Rhetorical Storytelling in Climate Change Denial Videos on YouTube

In recent years, YouTube became an important platform in shaping the public understanding of climate change. While previous research has addressed misinformation and public opinion, there has been a gap on how climate-sceptical creators on YouTube use rhetorical tools within audiovisual storytelling. This study investigates how persuasive strategies are applied in climate change-sceptical content on YouTube, for which a rhetorical analysis is applied. To examine this, a qualitative multimodal discourse analysis was conducted, deriving from the rhetorical appeals of ethos, pathos and logos. Additionally, an inductive category focusing on viewer engagement was developed. The analysis is based on 36 videos from four YouTube channels: Steven Crowder, John Stossel, PragerU and Heartland Institute. These were selected through purposive sampling and were analysed using a hybrid deductive-inductive coding approach in Atlas.ti. Hereby, all multimodal modes were considered. The findings show that ethos was the most frequently used appeal. Creators establish credibility through critical tone, the use of professional visuals and scepticism towards media and institutions. Hereby, the type of credibility differs depending on the content style. While conversation-style creators appeal to the audience through shared values such as economic concern and national identity, solo style creators tend to use structured visuals and formal delivery to create authority. This demonstrates how credibility is strategically adapted to different audiences and formats. Within the category of pathos, humour and satire were found to be dominant tools, particularly within Steven Crowder's content. Editing techniques such as reaction cuts and dramatic effects were used to amplify the emotional appeal and increase the entertainment value of the message. The analysis of logos showed that rational argumentation was often simulated rather than applied in a scientific way. Instead of offering robust evidence, creators frequently relied on simplified data, inserted news clips or visual props to appear rational. The rhetoric of critical thinking was frequently used to question climate policies or expert consensus, not to foster understanding but to create doubt. A final finding is the use of viewer engagement as a rhetorical technique. Statements like "do your own research" or requests for support are used to activate the viewer and increase loyalty. This reflects a shift from persuasion as argument to persuasion as participation. Altogether, these findings add significant research insights on how climate-sceptical creators use rhetorical storytelling to make their narratives persuasive. Rather than denying climate change outright, the content analysed in this study uses precisely chosen logic, tailored credibility and emotional resonance to challenge mainstream narratives and maintaining public doubt.