This essay examines how responsibility and actions related to climate-related issues are framed inthe media. There is a gap between the public’s attitudes and their actions on climate issues, and this essay aims to broaden the understanding of said gap. The goal is to contribute to the understanding of the public’s reasoning and doxa regarding the responsibility for action on climate issues. The essay is comparative and analyses articles from 2018 and 2021 in four of Sweden’s biggest newspapers. The articles were published on the same day the IPCC reports were published. The IPCC reports are of critical importance to highlight the extent of the current climate crisis. Therefore, the reports contain actual news value and could both influence and contribute to the understanding of how we collectively reason around the necessary actions and responsibilities we bear in regard to the climate. The essay is based on framing theory, topostheory, and theory on doxa. The methods used are framing analysis and close textual reading. Theresults of this study give insight into the fact that the actors assigned responsibility are many and ambiguous. The ambiguous collective “we”, “Sweden” and “the rest of the world”, are the threeagents assigned most responsibility to act. The actions they are assigned are broad and mostly on a global scale, while there is a change of framing in the newspapers from 2018 to 2021. The impact of the framing on the collective doxa and the gap between attitudes and action arediscussed in the essay but more research is needed on the topic. The conclusion of this essay is that we as individuals tend to put a great deal of responsibility on others and the actions to be taken are too challenging for individuals to manage. This along with vague calls for action and a lack of connection between different agents’ actions and how they affect each other couldcontribute to an understanding of why we do not do more about climate-related issues.