Commentary: What price eyeballs? – a commentary/reflection on Benoit, Thomas and Martin (2021).

In a response to a research paper which analyses how US newspapers represent young people and parents in their response to climate crisis, this commentary observes that the newspapers achieve some advantage in selecting frames, which privilege adult behaviour at the expense of actions taken by young people. It suggests that one effect of newspapers' choice to frame teens' awareness and activities surrounding climate change in disparaging terms may be to increase any eco‐anxiety by devaluing it. It argues that this is done to benefit the newspapers by supporting rather than challenging the schema of their adult readers, following a commercial rather than societal agenda. A subsidiary effect may be to drive younger people away from mainstream media, which fails to represent their viewpoint and towards misinformation and disinformation from unreliable sources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]