How Media Framing Shapes Opinion of Environmental Policy: The Case of ULEZ

Abstract

This article examines how British media outlets frame the ULEZ expansion policy in London and how that framing impacts public perception. Using content analysis, I examined 50 online news articles on the expansion from 19 British media outlets and analysed 508 comments. My findings reveal a strong polarisation, with opposition being the loudest. Framing varied by publication, showing clear policy bias. Some articles were neutral, whilst others were overtly supportive or opposed. Comments also reflected the polarisation: 58% opposed the expansion, 33% supported it, and 9% were neutral. This contrasts with a YouGov poll from August 2023, where 47% of Londoners supported the expansion and 42% opposed it, suggesting online commentary is not reflective of overall public opinion. Negatively framed articles attracted opponents, neutrally framed articles had balanced opinions, and positively framed articles attracted more support but still triggered notable opposition. Patterns emerged based on the overall sentiment of the comments. The most frequently mentioned subject was Sadiq Khan, followed by conspiracy / cash grab, policy criticism and affordability. Subjects were associated with the opinion of the commenter, with references to Sadiq Khan, conspiracy / cash grab and affordability coming from detractors, and policy criticism coming from both supporters and detractors.