Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Framing nitrogen pollution in the British press

Electronic data

  • Framing Nitrogen Pollution in the British Press_Accepted author manuscript

    Rights statement: The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Discourse & Communication, 14 (1), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Discourse & Communication page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/dcm on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/

    Accepted author manuscript, 389 KB, PDF document

    Available under license: CC BY-NC: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Framing nitrogen pollution in the British press: 1984-2018

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>1/02/2020
<mark>Journal</mark>Discourse and Communication
Issue number1
Volume14
Number of pages20
Pages (from-to)84-103
Publication StatusPublished
Early online date16/09/19
<mark>Original language</mark>English

Abstract

Awareness of the risks posed by excess nitrogen is low beyond the scientific community. As public understanding of scientific issues is partly influenced by news reporting, this article is the first to study how the British press has discussed nitrogen pollution. A corpus-assisted frame analysis of newspaper articles (1984-2018) highlighted five frames: Activism, where environmental charities and organizations are portrayed as having an active role in fighting pollution; Government Responsibility, where privatization is presented as central and positioned as one of the main causes of pollution; Industry Responsibility, in which industries' actions are depicted as causing pollution to increase; Pollutions as Politics, in which pollution is not discussed as a problem to be solved but rather as a means to increase votes; and Risk, where readers are warned about the possible effects of pollution on human health, flora and fauna. The analysis also points to the absence of named scientists and sources with the coverage being dominated by politicians.

Bibliographic note

The final, definitive version of this article has been published in the Journal, Discourse & Communication, 14 (1), 2019, © SAGE Publications Ltd, 2019 by SAGE Publications Ltd at the Discourse & Communication page: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/dcm on SAGE Journals Online: http://journals.sagepub.com/