The Framing of Climate-Change Discourse by Shell and the Framing of Shell’s Climate Change-Related Activities by The Economist and The Financial Times
PDF

Keywords

conceptual metaphor
corporate discourse
climate change
Shell

How to Cite

Kapranov, Oleksandr. 2017. “The Framing of Climate-Change Discourse by Shell and the Framing of Shell’s Climate Change-Related Activities by The Economist and The Financial Times”. Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies 7 (September). https://doi.org/10.15845/bells.v7i0.1088.

Abstract

This article presents a qualitative study of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group’s corporate image building in relation to climate change and how this image is represented in the British financial press. The material of the study involves the official 2014 Shell’s annual report (AR) and online coverage of Shell’s climate change-related activities by the leading British financial newspapers, The Economist and The Financial Times. Shell’s image of climate change is investigated by means of identification of conceptual metaphors viewed through the lenses of the methodological apparatus of cognitive linguistics. Conceptual metaphors identified in the 2014 AR are subsequently juxtaposed with conceptual metaphors associated with Shell’s climate-change activities in The Economist and in The Financial Times. The results reveal that Shell’s 2014 AR involves the following conceptual metaphors associated with climate change: ‘Climate Change as a Journey’, ‘Climate Change as a Battle’, ‘Shell as a Responsible Citizen’, ‘Shell as a Caring Corporation’, ‘Climate Change as Growth’, and ‘Climate Change as Money’. In contrast to these conceptual metaphors, The Economist represents Shell’s climate change activities in 2014 via ‘Shell as an Immoral Corporation’ and ‘Shell as a Sinner’. The Financial Times frames Shell’s climate change agenda in 2014 by means of conceptual metaphors ‘Climate Change as Growth’, ‘Climate Change as a Journey’, and ‘Climate Change as Money’ respectively. The discrepancies between Shell’s self-image of climate change and its representations by The Economist and The Financial Times are further presented and discussed in the article.
https://doi.org/10.15845/bells.v7i0.1088
PDF

References

Bakir, Vian. 2005. “Greenpeace v. Shell: Media Exploitation and the So­cial Amplification of Risk Framework (sarf).” Journal of Risk Re­search 8 (7–8):679–91.

Bakir, Vian. 2006. “Policy Agenda Setting and Risk Communication Greenpeace, Shell, and Issues of Trust.” The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 11 (3):67–88.

Boykoff, Maxwell T., and Jules M. Boykoff. 2007. “Climate Change and Journalistic Norms: A Case-Study of US Mass-Media Coverage,” Geo­forum 38 (6):1190–1204.

Browne, Jennifer, Evelyne de Leeuw, Deborah Gleeson, Karen Adams, Petah Atkinson, Rick Hayes. 2017. “A Network Approach to Policy Framing: A Case Study of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Plan.” Social Science & Medicine 172:10–18.

Carvalho, Anabela. 2010. “Media (Ted) Discourses and Climate Change: A Focus on Political Subjectivity and (Dis)engagement.” Wiley Inter­disciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 1 (2):172–79.

Crist, Eileen. 2007. “Beyond the Climate Crisis: A Critique of Climate Change Discourse.” Telos 141:29–55.

Dahl, Trine. 2017. “Verbal and Visual Framing Activity in Climate Change Discourse: Media Representations of the ipcc’s 5th Assess­ment Report.” In The Role of Language in the Climate Change Debate, edited by Kjersti Fløttum, 20–31. London/NY: Routledge.

Doulton, Hugh, and Katrina Brown. 2009. “Ten Years to Prevent Ca­tastrophe? Discourses of Climate Change and International Develop­ment in the UK Press.” Global Environmental Change 19 (2):191–202.

Eubanks, Philip. 2005. “‘Globalization’, ‘Corporate Rule’, and Blended Worlds: A Conceptual-Rhetorical Analysis of Metaphor, Metonymy, and Conceptual Blending.” Metaphor and Symbol 20 (3):173–97.

Fløttum, Kjersti, and Trine Dahl. 2014. “ipcc Communicative Practic­es: A Linguistic Comparison of the Summary for Policymakers 2007 and 2013.” Text & Talk 34 (4):401–20.

Fløttum, Kjersti, and Øyvind Gjerstad. 2017. “Narratives in Climate Change Discourse.” WIREs Climate Change 8:1–15.

Jensen, Hans Rask. 2003. “Staging Political Consumption: A Discourse Analysis of the Brent Spar Conflict as Recast by the Danish Mass Me­dia.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 10 (2):71–80.

Kampf, Constance. 2007. “Corporate Social Responsibility: WalMart, Maersk and the Cultural Bounds of Representation in Corporate Web Sites.” Corporate Communications: An International Journal 12 (1):41–57.

