exaggerated perspectives (Carcioppolo et al., 2022). Additionally, headlines and word choices often determine whether a reader will feel motivated to act, confused by conflicting messages, or apathetic due to fatigue (Konnikova, 2014). This research suggests that the way media editors frame climate-related headlines can determine not only how much attention an article receives but also how the reader interprets a major issue.

Three common emotional responses can emerge from climate change coverage: motivation, confusion, and apathy. Green and Appel (2024) state that motivation is often sparked by headlines that emphasize personal responsibility or suggest actionable steps. While confusion can arise from contradictory information, overly scientific language, or perceived politicization of the issue (Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004). And apathy frequently stems from repetitive, overwhelmingly negative messaging, which can lead to disengagement or hopelessness (Ryan & Doerksen, 2013). These responses provide a useful framework for categorizing how audiences emotionally engage with climate-related content.

Shifting Apathy into Motivation

The three emotions stem from psychological mechanisms. Apathy is often tied to the optimism bias which is the belief that negative impacts will not personally affect the reader. Climate change, for many people, can be difficult to conceptualize; it can feel abstract or like a distant issue which makes it harder to act on (Høegh-Krohn et al., 2025). However, research recommends solution-based messaging that grounds climate issues in local, tangible terms. The way a climate issue is framed aids in its relevance to readers and increases their motivation to act. Research from Stecula and Merkley (2019) also suggests that when framing a climate article around economic benefits or local impacts it tends to resonate with a broader range of readers.

Agenda-setting theory

Climate change media coverage may be understood through agenda-setting theory, which argues that media has the power to determine what the public perceives as important by intentionally choosing to report on some things and not others (Rosenberry & Vicker, 2022). Research by Wonneberger et al. (2019) examined how media framing and agenda-setting relates in the realm of climate conferences. The media framing of the conferences influenced engagement, finding that moderately engaged individuals were most susceptible to shifting their views based on news coverage. Wetts (2020) further noted that business and anti-climate perspectives receive disproportionate visibility in coverage, reinforcing climate skepticism through selective headline framing. These studies suggest that individual responses to media are filtered through preexisting beliefs and that framing can either challenge or solidify those perspectives. Those more deeply rooted on one side or the other will be harder to sway than someone who is more in the middle.

This research builds on existing studies about the influence of headlines by investigating how coverage of a natural disaster in an area unaccustomed to hurricanes may specifically alter public perceptions. The results offer new insight into how regional proximity, prior beliefs, and headline framing interact to influence motivation, confusion, or apathy among readers.

Hurricane Helene and Its Impact on Western North Carolina

Extreme weather events often lead to increased discussions about the climate. As found in an analysis from Torricelli et al. (2023), social media discussions surrounding major hurricanes significantly increase public discourse on climate change, particularly in the affected regions. This aligns with research by Arias and Blair (2024), who examined how personal experiences with hurricanes influence climate attitudes. They discovered that while direct exposure to extreme weather events can shape public opinion, it often reinforces preexisting beliefs rather than causing significant shifts. These mixed findings emphasize the need to better understand how both proximity and media framing contribute to public responses.

Hurricane Helene’s unusual trajectory through Western North Carolina presented an opportunity to study this phenomenon. The localized headlines, discussions and physical impact of Hurricane Helene in Western North Carolina could play a role in the way residents in an adjacent area interpret climate change moving forward.

Despite existing research on natural disasters and climate beliefs, questions remain about what specifically drives shifts in perception. Some studies suggest that experiencing a natural disaster reinforces established beliefs (e.g., Arias & Blair, 2024), others highlight the role of increased media discourse in reshaping opinions on climate change (e.g., Torricelli et al., 2023). What remains unclear is whether it’s the disaster itself, the media narrative surrounding it, or a combination of both that influences public understanding of climate change.

Research Questions

This study explores the aforementioned gap by focusing on how headlines about Hurricane Helene influenced public opinion in Central North Carolina. The following research questions guide this investigation:

R1: Did Hurricane Helene news headlines cause a shift in public perception of climate change in Central North Carolina?

R2: Did the media coverage of Western North Carolina prompt a shift in attitudes toward the urgency of addressing climate change in Central North Carolina?

