“…In this sense, it is relevant to consider the conclusions reached by some studies on the rationale of mass media in their coverage of environmental topics: issues related to the need for citizens to take a stand are practically ignored; the possibilities of impact and the expectation of selling news with the publication of dramatic facts have determined the choice of agenda, rather than news-worthy criteria related to relevance, proximity, and human interest (MAZZARINO e FLORES, 2013a; MIGUEL, 2012); the recipient is placed as a spectator and not as an actor in face of the broadcasted occurrences (MAZZARINO e FLORES, 2013b); it lacks a systemic and contextualized approach, focusing on a major conflict instead of an analytical, plural, non-binary approach (COSTA, 2009;MAZZARINO, 2015;MIGUEL, 2012); official and specialized sources are privileged, as are those that represent international non--governmental organizations, and many times there is only one version reported by the sources, as well as lack of space for common citizens who do not have scientific knowledge. (MIGUEL, 2012;LOOSE & PERUZZOLO, 2008;COSTA, 2009). Specifically regarding how the water crisis in São Paulo was framed in mass media, Martirani & Peres (2016) identified that it favored a process of perception that the responsibility for the crisis lay on climatic events, exempting social actors.…”