The purpose of this study was to identify the media frames that the metropolitan newspapers with wide circulation in mainland China, Hong Kong and U.S. applied to two "shoe-hurling" acts involving George W. Bush and Wen Jiabao. The theory of frame analysis was utilized in this study. Employing qualitative and quantitative research methodologies, all data were collected by the author with the aid of the coding sheet including five generic frames: issue define frame, causes frame, consequences frame, remedies suggested frame and human interest frame. The social system, nationality for mainland China, Hong Kong and U.S. and the level of commercialization for all selected newspapers were taken into consideration in this study. It was discovered that media in mainland China, Hong Kong and U.S. employed different media frames concerning the "shoe-hurling" issues. Media in mainland China were more likely to frame the "Wen Jiabao" issue as a "personal issue" and the "Bush" issue as a "social issue", to frame the "Wen Jiabao" issue as "law violation" and "Bush" issue as "justice seeking" in discussion of the causes of the two "shoe-hurling" issues and to frame "punish individual" concerning the "Bush" issue in discussing the remedies suggested. In defining "shoe-hurling" issues, media in U.S. were more likely to apply the frame of "social issue" than media in China and Hong Kong and to frame the "social level" in "Bush" issue more than media in China and Hong Kong in discussion of "shoe-hurling" issues' consequences. Lastly, media in Hong Kong were more likely to apply the "human interest" frame than did media in China and U.S.