Fracking Frames: a Framing Analysis and Comparative Study of Hydraulic Fracturing Coverage in American Newspapers

Fracking frames: A framing analysis and comparative study of hydraulic fracturing coverage in American newspapers.

Thesis

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

Cara R. Lawson, B.S.

Graduate Program in Agricultural and Extension Education

The Ohio State University

2014

Committee:

Dr. Emily Buck, Advisor

Dr. Gary Straquadine

Copyrighted by

Cara R. Lawson

2014

Abstract

Science is generally prone to controversy as technical decisions often become politically influenced. Hydraulic fracturing is currently a controversial topic in the media and is worthy of further exploration to understand the types of frames being used to communicate the issue. Before this study, no research examining the coverage of hydraulic fracturing in the news media could be found, and an understanding of how the issue was communicated could assist in understanding the influence on public participation and opinion.

To analyze frames associated with the issue of hydraulic fracturing, quantitative content analysis was used to evaluate dominant frames found in regions practicing fracking within the United States from 2010 to 2013. Articles were collected using the

LexisNexis database for all newspapers included in the study except for the Chicago Sun

Times, which relied upon the NewsBank database. Articles were identified in the databases by searching for the terms “hydraulic fracturing” or “fracking” within the time period of January 1, 2010 to October 31, 2013. Content analysis was conducted on 203 news and feature stories

Colorado was featured as the main state in 45 of the articles (22.2%), the nation was featured in 48 of the articles (23.6%) and New York was the most prominently featured state with 49 articles (24.1%). News and feature stories featuring fracking

ii increased each year examined in the study. Eleven articles appeared in 2010, and 77 articles appeared in 2013. Articles were most commonly framed in terms of community activism (14.3%) followed by government involvement (11.8%). Interest groups were most commonly cited as sources in the articles examined (51.2%), followed by industry representatives (45.8%), and political leaders (41.3%). The majority of the articles were written with a neutral tone (157 articles, 77.3%), while 33 (16.3%) articles were framed negatively, and 13 (6.4%) articles were framed in a positive manner.

With the number of news and feature articles increasing each year examined in this study, it seems reasonable to assume that fracking is a topic following the path similar to other science issues, such as nuclear energy. It appears that the issue raises a variety of questions for various stakeholders, and a likely result is that more media attention will be paid to the issue of hydraulic fracturing. While the articles were framed in a variety of ways, the indication of community involvement may suggest the role community members are taking against or in favor of the issue. This study demonstrates that fracking is both a science and political issue, and will likely continue to be woven into public policy agendas, which will impact communities.

iii

Acknowledgments

I am grateful for this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to the many people who have helped me to complete one of the greatest tasks in my life so far. First, I want to share my deepest thanks to my committee members, Dr. Buck and Dr. Straquadine, for all of their time, suggestions, thought-provoking questions, and encouragement to tackle this piece of research.

Dr. Buck, I must thank you for guiding me in the ways only a wonderful communication scholar and advisor could. You helped me to feel confident in my abilities to tackle a project that was outside of my comfort zone. Dr. Straquadine, thank you for your enthusiasm and encouragement. You definitely went above and beyond as a committee member, and helped me to understand the real world implications of this research. I am thankful to have been fortunate to work with both of you.

It is also important that I acknowledge Dr. Eric Nisbet, who encouraged me to think outside the box on what political issues were facing and would continue to be faced by those in agriculture. I hope that if you take a look at this thesis, you’ll be proud of the progress made since my class with you. Thanks for pushing me to take on this project.

To all of my fellow graduate students, it has been a joy to work with and get to know each of you. Thanks for your support, friendship, laughs in the office, shenanigans, and for helping me to have the fullest graduate student experience possible. You have

iv made the last year and a half one that I’ll never forget. What a wonderful break from

“the real world.”

Caryn, Abby, Lindsey, Rose, Andrew, John, Leah, Rita, and Randi, thank you for standing by my side through this experience. Your support and encouragement to follow my ambitions and take on this graduate journey was essential to making the whole thing work. Thanks for reassuring me that going back to school would be awesome and totally worthwhile – you were right.

Finally, and most importantly, I want to thank my family. Mom, Dad, Katie, and

Cory, thank you for believing in me and encouraging my pursuit of higher education. I’m so lucky to have each of you, and appreciate everything you do to help me be a better person each day. It is a great feeling to have a family that I know is so proud of me.

Your love and support has made this journey incredibly worthwhile. Thanks for believing in me. I love you!

Vita

June 2002…………….…...... …………Ripley-Union-Lewis-Huntington High School

June 2006…………….…..……………B.S. Agriculture, The Ohio State University

2006 to 2012…………………..………Director of Community Engagement, Ohio

Farm Bureau Federation

2013 to present……………….……….Graduate Research Assistant, Department of

Agricultural Communication, Education, and

Leadership, The Ohio State University

Fields of Study

Major Field: Agricultural and Extension Education

Table of Contents

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………..…ii

Acknowledgments………………………………………………….…………………iv

Vita…………………………………………………………………………………....vi

List of Tables……………………………………………………………………...…...x

List of Figures…………………………………………………………………………xi

Chapter 1……………………………………………………………………….………1

Background and Setting………………………………………………………..1

Problem Statement and Research Objectives…………....……………………..5

Limitations of Study……………………………………….……………...……6

Basic Assumptions………………………….……………………....…………..7

Definitions of Terms……………………………………………………………7

Significance of Study………………………………………………………….12

Chapter 2………………………………………………………………………………14

Theoretical Framework: Framing…………………………………………..…14

Possible Influences on Frame Construction…………….……………………..18

Journalist Perception and Bias…………………………………………18

Organization of Groups………………………………………………...20

vii

Conflicting Interest Groups…………………………………………..20

Elite Opinion……………………………………………….…………22

Occurrence of Promotional Events…………………………………...24

Perceived Threats and Values………………………………………...25

Risk…………………………………………………………………...26

Time…………………………………………………………………..27

Importance of Scientific and Agricultural Literacy…………………………..29

Chapter 3…………………………………………………………………………...…34

Problem Statement……………………………………………………………34

Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………….35

Research Objectives…………………………………………………………..35

Research Design………………………………………………………………35

Population and Sample………………………………………………………..37

Instrumentation………………………………………………………………..40

Validity………………………………………………………………..40

Reliability……………………………………………………………...41

Data Collection………………………………………………………………...42

Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………..42

Chapter 4……………………………………………………………………………….44

Findings Related to Objective One…………………………………………….47

Findings Related to Objective Two……………………………………………51

Findings Related to Objective Three…………………………………………..53

viii

Chapter 5…………………………………………………………………………………65

Conclusions………………………………………………………………………66

Conclusions related to Objective 1………………………………………67

Conclusions related to Objective 2………………………………………69

Conclusions related to Objective 3………………………………………71

Recommendations………………………………………………………………..72

Recommendations for Future Research………………………………………….73

References……………………………………………………………..………..……..…75

Appendix A: Code Book………………………………………………………..……..…82

Appendix B: Code Sheet for Fracking Frame Analysis………………………...……..…86

List of Tables

Table 1. Determining the Original Data Sample………………………………………...40

Table 2. Frequency of Articles by Newspaper………………………………………...... 45

Table 3. Primary Frame – Northeast Region…………………………………………….55

Table 4. Secondary Frame – Northeast Region………………………………………….56

Table 5. Primary Frame – Western Region……………………………………………...57

Table 6. Secondary Frame – Western Region…………………………………………...58

Table 7. Primary Frame – Southern Region……………………………………………..59

Table 8. Secondary Frame – Southern Region………………………………………..…60

Table 9. Primary Frame – Midwestern Region………………………………………..…61

Table 10. Secondary Frame – Midwestern Region………………………………………62

List of Figures

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework, Framing Theory……………………………………..17

Figure 2. Frequency of Article by Section and Type………………………………….…47

Figure 3. Overall Primary Frame……………………………………………………...…49

Figure 4. Overall Secondary Frame……………………………………………………...50

Figure 5. Number of Sources Referenced in Articles……………………………………52

Figure 6. Frequency of Source Types Referenced in Articles…………………………...53

Figure 7. Comparison of Primary Frames by Region……………………………………63

Chapter 1: Introduction

Background and Setting

Hydraulic fracturing, commonly referred to as fracking, is a procedure used in the majority of natural gas wells in the United States where water, sand, and a mixture of chemicals are pumped thousands of feet underground through a well to break up rock, also known as shale, to release and collect natural gas. The hydraulic fracturing process is implemented to allow oil or natural gas to move more freely from porous rock to production wells, which are designed to bring oil and natural gas to the surface (United

States Environmental Protection Agency, 2012).