Kapranov, Oleksandr. 2016. “The Framing of Serbia’s eu Accession by the British Foreign Office on Twitter.” Tekst i Dyskurs —Text und Diskurs 9:67–80.

Kruse, Julia. 2001. “Fantasy Themes and Rhetorical Visions in the Brent Spar Crisis: A Comparative Analysis of German and French Newspa­per Coverage.” Argumentation 15 (4):439–56.

Levin, Irwin P., Sandra L. Schneider, and Gary J. Gaeth. 1998. “All Frames are not Created Equal: A Typology and Critical Analysis of Framing Effects.” Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 76 (2):149–88.

Livesey, Sharon M. 2001. “Eco-Identity as Discursive Struggle: Royal Dutch/Shell, Brent Spar, and Nigeria.” Journal of Business Communi­cation 38 (1):58–91.

Livesey, Sharon M. 2002. “The Discourse of the Middle Ground Citizen Shell Commits to Sustainable Development.” Management Commu­nication Quarterly 15 (3):313–49.

Livesey, Sharon M., and Kate Kearins. 2002. “Transparent and Caring Corporations? A Study of Sustainability Reports by The Body Shop and Royal Dutch/Shell.” Organization & Environment 15 (3):233–58.

Mirvis, Philip H. 2000. “Transformation at Shell: Commerce and Citi­zenship.” Business and Society Review 105 (1):63–84.

Naylor, Rhiannon, Will Manley, Damian Maye, Gareth Enticott, Bri­an Ilbery and Alice Hamilton-Webb. 2017. “The Framing of Public Knowledge Controversies in the Media: A Comparative Analysis of the Portrayal of Badger Vaccination in the English National, Regional and Farming Press.” Sociologia Ruralis 57 (1):3–22.

Nisbet, Erik C., P.S. Hart, Teresa Myers, and Morgan Ellithorpe. 2013. “Attitude Change in Competitive Framing Environments? Open-/ Closed-Mindedness, Framing Effects, and Climate Change.” Journal of Communication 63:766–85.

Nisbet, Matthew C. 2009. “Communicating Climate Change: Why Frames Matter for Public Engagement.” Environmental Science Policy Sustainable Development 51:12–23.

Nwabueze, Chinenye and Stella Egbra. 2016. “Newspaper Framing of Climate Change in Nigeria and Ghana.” Applied Environmental Edu­cation & Communication 15 (2):111–24.

O’Neill, Saffron J. 2013. “Image Matters: Climate Change Imagery in US, UK and Australian Newspapers.” Geoforum 49:10–19.

Shehata, Andreas and Hopmann, D.N. 2012. “Framing Climate Change.” Journalism Studies, 13 (2):175–92.

Shell. 2015. “The 2014 Annual Report.” http://reports.shell.com/annual-report/2014/.../entire_shell_ar14.pdf (accessed 1 January 2016).

Swyngedouw, Erik. 2010. “Apocalypse Forever? Post-political Populism and the Spectre of Climate Change.” Theory Culture Society 27:213–32.

The Economist. 2014. “Greenpeace, Lego and Shell. Childish arguments.” http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/10/ greenpeace-lego-and-shell (accessed 1 January 2016).

The FT. 2014. “Oil Majors’ R&D into Conventional and Renewable En­ergy at Risk.” https://www.ft.com/content/c69618a0-4050-11e4-a343 -0014 4feabdc0 (accessed 1 January 2016).

The FT. 2014. “Monopoly is a Bureaucrat’s Friend but a Democrat’s Foe.” https://www.ft.com/content/b62b46cc-216d-11e4-b145-00144feab­dc0 (accessed 1 January 2016).

The FT. 2014. “Scotland After the Vote: Investments.” https://www. ft.com/content/edb5224e-38f0-11e4-9526-00144feabdc0 (accessed 1 January 2016).

The FT. 2014. “Raízen to Spend $1bn on Ethanol Boost.” https://www. ft.com/content/f585bbc0-8a33-11e4-9b5f-00144feabdc0 (accessed 1 January 2016).

The FT. 2014. “snc-Lavalin Agrees £1.16bn Offer for Kentz.” https:// www.ft.com/content/421d3c06-fac9-11e3-8993-00144feab7de (ac­cessed 1 January 2016).

Tsoukas, Haridimos. 1999. “David and Goliath in the Risk Society: Mak­ing Sense of the Conflict Between Shell and Greenpeace in the North Sea.” Organization 6 (3):499–528.

Wasike, Ben. 2017. “Persuasion in 140 Characters: Testing Issue Framing, Persuasion and Credibility via Twitter and Online News Articles in the Gun Control Debate.” Computers in Human Behavior 66:179–90.

Copyright (c) 2017 Oleksandr Kapranov

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

Bergen Open Access Publishing