Muted voices: how greenhushing and media cuts stall climate conversations
As boards and media go quiet on climate, directors must find new ways to communicate sustainability with clarity and credibility.
New Zealanders’ attitude to climate change is cooling, as some media and boards of directors retreat from open engagement and reporting on the issue.
In 2025, we are experiencing a new reality. Rather than talking openly, some companies seem to be going quiet on climate, entering a phase of downplaying or “greenhushing” their climate actions – an approach that threatens transparent sustainability communication.
In “Lessons from the Frontline” (Chapter Zero - KPMG 2024), it was reported that New Zealand companies with climate reporting obligations “opted to ‘say less’ – an outcome that raises questions about whether mandatory climate reporting could unintentionally be having greenhushing effects, as has been seen in other jurisdictions.”
Meanwhile, New Zealand newsrooms in 2025 have either vanished altogether or contracted as traditional media struggle to remain profitable. Reporters assigned to cover climate change have moved on, lost their jobs or been transferred to other news rounds deemed more newsworthy. By June 2025, Radio New Zealand reported that only one local mainstream news media organisation had a dedicated climate reporter.
The impact of these changes on perceptions of climate change and its significance is measurable. According to “Ipsos Aotearoa New Zealand - People and Climate Change Report 2025” the proportion of New Zealanders who think that our country should be doing more to tackle climate change has decreased significantly, to 54% in 2025 (down from 64% in 2024 and 2023). Notably, this finding is also much lower than the 32-country average of 62%.
Faced with the impact of anti-climate governments, rollbacks on media reporting, and fears about a broader cultural backlash against focusing on sustainability, what are the responsible communications options for the boards of climate reporting entities or organisations wanting to reassure their stakeholders?
On the one hand, they have committed themselves to doing meaningful climate work and want to share that progress. On the other hand, in a hostile landscape they fear criticism or even vitriol for speaking publicly about their climate efforts.
The antidote to misinformation, policy retreat and societal grumpiness about perceived regulatory climate overreach is first to look outwards. Understand the position of key stakeholders in order to enter a constructive conversation about how an organisation is managing and responding to climate impacts.
Without taking that first step, the challenges of being heard and trusted amidst the negative noise will be compounded.
Boards need to ensure they have a credible, stress-tested sustainability strategy addressing the issues that are most material to their business – and to their key stakeholders’ needs. Do this by setting specific, measurable and verifiable goals and reporting on them.
Use clear concise language that puts an organisation’s people at the heart of a climate story. Their efforts, the progress won and setbacks surmounted will resonate. Conversely, reliance on jargon and impenetrable charts will erect barriers and signal that an organisation is probably just going through the motions of regulatory compliance. If investors or customers are left bewildered, they will also be left wondering if they can trust what they have been told.
Trust can be further developed by honest assessments of progress. If climate action targets have not been met, then say so. Tell the story openly: “we tried, it didn’t work, we learned, and here is how we are adjusting our approach.”
As traditional media struggle to fulfil the fundamental requirements of daily news coverage, an organisation’s climate achievements might not gain a reporter’s attention. But misinformation or deliberate deception can quickly become the source of bold headlines, particularly if an organisation is called out by a regulator like the Financial Markets Authority.
The onus is on directors to ensure they and their management team share their climate story with honesty, clarity and conviction, backed by data that is not burdened by complexity. Case studies in particular are a powerful tool.
Although options for securing a news reporter’s attention are dwindling, there are many other communications channels that can be readily accessed, including social media, video-based platforms, via memberships such as Chapter Zero and an organisation’s own website, events, as well as formal and informal stakeholder interactions.
A story told once might be noticed and understood by a few. A story told many times, in a variety of settings, stands a better chance of securing attention and building respect.
By taking these practical steps, boards can help stem the contagion of the quiet epidemic and its impact on New Zealanders’ perceptions of climate change.
Anthem is the official communications partner of Chapter Zero NZ.