R3: Did the news headlines about Hurricane Helene generate feelings of confusion, apathy, or motivation to take action on climate change in Central North Carolina?

This is important because it supports ongoing research to examine how media coverage, particularly news headlines, impact how readers perceive climate change. With recent studies showing that it is common for many people to skim only the headlines of articles as they scroll on their phone, this study investigates more closely on the potential bigger impacts (Shulman et al., 2024). This study fills a gap in research by analyzing the impacts of Hurricane Helene news headlines in a timely manner after the hurricane and how they influenced public perception of climate change in an area adjacent to the hurricane.

As the climate crisis becomes more urgent, effective climate communication is critical in informing the public in a way that fosters motivation and engagement. By analyzing how different headlines influence audience reactions, this study will contribute to a better understanding of how to optimize climate communication in the future and will aid in the creation of positively impactful journalism and policymaking.

III. Methods

This study engaged individuals who live in central North Carolina, specifically Alamance and Guilford Counties. This area was chosen for its central North Carolina setting and its convenience for the researcher. Additionally, the two counties have a blend of urban and rural influences which allowed for a diverse sample of community members.

This study focused on individuals aged around 35 to 64 with a total of eight participants. This age group was selected based on research from Statista, which indicated that individuals in this demographic are often highly engaged with news media (Statista, 2024). Additionally, research suggests that younger individuals in the United States are more likely to believe in climate change. Given that just over half of individuals ages 35 to 65 consider climate change a threat (Scanlon, 2019), this allowed for a more interesting sample population.

The participants for this study were notified to voluntarily participate in an interview through community Facebook pages. Prospective respondents messaged the researcher to volunteer for the interview and then the interview was conducted through Zoom and lasted 30-45 minutes. Two of the eight interviews were conducted in-person and sought out through a sign that indicated voluntary participation in research; the interviewees approached the researcher to express their willingness to participate in the interview.

All eight participants were informed about the study’s purpose and confidentiality measures before consenting to participate; they were additionally read and shown the consent form. Once they signed the consent form and granted permission, the interview was voice recorded to later be transcribed for coding purposes.

To gain a closer understanding of the interviewee’s background and viewpoint, the researcher posed each respondent with a preliminary set of questions to gain relevant demographic information such as age range, gender, news consumption habits, and a baseline view of climate change.

Once the multiple-choice preliminary questions were answered, the semi-structured interview began. This study used a qualitative approach through semi-structured interviews to gain deeper insights into public perception of Hurricane Helene headlines. Semi-structured interviews allowed flexibility in responses while maintaining a consistent set of core questions The researcher presented the interviewees with five headlines from news websites describing the impacts of Hurricane Helene.

Headline 1 (Fox News)

Hurricane Helene: North Carolina residents fight for their survival as basic goods become scarce

North Carolina residents explain the dire need for water, power and cell phone service after Helene (Conklin, 2024)

The researcher used a form of a single-blind study in which the interviewees were unaware of the news outlet that produced each headline to allow for more meaningful discussion about the actual headlines and to avoid pre-judgement based on the specific source (Bazi, 2019). After assessing the interviewees’ reactions to all five headlines, the researcher asked follow-up questions to assess more deeply how they engaged with headlines during and after Hurricane Helene, as well as their association of the headlines with climate change and post-hurricane action.

IV. Results

Overall, the study found that while headlines did not necessarily prompt drastic changes in personal beliefs on climate change, they did elicit emotional reactions and occasional personal action. The responses in the interviews reflected a mix of media skepticism, personalized concern for the safety of oneself and the community, and selective motivation.

R1: Did Hurricane Helene news headlines cause a shift in public perception of climate change in Central North Carolina?

Across the eight interviews, the participants did not express a clear shift in their overall belief in climate change due to Hurricane Helene headlines. For those who already acknowledged the reality of climate change, the headlines reaffirmed their concerns. For skeptics, the headlines either reinforced existing doubts or were dismissed as politically motivated or exaggerated.

Table 1 displays the relevant demographic information of the interviewees accompanied with their level of concern and their inferred causes of climate change. This provided background evidence on their preexisting values as they reviewed the headlines used in the study.

