Representation(s) of Developed and Developing Countries in Newspapers’ Coverage of Climate Conferences: A Critical Discourse Analysis

Luu Thi Kim Nhung

doi:10.5539/ijel.v8n2p35

Abstract

This study critically analysed how developed and developing countries were represented in The Independent and The New York Times’ coverage of the Conferences of the Parties to the UNFCCC between 2004 and 2013. The method of analysis was a qualitative critical discourse analysis in accordance with Fairclough’s (1989) framework with the support of corpus techniques.The research findings showed that there were distinct responsibilities for climate change ascribed to the developed and the developing countries. While the developed countries were represented as being reluctant and indifferent towards their responsibility, the developing countries tended to depend on the developed countries’ support in solving their climate-related problems. During the study period, therefore, no consensus could be reached on a common framework for climate change. The linguistic features of lexical choice, passivisation, nominalisation, modality and metaphor were found ideologically employed in the newspapers’ representations of the countries. Additionally, the ideologies and their linguistic manifestations were influenced by the media’s discursive practices and the wider social context.

Highlights

Ever since climate change officially emerged on the world’s agenda at the Earth Summit in 1992, twenty-two Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have been organised, through which participating countries are believed to negotiate and develop a single global framework for every country to take their part in internationally cooperative efforts to tackle climate-related problems
Despite the body of existing literature focusing on the rhetorical devices, discourse strategies, metaphors, and other aspects of discourse on climate change (e.g., Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004; Boykoff & Robers, 2007; Carvalho, 2005, 2007; Fløttum & Gjerstad, 2017; Grundmann & Krishnamurthy, 2010; Moser & Dilling, 2007; Nerlich & Koteyko, 2011; Ukonu, Akpan, & Anorue, 2013; Wodak & Meyer, 2012), almost no research has analysed the linguistic realisations of the ideologies of developed and developing countries’ responsibilities for climate change as they wereconstructed in the media’s coverage of the COPs
This study has achieved three main goals: a practical goal, a methodological goal, and an educational goal. It decoded the ideologies about the developed and developing countries’ responsibilities for climate change as conveyed through The Independent and The New York Times’ coverage of the global climate conferences, investigated the language used in conveying these ideologies, and explained why the language was used the way it was in the discourse

Summary

Introduction

Ever since climate change officially emerged on the world’s agenda at the Earth Summit in 1992, twenty-two Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) have been organised, through which participating countries are believed to negotiate and develop a single global framework for every country to take their part in internationally cooperative efforts to tackle climate-related problems. The incapability of governments to forge effective progress has historically been attributed to the divide and conflict between the developed and developing countries (Parks & Roberts, 2010) due to their positions on who should pay and how much should be paid for climate change (Penetrante, 2010). Underlying such conflicting obligations and interests regarding climate change, there must be ideologies about countries’ responsibilities and particular linguistic features in the media to represent countries’ responsibilities, attitudes and behaviours. Despite the body of existing literature focusing on the rhetorical devices, discourse strategies, metaphors, and other aspects of discourse on climate change (e.g., Boykoff & Boykoff, 2004; Boykoff & Robers, 2007; Carvalho, 2005, 2007; Fløttum & Gjerstad, 2017; Grundmann & Krishnamurthy, 2010; Moser & Dilling, 2007; Nerlich & Koteyko, 2011; Ukonu, Akpan, & Anorue, 2013; Wodak & Meyer, 2012), almost no research has analysed the linguistic realisations of the ideologies of developed and developing countries’ responsibilities for climate change as they were (re)constructed in the media’s coverage of the COPs

Methods

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion