When Does a Social Problem Become a Legitimate Issue on the Media
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Movement-Countermovement Dynamics in the Global Warming Policy Conflict Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By James Everett Hein, M.A. Graduate Program in Sociology The Ohio State University 2012 Dissertation Committee: J. Craig Jenkins, Co-Advisor Andrew Martin, Co-Advisor Edward Crenshaw ii Copyright by James Everett Hein 2012 iii Abstract In a provocative paper, Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus (2005) shook the environmental establishment by declaring that environmentalism had died, claiming that the movement pushing for global warming policies had failed because of their framing strategy. A content analysis of pro-global warming policy movement frames deployed in the New York Times from 1981 through 2003 shows support for their claim that the frames were largely technocratic and lacked linkages to larger American values. However, their claim that the movement has framed global warming as solely an environmental problem is not supported by the data. The pro-global warming policy movement first focused their frames on prognostics, or in other words the causes and consequences of the social problem, but after the issue arrived on the international governmental agenda in 1988 the movement’s frames shifted focus to diagnostic frames, or solutions to global warming. Examination of countermovement frames shows that frame debunking fell into two categories: prognostic attacks and diagnostic attacks. The countermovement responded with diagnostic attacks when it mobilized in 1989 and in the 1990s gradually deployed prognostic attacks in equal numbers. Zero-inflated poisson regressions were used to test the sociopolitical factors accounting for frame deployment for both the movement and countermovement. Pro-global warming policy frames were found to increase in response to political threat, elite cues, and weather shocks. In contrast, anti-global warming policy counterframes decreased in response to political ii allies, election years, weather shocks, and elite cues. The agendas literature describes social problems progressing from the governmental policy agenda then to the media agenda; however I find that global warming media agenda access preceded Congressional agenda access. iii Dedication Dedicated to Joy De La Cruz. The world was a better place with her poetry and activism. iv Acknowledgements This work benefited most from the assistance of J. Craig Jenkins who I am forever grateful to due to his dedication to this project and my professional development as a researcher. Andrew Martin and Edward Crenshaw were also instrumental to the completion of this dissertation, and I thank them for all of their wonderful help. I’d also like to thank all of my instructors in the Sociology Department at the Ohio State University for sharing their knowledge of statistics, theory, academic writing, and sociology generally, all of which has contributed to making this work possible. I am also indebted to Bradley Keen and Matthew Costello, whose help earlier in my graduate school experience got me through the challenges of the time. In addition, I am thankful for my undergraduate research assistants who helped with some of the data collection and coding. I’d also like to thank the friends I’ve made during graduate school, all of whom have devoted some of their time to help me briefly escape the rigors of this experience and made Ohio somewhat bearable, and dare I say fun, for this Californian. Thank you Salvatore Restifo, Julie Restifo, Charles Patton, Darlene (Femi) Saporu, Jessica Vance, Alicia Croft, Anna Nicholas, Adrienne Chung, Mark Putcher, Ariel Godwin, Cat Feerick, Gizem Erdem, Fadi Shihadeh, Brian Bello, Adam Jasne, Sarah Haserodt, Lauren Wertz, v Jeremy Baker, Chris Keenan, Tim Lueke, Bobbi Reese, Ervin Matthew, Matthew Schoene, Cyrus Javan, Julia Ojcius, and Rachael Gossett. Finally, I’d like to thank my family and friends that helped me with moments of healing during breaks away from Ohio, whether it was back home in California, or in Arizona, Texas, Florida, Illinois, D.C., Europe, and Africa. Maryanne Price-Smith was especially helpful with her words of wisdom and gifts of possibility. Thank you Jasper H. Hardison Jr., AJ Redhawk Rising, P. Eric Hein, Sally Hein, my grandfather LTC Harold Everett Hein and his wife Kathleen Jean Merithew, John Everett Hein, Rosalinda Hein, Jeremiah Hein, Jacob Hein, Natalie Harb, Debi Spindelman, Paul Reeves, Benjamin Yablonovitch, Jamie Lin, Camilo Boada, Axel Alarcon, Jeff Green, Mindy Green, Rachel Lovell, A.J. Adams, Aurélien Parsy, Carissa Torres, Chris Scheingraber, Cristina Ruiz, Dylan Snowden, Elizabeth Nisley, Jill Ostrove, Kathlene Arranz, Lindsay Young, Mai-Tam Nguyen, Laura Kaplan, Matthew