Table 1
Interviewee Demographic Information and baseline climate change perspectives

Interviewee #	Age	Gender	Education Completed	Level of Concern with Climate Change	Cause of Climate Change (if applicable)
Interviewee 1	65+	Male	Graduate degree or higher	Extremely concerned	Climate change is primarily caused by human activity
Interviewee 2	50-65	Female	Graduate degree or higher	Somewhat concerned	Climate change is occurring, but mostly due to natural factors
Interviewee 3	50-65	Female	Some college	Very concerned	Climate change is primarily caused by human activity
Interviewee 4	35-49	Female	Bachelor’s degree	Somewhat concerned	Climate change is occurring, but it is mostly due to natural factors
Interviewee 5	50-65	Male	Some college	Not concerned at all	Climate change is not a serious issue
Interviewee 6	50-65	Female	Bachelor’s degree	Somewhat concerned	Climate change is occurring, but it is mostly due to natural factors
Interviewee 7	35-49	Male	Graduate degree or higher	Extremely concerned	Climate change is primarily caused by human activity
Interviewee 8	35-49	Male	Some college	Somewhat concerned	Climate change is occurring, but mostly due to natural factors

Respondents with greater trust in science or heightened environmental concern viewed the storm as further evidence of climate change. For instance, Interviewee 1 said, “this kind of thing has not happened in centuries, and so… something’s certainly… influenced, something’s changed. Rain’s not as regular. Temperatures are hotter. Crops that used to grow here don’t grow here anymore. Crops that didn’t grow here are growing here now, tropical things.” While a more neutral participant stated in reference to the storm headlines, “Yes, it could be climate change. I don’t know if it was directly responsible, but it definitely makes you think about it more.” While others, particularly those critical of mainstream or left-leaning media, were quick to question the attribution of the storm to climate change. One noted, “I think it’s more about infrastructure than climate. These towns just aren’t built for this.”

The headlines caused several readers to consider the topic of climate change, even mentioning it explicitly when describing their reaction to the headline. However, there was not a general significant shift in expressed beliefs among participants. Instead, interviewees found elements of each headline that aligned with their pre-existing perspectives.

R2: Did the media coverage of Western North Carolina prompt a shift in attitudes toward the urgency of addressing climate change in Central North Carolina?

For most participants, the media coverage reaffirmed previous beliefs more than opened their attitudes to new viewpoints. The geographic proximity of western North Carolina appeared to heighten participants’ sense of relevance and awareness, feeling like they could relate to the headlines due to personal experience in the geographic area, friends/family in the region, or simply that, “it’s close to home.”

Several participants emphasized infrastructure improvement rather than climate policy as a solution. A common shared sentiment was questioning “how much climate change impacted the storm actually happening versus it being more structurally related with … the structures around the town. and how they’re built.” While many acknowledged that a hurricane in the western part of the state was unusual and the resulting damage was shocking, few attributed the impacts directly to climate change. For example, one respondent said, “I feel like that it has a lot to do with underground components, the piping around the towns and just not being prepared for disasters when the rivers and lakes reach up to a certain point.”

Overall, while the headlines contributed to a greater sense of urgency about local vulnerability after the hurricane and consideration for future storms, they did not spark widespread reconsideration of climate change policy or deeper environmental action. One participant remarked, “I already drive a Civic. I try to decrease…we recycle, try to do our best with the carbon footprint minimizing. We don’t have big cars, gas guzzlers. I don’t really know what else we could do.” The concern remained localized, immediate, and reactive, mainly focused on small actions as well as “donating and helping by volunteering,” rather than systemic or long-term.

Conversely, participants who indicated extreme concern about climate change in the preliminary questionnaire expressed a clear connection between the storm, the headlines, and the changing climate. However, their tone conveyed a sense of exhaustion and worry, viewing the storm less as a wake-up call and more as another confirmation of what they already believed. As one respondent stated, “It’s shocking to see something like this in a place that is not used to it. It concerns me to think… Who’s next?”

All participants shared concern for those affected by the storm and recollected their impulse to contribute to relief efforts in the moment when they saw the original coverage. One participant shared, “It does kind of stimulate thoughts of you know, what do we need to do to prevent this from happening [here],” showing an interest to engage in more proactive measures. However, based on further context, that interest leaned more toward personal steps such as flood insurance and preparing for storms more defensively, rather than environmental advocacy.

R3: Did the news headlines about Hurricane Helene generate feelings of confusion, apathy, or motivation to take action on climate change in Central North Carolina?

The five news headlines in the experiment evoked a range of emotional reactions in participants. This research categorizes the dominant emotional themes as confusion, apathy, and motivation. Confusion and motivation were the most frequently reported responses. While some participants felt confusion due to inconsistent or sensationalized visuals and phrasing in the headlines, others expressed motivation to take practical action such as donating money or supplies. However, feelings of apathy were not as commonly reported, as several respondents empathized with the proximity of the disaster and had personal connections to the area.

Participants most reported feelings of confusion, particularly when the headlines and accompanying images did not match their understanding of the storm’s effects. One interviewee noted in reference to Headline 2, “that looks more like a tornado than anything … you don’t see any evidence of water damage,” highlighting a disconnect between the imagery of the headlines and their understanding of the storm’s impact. Furthermore, in reference to Headline 4, many participants referenced confusion and frustration because they felt that the topic of the article “[took] away from the actual devastation going on.”

Additionally, all eight participants questioned the use of dramatic language in Headline 3. One interviewee remarked, “I’m not sure about the ‘biblical devastation’… it’s just somebody trying to take a different spin off of what happened.” Many respondents felt the phrase distracted from the article’s message and even evoked unrelated emotional experiences like “religious trauma.” One respondent, who expressed that climate change was extremely important, emphasized a sense that other readers who resonated with the article have a twisted understanding of the topic, “People that are still denying this … they do say it’s biblical, or it’s an act of water or whatever, but you know, it’s really an act of man. We’ve contributed to it certainly, and natural fluctuations, of course, but you know, this kind of thing has not happened in centuries.”

For a lot of respondents, confusion appeared as a sense of skepticism and wariness. Nonetheless, the headlines motivated several participants to act as noted in the previous question’s findings. Some respondents contributed to direct aid efforts, stating they “took part in sending items up to help out with water and food and sent money as well.” While headlines sparked reflection on climate change, they more commonly prompted tangible actions supporting storm victims.

Apathy was notably the least evident reaction. While some expressed skepticism regarding the attribution of the storm to climate change, it did not lead to complete disengagement. One participant explained, “I’m immediately … filled with some questions … is this true?” indicating doubt about the sentiment of Headline 5, but not necessarily indifference. The respondent expressed wanting to learn more.

Overall, the underlying sense of skepticism was more about the accuracy of the reports rather than a lack of concern for the issues presented. For instance, one respondent said, “I’m not going to say that global or climate change isn’t a factor, but I’m also not going to say we’re the cause.” This reflects optimism bias and a lack of ownership, as the issue may feel too complex or distant to personalize.

Overall, the headlines generated feelings of confusion and motivation, but also left many participants wanting to seek out additional information. While apathy was less evident, the headlines did evoke a mixture of skepticism and a desire to act through mutual aid, particularly in the form of direct relief to affected communities, rather than an immediate shift in attitudes toward broader climate change policies.

V. Discussion

This study provides important insights into how media headlines about Hurricane Helene influenced public perceptions of climate change among residents of Central North Carolina. While the headlines provoked emotional responses and, in some cases, personal action, they primarily served to reinforce existing beliefs rather than transform them, even given the geographic proximity of the hurricane. These findings build on existing research about natural disasters and that the media coverage tend to validate preexisting attitudes rather than cause widespread opinion shifts (Arias & Blair, 2024; Torricelli et al., 2023).

Reinforcement of Preexisting Beliefs

A key theme that emerged from the interviews was the persistence of established beliefs in shaping how participants interpreted the media coverage. Respondents who already accepted the seriousness of climate change viewed the headlines as further evidence supporting their concerns. For instance, some participants expressed how the storm symbolized clear evidence of environmental shifts, emphasizing changes in weather patterns and agriculture over the years. These individuals shared a sentiment that the storm added to the list of evidence for climate change.

Meanwhile, skeptical participants interpreted the headlines through a different lens. They remained unconvinced, sometimes even citing the headlines’ sensationalism as justification for their skepticism. One respondent dismissed climate change as the primary source, instead attributing the storm’s impact to unfit infrastructure and poor preparation. Others questioned the charged language of headlines, interpreting it as “over-the-top to get a point across” or politicized.

