Analysis of Coverage Linking Phish to the Grateful Dead
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MEDIA FRAMING AS BRAND POSITIONING: ANALYSIS OF COVERAGE LINKING PHISH TO THE GRATEFUL DEAD A Dissertation Submitted to the Temple University Graduate Board In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Mass Media and Communication School of Communications and Theater By Jordan McClain May, 2011 Committee Members: Michael Maynard (chair), Ph.D., Associate Professor, Mass Media & Communication Fabienne Darling-Wolf, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Mass Media & Communication Cornelius Pratt, Ph.D., Professor, Mass Media & Communication Paul D’Angelo (external reader), Ph.D., Associate Professor, Communication Studies ! i! © by Jordan McClain 2011 All Rights Reserved ! ii! ABSTRACT This dissertation uses mass communication research about framing and positioning to explore media framing as brand positioning and analyze coverage that links the band Phish to the Grateful Dead. Based on content analysis, textual analysis, and interviews, this dissertation explores the framing of Phish—formed in Vermont in 1983 and often compared or connected to the Grateful Dead, a band formed in California in 1965— in a popular mainstream music magazine and beyond, placing particular interest in how this framing intersects with positioning the band vis-à-vis the Grateful Dead. By exploring framing of a commercially-oriented subject that media coverage regularly constructs in terms of or in relation to another more recognizable subject, this project aims to contribute to mass communication theory and our understanding of media in society. Through comprehension of media about Phish and Phish/Grateful Dead connections, this dissertation studies how, why, and with what result stories are told through such associative coverage. After reviewing previous works regarding Phish, positioning, and framing, media content is closely examined and discussed. A case study of Phish coverage employed a three-pronged multi-method approach focusing on content (Part A) and context (Part B). Part A1 is a content analysis of all Phish album reviews from Rolling Stone. This included 12 album reviews spanning from 1995-2009 and written by eight authors. Findings showed that the majority of reviews connected Phish to the Grateful Dead, that the connections were constructed through various link forms, and that Phish were connected most to the Grateful Dead. Part A2 is a textual analysis of all Rolling Stone coverage of Phish. This included coverage from 1992-2010 and 305 items such as magazine covers, articles, and letters to the editor. Findings identified five frames and four subframes used to portray Phish. Part B is a series of interviews involving a ! iii! primary group of 19 individuals who have significantly written, edited, and/or published content about Phish; and a secondary group of five individuals who added valuable context for understanding the issues. Findings included discussion of media conventions in general (journalistic) and specific (Phish) terms, and interpretation of the Phish/Grateful Dead link as a powerful, oversimplified reference point. About Phish, the project found they are an entity that innately defies standard molds and thus makes for an extraordinary and fruitful case study. Their naturally complex nature and paradoxical success makes them a potentially perplexing challenge for people in media to understand and address. Media often use the Grateful Dead motif in Phish coverage as a potent method of information assimilation to reconceive simply Phish’s unusual combination of characteristics via something more familiar and accessible. In terms of the literature, the collection of media content illustrates framing of the band via socially shared and persistent organizing principles that symbolically structure Phish’s character (Reese, 2003). The collection of content also illustrates positioning of Phish through portrayals that are often oversimplified and relate new information to familiar knowledge. The combination of literature on framing and positioning offers a productive explanation of media coverage about Phish, since both processes overlap in their tendency to oversimplistically relate X to Y. Thus, this dissertation’s findings suggest a new way of thinking about cumulative media framing’s ability to result in and serve as brand positioning, which may happen out of a brand’s design. ! iv! ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Endless thanks to my entire committee—Professors Michael Maynard, Fabienne Darling- Wolf, Cornelius Pratt, and Paul D’Angelo—for being so generous with your feedback and time. Without your guidance and open minds this project would not be what it is. Extra thanks to Fabienne Darling-Wolf: for your comments, instruction on qualitative research, and helpful chats. Extra thanks also to Michael Maynard: for your tireless work as my chair, constant availability, thorough and swift reviews, teaching advice, and humor. Thank you to Matthew Lombard: for your work in my comprehensive exams and instruction on quantitative research. Thank you to Nancy Morris: for your instruction on social science writing and feedback on my textual analysis. Thank you to the many other MM&C and SCT faculty I've had the pleasure of learning from. Thank you to Denise Lannon, Dolores Stanley, Nicole McKenna, and Gayle Conley. Thank you to all my MM&C peers, especially Mary Beth Ray, Byron Lee, and Katrina Flener. Thank you to the Temple University InterLibrary Loan employees: for all your hunting. Thank you also to Kristina DeVoe: for your expert help. Thanks to my entire family for your support: Dad, Mom, Barbara, Herman, Dave, Anne, and many others. Extra thanks to my amazing wife, Amanda: for your unlimited kindness and brilliance; you’re wonderful. Thank you to all my friends. Thank you to Ben Morgan and Jebney Lewis: for your help. Extra thanks to Robert Klein: for the tips. Extra thanks to Justin Carey: for sharing your love of Phish. Extra thanks to Adam and Nicole Spector, Kevin and Karen Hattrup, Scott and Tricia Chambley, Doug Sell, and Andrew Repasky McElhinney: for your interest. ! v! Thank you to the Deadwood Society of Grateful Dead studies scholars: for your hard work, inspiration, and being so welcoming. Thank you to all interviewees: for speaking to me, being pleasant to speak with, and allowing me to learn from you and share that knowledge with others. These individuals include (in alphabetical order): Andy Bernstein, Jnan Blau, Dean Budnick, Dave Calarco, Josh Clark, Brian Cohen, Anthony DeCurtis, Benjy Eisen, David Fricke, Andy Gadiel, Richard Gehr, Ellis Godard, Mike Greenhaus, Brent Hallenbeck, Jesse Jarnow, Jason Kaczorowski, Aron Magner, Kevin O’Donnell, Jon Pareles, Jim Pollock, Parke Puterbaugh, Paul Robicheau, Peter Shapiro, Lockhart Steele. Extra thanks to those interviewees who kindly helped connect with me other potential interviewees. Extra thanks also to Mike Greenhaus for inviting me to examine the Relix archives. Thank you to the Phish employees I consulted about this project: Tavi Black, Dave Heard, and Nichole Nierman. Thank you to Becky Holt at the Burlington Free Press: for compiling and sharing all of the BFP’s Phish coverage. Thank you to the many people who have written articles and books about Phish that take the band seriously. Thank you to the Phish.net/Mockingbird Foundation contributors: for your efforts in creating such a useful and important resource. Thank you to Phish archivist Kevin Shapiro and Phish managers Patrick Jordan and Jason Colton: for your work, kind emails, and not making it impossible for me to interview people. ! vi! Thank you to the unrivaled community of Phish fans: for your fun spirit and critical music appreciation. Thank you to Phish: for all the phenomenal music. ! vii! Dedicated to Ernest Appel and Laura McClain ! viii! TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………………...................iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………….............................v DEDICATION…………….…………………………………………………….........................viii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………….......x CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………….1 2. PHISH…………………………...……………………………………….……………......11 3. POSITIONING…………………………………………………………………………....34 4. FRAMING………………..……………………………………………………..………...54 5. METHODS…………………………………….……………………………….….….......71 6. CASE STUDY PART A1, “BIRDS OF A FEATHER”: CONTENT ANALYSIS OF PHISH ALBUM REVIEWS FROM ROLLING STONE…………………………............90 7. CASE STUDY PART A2, “ALL THINGS RECONSIDERED”: TEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF ALL PHISH COVERAGE IN ROLLING STONE……………………………….…..98 8. CASE STUDY PART B, “THE CONNECTION”: INTERVIEWS WITH WRITERS, EDITORS, AND PUBLISHERS……………………………................................…......119 9. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………...….165 REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………………..183 APPENDICES A. CONTENT ANALYSIS MANUAL…………………………………………………...208 B. INTERVIEWEE BIOGRAPHIES……………………………………………….……..212 ! ix! LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Three-Pronged Approach to the Case Study of Phish Coverage..…………………………....71 2. Grateful Dead References in Phish Album Reviews………………………………………....92 3. Five Frames and Four Subframes Characterizing Phish in Rolling Stone…….………...........99 4. Link Forms and Contexts in Coverage of Phish………………………………………….....169 5. Linked Positioning Ladders of the Grateful Dead and Phish…………….……………..…..171 ! x! CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Using a three-pronged multi-method approach to a case study of Phish, this dissertation uses mass communication research about framing and positioning to explore media framing