A Mixed-Methods Content Analysis Case Study of Frames and Ideologies in Mainstream Environmental News a Dissertation Submitted
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Mixed-Methods Content Analysis Case Study of Frames and Ideologies in Mainstream Environmental News A dissertation submitted to the College of Communication and Information of Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy by William F. Kelvin December, 2019 Dissertation written by William F. Kelvin B.A., Humboldt State University, 2002 M.A., California State University, Chico, 2009 Ph.D., Kent State University, 2019 Approved by ____________________________________ Danielle Sarver Coombs, Ph.D., Chair, Doctoral Dissertation Committee ____________________________________ Paul Haridakis, Ph.D., Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee ____________________________________ Yesim Kaptan, Ph.D., Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee ____________________________________ Steven Hook, Ph.D., Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Accepted by ____________________________________ Miriam Matteson, Ph.D., Interim Associate Dean, Doctoral Studies Committee ____________________________________ Amy Reynolds, Ph.D., Dean, College of Communication and Information ii Table of Contents Page TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... ii LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ..........................................................................................................................v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................ vi CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................1 Rationale for Study ..................................................................................................1 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ...................................................................10 Political and Ideological Roots of Modern Ecological Crises ...............................10 The Public Sphere, Mass Media, and Framing Contests .......................................25 Mass Media News Models .................................................................................... 39 Research Questions and Hypotheses .................................................................... 60 III. METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 65 Comparative Case Study ....................................................................................... 65 Key Theoretical Difference Between Cases ......................................................... 72 Sample and Sampling Strategy ............................................................................. 74 Data Coding and Analysis .................................................................................... 86 IV. QUALITATIVE DISCOURSE ANALYSIS RESULTS ..........................................100 Status Quo-Support Frames .................................................................................106 Status Quo-Critique Frames ................................................................................141 iii Linking Environmental News Frames to Environmental Ideologies ...................174 V. QUANTITATIVE CONTENT ANALYSIS RESULTS ............................................190 Rationales, Hypotheses, and Research Question .................................................191 Procedures ............................................................................................................194 Results ..................................................................................................................197 VI. DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................211 Summary of Findings ..........................................................................................211 Indications Anthropocentrism Dominates Mass Media .......................................213 Mass Media Models Extended .............................................................................224 Struggle to Define Center ....................................................................................240 Limitations ...........................................................................................................246 Recommendations for Future Scholarship and Activism ....................................249 APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................257 A. Codebook 1 .....................................................................................................258 B. Codebook 2 Revision ......................................................................................262 C. Corpus References...........................................................................................264 REFERENCES ...........................................................................................................................272 iv List of Figures Figure Page 1. A Spectrum of Environmental Ideologies............................................................................17 2. Functions and Objects of News Frames ..............................................................................88 3. Frames Placed on Corbett’s Spectrum of Environmental Ideologies ...............................196 v List of Tables Table Page 1. Keystone XL Corpus and Sampling .............................................................................84 2. Deepwater Horizon Corpus and Sampling ...................................................................85 3. Interrater Reliability Kappa (κ) Scores .........................................................................99 4. Frames Identified in Qualitative Content Analysis .....................................................105 5. Corpus Article Counts by Periodical Title and Case ..................................................195 6. Frame Frequencies Across Keystone XL and Deepwater Horizon Stories ................198 7. Hypothesis 1: Anthropocentrism and Ecocentrism Across Cases ..............................200 8. Hypothesis 2: Unrestrained Instrumentalism and Environmentalism Across Cases. ..201 9. Hypothesis 3: Ecocentric Ideology Frequencies by Case ...........................................203 10. Hypothesis 4: Environmentalist Ideology Frequencies by Case ...............................203 11. Extraction Impacts on Humans Frame Frequencies by Case ....................................204 12. Consumption Impacts on Humans Frame Frequencies by Case ...............................206 13. National Security Frame Frequencies by Periodical Type .......................................207 14. Ecocentric Frame Frequencies by Periodical Type ..................................................207 15. Environmentalist Frame Frequencies by Periodical Type ........................................208 16. Environmentalist Ideology Frequencies by Periodical Title .....................................209 17. Consumption Impacts on Humans Frame Frequencies by Periodical Title ..............209 vi Acknowledgments First and foremost, I would like to extend profound thanks to Dr. Danielle Sarver Coombs, who advised me through comprehensive exams and chaired my dissertation. Her wisdom was invaluable in taming my menagerie of ideas into a manageable dissertation. Her guidance was precise, her patience boundless, and because of her leadership I am able to accomplish a long-standing dream. Thank you, Dr. Coombs! Of course, a complex research project benefits from many voices, and I was lucky to attract the involvement of an excellent team of intellectual, attentive researchers to guide my plans. Dr. Paul Haridakis is a wealth of knowledge on mass media research, whose comprehensive exam questions shaped my knowledge, and whose understanding of research design options shaped my project. Dr. Yesim Kaptan was a friendly voice who was incredibly well versed in critical and qualitative research. Her conversations helped me understand how critical media studies fit into academia, and how to better position myself as a scholar. Finally, Dr. Steven Hook reminded me (continually) that the best kind of dissertation is a completed dissertation. He challenged me to catch up on a bachelor’s degree’s worth of political science in a semester, some of which made it into this project, and reined in my enthusiasm when my project’s boundaries were too expansive. Thank you committee members! Also, I would like to acknowledge Dr. Joelle Cruz for critical comps questions and Dr. Federico Subervi and Prof. Bill Sledzik for radical journalism courses. Many others were instrumental in both seeing my project through and helping me maintain my wits throughout a Ph.D. education. University Libraries’ Kristin Yeager helped me manage my data, both qualitative and quantitative; she is an invaluable resource to Kent State. Thanks to Zach Humphries I had reliable data to code; good looking out! School of vii Communication Studies Director Dr. Beth Graham was a reassuring voice when I was stressed out and helped me learn to balance teaching and studying workloads. Conversations with Dr. Bill Gorden were similarly edifying. The Division of Graduate Studies’ Dissertation Boot Camps propelled me forward so many