Who's responsible? A media framing analysis of climate change and meat reduction in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Addressing climate change requires urgent and impactful action. This includes reducing consumption of red meat for people living in high-income countries. This article seeks to understand the role that media play in the construction of arguments about meat reduction. A framing analysis of 58 news media stories from Aotearoa New Zealand (herein Aotearoa) examines how arguments about meat reduction are made persuasive. It was found that within Aotearoa media, responsibility was mainly framed in terms of 'individual responsibility'; this served to limit understanding of how to mobilize collective action and hold powerful groups to account. Aggregated individual choices were instead given the power to influence political action. 'Collective responsibility' and 'political responsibility' frames were also present; these recognized government inaction and the political and economic challenges of meat. In these frames, citizens were encouraged to undertake civil action against political inaction. While individual responsibility is important, individual action alone is insufficient in the face of the increasing climate crisis. The individual actions of many do not replace political and corporate actions that have the potential to reduce emissions and advance climate justice.