These patterns illustrated motivated reasoning (Kunda, 1990), in which individuals process information in a way that aligns with their prior beliefs. This pattern suggests that news headlines, while powerful, may result in unintended outcomes when considering Schramm’s model of communication (1954), where meaning is shaped by both sender and receiver. Messages may be decoded by the reader in ways that are different from what the writer may have intended, leading to readers subconsciously finding ways to reinforce what they already believe.

This outcome is particularly relevant when considered alongside theories of media framing and agenda-setting (Rosenberry & Vicker, 2022). While headlines succeeded in directing public attention toward the storm and its unusual geographic impact, they did not consistently reframe readers’ deeper worldviews about climate change, an unsurprising result, given that not all articles aimed to do so. However, it is notable that five out of eight interviewees did not mention climate change until prompted, suggesting that even localized extreme weather events may not be enough to independently bring climate considerations into the public mind.

Emotional Reactions and Localized Concern

Another important theme that emerged was the role of geographic proximity in creating emotional reactions and urgency. While the headlines and/or the storm may not have transformed beliefs about climate change, information about the storm felt relevant to all the participants’ lives, bringing a distant issue closer. Several interviewees expressed heightened concern about the vulnerability of their own communities in central North Carolina, particularly regarding preparedness for future disasters.

However, this concern often manifested in a localized and immediate way rather than a systemic or future-oriented manner. Participants emphasized infrastructure resilience, emergency response, and personal disaster preparedness over broader environmental activism or support for climate change mitigation policies. Interestingly, this finding reinforces previous research suggesting that while personal experiences with natural disasters can increase perceived risk, they often channel concern into short-term or personally relevant actions rather than broad, systemic changes (Arias & Blair, 2024; Høegh-Krohn et al., 2025).

Confusion resulting in media distrust

The confusion created by headlines caused a decrease in trust in the media with all participants, no matter their stance on climate change. This trend could have long-term consequences for climate change communication. One interviewee remarked that, “a beautiful day doesn’t make weather headlines, and so I think the local stations tend to err on the side of catastrophe to try to get people to listen and tune in.” This mindset was shared by other respondents and shows that there is an overall hesitancy about emotional weather-related headlines. A sentiment shared by all the participants was that they, “just want the facts,” because they felt the divisive language made it hard to decode the important information.

When individuals perceive headlines as hyperbolic or politically motivated, they may become more resistant to future messages about climate change, even when the actual communication is scientifically accurate and important. Many respondents shared that they tune into several news outlets to gain more of the “complete story” because they have trouble trusting just one news source. Simple, clear messaging is crucial for future climate communication to be impactful to a broader audience.

An important aspect of the research was that most of the respondents admitted to commonly skimming media headlines as they scroll through the news, flip through the paper, or scan the television stations. While they compare stories from one news outlet with others to gain a more holistic view, by exposing themselves to only the headlines, they are receiving only the most dramatic portion of a story and making quick decisions based off it.

Implications of this Research

The results of this study have several important implications for improving climate change communication strategies, particularly through news media. It was clear that the localized coverage did prompt awareness, but did not change minds. Whether participants were relating the issue to climate change or not, they mostly acknowledged that the storm and its impacts were “not normal.” For this coverage to foster broader engagement with climate change, it must balance urgency with accuracy. Sensationalism may capture attention in the short term but holds a risk of eroding trust over time.

It is necessary for communicators to consider that media messages are filtered through the lens of individuals’ preexisting beliefs and values. Many of the participants explained that they choose to consume multiple news sources because they did not feel like they can trust just one. Even just several years ago, journalism regarding weather impacts would not have been seen as political. Strategies that appeal to shared experiences, emphasize local impacts, and avoid overly divisive language may be more effective in motivating a broader range of people and leading to a shift in mindset on the part of more moderate individuals.

Finally, as many people of the world have moved into a society where headlines are often the only part of a story that readers engage with (Xu et al., 2023), careful attention to detailed framing is crucial. Headlines that responsibly highlight the link between extreme weather and climate change, without exaggeration, may help build greater public understanding and support for action. Intentionally choosing clearer and simpler headlines could aid in a less extreme or divided society as many people make split judgements solely based on a headline (Rodrigo-Ginés et al., 2023).

