Individual action and support for policy to tackle climate change have been linked to perceptions of political and scientific controversy and consensus concerning the issue. Recent media effects research indicates that presentation of agreement or conflict between actors’ opinions influences how audiences respond to news about climate change and policy. While some national case studies have investigated portrayals of actors’ positions on important questions regarding climate change in the media, they are largely absent from comparative research. This study addresses this gap by analysing portrayals of actor-issue-positions and the emerging patterns of controversy and consensus in German, Canadian, and US coverage. Studying a sample of occurrences of climate change-related issues (N = 902) in-depth, the results show German media present political consensus about the need to limit emissions and societal controversy about the efficacy of specific mitigation measures. Presenting mainly consensus, Canadian media report more on climate change’s impact, leaving aside the issue of efficacy. In the US, media emphasise political controversy — about the need to limit emissions and occasionally about climate change’s impact on humans. The findings, consistent with other recent publications, can best be explained by journalists selectively indexing of seemingly relevant actor-issue-positions.

个人对解决气候变化的行动和对政策的支持与对政治和科学争议以及对该问题的共识的理解有关。最近的媒体影响研究表明，参与者观点之间达成一致或冲突的表现会影响听众对有关气候变化和政策新闻的反应。尽管一些国家案例研究调查了演员在媒体上有关气候变化的重要问题上的立场刻画，但比较研究却基本上没有。这项研究通过分析演员问题立场的刻画以及在德国，加拿大和美国报道中出现的争议和共识的新模式来解决这一差距。研究与气候变化有关的问题的样本（N = 902）深入地，研究结果表明德国媒体就限制排放的必要性达成了政治共识，并就特定减排措施的有效性引发了社会争议。加拿大媒体主要发表共识，更多地报道了气候变化的影响，而忽略了效力问题。在美国，媒体强调政治争议-有关限制排放的必要性，偶尔涉及气候变化对人类的影响。这些发现与最近的其他出版物一致，可以由记者选择性地索引看似相关的演员问题位置来最好地解释。