The front page of the Times on July 25 carried a photograph of three people sitting under a striped parasol on the sand near Lacanau in southwest France, looking out to sea. Beyond them, the sky was rust-orange as a wall of wildfire smoke climbed above the treeline. The caption described it as a “dramatic view”.

Above the photo, the lead news story was on how the UK’s net zero policy risks blackouts. It reported a whistleblower’s claim that the expansion of wind and solar had left officials struggling to gauge supply and demand.

The rest of the front page offered barbecuing tips and 25 of the best summer wines. The full story of the fire that has displaced more than 110,000 people in southwest France didn’t appear until page five.

This was met with cries of hypocrisy on social media. But exploring how these contradictions can sit on the same front page tells us a lot about how climate change is narrated in the UK, and why climate reporting differs so much from country to country.

Over the same weekend, other UK newspapers reported on the fires gripping Europe. The Mirror led with the headline “Summer of chaos”, reporting that wildfires were forcing Britons to flee holiday resorts. While the i’s headlines were more nuanced online, its print lead was “Tourists flee France inferno”. The Financial Times led with “Europe ablaze”, while in Scotland, the Herald newspaper led on the evacuation of a village in the Cairngorms.

Europe’s fires were written up as a combination of holidays spoiled, energy policy rows, domestic civil protection issues and continental emergencies. All the articles were true, but what separates them is how far back each story begins. A fire can be explained by today’s barbecue, yesterday’s wind direction, by a dry spring, by four decades........

© The Conversation