Climate change is a major threat to public health worldwide. Conversely, well-designed action to mitigate climate change offers numerous opportunities to improve health and equity. Despite this, comprehensive climate action has not been forthcoming within New Zealand. The media plays an important role in shaping public opinion and support for policy change. Previous literature has suggested that certain types of framing may be more effective than others at encouraging support for climate action and policy. This includes positive, personally relevant framing, as well as key journalistic tools which appear counter-intuitive, such as an increase in human interest stories and 'sensationalist' framing. We undertook a qualitative thematic analysis of climate change and health media coverage in two online New Zealand news outlets to understand how the issue was framed, and how it may be framed more effectively to encourage climate action. We compared the framing used by journalists in mainstream media outlet the New Zealand Herald Online (NZHO) with that of contributors to independent news repository site Scoop. Content in both outlets emphasized the threat unchecked climate change poses to health, which overshadowed the positive health opportunities of climate action. The NZHO was more prone to negative framing, and more likely to favour stories which could be sensationalized and were international in scope. We considered the possible effectiveness of the framing we found for attracting greater media attention and encouraging support for climate action and policy.