Hydraulic fracturing works when pressure strength from the fluids pumped into the geologic formation exceeds the strength of the rock. When this occurs, fractures are created and the natural gasses rise toward the surface along with the flowback, or recovered fracturing fluids (U.S. EPA, 2012). After the natural gas has been extracted, the water and chemical mix recovered from the process is stored in open pits before being transferred to a water treatment plant. After extraction, natural gas is moved via pipes to market (Granberg, 2013).

With the advances made in the fracking industry, due in large part to the use of hydraulic fracturing and also technology allowing for the discovery of shale basins, more

1 states are now practicing fracking. While hydraulic fracturing is not a new method in the oil and gas industry, the use of drilling horizontally through shale is a new application

(Aller, Zwierschke, Weatherington-Rice, Houston, Dougherty, Shaner, and Johnson,

2013).

Some areas of the United States have practiced fracking longer than others, but in many areas there is concern and controversy associated with fracking practices. The Pew

Research Center (Kohut, Doherty, Dimock, and Keeter, 2012) has found that the awareness of fracking leads to more favorable opinions as gas prices rise. However, hydraulic fracturing remains an issue which citizens hold both positive and negative opinions, perhaps due in part to its complex nature and unknown consequences.

The controversial nature of fracking has brought forth strong arguments both in favor and against the practice, and stakes for the industry are high. In California alone, the Monterey Shale basin is estimated to have amounts of oil equivalent to five years of

U. S. petroleum imports and could create as many as 500,000 jobs in the next two years

(Buford, 2013).

The practice of hydraulic fracturing has led some communities to experience an economic boom. In one oil and gas-drilling town, Schultz (2011) reported few signs of recession and claimed some businesses had grown by 100 percent due to the influx of people migrating to the community to work in the oil and gas drilling industry.

Conflicting viewpoints focus on issues such as environmental risks versus economic value associated with fracking.

While the economic benefits may be great for landowners, there are also unintended consequences that many landowners may be unaware of. Drilling activities can affect many aspects of life on a landowner’s property including the quality of well water, water quality in springs or ponds, drilling pad construction close to a home or livestock, interruption of sleep due to activities taking place at the drilling site, and the selling of leases to different companies throughout time (Aller et al., 2013).

In some situations, oil and gas can be drilled on a landowner’s property without the signing of a lease. This instance might occur if a previous owner has severed the mineral rights, or if mandatory pooling laws are applied (Aller et al., 2013). Mandatory pooling is typically used to combine smaller tracts of land to meet minimum spacing requirements between property and wells (Aller et al., 2013).

Nature published arguments both for and against fracking practices in 2010. In the article, one author argues that hydraulic fracturing is met with fear levels with unfounded evidence, and that fracking will increase employment opportunities, stimulate the economy, positively influence national security, and potentially reduce greenhouse gasses (Howarth, Ingraffea, and Engelder, 2010). On the other hand, a different author argues that fracking has resulted in environmental damage, drinking water contamination, and holds the potential to have a worse greenhouse gas footprint than other fossil fuels such as coal (Howarth et al., 2010).

Television and film entertainment have also arguably played a role in bringing the issue of hydraulic fracturing to the attention of citizens. A number of entertainment

3 pieces that feature hydraulic fracturing have been created in part because people are more likely to engage with the content when it is presented in an entertaining manner.

Holbert (2005) asserts that the audience plays a role in the entertainment viewing experience, and maximum enjoyment will occur if the content provided correlates with the expectations of the audience. Enjoyment of entertainment may gain further importance as Benford and Snow (2000) argue that when frames resonate, they can be used to mobilize people to perform collective action. In other words, it is reasonable to assume that an entertainment piece might also serve as a piece of information that inspires citizens to act.

At the same time, television news broadcasts have played a role in promoting certain hydraulic fracturing issue frames. To name a few, television news has shared frames about the fracking issue by focusing on themes such as health concerns (Winslow,

2011), job creation (Kim, 2011), economic benefits (Bar-On & Frank, 2010, and Burkey,

2012), and environmental concerns (Goldston, 2011). These frame examples will likely be consistent across other media platforms, such as print news, as well.

Much of the entertainment developed with fracking practices in mind appears to fall into the category of life-world content, as the programming reflects individuals struggling to overcome a problem or issue (Holbert, 2005). Political docudramas also appear to be commonly produced on the issue of hydraulic fracturing. Holbert (2005) explains that political docudramas “focus on a particular set of individuals or a community dealing with crisis, but the teleplays also present what are inherently political issues that involve citizens engaging public officials or some interaction between

4 competing public versus private interests” (p. 446).

The docudrama Gasland (Fox, 2010) portrayed the journey of filmmaker Josh

Fox on his quest to learn about the potential environmental and health risks associated with hydraulic fracturing. Another docudrama, Fracknation (McElhinney, McAleer, &

Segeida, 2013) was released to reveal a more positive side of fracking practices, and its potential benefits.

With the many factors, potential complications, and implications at hand when dealing with the issue of fracking, and given the potentially varying climate for reporting controversial environmental issues, an examination of media frames that discuss hydraulic fracturing is called for. This study proposed an analysis of primary and secondary frames used to communicate the issue of hydraulic fracturing found in news and feature stories in the 10 largest daily American newspapers, based on circulation numbers. Framing theory was used to guide the analysis.

Problem Statement and Research Objectives

Given the expansion and growth of hydraulic fracturing and opportunities presented with shale basins, universities are undertaking new research initiatives to learn more about areas such as human health impact, groundwater impact, and air and soil quality (Filipic, 2013). However at this time no research has been conducted to examine the coverage of hydraulic fracturing in the news media exists, and its importance in understanding how the issue is communicated as news coverage may influence public participation and opinion. The objectives of this study are to:

1) Identify dominant news frames in mainstream newspapers that cover hydraulic

fracturing.

2) Determine what sources the news media most commonly rely upon for

hydraulic fracturing information.

3) Compare and contrast hydraulic fracturing frames used in media discourse by

different regions of the United States.

Limitations of the Study

The sample of news articles and feature stories from the New York Times, USA

Today, Los Angeles Times, New York Daily News, New York Post, Washington Post,

Chicago Sun Times, and Denver Post examined in this study were selected from the

LexisNexis Academic online newspaper database. Weaver & Bimber (2008) found

LexisNexis omitted 50 percent or more stories appearing in major newspapers due to its blindness for wire stories.

The Chicago Sun Times was not accessible through the LexisNexis database, and therefore may not provide a sample comparable to the other newspapers examined in this study. Due to accessibility issues, the Wall Street Journal and Chicago Tribune were omitted from the study.

The majority of the 10 largest daily newspapers by circulation in the United States are distributed nationally, and therefore a representation of each region involved in hydraulic fracturing may not be a true sample of what the coverage in each area is like.

When newspapers are situated in urban areas, reporters may be more likely to frame news

6 and feature stories with a focus toward the demographic (Meyers & Rhoades, 2006).

Additionally, it is reasonable to assume that coverage in large, nationally distributed newspapers will vary from newspapers in smaller, yet still large, markets.

The study was limited to three years and 10 months. It is possible that different results could be yielded during a different time frame. The findings of this study are limited to the sample of articles from newspapers selected for this study. Therefore, the results cannot be generalized to newspapers beyond the sample.

Basic Assumptions

An assumption of this study was that the news stories selected for analysis were a true sampling of the general population of news stories and feature stories regarding the practice of hydraulic fracturing in the largest daily newspapers in the United States.

Additionally, it was assumed that the researchers evaluating the news and feature stories would practice consistent judgment in coding and evaluation. Because the LexisNexis database was blind to wire stories, it was assumed that very few, if any, wire or AP stories were included in the sample.

Definitions of Terms

The following terms were defined and agreed upon by the researchers for the purpose of this study.

General Terms

Dominant news frames - Dominant news frames describe the ways in which the news media prominently or primarily communicates aspects of the hydraulic fracturing issue.

Types of Sources

Activist – any concerned person who advocates for, or against the issue. May or may not be affiliated with an interest group.

Business owner – one who owns or operates his or her own business.

Book author – person credited for writing a book or novel.

Community member – anyone cited as a person living in the community being discussed that does not fall into any of the other categories listed.

Consultant – a person who may or may not be specifically associated with an interest group or industry but one who comments on the issue at hand.

Economist – expert in economics or economic issues. May or may not be affiliated with a university or private research company.

Engineer – expert in engineering or engineering issues. May or may not be affiliated with industry.

Educator – one in the discipline of education. Could be a principal, teacher, guidance counselor, or other.

Employee –one employed by a business who is not the owner or manager.

Extension / University – one affiliated with extension or university. Might also be classified as a scientist, researcher, or other.

Government agency – any bureau, commission, agency, department, or other government sponsored entity. Examples might include the Environmental Protection

Agency, Department of Health, or other.

Industry representative – spokesperson for a business or corporation. The spokesperson may be a business owner, attorney, public relations professional, consultant, or other.

