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.

    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.