Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Conflicting Climate Change Frames in a Global Field of Media Discourse

Broadbent, Jeffrey ; Sonnett, John ; Botetzaigas, Iosef ; Carson, Marcus ; Carvalho, Anabela ; Chien, Yu-Ju ; Edling, Christofer LU orcid ; Fisher, Dana ; Giouzepas, Georgios and Haluza-DeLay, Randolph , et al. (2016) In Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World 1(1).
Abstract
Reducing global emissions will require a global cosmopolitan culture built from detailed attention to conflicting national climate change frames (interpretations) in media discourse. The authors analyze the global field of media climate change discourse using 17 diverse cases and 131 frames. They find four main conflicting dimensions of difference: validity of climate science, scale of ecological risk, scale of climate politics, and support for mitigation policy. These dimensions yield four clusters of cases producing a fractured global field. Positive values on the dimensions show modest association with emissions reductions. Data-mining media research is needed to determine trends in this global field.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
climate change, comparative, cosmopolitan, frame conflict, global warming
in
Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World
volume
1
issue
1
publisher
SAGE Publications
external identifiers
  • scopus:85101223026
ISSN
2378-0231
DOI
10.1177/2378023116670660
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
ed0da421-b7f1-42b1-804e-68c528261266
date added to LUP
2016-11-24 16:36:09
date last changed
2022-07-12 09:14:25
@article{ed0da421-b7f1-42b1-804e-68c528261266,
  abstract     = {{Reducing global emissions will require a global cosmopolitan culture built from detailed attention to conflicting national climate change frames (interpretations) in media discourse. The authors analyze the global field of media climate change discourse using 17 diverse cases and 131 frames. They find four main conflicting dimensions of difference: validity of climate science, scale of ecological risk, scale of climate politics, and support for mitigation policy. These dimensions yield four clusters of cases producing a fractured global field. Positive values on the dimensions show modest association with emissions reductions. Data-mining media research is needed to determine trends in this global field.}},
  author       = {{Broadbent, Jeffrey and Sonnett, John and Botetzaigas, Iosef and Carson, Marcus and Carvalho, Anabela and Chien, Yu-Ju and Edling, Christofer and Fisher, Dana and Giouzepas, Georgios and Haluza-DeLay, Randolph and Hasegawa, Koichi and Hirschi, Christian and Horta, Ana and Ikeda, Kazuhiro and Jin, Jun and Ku, Dowan and Lahsen, Myanna and Lee, Ho-Ching and Lin, Tze-Luen Alan and Malang, Thomas and Ollmann, Jana and Payne, Diane and Pellissery, Sony and Price, Stephan and Pulver, Simone and Sainz, Jaime and Satoh, Kelichi and Saunders, Clare and Schmidt, Luisa and Stoddart, Mark CJ and Swarnakar, Pradip and Tatsumi, Tomoyuki and Tindall, David and Vaughter, Phillip and Wagner, Paul and Yun, Sun-Jin and Zhengyi, Sun}},
  issn         = {{2378-0231}},
  keywords     = {{climate change; comparative; cosmopolitan; frame conflict; global warming}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  month        = {{10}},
  number       = {{1}},
  publisher    = {{SAGE Publications}},
  series       = {{Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World}},
  title        = {{Conflicting Climate Change Frames in a Global Field of Media Discourse}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2378023116670660}},
  doi          = {{10.1177/2378023116670660}},
  volume       = {{1}},
  year         = {{2016}},
}