Interest group – may or may not be a nonprofit organization, but has a clear position on the issue. The interest group is organized and established.

Investor – one who invests in a business, idea, or corporation with hopes to gain a profit.

Land owner – one who owns land or property such as a farmer, home owner, or other.

Lawyer – attorney or spokesperson on legal issues. May or may not be affiliated with an interest group or particular industry.

Medical professional – one who practices in the medical profession such as a doctor or nurse.

Politician – elected official such as a mayor, commissioner, president, senator, or any other elected representative.

Scientist – one identified as scientist, expert in science. May be affiliated with a university or private research business.

Tone of article

Overall tone – the tone in which the article is written. Could be positive, negative, or neutral depending on the frame in place, words used, and references cited.

Positive tone – suggestion of growth, independence, innovation, happiness, and positive attributes.

Negative tone – suggestion of discomfort, fear, risk, danger, uncertainty, distrust or other negative attributes.

Neutral tone – neither positive nor negative, or a possible balance between positive and negative.

Frame descriptors

Advertisement spending – money spent on advertising for a certain issue or belief.

Community activism – an activist or interest group rallying to share beliefs or opinions. Community activism may also refer to issue involvement by local residents or community members.

Division or confusion – refers to confusion or division amongst a group of community members or stakeholders.

Economic benefits –opportunities to grow the economy, invest because of the issue, saving money or lowering prices, or other.

Energy source – alternative energy, promising energy, or explains the benefits of the source.

Environmental impact – impact on the environment, such as earthquakes, that may be due in part to other factors in play.

Fracking downfalls – any discussion of hydraulic fracturing impact that portrays the negative effects of an otherwise positive situation. An example is a community being unprepared for the boom in terms of housing or infrastructure.

Government involvement – support, opposition, or level of involvement otherwise on the issue from government / elected officials.

Health risk – sickness, potential for sickness, effects on health in question, or any sort of issue that might affect human health.

Innovation / Technology – potential benefits because of the newness, or technologically advanced nature of the technique.

Job creation – new jobs have been developed or will be developed as a result of the issue.

Legal – an ongoing or forthcoming lawsuit, lack of law or policy, or other legal issue such as eminent domain.

Policy development – development (or potential development) of new law, policy or other regulation on the issue.

Pollution – air, water, and / or soil contamination, or any kind of pollution issue.

Protest – an activist or interest group sharing beliefs against the issue.

Relationships –refers to relationships between entities, such as nonprofit groups and for profit businesses.

Research controversy – discusses research that may be biased, somehow controversial, or worthy of skepticism.

Safety – concern for the safety of any group of individuals because of the issue.

Trade secrets – information regarding practices that businesses, corporations, or other groups choose not to share with the general public.

Water contamination – water quality is in question, or water may be testing at abnormal levels.

Water rights – usually associated with lack of water resources, the water rights frame discusses who has rights to the available water.

Significance of Study

Science is generally prone to controversy as technical decisions often become politically charged. Hydraulic fracturing is currently a controversial topic in the media and worthy of further exploration on the types of frames being used to communicate the issue. If fracking follows the paths of similar science and technology issues, it is reasonable to argue there may be further conflict and frame development before the issue is resolved. Further, MacLeod (1995) argues that when government invests in new technology, especially when issues of property, health, and environment may be at risk, full disclosure of information and a clearly argued case is required.

Despite the risk that may be associated with the issue of fracking, there are other implications of the frames used to discuss this issue. It may be argued that policy development on hydraulic fracturing could be viewed as the ultimate resolution to the

12 issue. However, factors such as issue knowledge and public acceptance will likely contribute to policy development in terms of time and content. Therefore, frames created around the issue of hydraulic fracturing should be examined.

As frames have the potential to influence public opinion and knowledge, as well as public acceptance and policy development, this study may lend further insight to the state of the issue and help to predict what lies ahead. It can be argued that public opinion, knowledge, and acceptance will lead to policy development. Therefore, this study will provide information on how the issue of hydraulic fracturing might play out over time.

Furthermore, this study will aid in the American Association for Agricultural Education’s

(AAAE) National Research Agenda by furthering its priority area number one, public and policy maker understanding of agriculture and natural resources (Doerfert, 2011).

Chapter 2: Review of Literature

With the potential for attitude and opinion formation, and the varying mediators and moderators in play as it pertains to fracking practices, an extensive review of media frames will provide an in depth analysis of media coverage on this issue which may lead to insight on issue knowledge and public opinion.

To establish a theoretical framework for this study, a review of related literature was conducted. A basic understanding of the literature was needed to further understand the significance of framing to this study.

Chapter II was divided into three sections: 1) framing theory, 2) possible influences on frame construction, and 3) the role of scientific and agricultural literacy in understanding issues. This section provides an outline of framing theory, a discussion regarding potential factors that may contribute to a frame’s creation, such as elite opinion, time, and more, and lastly discussion on the role of scientific and agricultural literacy on resolving the issue of hydraulic fracturing.

Theoretical Framework – Framing

Many scholars have contributed works that lend insight to framing theory, analysis, and implications. Frames are tools for making complex issues easier to

14 understand (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007). When issues are complicated and complex, frames are used to make sense of relevant events and suggest issues (Gamson &

Modigliani, 1989).

Frames also hold potential to suggest relevancy to issues and also what can be overlooked or noteworthy of attention (Nisbet and Huge, 2006). As will be discussed, some scholars have demonstrated that framing in media holds potential to impact public opinion, response, or involvement. The print media’s utilization of frames will have significant impact on the future of the agriculture industry (Meyers & Abrams, 2010).

Chong & Druckman (2007) asserted that frames work by arranging everyday reality by: 1) making new beliefs (availability), 2) making certain beliefs accessible, and

3) making beliefs “strong” (applicability). Scheufele and Tewksbury (2007) argue, however, that framing is not based upon accessibility and assert that framing assumes that the way an issue is shared in the news influences the audience’s understanding of the issue. Scheufele and Tewsksbury (2007) also claim that framing “describes how people use information and presentation features regarding issues as they form impressions,”

(p.12).

Frames are often presented in packages and offer a variety of devices such as metaphors, exemplars, catchphrases, depictions, and visual images to encourage a way of thinking about an issue (Gamson & Modigliani, 1989). Pan & Kosicki (1993) add that framing “views news texts as consisting of organized symbolic devices that will interact with individual agents’ memory for meaning construction,” (p. 58). The variety of

15 devices may be further used for collective action frame generation, which occurs by articulation and amplification (Benford and Snow, 2000).

Pan and Kosicki (1993) argue that a news frame may be interpreted as a

“cognitive device used in information encoding, interpreting, and retrieving; it is communicable; and it is related to journalistic professional routines and conventions,” (p.

57). Frames can be used to shape and influence readers’ policy preferences and opinions by highlighting certain aspects of a controversial topic (Tewksbury, Jones, Peske,

Raymond, & Vig, 2000). Benford and Snow (2000) argue frames can be used to describe solutions and plans for solving problems. However, before preferences and opinions can be shaped, it is important to keep in mind that in order for frame evaluation to occur, motivation is essential (Chong & Druckman, 2007).

Pan and Kosicki (1993) argue that framing may be studied as a characteristic of news discourse, which begins when a newsworthy event occurs. Sources, journalists, and audience members participate by designing, constructing, transmitting, and acting upon the frame (Pan and Kosicki, 1993). Framing devices within news discourse can be classified into four categories that align with the field’s structural dimensions which include: 1) syntactical structure, which follows the inverted pyramid structure; 2) script structure, which is descriptive and narrative; 3) thematic structure, which is used to test hypotheses; and 4) rhetorical structure, which is used to invoke images (Pan & Kosicki,

1993).

The news frame goes through a process beginning with its creation and ending with an impact or result. Framing begins with the identification of a complex issue by

16 the news media and ends when media consumers experience an impact, take action or get involved with the complex issue first identified by the media. The news media, after identifying the complex issue, constructs the framing device, and then amplifies the frame. The media consumer, who must be motivated to receive the framing device, next evaluates the message presented in the frame, and the media consumer’s beliefs or understanding of the issue may be affected. As a result, the media consumer may experience some impact as a result of the frame (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. News Frame Process. Lawson, 2014.

Possible Influences on Frame Construction

Many scholars have offered theory and work on frame development, and it has been shown that a variety of factors can influence what issues or events are covered in media discourse. A variety of common frame construction factors are explored here. It is possible that the factors might often occur simultaneously when frames are being created. Sources used within an article have an impact on the frame, and a quote used in the middle of an article can change the frame. National articles often have two frames because of the varying quotes or referenced sources (Lindsey, 2011).

Journalist perceptions and bias. A variety of scholars have shown evidence that journalist perceptions and biases may influence the types of news stories and frames exposed in media discourse. Journalists are not immune from biases and perceptions, and can make judgment about what frame news or feature stories should reflect. For example, a study by Cartmell, Dyer, Birkenholz, and Sitton (2003) of perceptions held by newspaper journalists about reader interest in Arkansas found water quality, human health, and environmental concerns to be among the most important and interesting agricultural topics.

It seems reasonable to consider that journalist perceptions about the perceived importance of certain topics may correspond with the frequency in which those identified topics are covered and promoted. Journalist bias also influences agenda setting, which refers to the idea that certain emphasis is placed upon issues within the mass media and influences public attitudes on issues (McCombs & Shaw, 1972).

Nelkin (1987) found that as journalists are exposed to risk for adopting scientific values, they might also lose their ability to think critically, and perhaps further contribute to bias. Bias and perception may also arise due to the amount of knowledge held by a journalist. Nelkin (1987) found that too much information on a technical subject possessed by a journalist might cause his or her writing to become too complex for the average person to understand.

At the same time, Nelkin (1987) argued that reporters with little understanding of science could also be unaware of how to find reliable sources, what questions were appropriate to ask, and how to interpret the answers. Dyer and Whittaker (2000) found that articles were “often printed in sections of the publication that appeared to have no relationship to the nature of the article,” (p. 125).

Sitton, Terry, Cartmell, and Keys (2004) found that while journalists may enjoy reporting on agricultural issues, and feel they are qualified to do so, they may not be agriculturally literate. The importance of journalist knowledge in science can be illustrated in a frame analysis of climate change. Antilla (2005) found articles were framed in terms of debate, controversy, or uncertainty, and that skeptics were commonly cited as sources. Further, much of the content was picked up from wire and news service providers, suggesting perhaps an easy solution to the difficulties in sourcing information.

Science issues have a tendency to become or be presented as controversial. When a controversial issue arises, some news reporters use stories as propaganda instead of information pieces (Hagins, 2001). In the issue of plant biotechnology, Nisbet and Huge

(2006) found that business and science writers primarily reported the controversy from a

19 regulatory and industry standpoint, but found no real significant number of political or general assignment reporters who reported in technical ways.

Many scholars offer suggestions on how to reduce journalist perceptions and bias, and to increase objectivity. King, Cartmell, and Sitton (2006) suggest reporters can improve objectivity by being trained to recognize judgment statements, understanding the negative effects of judgment statements, and by reducing the number of judgment statements being used.

Organization of groups. Andrews and Caren (2010) found news media favors professional groups that utilize advocacy tactics and can mobilize a large group of people, thus influencing the promotion of frames. Organization may be an essential quality for groups who wish to control issue frames. Issue advocates routinely attempt to control the media’s attention to portray their issues in a positive light (Nisbet and Huge,

2006).

The news media’s tendency to favor professional groups may be due in part a variety of factors. The professional group may assist the media in providing easily available information and by creating promotional events, both of which the media find to be appealing. Nisbet and Huge (2006) argue that while mobilization of opponents can do little to change policy, it can slow industry growth.

Conflicting interest groups. The news media has a tendency to report controversial and conflicting issues (Andsager, 2000). As a result, it is likely that conflicting interest groups will be used as sources. Sources of potential opposition can vary greatly and range from religious sources, politicians, the general public, and

20 business leaders (Bruland, 1995). Conflict may often be presented in the form of group organization or protest. Protest groups can be used to fight for the preservation of values sometimes lost over the course of technological progress, but may be less concerned with science and more concerned with power and relationship associations (Nelkin, 1984).

Conflicting interest groups may be a factor in credibility problems when dealing with certain issues. Rabe and Borick (2011) found on fracking practices specifically that people have “significant doubts about the credibility of the media, environmental groups, and scientists on the issue,” (p. 8). If the public doubts accuracy or truth in the reporting of fracking news stories, there may be added complexity and risk associated with communicating the issue, ultimately affecting issue knowledge and public opinion.

Conflicting interest groups employ a variety of tactics to compete for news coverage. Rhetoric has a strong influence on how the media frames issues and news stories (Andsager, 2000). According to Andsager (2000), the news tends to focus on conflict with “competing rhetorical positions of the most highly involved interest groups vying for coverage,” (p. 590).

Choice of words and phrasing may also present opportunities and play an important role in frame construction as words chosen and used by sources can also exert an influence on the terminology appearing in news text (Andsager, 2000). At the same time, word choice and phrasing can also lend itself to further confusing the issue.

Competing actors used contested definitions and strategic implications within boundary- defining language to their advantage to differentiate between science and policy

(Jasanoff, 1987). Therefore, actors have the potential to further their interests by interpreting science on their own terms.

Although Andsanger (2000) suggested rhetoric might be powerful in shaping news media frames, it may not make a huge impact on public opinion, as many other factors are often in play. For example, Slothuus & deVreese (2010), assert that while citizens are more likely to accept frames that are sponsored by their own party, more politically aware people are able to dismiss frames from opposing parties, which might result in canceling out frame messages.

Elite opinion. Bauer (1995) identifies two main social groups of actors when it comes to political or technological resistance which include, 1) natural groups, who are often organized formally with legal status or named society or club, and 2) statistical groups, which are based on various classes and distinguished by conceptual criteria. The most commonly used sources of information tend to be related to education or government (Dyer & Whitaker, 2000). Journalists who frequently cite government sources may be attempting to establish credibility on the issue (Ruth, Eubanks, and Telg,

2005).

Political actors, special interest groups, and other key players may often have varying roles in communicating issues. Leiss (2001) argues that government elites ultimately control public debate, but can at times fail to heed this control responsibly.

With this in mind, it is important to remember that the implementation of policies involving science and technology depend upon public acceptance (Nelkin, 1984) and public acceptance can come about as a result of news frames.

Political debate can be fueled by conflicting expert opinion, which often shifts the decision-making focus from technical to political (Tierney, 1984). The issue is further complicated given the nature of science issues in the public policy arena as relatively few

Americans understand basic terms of science and are unable to make sense of conflicting arguments from issue experts (Miller, 1989). When elite debate becomes unbalanced, the lack of balance will present itself in a variety of forms, which might include uneven representation of information on federal government sponsored websites in which the tone is often one sided, and strong affirmation of regulatory oversight (Leiss, 2001).

Lewandowsky, Ecker, Seifert, Schwarz, and Cook (2012) argue that although information on an issue may be factually incorrect, political and societal decisions may be made possibly to the detriment of public interest, when the majority is in agreement and believes the information to be true and correct. Rumors, or unverified information, often occur when accurate information is not in place and more exposure to rumors often strengthens belief in them (Garrett, 2011). Also, Garrett (2011) found that if friends or family share emails containing political rumors, people are more likely to believe the rumor.

In addition to the use of elites as sources in news and feature stories, elite opinion can be presented in a variety of other forms. Studies have shown that celebrity endorsements may aid in making unpopular statements more acceptable and increase the level of agreeability with already popular opinion (Jackson & Darrow, 2005). At the same time, Brader (2006) argues that citizen response to political messages can be

23 changed when political actors appeal to emotions through advertising, by working to sway voters, and using images and music.

Occurrence of promotional events. King et al. (2006) found the print media tended to prefer news stories over feature stories when the subject matters were time sensitive. This may lend insight as to why the news media takes interest in the occurrence of promotional events, given their newsworthy nature. Promotional events for local business sectors and permitted protest rallies receive a high rate of media coverage

(Oliver and Myers, 1999).

It is also possible that one issue may ignite both promotional events and protest rallies depending on the community and controversy at hand. Given the nature of promotional events, it is worth consideration to assume that promotional events may influence the creation of frames in the media.

As briefly discussed above, organized professional groups can often times create promotional or protest events with the media in mind. It is not difficult to find examples of protest when it comes to the issue of hydraulic fracturing. Protest events do not arise in vacuums, but instead are a response to another event or problem (Oliver & Maney,

2000). Oliver & Maney (2000) argue that protest messages can be delivered through a variety of forms which include ceremonies, speeches, displays, lobbying days, rallies, marches, vigils, and pickets.

Findings by Nisbet and Huge (2006) suggest strategy and conflict frames peak as social protest begins to emerge, further suggesting the importance of promotional events.

Promotional events and experiences also allow for added frame articulation and

24 amplification (Benford and Snow, 2000). Most who take part in protests or events are middle-class, educated people who possess political skill to participate in decision- making and are often motivated by moral implications and fear that the normal state of nature may be changed (Nelkin, 1984).

Perceived threats and values. Many scholars have demonstrated the power of values held by citizens when it comes to decision-making. Public values are sometimes reflected in the news media, as content in opinion pages tends to focus on issues of morality, ethics, conflict, and values (Nisbet and Huge, 2006). When political issues are framed with values or consequences, citizens are more likely to adjust their attitudes, if the frames reflect their issue schemas (Shen, 2004). However, factual information within frames generally does not have a greater impact than background factors, such as values, when it comes to the formation of opinions on technology (Druckman & Bolsen, 2011).

