Critical discourse analysis examines ideological differences in news coverage of Türkiye’s Climate Law, indicating varied interpretations of climate action.
Türkiye’s ratification of the Paris Agreement and the subsequent enactment of Climate Law No. 7552 mark a critical phase in the institutionalization of national climate policy. The law’s reliance on market-based mechanisms, particularly the Emissions Trading System, has generated substantial public and media debate. This study examines how three ideologically distinct news outlets, Yeni Şafak, Evrensel, and Deutsche Welle Turkish, represented the legislative process between June and July 2025. Drawing on Teun A. van Dijk’s critical discourse analysis, this study analyses 14 news texts at the microstructural level, focusing on headlines, word choice, actor representation, and legitimization strategies. The findings reveal three distinct discursive roles articulated around a shared market-based logic of climate governance: pro-government coverage legitimizes the law as an economic opportunity and a national achievement, oppositional coverage contests it as ecological exploitation and neoliberal environmental governance, and international coverage audits it against international commitments and standards of technical adequacy. The analysis shows that climate legislation becomes a site of ideological struggle in news discourse, even when debate remains largely organized around a shared market-based understanding of climate policy. Journalism may support, challenge, or scrutinize this framework in different ways.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karaduman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: