<p>Groups advocating on climate and environmental issues often seek to obtain media coverage to increase public awareness of their cause, yet comparatively little is understood about the factors influencing the volume and content of that coverage. This study investigates the quantity and characteristics of media coverage of climate advocacy groups through a mixed-method analysis of 17,380 Australian media articles published between 2017–2022. Four types of advocacy groups were the focus: ‘Established’ groups (large professionalised environmental groups); ‘Disruptive’ groups (the greatest use of civil resistance tactics); and two types of what we call ‘Unconventional advocates’ – those who advocate for action on climate change but from a social identity position that is either typically not associated with climate action (‘Role-based unconventional advocates’, such as parents or doctors) or has a history of <i>conflict</i> with climate or other environmental causes and environmentalists (‘Conflict-spanning unconventional advocates’, such as farmers and political conservatives). Findings indicate that linguistic cues associated with conflict, achievement, and emotional sentiment differed significantly according to the advocacy group type and media ownership. While Established groups gained the greatest volume of coverage, Disruptive groups attracted the highest conflict language and lowest achievement language, particularly in outlets published by <i>News Corp</i> (the Murdoch owned media company). Meanwhile, conflict-spanning unconventional advocates received coverage using language with the lowest levels of conflict and highest levels of achievement. Our findings highlight the potential for new types of climate advocates to gain comparative sympathetic media coverage and potentially expand the social basis of support for climate action.</p>