Nelkin (1995) identified several values that have appeared to have an impact on science and technology issues. These values include, intrusion on individual rights, potential for social control, threat to democratic values, affected interests and resistance, possibility of biohazards, and morality and tampering with nature. When values are threatened or risk is perceived, resistance may occur. According to Bauer (1995),

“resistance may oppose the particular way a problem is framed in terms of issues, themes, and concerns,” (p. 26).

When it comes to the issue of hydraulic fracturing, disclosure of chemicals used in the process may be a common concern for community members. While each state’s policy and law regarding chemical disclosure varies, it appears that the state

Environmental Protection Agency or Department of Natural Resources is typically involved in the governance. While the majority, approximately 98 percent, of the drilling fluid is water, the remaining two percent consists of chemicals, which are often undisclosed (Aller et al., 2013).

Risk. Risk and threat may also motivate citizens to act. An analysis of environmental communication frames revealed that simple, clear, and comprehensive calls to action were the best tactics for encouraging people to participate in environmentally responsible behaviors (Davis, 1995). At the same time, Davis (1995) found action was more likely to occur when citizens were most influenced by messages that explained negative consequences as a result of their own inaction.

Many groups of citizens have identified risks associated with hydraulic fracturing.

According to the Ohio Environmental Council (Aller et al. 2013), the primary risks from gas drilling associated to a water supply include, 1) drilling completion of the well itself,

2) hydraulic fracturing, and 3) flowback and production waters.

Some scholars do offer suggestions for managing risk. To better manage risk controversy, Leiss (2001) suggests four initiatives including, 1) the risk manager (in some cases federal government) should cease to promote the new technology in order to build credibility, 2) launch a long-term risk dialogue program so the public can better grasps the scientific principles and discuss implications, 3) consider creating a new agency to monitor implications of the new technology that may not be specifically addressed by other regulatory bodies, and 4) the risk manager should refer scientific issues to independent expert panels.

Frames may play a role in influencing public participation and opinion about fracking practices. Though mostly divided on the issue of fracking, the majority of people surveyed in a Pennsylvania study expect more benefits than problems when it comes to natural gas drilling (Rabe & Borick, 2011). While fracking practices may involve levels of fear, risk, and doubt, some audiences or people may believe great benefits of fracking are in store. Given Rabe & Borick’s (2011) findings, it can be argued that fracking is seen as a complicated issue and citizens may perceive risk with fracking practices.

With risk, there is potential for a sacrifice of knowledge. Therefore, it is crucial to acknowledge that decision-making becomes more complex when uncertainty or risks are factors in play (Kahneman & Tverksy, 1986). The risk or perceived threats and values frame is important for agriculturalists to acknowledge, as many agricultural issues tend to be framed in terms of risk. If journalists cover only agricultural stories associated with risk, it can be expected that consumers will lack accurate understanding of agricultural issues (Ruth et al., 2005).

Time. It is important to acknowledge the role of time and information gained over time in the creation of frame messages. Cacciatore, Anderson, Choi, Brossard, Scheufele,

Liang, and Dudo (2012) argue that scientific issues follow a pattern in traditional news media in which early coverage is largely positive, but becomes increasingly negative and driven by conflict over time.

Bauer (1995) demonstrates that over time science and technology issues often build up to a peak of press coverage and then decline. Attention cycles and interest for

27 certain issues vary due to competition with other issues, debates, and events (Nisbet and

Huge, 2006).

It is reasonable to assume that science and technology do not become issues until a realization or event occurs to trigger questions and concerns from the public, and therefore increased media attention. Science and technology issues are often framed positively and demonstrate potential for economic or market development until opponents redefine the issue in negative ways (Nisbet and Huge, 2006).

Nisbet and Huge (2006) found that as media attention increased, policy frames, and frames focused on moral or ethical facets of the issue were more likely to occur.

Nelkin (1984) states, “many controversies arise when citizens in a community become aware that they must bear the costs of a project that will benefit a different or much broader constituency,” (p. 12). In some cases, scientific proponents bring concern of risk to the minds of citizens. In the case of nuclear waste disposal, only when scientists openly debated hazards and uncertainties did the public become aware some of the problems associated with the technology (Tierney, 1984).

As longer periods of time pass and adequate information has been gathered, people will think similarly to scientists when issues in science are being explored (Nisbet,

2009a). This argument is in contrast to the argument that ignorance lies at the center of social conflict (Nisbet, 2009a). Additionally, although an issue may fade over time in traditional media, coverage of the issue may not disappear online (Cacciatore et al.,

2012).

It may also be important to recognize the role of timing within the influence of time. There may be only certain windows of time in which frames are applicable and meaningful. When it comes to issues of science, especially when those issues involve risk, the public has the option to grant acceptance on the issue. Public acceptance on any new or emerging technology is essential to its success (Druckman & Bolsen, 2011).

Willingness to discuss and address concerns about new technology is important to a new technology’s success and public acceptance. For example, Leiss (2001) described

Monsanto’s lack of attention to this important matter and explained the consequences as,

“it made no attempt to engage in a reasoned dialogue with the critics of biotechnology

(until it was too late to make any difference) and, worse, showed no sympathy whatsoever for those segments of the public which claimed to be worried about the new technology, perhaps because (according to Monsanto) they could not comprehend what it is and how it differs from older technologies,” (p. 19).

Importance of Scientific and Agricultural Literacy

As demonstrated in the literature reviewed above, new issues in science and technology can influence a variety of outcomes, often stemming from lack of information. The nature of hydraulic fracturing is complex on a multitude of levels and impacts a variety of citizens from land owners and community members, to business owners and political leaders.

According to Miller (1989), “to be scientifically literate, it is necessary to have a minimal understanding of the processes of science, a minimal understanding of scientific

29 terms and concepts, and a minimal understanding of the impact of science on society,” (p.

14). Scientific literacy refers to the level of scientific understanding that exists within the adult population, which changes and grows over time (DeBoer, 2000).

In his 1989 study, Miller predicted that, “the number and complexity of scientific and technical issues reaching the public policy agenda during the next century will increase markedly,” (p. 1). It is reasonable to assume that many issues of science and technology will experience some part of the public policy agenda. Arguably, controversial issues in science and technology are somewhat resolved once policy has been established.

Miller (1998) argues “there is near unanimous agreement within the scientific community that modern societies will need to transition from fossil-based energy systems to new energy sources within the next century, and there will be numerous important public policy controversies associated with that transition,” (p. 218). Thus, the relevancy of the fracking issue increases.

Arguably, knowledge and public acceptance are important factors when considering policy action. Given the nature of issue framing, it is reasonable to assume that not all involved in the decision making process on how to manage the science or technology issue will have the same level of information.

According to Nisbet (2009a), “after formal science education ends, the popular science media should be used to educate the public about the technical details of the matter in dispute,” (pp. 41-42). Fracking may be applied to Nisbet’s (2009b) claim that policy action on environmental issues, such as climate change, will only take place when

30 people get involved and grant acceptance on an issue. Nisbet (2009b) claims that policy will affect people economically, as well as making an impact on communities and lifestyles.

The risky nature of hydraulic fracturing is perhaps somewhat to blame for the potential concern amongst citizens. Increasingly, people have concerns about risk issues, but may be unequipped with scientific knowledge. To learn more and perhaps foster a sense of community regarding the issue, people use the Internet to establish contact with like-minded people to become more informed on issues (Leiss, 2001). The nature of debate and conversation likely varies, but while political values often motivate controversy in these kinds of conversations, technical questions are typically the focus of debate (Nelkin, 1984).

The importance of communicating accurate information is further demonstrated by Nelkin’s (1984) finding that as a result of manipulated knowledge and challenged evidence, political values and scientific facts become difficult to differentiate.

Perceptions can be influenced by factors such as peers, print media, formal or basic knowledge, geographic location, and cultural backgrounds (Hagins, 2001). Kuklinski,

Quirk, Jerit, Schwieder, and Rich (2000) posit people become misinformed when wrong beliefs are held confidently, and a great deal of widespread misinformation can lead to preferences that differ from those that would exist should people be correctly informed.

When knowledge is manipulated, rumors may arise. DiFonzo and Bordia (2007) describe rumors as unverified, but potentially useful, informative statements that come about as a result of threatening situations to help people manage and make sense of

31 threat. According to DiFonzo and Bordia (2007), rumors are rooted in situations that are ambiguous, threatening or potentially threatening, and when possess a psychological need for understanding or security.

Leiss (2001) states, “environmental policy making is often driven in political context by just those issues for which we have at that times of the most imperfect scientific understanding,” (p. 172). Additionally, Jasonoff (1987) found that science, policy, and science-policy are difficult to distinguish because often, the efforts to do so are politically charged, and the way an issue is characterized influences the way it’s decided procedurally and institutionally.

The most frequently targeted populations of agricultural literacy studies are elementary teachers and students, which potentially excludes older audiences who may be capable of impacting complex issues and policy decisions (Kovar & Ball, 2013).

Agricultural policy opinions and decisions can by influenced by the general public’s agricultural knowledge, or lack thereof (Hays, 1993). Therefore, American citizens should possess a minimal understanding of agriculture along with the potential impact on policy-making decisions (Russell, McCracken & Miller, 1990).

Frick, Birkenholz, Gardner, and Machtmes (1995) studied rural and urban student knowledge and perception of agriculture and found agricultural policy to be an area in which both groups of students scored relatively low. In order to respond appropriately when issues arise, policy makers and consumers need to be “agriculturally literate” (Frick et al., 1995). To foster greater acceptance of science and technology, greater access to

32 information, and expanded opportunities for public forums have been implemented for past issues (Nelkin, 1984).

As discussed above, there may be various factors in play when frames are being created and amplified. It is likely that because of the controversial nature of hydraulic fracturing, multiple frames are possible. An understanding of framing theory, and awareness of the factors associated with frame development were essential in implementing this study.

Chapter 3: Methodology

Problem Statement

2013). The problem is at this time no research examining the coverage of hydraulic fracturing in the news media exists, and it is important to understand how the issue is communicated as news coverage may influence public participation and opinion.

Chapter one of this study discussed the background of the hydraulic fracturing issue, the problem statement, study limitations, assumptions, definition of terms, and the significance of the study. Chapter two provided theoretical groundwork for the study by examining framing theory, possible influences on frame construction, and literature regarding scientific and agricultural literacy. Chapter three is used to discuss the methodology used to complete the study and includes the research design, information on the sample, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this media content analysis study was to determine how hydraulic fracturing was communicated in the news media from January 1, 2010 to October 31,

2013. The study also sought to determine what news frames were most primarily used, and whom reporters relied upon as sources of information on the issue. Lastly, the study sought to explore the possible variety of frames used in different regions of the Unites

States.

Research Objectives

The study was guided by the following research objectives.

1) Identify dominant news frames in mainstream newspapers that cover

hydraulic fracturing.

2) Determine what sources the news media most commonly relied upon for

hydraulic fracturing information.

3) Compare and contrast hydraulic fracturing frames used in media discourse

by different regions of the United States.

Research Design

To analyze frames associated with the issue of hydraulic fracturing, quantitative content analysis of newspapers was used to evaluate dominant frames found in regions practicing fracking within the United States from January 1, 2010 to October 31, 2013.

Content analysis is “a research technique for making replicable and valid inferences from

35 data to their context,” (Krippendorf, 1980, p. 21). Variables were identified and assigned numbers in the content to demonstrate variation. Quantitative content analysis is a reliable technique as it is replicable and objective (Krippendorf, 1980). Content analysis is also a useful method for identifying and examining trends and patterns within documents (Stemler, 2001).

In addition to the fourteen original frames identified prior to the establishment of reliability, an additional eight frames were identified during the process to establish reliability. These frames included environmental impact, water rights, relationships, advertising spending, research controversy, economic downfalls associated with fracking, trade or industry secrets, and division or confusion. Two additional author types were also identified during the coding process and added to the category, which included the

Times Wire and Reuters.

The code sheet that was developed for the study included 15 possible newspaper sections. During coding, six additional sections of the newspaper were noted. These sections included Section A, Metro, All Editions, Dallas and the West (DTW), Section F, and page 2. Sections appearing only once were coded as “other” but included Foreign,

Outlook, Page 14, Section MM, Style, and Late City sections.

Each state received its own code for the “region featured” category. If more than one state was mentioned in an article, the article was coded “nation” in that category.

Countries or regions outside of the United States were classified and coded as “world.” If no region was identified within the article, the article was coded as “none.”

Population and Sample

The target population for the study was news stories and feature stories pertaining to hydraulic fracturing appearing in the 10 largest American newspapers by daily circulation rate in April 2013. The 10 largest newspapers by daily circulation rate identified were the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, Los Angeles Times,

New York Daily News, New York Post, Washington Post, Chicago Sun Times, Denver

Post , and Chicago Tribune (Lulofs, 2013).

The Wall Street Journal and Chicago Tribune were omitted from the study due to accessibility issues, which decreased the target population and sample. The Wall Street

Journal presented an amount of data much larger than the other papers, and thus was deemed as a potential outlier compared to the other papers. At the same time, the researchers determined that the Wall Street Journal differed from the other newspapers being examined due its focus and target audience. Articles from the Chicago Tribune were inaccessible in databases the researchers could access.

Newspaper content analysis was selected for a variety of reasons. Newspapers play an important role in the realm of mass media by serving as a means for sharing information and details on local events and issues with community members. It has been shown that other sources within the news media also have a tendency to favor issues covered by newspapers that promote economic growth (Andrews & Caren, 2010). In this regard, it appears that newspapers may set the stage and hold some power in determining selected news topics for other mass media platforms.

Additional arguments can be made for the importance of the newspapers in media discourse. Local news reported by newspapers has been found to contribute to a citizen’s perception of knowledge, and attention to local news in newspapers has also been linked to political participation (Moy, McCluskey, McCoy & Spratt, 2004). While a citizen’s perceived knowledge gained from a newspaper may not always be accurate, this research could further argue for the importance of balanced newspaper reporting due to its potential impact on the public.

Articles were collected using the LexisNexis database for all newspapers included in the study except for the Chicago Sun Times, in which articles were selected from the

NewsBank database. Articles were identified in the databases by searching for the terms

“hydraulic fracturing” or “fracking” within the time period of January 1, 2010 to October

31, 2013. The beginning time frame was selected because few news stories or feature stories occurred in the newspapers examined prior to 2010. Additionally, the end date was selected as it provided the most recent coverage of hydraulic fracturing at the time of data collection.

Duplicates and irrelevant articles were eliminated from the study. Content analysis was conducted on news stories and feature stories. Omitted from the study were opinion pieces, editorials, reviews, and other non-feature or non-news story types. These pieces were omitted because content in opinion pages tends to focus on issues of ethics, morality, conflict, and values (Nisbet & Huge, 2006). Non-news and non-feature stories may be more likely to feature bias and lack news information.

A total of 1,599 articles were identified in the eight newspapers mentioned above

38 by the Internet news databases, LexisNexis Academic and NewsBank. After removing non-news stories and non-feature stories from the population, a new population of 870 articles was established.

According to Krejcie and Morgan (1970), a sample size of 265 is appropriate for a given population of 870. The sample was constructed to ensure appropriate representation for each newspaper involved in the study by calculating the percentage each newspaper contributed to the given population. Articles were numbered and random.org was used to select articles from the population for the sample. As such, the original sample was constructed (see Table 1).

During data analysis, an additional 62 articles were removed from the sample as they were determined to be irrelevant. An article was thrown out for irrelevancy if it was not a news story or feature story, or if hydraulic fracturing was not a main focus of the article. A total of 203 articles were included in the study. Coding was based upon state or region featured, newspaper name, publish date, section of newspaper, type of article, word length, sources referenced, author, overall tone, dominant frames, and image accompanying the article.

Newspaper Name Original Number of Percent N Number for Population useable Sample articles New York Times 466 307 0.352873563 94 USA Today 72 56 0.064367816 17 Los Angeles Times 50 37 0.042528736 11 New York Daily News 89 36 0.04137931 11 New York Post 227 136 0.156321839 41 Washington Post 228 105 0.120689655 32 Chicago Sun Times 10 6 0.006896552 2 Denver Post 457 187 0.214942529 57 TOTALS 1599 870 1 265

Table 1. Determining the Original Data Sample

Instrumentation

Validity

Validity requires the assignment of numbers to be reliable, and the assignment of numbers to accurately represent the concept being studied (Riffe, Lacy, and Fico, 1998).

Past framing studies on similar issues were used to develop the initial code sheet. A code sheet was developed by two researchers to serve as the primary instrument of the study.

The code sheet was developed using emergent coding method, as the categories were established following some preliminary observations of the data (Stemler, 2001). A codebook was also developed to accompany the code sheet, which provided the definition of terms (see Appendix A).

The code sheet, named “Fracking Analysis,” contained items designed to measure characteristics of the sample articles including the region or state featured, name of

40 newspaper, publish year, month and day, section of newspaper, type of article, word length, number of sources, sources referenced, author, overall tone, primary and secondary frames, frame description, and image accompanying story (see Appendix B).

