A content analysis of legacy news and digital media from March 2015 to December 2018 found modest progress in communicating solutions to combat climate change. However, the mitigation frame continues to overshadow the adaptation frame and less emphasis on preparing for and adjusting to changing climate conditions happening now. Overall, legacy news and digital media still frame climate solutions using familiar terms and visuals that de-emphasize concrete, individual actions to combat climate change.
AltheideD. L.SchneiderC. (2013). Qualitative media analysis. SAGE.
2.
BarnoskyA.MatlockT.ChristensenJ.HanH.MilesJ.RiceR.WesterlingL.WhiteL. (2016). Establishing common ground: Finding better ways to communicate about climate disruption. Collabra: Psychology, 2(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.68
3.
BenfordR. D.SnowD. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 611–639.
4.
BolsenT.DruckmanJ. N. (2018). Do partisanship and politicization undermine the impact of a scientific consensus message about climate change?Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 21(3), 389–402.
ChapmanD. A.CornerA.WebsterR.MarkowitzE. M. (2016). Climate visuals: A mixed methods investigation of public perceptions of climate images in three countries. Global Environmental Change, 41, 172–182.
7.
CornerA.RobertsO.ChiariS.VöllerS.MayrhuberE. S.MandlS.MonsonK. (2015). How do young people engage with climate change? The role of knowledge, values, message framing, and trusted communicators. Wires: Climate Change, 6(5), 523–534.
8.
DohertyK.WeblerT. (2016). Social norms and efficacy beliefs drive the alarmed segment’s public-sphere climate actions. Nature Climate Change, 6(9), 879–884. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3025
9.
EntmanR. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
10.
FeldmanL.HartP. (2016). Using political efficacy messages to increase climate activism: The mediating role of emotions. Science Communication, 38(1), 99–127.
11.
FeldmanL.HartP. (2018a). Broadening exposure to climate change news? How framing and political orientation interact to influence selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 68(3), 503–524.
12.
FeldmanL.HartP. S. (2018b). Is there any hope? How climate change news imagery and text influence audience emotions and support for climate mitigation policies. Risk Analysis, 38(3), 585–602.
13.
FeldmanL.HartP. S.MilosevicT. (2017). Polarizing news? Representations of threat and efficacy in leading US newspapers’ coverage of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 26(4), 481–497.
14.
FordJ.KingD. (2015). Coverage and framing of climate change adaptation in the media: A review of influential North American newspapers during 1993–2013. Environmental Science and Policy, 48, 137–146.
15.
FreelonD. (2013). ReCal OIR: Ordinal, interval, and ratio intercoder reliability as a web service. International Journal of Internet Science, 8(1), 10–16. http://dfreelon.org/utils/recalfront/
16.
GeigerN.SwimJ. K.FraserJ. (2017). Creating a climate for change: Interventions, efficacy and public discussion about climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 51, 104–116.
17.
GoffmanE. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press.
18.
GoldbergM. H.GustafsonA.van der LindenS. (2020). Leveraging social science to generate lasting engagement with Climate Change Solutions. One Earth, 3(3), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.011
19.
HarrisonS.MacmillanA.RuddC. (2020). Framing climate change and health: New Zealand’s online media. Health Promotion International, 35, 1320–1330. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/daz130
20.
HartP. S.FeldmanL. (2014). Threat without efficacy? Climate change on U.S. network news. Science Communication, 36(3), 325–351.
21.
HartP. S.FeldmanL. (2016). The impact of climate change–related imagery and text on public opinion and behavior change. Science Communication, 38(4), 415–441.
22.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (n.d.). Organization. http://www.ipcc.ch
23.
JangS. M.HartP. S. (2015). Polarized frames on “climate change” and “global warming” across countries and states: Evidence from Twitter big data. Global Environmental Change, 32, 11–17.
24.
KotcherJ.FeldmanL.LuongK. T.WyattJ.MaibachE. (2021). Advocacy messages about climate and health are more effective when they include information about risks, solutions, and a normative appeal: Evidence from a conjoint experiment. The Journal of Climate Change and Health, 3, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joclim.2021.100030
25.
KrippendorffK. (2019). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). SAGE.
LeiserowitzA.MaibachE.RosenthalS.KotcherJ.BergquistP.BallewM.GoldbergM.GustafsonA.WangX. (2020). Climate change in the American mind: April 2020 (Yale University and George Mason University). Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
28.
LesterL.CottleS. (2009). Visualizing climate change: Television news and ecological citizenship. International Journal of Communication, 3, 920–936.
29.
LoughK.AsheI. (2021). Journalism’s visual construction of place in environmental coverage. Newspaper Research Journal, 42(2), 253–269.
30.
