Framing Climate Change

Abstract This comparative study investigates news coverage of climate change in the United States and Sweden. The main research question concerns the extent to which news coverage of climate change is influenced by domestic political elite discussion or the scientific consensus surrounding the issue. While there has been a widespread consensus in Sweden that climate change is (partly) caused by human activity and that there is an unquestionable need to take countermeasures, there has been substantial debate about the causes and the necessity of political action in the United States. Based on an extensive content analysis of 1785 articles over a 10-year period, as well as an intensive analysis of news coverage of the Kyoto and Bali summits, results show that media coverage is strikingly similar in these two countries, indicating a weak influence of national political elites on how climate change is framed in news coverage. Keywords: climate changeframingglobal warmingindexingmedia coveragenews Notes 1. For the variables used here, the reliability scores were: domestic government, 100 percent agreement; other politicians, 99 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.95; public administration, 98 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.91; foreign government, 100 percent agreement; summits, 99 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.94; United Nations, 99 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.66; European Union, 99 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.93; NGOs, 99 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.80; scientists, 98 percent agreement, Cohen's kappa=0.89. 2. Based on an intra-coder test of 80 randomly selected paragraphs. 3. Differences between newspapers within both countries exist with regard to the climate change frame. With respect to the Kyoto summit: New York Times 55.9 percent, Washington Post 75.1 percent, Dagens Nyheter 39.7 percent and Svenska Dagbladet 64.9 percent. With respect to the Bali summit: New York Times 73.1 percent, Washington Post 71.0 percent, Dagens Nyheter 83.0 percent and Svenska Dagbladet 74.8 percent. However, we do not consider these differences to be important in their own right as the climate change frame still permeates news coverage at both summits. The relevant question is rather whether—and to what extent—this frame is challenged by counter-frames.