Options for indentifying primary and secondary frames included, health risk, water contamination, energy source, pollution, community activism, innovation or technology, protest, legal, government involvement, economic benefits, safety, job creation, policy development, and other. Additional frame options added to the code sheet during data collection included, environmental impact, water rights, relationships, advertisement spending, controversial research, fracking downfalls, trade secrets, and division or confusion.

Source options listed on the code sheet included scientist, politician, activist, industry representative, economist, landowner, interest group, and extension or university. During data collection, additional sources were identified and added to the code sheet, which included, government agency, lawyer, community member, investor, book author, business owner, medical professional, consultant, employee, educator, engineer, unnamed source, and other.

Reliability

Riffe, Lacy, and Fico (1998) claim, “reliability requires that different coders applying the same classification rules to the same content will assign the same numbers,”

(p. 54). Krippendorf (1980) states, “Reliability data require that at least two coders independently describe a possibly large set of recording units in terms of a common data

41 language,” (p. 133). Wimmer & Dominick (1997) suggest that 10 percent of the sample content should be tested for reliability. To establish reliability, two researchers coded 10 percent of the sample and compared results. Before comparison, the researchers were in agreement 88 percent of the time, and after discussion and clarification, the researchers came to agreement 96 percent of the time.

Data Collection

Data collection began in December 2013 using the LexisNexis Academic news database, and NewsBank using the terms “hydraulic fracturing” or “fracking” during the time period of January 1, 2010 to October 31, 2013. As the database did not accurately filter the results based upon story type, the researchers sought to manually remove all articles that were not news or feature stories from the population by reviewing the short description of each article as provided by the database to provide a more true representation of the desired population.

After reviewing the initial population for irrelevant articles, the researcher constructed a sample by determining the percentage of each newspaper to the total population, and then determining an appropriate sample size from the given population per Krejcie & Morgan (1970). Data collection was concluded in January 2014.

Data Analysis

To begin data analysis, each article was coded using the methods and instrumentation described above. At the conclusion of the coding exercise, data was

42 entered in an excel file and later analyzed using SPSS 21. Descriptive statistics were used to measure frequencies to describe the nature of hydraulic fracturing coverage in the news media. Additionally, the average number of words per article, and number of sources cited were also examined.

During data collection, an additional 62 articles were removed from the sample as they were determined to be irrelevant. An article was thrown out for irrelevancy if it was not a news or feature story, or if hydraulic fracturing was not a main focus of the article.

A total of 203 articles were included in the study. The study began in November 2013 and was completed in February 2014.

Chapter 4: Results and Findings

The purpose of this study was to examine the coverage of hydraulic fracturing in the largest American newspapers. The objectives of this study were to:

1) Identify dominant news frames in mainstream newspapers that cover hydraulic

fracturing.

2) Determine what sources the news media most commonly relied upon for

hydraulic fracturing information.

3) Compare and contrast hydraulic fracturing frames used in media discourse by

different regions of the United States.

This chapter contains the results related to the objectives of the study as listed above. Information and data identified from the research conducted are used to explain the results. Chapter one of this study discussed the background of the hydraulic fracturing issue, the problem statement, study limitations, assumptions, definition of terms, and the significance of the study.

Chapter two provided theoretical groundwork for the study by examining framing theory, which guided the study, as well as possible influences on frame construction, and literature regarding scientific and agricultural literacy. Chapter three discussed the

44 methodology used to complete this content analysis study and includes the research design, information on the sample, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis.

As noted previously, two newspapers were eliminated from the study leaving eight national newspapers to examine. Articles were selected from the remaining newspapers and analyzed. The New York Times (38.4%) and Denver Post (21.2%) had the most articles examined. Table 2 outlines the frequency of articles for each newspaper included in the study.

Frequency of Articles by Newspaper

Frequency Percent

New York Times 78 38.4

Denver Post 43 21.2 Washington Post 27 13.3 New York Post 24 11.8

USA Today 11 5.4 New York Daily News 9 4.4 Los Angeles Times 9 4.4

Chicago Sun Times 2 1.0 Total 203 100.0

Table 2. Frequency of Articles by Newspaper

The number of articles pertaining to hydraulic fracturing increased with each year examined in this study. Eleven articles (5.4%) in this study were printed in 2010, 45 articles (22.2%) were printed in 2011, 70 articles (34.5%) were printed in 2012, and 77

(37.9%) articles were printed in 2013. Years 2010, 2011, and 2012 each contained 12 months, but due to time limitations associated with the study, 2013 contained 10 months.

News and feature stories featuring hydraulic fracturing increased each year examined in the study. Eleven articles appeared in 2010 and 77 appeared in 2013. News features were identified more often than feature stories as the sample included 144

(70.9%) news stories and 59 (29.1%) feature stories. The mean of words per article was

796, the median was 612, and multiple modes existed, with 331 as the smallest value.

The shortest article in the study was 50 words and the longest article was 5,670 words.

An image or images, which included charts, photos, graphs, drawings, maps, or diagrams, appeared in 83 (40.9%) of the articles examined. No image was included with

85 (41.9%) of the articles, and it was unknown if an image was included with 35 (17.2%) of the articles in the study.

Section A was the most common section that articles in the study were found

(29.6%). Articles were identified in 14 different sections within the various papers examined in the study. Figure 2 outlines the frequencies in which the articles appeared the various sections of the newspapers, and also the frequency in which news and feature stories appeared in the various sections. Additionally, staff writers were the authors of

192 (94.6%) of the articles. Other authors were defined as the AP Newswire, Times

Wire, and Reuters (5.4%).

Figure 2. Frequency of Article by Newspaper Section and Type of Article

Findings Related to Objective One

Objective one sought to identify dominant news frames pertaining to hydraulic fracturing in the 10 largest American newspapers by daily circulation rate. Primary and

47 secondary frames were identified in the articles within this study. A total of 22 different frames were indentified within the articles.

Of the 203 articles analyzed, community activism was featured as a primary or secondary frame in 49 of the articles (24.1%). Community activism framed articles included headlines such as, “fracking gets its backers, attackers,” and “Blue Ridge becomes battle line over fracking.”

Government involvement was featured as a primary or secondary frame in 48 of the articles (23.6%). Articles with government involvement frame featured headlines such as, “Bloomberg backs ‘responsible’ extraction of gas and pays to help set up rules,” and “officials push for clarity on oil and gas leases.”

Policy development was featured as a primary or secondary frame in 26 of the articles (12.8%). Headlines found in articles framed with policy development included examples such as, “Obama seeks views of experts, executives on energy policies,” and

“disclosing of fracking chemicals proposed.”

Community activism was the most frequently appearing primary frame as it occurred in 29 (14.3%) of the articles examined, followed by the government involvement frame, which occurred in 24 (11.8%) of the articles examined. Figure 3 indicates the frequencies of the overall primary frames identified within the articles.

Figure 3. Overall Primary Frame

It was most common for an article to contain no secondary frame, as 30 (14.8%) articles featured only a primary frame. Of the frames identified other than none, government involvement, and policy development occurred the most frequently as a secondary frame as both appeared in 24 (11.8%) articles each.

Figure 4. Overall Secondary Frame

Researchers also examined the articles in the study to determine the tone in which the article was written and presented. The majority of the articles were written with a neutral tone (157 articles, 77.3%), while 33 (16.3%) articles were framed negatively, and

13 (6.4%) articles were framed in a positive manner.

Positive articles were most commonly framed by communicating economic benefits or job creation (30.8% for each of these two frames). Innovation or technology was the second most common frame for articles written in a positive tone. Examples of 50 headlines in articles written in a positive tone included, “the coming oil boom,” and

“states’ oil and gas fields employ nearly 30,000.”

Negative articles saw the most common frames as water contamination (15.2%), followed by pollution and safety (12.1% each). Headline examples of articles written in a negative tone included, “quake linked to waste water well,” and “as fracking increases, so do fears about water supply.”

Neutral articles were most commonly framed in terms of community activism

(17.8%), followed by government involvement (14.6%). Articles written neutrally featured articles with headlines such as, “residents discuss fracking,” and “cuts in state agency are troubling, environmentalists and gas drillers agree.”

Findings Related to Objective Two

Objective two was to determine what sources the news media most commonly relied upon for information on hydraulic fracturing. Twenty source types were identified, and five outlying sources were categorized as “other.” A total of 599 sources were referenced throughout the 203 articles with the average number of sources per article at 3.

The maximum number of sources in an article was 10 and the lowest number of sources referenced in an article was zero (see Figure 5). The sources listed in the other category appeared only one time and included a political blogger, TIME magazine, a cooperative, the National Weather Service, and AP Report.

