Journals Information
Environment and Ecology Research Vol. 13(4), pp. 586 - 593
DOI: 10.13189/eer.2025.130411
Reprint (PDF) (307Kb)
An Ecolinguistic Analysis of Frames of LA Wildfires in National Geographic's Environmental Reporting
Famala Eka Sanhadi Rahayu 1, Wilma Prafitri 1,*, Ahmad Mubarok 2, Muhammad Alim Akbar Nasir 1, Aris Setyoko 3
1 Department of English Literature, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, University of Mulawarman, Indonesia
2 Department of Indonesian Literature, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, University of Mulawarman, Indonesia
3 Department of Ethnomusicology, Faculty of Cultural Sciences, University of Mulawarman, Indonesia
ABSTRACT
Wildfires have become more common, fierce, and devastating worldwide, especially those that happened recently in Los Angeles, California, USA. These phenomena signify both environmental catastrophes and media phenomena that influence public perception of climate change and ecological hazards. The core concept of the ecolinguistics approach is how media influence public perception through language. This study examines the framing of the Los Angeles wildfires in National Geographic's Environment section from an ecolinguistic perspective by utilizing a qualitative analysis employing Stibbe's ecological discourse framework to classify linguistic patterns in a focused selection of six articles published on June 8th, 2025 and the later ones into thematic categories, including Destruction, Sustainability, Erasure, Resilience, and Othering. The analysis uncovers a notable pattern in which National Geographic formulates narratives around the LA wildfires. Although the source presents itself as an advocate for environmental consciousness, the framing decisions in these articles largely exhibit an anthropocentric perspective. The predominant frames鈥擠estruction, Sustainability, and Resilience鈥攑rimarily emphasize human suffering, community recovery, and anthropogenic climatic factors, whereas non-human ecological effects are consistently underrepresented. An important conclusion is that the Erasure and Othering Frames highlight a silence about non-human life. Despite California's ecological sensitivity, biodiversity, animal loss, and habitat deterioration are rare. These omissions demonstrate ecological erasure, which marginalizes non-human entities in environmental discourses. There are national Geographic reports on wildfires both scientifically and emotionally, but the language used often promotes technocratic, anthropocentric, and resilience-focused ideologies rather than fostering profound ecological contemplation or relational consciousness. These findings show how altruistic environmental journalism might fail to promote multi-species fairness and ecocentric attitudes. The implications for environmental journalism, public understanding, and ecological advocacy are enormous. They illustrate how prevailing stories in elite media can inadvertently make climate disasters seem normal, non-human beings insignificant, and anthropocentrism inevitable. This research emphasizes the necessity of ecologically informed and ecocentric discourses that foster ecological literacy, multi-species鈥俲ustice, and transformative values and practices of sustainability. While this study provides an in-depth analysis of these specific articles, the conclusions drawn are primarily applicable to this focused dataset and serve as a basis for further broader inquiry.
KEYWORDS
Ecolinguistics, Frames, LA Wildfires, National Geographic Magazine, Environmental Reporting
Cite This Paper in IEEE or APA Citation Styles
(a). IEEE Format:
[1] Famala Eka Sanhadi Rahayu , Wilma Prafitri , Ahmad Mubarok , Muhammad Alim Akbar Nasir , Aris Setyoko , "An Ecolinguistic Analysis of Frames of LA Wildfires in National Geographic's Environmental Reporting," Environment and Ecology Research, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 586 - 593, 2025. DOI: 10.13189/eer.2025.130411.
(b). APA Format:
Famala Eka Sanhadi Rahayu , Wilma Prafitri , Ahmad Mubarok , Muhammad Alim Akbar Nasir , Aris Setyoko (2025). An Ecolinguistic Analysis of Frames of LA Wildfires in National Geographic's Environmental Reporting. Environment and Ecology Research, 13(4), 586 - 593. DOI: 10.13189/eer.2025.130411.