Limitations

While this study provides valuable insights, it is important to acknowledge its limitations. The sample size was small and geographically limited to Alamance and Guilford Counties in Central North Carolina, which may limit the overall conclusions. Future research should consider larger, more diverse populations. Additionally, it would have been interesting to compare respondents’ pre- and post-hurricane opinions. Since the interviews occurred, there was a major flooding event in Alamance and Orange counties in July 2025. This research could benefit from repeated interviews with the same respondents to investigate further as the storms become more localized and more repeated if that plays a role in shifting mindsets.

Furthermore, while this study focused on news headlines, the researcher withheld the media source from respondents to avoid pre-judgement. It would be interesting to consider if providing information about the source of the article would play a role in their sense of trust or distrust as it is more realistic to their day-to-day experience. Additionally, further research could investigate the role of images, video content, and social media interactions in shaping public reactions to climate change-related news and overall conversations around climate change in an area before and after a major hurricane.

VI. Conclusion

The goal of this research was to explore how news headlines about Hurricane Helene influenced public perceptions of climate change in central North Carolina. The research interest was sparked because this was a region adjacent to, but not directly hit, by the storm. The findings suggest that headlines play a significant role in shaping emotional responses to climate events, particularly in areas where proximity makes the event feel relevant, even without physical impact.

Participants expressed a range of reactions, most commonly falling into categories of confusion and motivation and developing deeper meaning based on their preexisting values or beliefs. While some individuals strengthened their awareness or concern about climate change, others interpreted the coverage through a lens of skepticism or perceived exaggeration.

These varied reactions reinforce the importance of headline framing in climate communication. In many cases, headlines either reinforced established understandings or activated emotional responses that did not always translate into greater engagement or behavior change. For communities like those in central North Carolina that were close enough to feel threatened, but distant enough to remain untouched, the way climate events are communicated may determine whether the public sees climate change as a personal issue or a distant abstraction.

As climate-related natural disasters become more frequent, the role of the media in shaping public discourse will only grow more critical. Through the agenda-setting theory, there is pressure on journalists to present the facts of these situations in a truthful manner while also creating a sense of motivation toward change. Keeping it simple and fact-based, rather than intense and captivating may allow for less debate of the relationship between the storm and climate change.

Future researchers could build on this study by analyzing a larger, more diverse sample across multiple geographic regions and a variety of natural disasters to better understand how local context influences headline interpretation in different areas. Additionally, comparative studies could examine how social media versus traditional news headlines impact perception differently. Understanding these nuances could help journalists, scientists, and policymakers come together to communicate more effectively about climate change.

Ultimately, this research affirms that it is not the storm itself, but how the storm is framed that can influence public perceptions, even in a short headline. As climate communication becomes more critical, headline writing must balance clarity and urgency to foster engagement without alienating skeptical readers.

Acknowledgements

I feel so fortunate to have taken Daniel Haygood’s Great Ideas class. His steady support and thoughtful feedback fueled my excitement throughout this process, and this paper would not have taken shape as it has without his encouragement along the way. I am also deeply grateful to the participants who generously contributed their time and perspectives to fuel student research. Finally, I want to thank my parents for instilling in me a love of research and for encouraging me throughout this entire journey.

References

Arias, S. B., & Blair, C. W. (2024). In the eye of the storm: Hurricanes, climate migration, and climate attitudes. American Political Science Review, 118(4), 1593–1613. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055424000352

Bazi, T. (2019). Peer review: Single-blind, double-blind, or all the way-blind? International Urogynecology Journal, 31(3), 481–483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00192-019-04187-2

Boykoff, M. T., & Boykoff, J. M. (2004). Balance as bias: Global warming and the US prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14(2), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001

Carcioppolo, N., Lun, D., & McFarlane, S. J. (2021). Exaggerated and questioning clickbait headlines and their influence on media learning. Journal of Media Psychology Theories Methods and Applications, 34(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000298

Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. (2023, July 14). Hurricanes and climate change. https://www.c2es.org/content/hurricanes-and-climate-change/

Cohen, L. (2024, October 2). Here’s how Hurricane Helene brought “biblical devastation” to western North Carolina in a near “worst-case scenario.” CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hurricane-helene-biblical-devastation-north-carolina-near-worst-case-scenario/

