TY - JOUR
T1 - Uncertainty, risk, and opportunity frames in Australian online media reports of the 2016 Great Barrier Reef mass coral-bleaching event
AU - Mitchell, Marilyn
AU - Roffey-Mitchell, Ted
N1 - Marilyn Mitchell lectures in Mass
Communication, Communication Research, and
Organizational Communication at Bond
University in Australia. She has past experience
in environmental consulting and has published
training materials on environmental management
in the United States and Australia. She is
interested in principles of visual and verbal
representation and has published in Visible
Language, Sign System Studies, Cogent Social
Sciences, Australasian College of Road Safety,
and International Journal of Literacies.
Ted Roffey-Mitchell is a market research analyst
at Enhance Research in Brisbane. He has a
Master of Business with a specialty in marketing
and has previously tutored in social media and
public relations.
PY - 2018/10/15
Y1 - 2018/10/15
N2 - Through a content analysis, this research aimed to discover how frequently the linguistic frames of scientific uncertainty, skepticism, risk, and opportunity were used in 224 Australian online news reports of the 2016 Great Barrier Reef mass coral-bleaching event, which virtually all climate scientists attribute to climate change. During this event, 29% of shallow-water coral died. Particularly, the research aimed to determine how often the frame of explicit risk was used compared to the other frames since explicit risk is considered by many to be the most honest and effective frame for communicating climate change. In this frame, the word “risk” is used and the odds, probabilities, or chance of something adverse happening to an asset are given. It is used commonly by people in business and the military. Reports were taken from six outlets: The Australian, Courier Mail, and Townsville Bulletin, each of which is owned by News Corp, and the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), ABC, and Guardian Australia edition. When comparing the outlets, skepticism was most dominant in the News Corp reports. In contrast, the opportunity frame was most dominant in the Guardian (47%) and ABC reports (30%), followed by scientific uncertainty in the SMH reports (40%). Across all the outlets, the explicit risk frame had the lowest salience (3%) and dominance (4%). It is recommended that journalists receive more training in using the explicit risk frame for reporting on actual and predicted climate change events.
AB - Through a content analysis, this research aimed to discover how frequently the linguistic frames of scientific uncertainty, skepticism, risk, and opportunity were used in 224 Australian online news reports of the 2016 Great Barrier Reef mass coral-bleaching event, which virtually all climate scientists attribute to climate change. During this event, 29% of shallow-water coral died. Particularly, the research aimed to determine how often the frame of explicit risk was used compared to the other frames since explicit risk is considered by many to be the most honest and effective frame for communicating climate change. In this frame, the word “risk” is used and the odds, probabilities, or chance of something adverse happening to an asset are given. It is used commonly by people in business and the military. Reports were taken from six outlets: The Australian, Courier Mail, and Townsville Bulletin, each of which is owned by News Corp, and the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), ABC, and Guardian Australia edition. When comparing the outlets, skepticism was most dominant in the News Corp reports. In contrast, the opportunity frame was most dominant in the Guardian (47%) and ABC reports (30%), followed by scientific uncertainty in the SMH reports (40%). Across all the outlets, the explicit risk frame had the lowest salience (3%) and dominance (4%). It is recommended that journalists receive more training in using the explicit risk frame for reporting on actual and predicted climate change events.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85056127635&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/23311886.2018.1536317
DO - 10.1080/23311886.2018.1536317
M3 - Article
SN - 2331-1886
VL - 4
SP - 1
EP - 21
JO - Cogent Social Sciences
JF - Cogent Social Sciences
ER -