LoughK.McIntyreK. (2019). Visualizing the solution: An analysis of the images that accompany solutions-oriented news stories. Journalism, 20(4), 583–599.
31.
MajorA. M.AtwoodL. E. (2004). Environmental stories define problems, not solutions. Newspaper Research Journal, 25(3), 8–22.
MatthewsJ. (2020). Accommodating interests? Elite journalism, green interest groups and the UK reporting of climate change. Newspaper Research Journal, 41(4), 469–488.
MeissnerF.HaasA.HinkelJ.BisaroA. (2020). A typology for analysing mitigation and adaptation win-win strategies. Climatic Change, 160, 539–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02681-x
37.
MetagJ.SchäferM. S.FüchslinT.BarsuhnT.Kleinen-von KönigslöwK. (2016). Perceptions of climate change imagery: Evoked salience and self-efficacy in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria. Science Communication, 38(2), 197–227.
38.
NabiR. L.GustafsonA.JensenR. (2018). Framing climate change: Exploring the role of emotion in generating advocacy behavior. Science Communication, 40(4), 442–468.
39.
NabiR. L.WalterN.OshidaryN.EndacottC. G.Love-NicholsJ.LewZ. J.AuneA. (2020). Can emotions capture the elusive gain-loss framing effect? A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 47(8), 1107–1130.
40.
NisbetM. (2009). Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement. Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(2), 12–23.
41.
OlaussonU.BerglezP. (2014). Media and climate change: Four longstanding research challenges revisited. Environmental Communication, 8(2), 249–265.
42.
O’NeillS. (2020). More than meets the eye: A longitudinal analysis of climate change imagery in the print media. Climatic Change, 163(1), 9–26.
43.
O’NeillS.Nicholson-ColeS. (2009). “Fear won’t do it”: Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communication, 30(3), 355–379.
OverholserG.JamiesonK. L. (2005). The press. Oxford University Press.
46.
PainterJ.KristiansenS.SchäferM. S. (2018). How ‘digital-born’media cover climate change in comparison to legacy media: A case study of the COP 21 summit in Paris. Global Environmental Change, 48, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.11.003
47.
PalinkasL. A.HorwitzS. M.GreenC. A.WisdomJ. P.DuanN.HoagwoodK. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544.
Rebich-HespanhaS.RiceR. E. (2016). Dominant visual frames in climate change news stories: Implications for formative evaluation in climate change campaigns. International Journal of Communication, 10, 4830–4862.
50.
Rebich-HespanhaS.RiceR. E.MontelloD. R.RetzloffS.TienS.HespanhaJ. P. (2015). Image themes and frames in US print news stories about climate change. Environmental Communication, 9(4), 491–519.
51.
SchäferM. S.SchlichtingI. (2014). Media representations of climate change: A meta-analysis of the research field. Environmental Communication, 8(2), 142–160.
52.
ScheufeleB. (2004). Framing-effects approach: A theoretical and methodological critique. The European Journal of Communication Research, 29, 401–428.
53.
SeeligM. I. (2016). Communicating the environment beyond photography. Peter Lang.
54.
SeeligM. I. (2019). Popularizing the environment in modern media. The Communication Review, 22(1), 45–83.
Terracina-HartmanC. (2019). Love your mother: How one news magazine defined and refined environmental journalism. Journal of Magazine Media, 19(1), 44–74. https://doi.org/10.1353/jmm.2019.0004
57.
TschötschelR.SchuckA.WonnebergerA. (2020). Patterns of controversy and consensus in German, Canadian, and US online news on climate change. Global Environmental Change, 60, 101957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101957
VeltriG. A.AtanasovaD. (2017). Climate change on Twitter: Content, media ecology and information sharing behaviour. Public Understanding of Science, 26(6), 721–737.
60.
ViteriF.TakahashiB. (2019). Use of learning frames in climate change communication: A study of organizations in Latin America. The International Communication Gazette, 82, 726–748. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048519827728
61.
von ZabernL.TullochC. D. (2020). Rebel with a cause: The framing of climate change and intergenerational justice in the German press treatment of the Fridays for future protests. Media, Culture & Society, 43(1), 23–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720960923
62.
WangS.CornerA.ChapmanD.MarkowitzE. (2018). Public engagement with climate imagery in a changing digital landscape. Wires: Climate Change, 9(2), e509. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.509.
63.
WeathersM. R.KendallB. E. (2016). Developments in the framing of climate change as a public health issue in US newspapers. Environmental Communication, 10(5), 593–611.
Williams-TurkowskiS.SternadoriM. (2019). The daily “periodical”: How traditional and emerging magazine media appeal to Snapchat users. Journal of Magazine Media, 20(1), 89–116.
66.
XieL. (2015). The story of two big chimneys: A frame analysis of climate change in US and Chinese newspapers. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 44(2), 151–177.
