Who should lift the burdens of austerity policy? Who succeeded in improving public transport – and who failed? Questions of this kind are posed and answered in public  discourse. The public attribution of responsibility, i.e. blaming and praising for past and future developments, requesting and defining political competencies, is a back bone of public  sense making as it links actors to actions and results.  Such interpretations, especially if they become dominant, are highly consequential. They have implications not only on the definition of appropriate measures but also on the role of actors who are regarded as initiators (or not). Responsibility for past actions and developments can result in blame or praise aligned with decrease or increase in perceived legitimacy. Addressing a certain actor with a request sets the scene of who is in the driving seat and who can dive away from becoming the target of accusations. Furthermore, the choice of actors in charge defines a path for possible further policies, as for example actors focused on economic policy will address a problem differently than actors focused on social policy. The ‘who’ presupposes the ‘how’. It is crucial to understand which systematic processes and strategies guide the public attribution of responsibility. While after Weaver’s seminal article on blame avoidance (1986) research primarily focused on administrative structures, recently the attribution of responsibility in the media has gained research interest. The panel brings together results from recent and running European comparative research projects focusing on these processes.