Author
Abstract
The media discourse surrounding climate change has evolved beyond issues of science and public health, becoming increasingly politicized and intertwined with broader ideological and geopolitical dynamics. While existing research has examined how Chinese state-run media constructs climate narratives, few studies have explored such discourse across national and ideological borders to understand how China’s dual-carbon commitment is discursively represented. To bridge this gap, this study examines news reports between September 22, 2020 and December 31, 2023 from three globally influential newspapers: People’s Daily (PD), the Guardian (TG), and the New York Times (NYT). Combining topic modeling and discourse-historical analysis, this study investigates both recurring themes and the discursive strategies employed to portray China’s dual-carbon commitment. Findings reveal that while all three newspapers highlighted multilateral cooperation, they differed significantly in framing China, its climate actions and responsibilities: PD emphasized China’s low-carbon achievements primarily through top-down narratives and framed its practice as aligned with global well-being, whereas TG and NYT underscored inconsistencies between China’s pledge and actions mainly through selective statistics and anecdotal critiques, reflecting distinct ideological and geopolitical standpoints. In addition to explicit strategies such as nomination and predication, this study has also identified patterns of “concealment†across the corpora, where certain issues were downplayed or omitted to influence public attitudes and perceptions in directions that support each outlet’s particular agenda and strategic interests. This study contributes to the field of environmental communication by illustrating how media discourse reflects and reinforces broader power relations, ideological divides, and national interests.
Suggested Citation
Yuan Fan & Linda H. F. Lin, 2025.
"Synergizing Topic Modeling in Analyzing Media Discourse on China’s Dual-Carbon Commitment and Actions,"
SAGE Open, , vol. 15(3), pages 21582440251, August.
Handle:
RePEc:sae:sagope:v:15:y:2025:i:3:p:21582440251368043
DOI: 10.1177/21582440251368043
Download full text from publisher
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:sae:sagope:v:15:y:2025:i:3:p:21582440251368043. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.