Conklin, A. (2024, October 2). Hurricane Helene: North Carolina residents fight for their survival as basic goods become scarce. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/us/hurricane-helene-north-carolina-residents-fight-survival-basic-goods-become-scarce

Green, M. C., & Appel, M. (2024). Narrative transportation: How stories shape how we see ourselves and the world. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 70, 1–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2024.03.002

Greene, B., & Waddell, S. (2024, December 16). The devastation of Hurricane Helene: the Fifth District. Richmond Fed. https://www.richmondfed.org/region_communities/regional_data_analysis/regional_matters/2024/rm_10_11_24_devastation_hurricane_helene

Høegh-Krohn, S. K. B., Haarstad, H., & Ytre-Arne, B. (2025). Climate change is an intangible news topic: A qualitative analysis of audience perceptions. Environmental Communication, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2025.2458220

Konnikova, M. (2014, December 17). How headlines change the way we think. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/headlines-change-way-think

Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480

Malkoff, D., Zalani, A., & McCray, J. (2025, February 5). Hurricane Helene destroyed their local bridge, but residents must pay for its replacement. CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hurricane-helene-destroyed-private-bridges-north-carolina/

News consumption by age U.S. 2022. (2024, January 4). Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/717651/most-popular-news-platforms/

Rodrigo-Ginés, F., Carrillo-De-Albornoz, J., & Plaza, L. (2023). A systematic review on media bias detection: What is media bias, how it is expressed, and how to detect it. Expert Systems With Applications, 237, 121641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2023.121641

Rosenberry, J., & Vicker, L. A. (2022). Applied Communication Theory. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.

Ryan, C. D., & Doerksen, K. (2013). Apathy and online activism: An impetus for science and science communication in universities. The International Journal of Technology Knowledge and Society, 9(2), 81–94. https://doi.org/10.18848/1832-3669/cgp/v09i02/56369

Scanlon, R. (2019, October 4). The generational divide over climate change. Chicago Council on Global Affairs. https://globalaffairs.org/commentary-and-analysis/blogs/generational-divide-over-climate-change

Schramm, W. (1954). How communication works. In W. Schramm (Ed.), The Process and Effects of Mass Communication (pp. 3–26). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Semistructured interview. (2004). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412950589.n909

Shulman, H. C., Markowitz, D. M., & Rogers, T. (2024). Reading dies in complexity: Online news consumers prefer simple writing. Science Advances, 10(23). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn2555

St. John, A. (2024, October 9). Climate change boosted Helene’s deadly rain and wind and scientists say same is likely for Milton. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-hurricane-helene-science-fatalities-8a0d4f072669fd1d0031a23d7fc4b29c

Stecula, D. A., & Merkley, E. (2019). Framing climate change: Economics, ideology, and uncertainty in American news media content from 1988 to 2014. Frontiers in Communication, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00006

Torricelli, M., Falkenberg, M., Galeazzi, A., Zollo, F., Quattrociocchi, W., & Baronchelli, A. (2023). How does extreme weather impact the climate change discourse? Insights from the Twitter discussion on hurricanes. PLOS Climate, 2(11), e0000277. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000277

Wetts, R. (2020). In climate news, statements from large businesses and opponents of climate action receive heightened visibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(32), 19054–19060. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1921526117

Wonneberger, A., Meijers, M. H. C., & Schuck, A. R. T. (2019). Shifting public engagement: How media coverage of climate change conferences affects climate change audience segments. Public Understanding of Science, 29(2), 176–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662519886474

Xu, H., Patiño, J. G., & Linaza, J. L. (2023). Reader influence on the creation of transmedia science fiction: A participatory culture perspective. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01772-1

Xu, Z., Laffidy, M., & Ellis, L. (2022). Clickbait for climate change: Comparing emotions in headlines and full-texts and their engagement. Information Communication & Society, 26(10), 1915–1932. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2022.2050416

Yan, H., & Almasy, S. (2024, September 30). Helene left at least 128 people dead and communities “wiped off the map.” Now, survivors are struggling to get food and water. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/30/weather/hurricane-helene-recovery-cleanup-monday/index.html

Neighboring the Eye of the Storm: How News Headlines of Hurricane Helene Challenged Climate Perceptions in Central North Carolina