Abstract
This study aimed to identify the specific features of media narratives and communication strategies used to report on social problems in the digital information environment of Central Asian countries. This was achieved through a comparative examination of a media corpus using qualitative content analysis, discourse analysis and frame analysis, as well as a comparison of platform-specific characteristics of media messages. The analysis revealed that key differences between media outlets were not only evident in the tone of their coverage, but also in their explanations of the causes of social problems, identification of responsible actors, and legitimisation of proposed solutions. Seven narrative models were identified: the problem as a threat; the problem as a consequence of reforms; individual responsibility; social justice; heroisation; victimisation; and dramatisation. State media focused on administrative measures, programmes and quantitative outcomes when discussing social issues, while independent and private media focused more on structural inequality, legal restrictions, vulnerable groups and individual experiences. In crisis-related coverage, state-centred and security-oriented frames were contrasted with human rights-based interpretations. The platform analysis revealed that Facebook tended to facilitate detailed explanations and visible discussion, whereas Telegram concentrated messages around a central fact, numerical indicator, or brief, problem-focused conclusion. Four strategies of audience engagement were also pinpointed: informing, problematisation, personalisation and mobilisation. The practical significance of these findings lies in their potential application in comparative media research, improving editorial practices, assessing government communication, developing media literacy and preparing recommendations for more balanced coverage of social problems in Central Asian countries