Energy transition is discussed in the contemporary sociological literature. Usually, it is defined broadly through the socio-political lens, taking into account the social patterns of thinking about the energy problems. Also the media content is taken into account. However, the media analyses are usually conducted in reference to the socio-psychological approach, in order to reconstruct social representations of chosen problems, to present attitudes towards them or to identify the rhetoric tools used in the argumentation. It is not enough. The media discourse is nowadays the core dimension of public sphere, and the important issues are questions about citizens' participation in public debate. Who is included into dialogue and who is excluded? What perspectives are hegemonic and what are the mechanisms of legitimising and de-legitimising the argumentation strategies? Shale gas is an excellent example of how media shape public debate. The current analyses present the media as being between the devil of industry and the deep blue sea of environmentalist lobby. The crucial issue is not only the question how media create or reflect the social representations of fracking, but what even more important, how they established the communication space for discussing it: what actors, what values constitute our public sphere. What symbolical resources are used by the actors and in what purpose? Fracking is a new and controversial technology, discussed in various European countries. Poles - according to the public opinion polls- accept it, in Germany the social resistance to this technology is much stronger. Comparison of the discursive maps of shale gas and fracking debate shows significant differences in the patterns of media discourse in both countries. But there are still questions: what are the mechanisms laying behind that? What could be the consequences of that for energy transition? What are main challenges for European energy democracy and what is the role of mass media in that?