This paper applies discourse analysis to policies surrounding the siting of radioactive waste disposal facilities in South Korea. We question the premises of previous studies that define the radioactive waste disposal facilities decision outcomes in Korea as ‘repeated failures’. Instead, we suggest that underlying ideas and value systems surrounding the policy problem differ between supporting and opposing parties. In particular, our focus is on the ‘framing’ strategies manifest in policy discourse. Our analysis of newspaper articles shows that participants define and frame the policy issue in distinctive ways. Framing strategies include selective attention to, and naming of, the policy issues in the processes of frame articulation, amplification, extension and transformation. Overall, our analysis shows that framing analysis is a useful tool for understanding the policy decision-making process from a different perspective than traditional policy analysis.