The paper aims to explore the argumentative strategies and the definitional struggles over bedrock hydrocarbon controversies in France and in Quebec. Both cases demonstrated the success of the opponents’ coalition, although with different temporality, to stop shale gas industry. However, in both countries, diversion strategies occurred in favor of other types of hydrocarbon: shale oil in Quebec, coalbed methane in France. Controversy over shale gas ignited the conflict between proponents of unconventional hydrocarbon and their opponents. The study of this controversy demonstrated the failure of the industrial definition of shale gas as an economic and energy resource (and of fracking as a safe technique), often backed by institutional actors. The opposition networks succeeded in framing shale gas as a threat for the environment and public health, pressurizing for a ban in France and for more impact studies and a moratorium in Quebec.