The Impact of Gender Frame Sponsorship on the Frame Process in Sport
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 5-2005 The Impact of Gender Frame Sponsorship on the Frame Process in Sport Christie Morgan Kleinmann University of Tennessee, Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss Part of the Communication Commons Recommended Citation Kleinmann, Christie Morgan, "The Impact of Gender Frame Sponsorship on the Frame Process in Sport. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 2005. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/4299 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Christie Morgan Kleinmann entitled "The Impact of Gender Frame Sponsorship on the Frame Process in Sport." I have examined the final electronic copy of this dissertation for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Communication and Information. Michelle Violanti, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Lisa L. Fall, Candace White, Joy T. DeSensi Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a dissertation written by Christie Morgan Kleinmann entitled "The Impact of Gender Frame Sponsorship on the Frame Process in Sport." I have examined the final paper copy of this dissertation for formand content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, with a major in Communication and Information. M. Violanti, Major Professor We have read this dissertation and recommend its acceptance: Accepted forthe Counc�: ::=enOTa�� Dean of Graduate Studies THE IMP ACT OF GENDER FRAME SPONSORSHIP ON THE FRAME PROCESS IN SPORT A Dissertation Presented for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville Christie Morgan Kleinmann May2005 �· fbo5b -K55 Copyright © 2005 by Christie MorganKleinmann All rights reserved ii DEDICATION This dissertation to dedicated to my husband for his unfailing love and support and to the joys of my life, Caleband Kinsley. I lll ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my committee for theirtime, expertise and guidance in the development and review ofthis dissertation. Themembers ofmy committee were M. Violanti (committee chair), J. DeSensi, L. Fall, R. Hardin and C. White. I want to extend a special thanksto M. Violanti forher guidance anddirection in the dissertation and throughoutmy program ofstudy. The time and attention devoted to me, my research and career were invaluable. I want to thank my parents for their willing sacrifice andcontinual encouragement throughout my academic career. Finally, I want to thank my husband for his love and support during the past three years. The demands ofwork and familywere often a difficultbalance for everyone, but one that was achieved through prayer and sacrifice. I cannot thank my family enough for helping me achieve my goal. This dissertation is a product of each of you. iv ABSTRACT Media represent a dominant constructor of reality in today's mediated culture, and frame research has examined this construction,particularly in sport, and concluded that media influence the continuance of hegemonic ideals that devalue women (Carragee & Roefs, 2004; Funkhauser, 1973; Lind & Salo, 2002). Framing's alignmentwith agenda setting centers on thetransfer of frames from agenda to agenda through frame sponsorship and incorporatesan examination of power by considering who influencesthe media agenda (Carragee & Roefs, 2004). A sport gender frame sponsorship analysis revealed the continuanceand dominance of negative gender framesin both public relations andmedia texts. It also identified anadditional negative gender framein sport, the hierarchy of topics, in both public relations material andmedia. Analysis also confirmedthe inclusion of framesponsorship in process models; however it noted a distinction between issue frame sponsorship andattribute framesponsorship. Frames were foundto transferissues and attributes separately, just as agenda setting research. Sport public relations personnel were successful in placing their framesin media discourse, but the centrality of power in frame sponsorship raises ideological concerns. The study founddamaging gender frameswere sponsored and placed successfullyin media discourse, perpetuatingthe devaluation of women athletes and women's sport, but positive gender frames were also successfully sponsored. Thus framesponsorship is an active component of the framing process andserves as a viable consideration in producing counter-hegemonicframes to challenge dominant ideology in sport. V TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction. 1 Background. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 2 TheoreticalOverview . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 4 Fram.e Sponsorship. