Human-coyote sightings and interactions are becoming more frequent in urban areas across North and Central America. While many species have lost territory, the coyote range has expanded. Relatively recently, ecologists have coalesced around the idea that coexistence is the most promising avenue to reduce human-coyote conflict in urban areas. Despite this, calls for the eradication of coyotes continue. We apply and extend the theory of survival of the friendliest to evaluate how the media is framing coyotes and management strategies and what the implications of this framing might be. Through a content analysis of newspaper articles from three different urban areas in the US (Los Angeles, CA; Seattle, WA; and Boston, MA), from 2000 to 2022, we find that friendly language is used to promote coexistence, while unfriendly language (threat, hostile, unfriendly, and danger) is used to justify eradication. We also find considerable variation in the type of coverage and consistency with scientific consensus across cities, likely reflecting the cities' varied histories and cultural understandings of the species. Given the media's influence on the public's views of coyotes and their support for management strategies, these findings suggest that the media plays a central role in shaping coyote-human relationships and management strategies.
Keywords: human–animal conflict; human–animal studies; survival of the friendliest; urban coyotes; urban wildlife; wildlife management plans.