English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

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.U.S. National Science Foundation (BCS 0827006)Canada Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (430-2011-0093)Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Standard Research Grant) (22243036)China National Planning Office of Philosophy and Social Science (Young Scholar Research Grant for Social Science) (11CSH026)PRTLI 5 Higher Education Authority IrelandKorea Research Foundation Global Research Network Grant (MEST) (KRF-2008-220-B00013)Swedish Research Council (2007-2363)Swiss National Science Foundation, and National Science Council of Taiwa

Conflicting Climate Change Frames in a Global Field of Media Discourse