Kaplan, Adrienne Kaplan, Maya Cano, Roberto Rizzo, and Lotta Schön. Your belief in me has pushed me to achieve an imposing accomplishment on this path towards knowledge. vi Vita 2003 to 2004…………………………………McNair Scholar 2004………………………………………….B.A. Sociology, University of California, San Diego 2006………………………………………….Researcher on “The Green Money Project”, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University 2007………………………………………….M.A. Sociology, The Ohio State University 2007………………………………………….Research Assistant on “The Prison Project”, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University 2005 to present……………………………….Graduate Teaching Associate, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University 2012…………………………………………...Adjunct Instructor, Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Columbus State Community College vii Publications Hein, James Everett. 2011. “Kyoto Protocol.” in Green Culture: An A-to-Z Guide, edited by Paul Robbins, Kevin Wehr and J. Geoffrey Golson. SAGE Publications. Hein, James Everett. 2011. “Print Media, Advertising.” in Green Culture: An A-to-Z Guide, edited by Paul Robbins, Kevin Wehr and J. Geoffrey Golson. SAGE Publications. Fields of Study Major Fields: Sociology viii Table of Contents Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………....ii Dedication………………………………………………………………………………...iv Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………..v Vita……………………………………………………………………………………....vii List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………...x List of Figures………………………………………………………………………….....xi Chapter 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………………...1 Chapter 2: Getting Global Warming onto the Agenda…………………………………...8 Chapter 3: Revisiting the Death of Environmentalism………………………………….57 Chapter 4: Heated Arguments…………………………………………………………..95 Chapter 5: Conclusion………………………………………………………………….127 References………………………………………………………………………………130 Appendix: Codebook and Data…….…………………………………………………..140 ix List of Tables Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Monthly Mentions of Global Warming Policy Frames, 1981-2003……………………………………………………………………………......78 Table 2. Global Warming Policy Movement Frames and Counterframes, 1981- 2003…….………………………………………………………………………………...84 Table 3. Zero-Inflated Poisson Regression Testing the Association Between Variables and Pro-Frames, 1981-2003 (N = 274)…………… ………………………………….....87 Table 4. Zero-Inflated Poisson Regression Testing the Association Between Variables and Anti-Frames, 1981-2003 (N = 274)………………………………………….……...90 Table 5. Descriptive Statistics for Monthly Pro and Anti-Global Warming Policy Frames, 1981-2003……………………………………………………………………..112 Table 6. Zero-Inflated Poisson Regression Testing the Association Between Variables and Pro-Frames (N = 274)…………………………..………………………………….120 Table 7. Zero-Inflated Poisson Regression Testing the Association Between Variables and Anti-Frames (N = 274)……………………………………….…………………….122 Table 8. Raw Pro-Frames and Condensed Categories.………. ……………………….169 Table 9. Raw Counter-Frames and Condensed Categories………………...………….177 x Table 10. Top Environmental Advocacy Organizations in the New York Times, 1981- 2009…………………………………………………………………………….............180 Table 11. Top Pro-Global Warming Policy Think Tanks in the New York Times, 1981- 2009………………………………………………………………………………….....180 Table 12. Top Pro-Global Warming Policy Corporations and Trade Associations in the New York Times, 1981-2009…………………………………………………………..181 Table 13. Top Anti-Global Warming Policy Corporations and Trade Associations in the New York Times, 1981-2009………………………………………...………………...182 Table 14. Top Anti-Global Warming Policy Think Tanks in the New York Times, 1981- 2009…………………………………………...………………………………………...182 Table 15. Top Front Groups in the New York Times, 1981-2009……………..……...182 xi List of Figures Figure 1. Global Climate Change Mentions in the New York Times, 1955-1979……...15 Figure 2. Congressional Hearings on Global Warming, 1981-2007……………..……..44 Figure 3. Global Climate Change Mentions in the New York Times, 1955-1988….…..47 Figure 4. Global Climate Change Mentions in the New York Times, 1988……..……..49 Figure 5. Pro and Anti-Global Warming Policy Frames, 1981-2003….………………..81 Figure 6. Frame and Counterframes in the Global Warming Policy Conflict, 1981- 2003……………………………………………………………………………………..115 Figure 7. Pro-Global Warming Policy Frames, 1981-2003……………………………117 Figure 8. Anti-Global Warming Policy Counterframes, 1981-2003………………..…118 xii Chapter 1: Introduction In the year 2012, the United States has still not passed any global warming legislation at the federal level even though a scientific consensus has been reached on global warming for several years now (McCright and Dunlap 2003; Oreskes 2004; Oreskes and Conway 2010) According to McCright and Dunlap (2003), scientific consensus around