IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nat/natcli/v5y2015i4d10.1038_nclimate2535.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dominant frames in legacy and social media coverage of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report

Author

Listed:
  • Saffron O’Neill

    (Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Amory Building, Rennes Drive Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK)

  • Hywel T. P. Williams

    (Biosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Laver Building, North Park Road Exeter EX4 4QE, UK)

  • Tim Kurz

    (Psychology, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Washington Singer Laboratories)

  • Bouke Wiersma

    (Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Amory Building, Rennes Drive Exeter EX4 4RJ, UK)

  • Maxwell Boykoff

    (Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES), University of Colorado-Boulder)

Abstract

The media are powerful agents that translate information across the science–policy interface, framing it for audiences. Yet frames are never neutral: they define an issue, identify causes, make moral judgements and shape proposed solutions. Here, we show how the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) was framed in UK and US broadcast and print coverage, and on Twitter. Coverage of IPCC Working Group I (WGI) was contested and politicized, employing the ‘Settled Science, Uncertain Science, Political or Ideological Struggle and Role of Science’ frames. WGII coverage commonly used Disaster or Security. More diverse frames were employed for WGII and WGIII, including Economics and Morality and Ethics. Framing also varied by media institution: for example, the BBC used Uncertain Science, whereas Channel 4 did not. Coverage varied by working group, with WGIII gaining far less coverage than WGI or WGII. We suggest that media coverage and framing of AR5 was influenced by its sequential three-part structure and by the availability of accessible narratives and visuals. We recommend that these communication lessons be applied to future climate science reports.

Suggested Citation

  • Saffron O’Neill & Hywel T. P. Williams & Tim Kurz & Bouke Wiersma & Maxwell Boykoff, 2015. "Dominant frames in legacy and social media coverage of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(4), pages 380-385, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:nat:natcli:v:5:y:2015:i:4:d:10.1038_nclimate2535
    DOI: 10.1038/nclimate2535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2535
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1038/nclimate2535?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elisabeth Eide & Risto Kunelius, 2021. "Voices of a generation the communicative power of youth activism," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Daniela Acquadro Maran & Tatiana Begotti, 2021. "Media Exposure to Climate Change, Anxiety, and Efficacy Beliefs in a Sample of Italian University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(17), pages 1-11, September.
    3. Sonya Gurwitt & Kari Malkki & Mili Mitra, 2017. "Global issue, developed country bias: the Paris climate conference as covered by daily print news organizations in 13 nations," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 281-296, August.
    4. Yixi Yang & Mark C. J. Stoddart, 2021. "Public Engagement in Climate Communication on China’s Weibo: Network Structure and Information Flows," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(2), pages 146-158.
    5. Heinz, Nicolai & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin, 2021. "Other-regarding preferences and pro-environmental behaviour: An interdisciplinary review of experimental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    6. Elise Talgorn & Helle Ullerup, 2023. "Invoking ‘Empathy for the Planet’ through Participatory Ecological Storytelling: From Human-Centered to Planet-Centered Design," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-31, May.
    7. Tomas Molina & Ernest Abadal, 2021. "The Evolution of Communicating the Uncertainty of Climate Change to Policymakers: A Study of IPCC Synthesis Reports," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-12, February.
    8. Luis Pérez-González, 2020. "‘Is climate science taking over the science?’: A corpus-based study of competing stances on bias, dogma and expertise in the blogosphere," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Pringle Anna & Robbins David, 2022. "From denial to delay: Climate change discourses in Ireland," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 70(3), pages 59-84, August.
    10. James Painter & J. Scott Brennen & Silje Kristiansen, 2020. "The coverage of cultured meat in the US and UK traditional media, 2013–2019: drivers, sources, and competing narratives," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(4), pages 2379-2396, October.
    11. Wen Shi & Haohuan Fu & Peinan Wang & Changfeng Chen & Jie Xiong, 2020. "#Climatechange vs. #Globalwarming: Characterizing Two Competing Climate Discourses on Twitter with Semantic Network and Temporal Analyses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-22, February.
    12. K.C. Busch & Regina Ayala Chávez, 2022. "Adolescent framings of climate change, psychological distancing, and implications for climate change concern and behavior," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-19, April.
    13. Platania, Federico & Hernandez, C. Toscano & Arreola, Fernanda, 2022. "Social media communication during natural disasters and the impact on the agricultural market," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    14. Mary Sanford & James Painter & Taha Yasseri & Jamie Lorimer, 2021. "Controversy around climate change reports: a case study of Twitter responses to the 2019 IPCC report on land," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-25, August.
    15. Arjan Wardekker & Susanne Lorenz, 2019. "The visual framing of climate change impacts and adaptation in the IPCC assessment reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 273-292, September.
    16. Meghan M. Shea & James Painter & Shannon Osaka, 2020. "Representations of Pacific Islands and climate change in US, UK, and Australian newspaper reporting," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(1), pages 89-108, July.
    17. Toby Bolsen & Justin Kingsland & Risa Palm, 2018. "The impact of frames highlighting coastal flooding in the USA on climate change beliefs," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 359-368, March.
    18. Sujatha Raman & Warren Pearce, 2020. "Learning the lessons of Climategate: A cosmopolitan moment in the public life of climate science," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    19. Valatin, Gregory & Moseley, Darren & Dandy, Norman, 2016. "Insights from behavioural economics for forest economics and environmental policy: Potential nudges to encourage woodland creation for climate change mitigation and adaptation?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 27-36.
    20. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Lila Rabinovich & Kate Weber & Marianna Babboni & Monica Dean & Lance Ignon, 2021. "Public understanding of climate change terminology," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-21, August.
    21. John Chung-En Liu & Bo Zhao, 2017. "Who speaks for climate change in China? Evidence from Weibo," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(3), pages 413-422, February.
    22. Erlend A. T. Hermansen & Bård Lahn & Göran Sundqvist & Eirik Øye, 2021. "Post-Paris policy relevance: lessons from the IPCC SR15 process," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 1-18, November.
    23. Wei, Yigang & Gong, Ping & Zhang, Jianhong & Wang, Li, 2021. "Exploring public opinions on climate change policy in "Big Data Era"—A case study of the European Union Emission Trading System (EU-ETS) based on Twitter," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nat:natcli:v:5:y:2015:i:4:d:10.1038_nclimate2535. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nature.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.