Metaphors of Climate Change and Climate Action in COP27 News Coverage
What is it about?
How do metaphors shape the way we understand and respond to climate change? This article examines the role of metaphors in media coverage of the COP27 climate conference in two major news sources, the China Daily and the New York Times. By analyzing how these newspapers use metaphors to frame climate change and climate action, this research shows how different linguistic choices can influence public perceptions and attitudes towards the climate crisis. This article finds that both news outlets frequently use the fight metaphor to frame the battle against climate change, personifying climate change as an enemy that needs to be defeated. This metaphor highlights the urgency of action needed to tackle the climate crisis. However, there are differences between the two newspapers in how they use these metaphors. For example, the China Daily sometimes gives nature a more active role, personifying trees or other natural elements as active participants in the fight against climate change, which can shift the responsibility away from humans. On the other hand, The New York Times ascribes more emphasis to human beings: it accentuates the roles that countries and organizations should actively play in fighting climate change. The article also discusses how countries are framed within these metaphorical frames, especially the contrasting representations of wealthier and poorer nations. Wealthier nations are often expected to support the more vulnerable countries that bear most of the disastrous brunt of climate change. This raises important ethical dimensions in climate action, as well as the moral obligation of the more developed and rich nations toward reducing global climate injustice. What this article does, ultimately, is point out that metaphors are not just linguistic devices but ways in which we cognitively construe concepts like responsibility, action, and justice in the struggle against climate change.
Why is it important?
This study helps us understand how the language used in news coverage of climate change can influence how the public perceives and defines climate action. By focusing on metaphors, powerful linguistic and cognitive devices in persuasion, the study sheds light on how media outlets from two major emitting countries frame climate change and climate action in different ways. What makes this study significant is its comparison between two major, yet distinct, media sources: the China Daily and the New York Times. These outlets represent different cultural and political perspectives, and their coverage of the same event—COP27—offers contrasting views on climate change and global responsibility. By analyzing these differences, this research shows that metaphors can be used to shift or attribute responsibility for climate action to various social actors, reflecting different political views on which countries should be considered developed and thus bear more responsibility for addressing the effects of climate change. The varying social roles assigned to countries in the global fight against climate change are reflected in how they are portrayed with agency and responsibility within metaphorical frames. This study also makes a significant contribution to climate communication research by showing how metaphors are used not only to explain but also to persuade audiences. It provides insights into how metaphors can either motivate action or potentially cause confusion or inaction. It draws attention to the moral and ethical dimensions of climate change discourse and the need for clearer, more transparent reporting that encourages effective, equitable global responses to the climate crisis.