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7 SymbioticRelationship . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 10 Media Hegemony & Societal Implications. .. .. .. 11 Summary-. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 13 ResearchQuestions . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 14 Related Tenninology . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15 Chapter 2: Literature & Conceptual Convergence . 17 TheoreticalFoundation. .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 17 Critique of the Framing/AgendaSetting Convergence...... 33 Frame Sp<>nsorship . 3 5 Fram.e Sponsorshipand Sport......................... 38 Sport Gender Fram.eResearch ........................ · 39 Universal SportGender Fram.es. .. .. .. .. 44 SJ)()rtand Media . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 48 Swnmary- . .. 5 3 Vl Chapter 3: Methodology . 55 Guiding Operational Definitions. .. .. .. .. 5 5 Content TextualAnalysis . .. .. .. .. .. .. 57 2004 Women's Final Four. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 59 Study Timeframe. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 61 SportsInformation Communication Text. .. .. .. 62 Print MediaCommunication Text............. ......... 65 Local Newspapers. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 65 NationalNewspapers . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 66 BroadcastCommunication Text ..............·. 69 Computer-AssistedTextual Analysis . .. .. .. .. 72 Preparingthe Data .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 76 Identificationof FrameTerms ... .. .. .. .. 77 HierarchicalCluster Analysis. .. .. .. .. .. 78 Frame Dominance. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 79 Gender FrameAnalysis . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 80 Summary. 81 Chapter 4: Analysis and Discussion.... .. .. .. .. .. · 84 Vll ResearchQuestion One .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 84 Public Relations Frames . 86 Media Frames . 86 Print Frames . 88 BroadcastFrames . 90 Research Question One Summary . 92 ResearchQuestion Two . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 92 Research Question Two Summary. 94 ResearchQuestion Three....... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 95 Symbolic Superiority . 95 Formula of&c/usion . 96 Symbolic Dominance . 97 Research QuestionThree Summary . 99 ResearchQuestion Four.............................. 99 Connecticut Public Relations and Connecticut Post . 100 Comparison Tennessee Public Relations and KnoxvilleNews . 106 Sentinel Comparison LSU Public Relationsand TheAdvocate Comparison . 109 Minnesota Public Relations and Star Tribune . 111 Comparison Local and NationalPrint Comparison............. 115 Research Question Four Summary. 121 vm ResearchQuestion Five. .. .. .. .. .. 122 Public Relations and Broadcast SemifinalGame... .. 12 3 Comparison Public Relations andBroadcast Final Game. .. 128 Comparison SecondaryAnalysis of Event Salience . .. 134 Research QuestionFive Summary. .. .. 137 Research Question Six...................... .. 137 GenderFrame Similarities_....... .. .. 137 Gender Frame Differences. .. .. .. .. 140 ResearchQuestion Six Summary . .. .. 148 S-wnmary-...................................... 149 Chapter S: Conclusion.... 151 Gender FrameFindings and Implications .. 151 FrameSponsorship Findings andImplications............ 155 Print Frame Sponsorship. .. .. 15 8 BroadcastFrame Sponsorship.................. 15 9 Gender Frame SponsorshipFindings andImplications . 160 Contributionsto CurrentResearch . .. .. .. 162 Limitations andFuture Research .. .. .. 166 Conclusion. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 171 lX References ••.••...•.•.••..•.•••..•..•..••...•.••••...••. 173 Vita ................................................... 186 X LIST OF TABLES Table I.I Study Terminology ................ .. .. .. .. .. .. 16 Table 2.1 FrameDefinition Evolution . .. .. .. .. .. 20 Table 2.2 UniversalGender SportFrames . .. .. .. .. .. 45 Table3. 1 Sports InformationCommunication Text ............... 64 Table 3.2 Local Print CommunicationText . .. .. .. 67 Table 3.3 National PrintCommunication Text. .. .. .. 70 Table 3.4 Broadcast CommunicationText...................... 73 Table 3.5 Positive andNegative Gender FrameIndicators .......... 82 Table 4.1 Public Relations Frames.. .. .. .. 87 Table 4.2 Media Frames.. .. .. .. .. .. .. 89 Table 4.3 Print Frames. .. .. .. .. 91 Table 4.4 BroadcastFrames . .. .. .. 93 Table 4.6 Public Relations and Local Print Frames . .. .. 101 by University Table 4.7 National Print Frames.. .. .. .. .. 116 Table 4.8 Public Relations andBroadcast Frames ...............