Public Understanding of Science 2014, Vol. 23(3) 348–363 © The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0963662513498835 pus.sagepub.com P U S Fracking in the UK press: Threat dynamics in an unfolding debate Rusi Jaspal De Montfort University, UK Brigitte Nerlich University of Nottingham, UK Abstract Shale gas is a novel source of fossil fuel which is extracted by induced hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”. This article examines the socio-political dimension of fracking as manifested in the UK press at three key temporal points in the debate on the practice. Three newspaper corpora were analysed qualitatively using Thematic Analysis and Social Representations Theory. Three overarching themes are discussed: “April–May 2011: From Optimism to Scepticism”; “November 2011: (De-)Constructing and Re-Constructing Risk and Danger”; “April 2012: Consolidating Social Representations of Fracking”. In this article, we examine the emergence of and inter-relations between competing social representations, discuss the dynamics of threat positioning and show how threat can be re-construed in order to serve particular socio-political ends in the debate on fracking. Keywords climate change, collective symbolic coping, environmental communication, fracking, media, social representa- tions theory 1. Introduction Despite the negative environmental impacts of continued dependence upon fossils fuels, fossil fuels will nonetheless continue to provide the majority of the world’s energy (Shafie and Topal, 2009). Novel fossil fuels are therefore being sought in a context where climate change mitigation technologies for CO 2 reduction, such as carbon capture and storage and geoengineering, are being discussed in the media (Nerlich and Jaspal, 2012, 2013). One of these novel sources of fossil fuel is shale gas that is extracted by induced hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking”. Being a natural gas, shale gas that is extracted by fracking is often said to have a lower carbon footprint compared to other fossil fuels and to be a clean(er)/ “transitional” energy source (Engelder, 2011). Corresponding author: Rusi Jaspal, Division of Psychology, School of Applied Social Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, De Montfort University, Leicester LE1 9BH, UK. Email: rusi.jaspal@cantab.net 498835PUS 23 3 10.1177/0963662513498835Public Understanding of ScienceJaspal and Nerlich 13 Article