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

Oil pollution incidents have become a reoccurring decimal in most countries during the last twenty decades. The controversy about who is responsible for the massive oil pollution experienced globally in certain oil-producing countries has amplified tensions between significant stakeholders in those countries. For example, oil pollution in Nigeria and Ghana has triggered ecosystem degradation, the devastation of local communities’ means of livelihood, and the death of aquatic organisms such as fish. This paper discusses the escalation in oil pollution and the print media’s coverage through a content analysis method. Our report evaluates news approaches developed by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000a, 2000b) and differences and similarities in the distribution of news frames among three Nigerian newspapers;  The Daily Sun, The Guardian,  and  The Punch  from 2014–2018. Our findings show that  The Daily Sun  used more of the frames of responsibility, economic consequences, and human interest in their oil pollution reports in the Niger-Delta region. This is probably because journalists at  The Daily Sun  often chose to be objective and on the people’s side by reporting the whole truth irrespective of the consequences to their job and news organization. This was in harmony with the quantitative content analysis results, where 57.7%, 63.3%, and 55.6% of oil pollution coverage were framed as responsibility, economic consequences, and human interest. In contrast,  The Guardian  and  The Punch  newspapers used less of these frames, perhaps due to the two papers’ laissez-faire attitude towards holding the oil companies accountable despite glaring evidence of the negative consequences of oil pollution on the livelihood of oil-bearing communities and the environment. However, our result also indicates that the morality frame was the least used among the three selected newspapers, as journalists find it challenging to give moral messages while maintaining journalistic neutrality.

Evaluating escalation in oil pollution and its framing: approaches used by the print media for coverage