Min

Max

Mode Series1

Median

Mean

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Figure 5. Number of Sources Referenced in Articles

Interest groups were cited commonly within the articles and appeared in 104

(51.2%) of the 203 articles. Industry representatives were the second most commonly cited sources and appeared in 93 articles (45.8%). Political leaders or elected officials were cited in 84 (41.3%) of the articles included in the study. Figure 6 outlines the frequencies of sources cited in the sample.

other unnamed source engineer educator employee consultant medical professional Business owner book author investor comm mem govt agency / reps lawyer ext / univ interest group land owner economist industry rep acvist polician scienst

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Figure 6. Frequency of Source Types in Articles

Findings Related to Objective Three

Objective three of the study was to compare and contrast hydraulic fracturing frames used in media discourse by different regions of the United States. Colorado was the most commonly featured state in 45 of the articles (22.2%), the nation was featured in

48 of the articles (23.6%) and New York was the most prominently featured state with 49 articles (24.1%). States featured in the news and feature articles in the study were placed into one of four regional categories. Four regional categories were constructed based upon the regions identified by the United States Census Bureau (2010).

New York and Pennsylvania were placed in the northeast region category. Fifty- three articles were included in this category and 17 frames were identified as primary or secondary within the articles that were a part of the northeast region. Community activism was the most commonly occurring primary frame in the selection of articles featured in the northeast region with 14 (26.4%) of the articles within this category.

Government involvement and policy development were the second most commonly occurring primary frames with 6 (11.3%) articles for each frame. Table 3 describes the primary frames found in the northeast region.

Frequency Percent Community activism 14 26.4 Government involvement 6 11.3 Policy development 6 11.3 Job creation 5 9.4 Economic benefits 4 7.5 Health risk 3 5.7 Water contamination 3 5.7 Legal 3 5.7 Research controversy 2 3.8 Division / confusion 2 3.8 Safety 2 3.8 Protest 2 3.8 Innovation / technology 1 1.9 Total 53 100

Table 3. Primary Frame – Northeast Region

In regard to secondary frames for the northeast region, government involvement occurred the most frequently (18.9%) and no secondary frame was the second most common (17.0%) of the articles in this region.

Frequency Percent Government involvement 10 18.9 None 9 17 Policy development 6 11.3 Community activism 5 9.4 Water contamination 4 7.5 Energy source 3 5.7 Economic benefits 3 5.7 Safety 3 5.7 Job creation 2 3.8 Division / confusion 2 3.8 Pollution 2 3.8 Protest 1 1.9 Legal 1 1.9 Health risk 1 1.9 Relationships 1 1.9 Total 53 100

Table 4. Secondary Frame – Northeast Region

The western region included articles from California, Colorado, Idaho, and Utah.

There were 53 articles that were classified into this region. Community activism occurred the most frequently as a primary frame with 13 (24.5%) articles. Policy development was identified as the second most commonly occurring primary frame, as

11 (20.8%) articles were identified. Table 5 identifies the primary frames for the western region. 56

Frequency Percent Community activism 13 24.5 Policy development 11 20.8 Government involvement 7 13.2 Relationships 5 9.4 Water rights 4 7.5 Safety 3 5.7 Health risk 2 3.8 Water contamination 2 3.8 Pollution 2 3.8 Fracking downfalls 1 1.9 Division / confusion 1 1.9 Legal 1 1.9 Job creation 1 1.9 Total 53 100

Table 5. Western Region Primary Frames

Community activism and policy development were also determined to be the most commonly identified primary and secondary frames in the western region with 10

(18.9%) articles falling into the community activism frame, and 9 (17.0%) articles identified as policy development.

Frequency Percent Community activism 10 18.9 Policy development 9 17 None 6 11.3 Legal 6 11.3 Government involvement 5 9.4 Economic benefits 5 9.4 Innovation / technology 3 5.7 Health risk 2 3.8 Pollution 2 3.8 Protest 2 3.8 Safety 1 1.9 Job creation 1 1.9 Trade secrets 1 1.9 Total 53 100

Table 6. Western Region Secondary Frame

More states were categorized into the southern region than other regions in the study. Twenty-six articles were included in the southern region category. States included in the southern region were, Washington D. C., Louisiana, Maryland, West Virginia,

Texas, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Virginia. Eighteen frames were identified as primary or secondary in this regional category. Articles in the southern region were primarily framed in terms of economic benefits as the frame occurred in four

(15.4%) of the articles. Environmental impact and government involvement each

58 occurred three times in this set of articles, making these frames the second most commonly identified primary frames. Table 7 demonstrates the results of the primary frames in the southern region.

Frequency Percent Economic benefits 4 15.4 Environmental impact 3 11.5 Government involvement 3 11.5 Energy source 2 7.7 Pollution 2 7.7 Community activism 2 7.7 Innovation / technology 2 7.7 Water rights 2 7.7 Relationships 1 3.8 Ad spending 1 3.8 Research controversy 1 3.8 Fracking downfalls 1 3.8 Safety 1 3.8 Policy development 1 3.8 Total 26 100

Table 7. Southern Region – Primary Frames

Policy development was the most identified as the secondary frame in articles in the southern region with four articles (15.4%). Three frames tie for the second most commonly occurring secondary frame, which includes none identified, energy source,

59 and environmental impact with three articles each (11.5%). Table 8 demonstrates the results of the secondary frames in the southern region.

Frequency Percent Policy development 4 15.4 None 3 11.5 Energy source 3 11.5 Environmental impact 3 11.5 Community activism 2 7.7 Legal 2 7.7 Government involvement 2 7.7 Innovation / technology 1 3.8 Protest 1 3.8 Economic benefits 1 3.8 Safety 1 3.8 Job creation 1 3.8 Relationships 1 3.8 Fracking downfalls 1 3.8 Total 26 100

Table 8: Southern Region Secondary Frames

The final region examined in this study was the United States midwest. Articles within the study featured four midwestern states, yet this category had the fewest number of articles compared with other regions at nine total. Four states were identified as midwestern, which included Montana, Ohio, North Dakota, and Illinois. Nine different frames were identified in the articles placed in the midwest region. 60

Primary frames in this region were identified as economic benefits, job creation, and environmental, as each of these frames were observed in 2 (22.2%) articles each.

Energy source, advertisement spending, and fracking downfall frames were each observed once (11.1%). Details regarding the primary frames in the midwest are outlined in Table 9.

Frequency Percent Economic benefits 2 22.2 Job creation 2 22.2 Environmental impact 2 22.2 Ad spending 1 11.1 Fracking downfalls 1 11.1 Energy source 1 11.1 Total 9 100

Table 9: Midwestern Primary Frames

No secondary frame was indentified in the majority of the articles in this category

(33.3%), but economic benefits and job creation frames were the second most common secondary frames with 2 (22.2%) articles each. Details regarding the secondary frames in the midwest are outlined in Table 10.

Frequency Percent

None 3 33.3

Economic benefits 2 22.2

Job creation 2 22.2

Energy source 1 11.1

Government involvement 1 11.1

Total 9 100

Table 10: Midwestern Secondary Frames

The northeast region and western region both included articles primarily framed in terms of community activism. The southern and midwestern regions included articles primarily framed in terms of economic benefits and environmental impact. The regions revealed no common secondary frames, as the secondary frames tended to vary. Table 11 compares the frequency of primary frames by each of the four regions.

Job Creaon

Environmental Impact

Economic Beneis West South Policy Development Midwest Northeast Government Involvement

Community Acvism

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Figure 7: Primary Frames Comparison by Region

Articles that did not feature a certain state, or identified more than one state, were classified as national. The world classification was used when articles featured areas outside of the United States. Countries featured outside the United States included,

England, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and Russia. Articles with no indication of region or area featured were classified as unknown.

Forty-eight articles were classified as national, 12 were classified as world, and 2 were classified as unknown. Two primary frames were identified in the national articles, which were government involvement and environmental impact (12.5% and 6 articles each). It was most common for the national articles to feature no secondary frame as 9

(18.8%) of the articles featured only a primary frame. Articles classified as world

63 featured protest as the leading primary frame in 3 (25%) of the articles, and energy source as the leading secondary frame in 5 (41.5%) of the articles.

Post hoc: The researcher also compared the tone of the articles by region. The midwest featured articles that were 77.8% neutral and 22.2% negative. The northeast articles were written in a neutral tone 79.2% of the time, positive 11.3%, and negative

9.4%. The articles in the southern region were 65.4% neutral, 26.9% negative, and 7.7% positive. Articles appearing the in western region were 81.1% neutral, 17% negative, and

1.9% positive.

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations

The purpose of this study was to examine how the issue of hydraulic fracturing was covered in the news print media from January 1, 2010 to October 31, 2013 by examining news frames, the general tone, and sources relied upon by the media. The following objectives were created to guide the direction of this study:

1) Identify dominant news frames in the mainstream newspapers that cover

hydraulic fracturing.

2) Determine what sources the news media most commonly relied upon for

hydraulic fracturing information.

3) Compare and contrast hydraulic fracturing frames used in media discourse by

different regions of the United States.

Chapter one of this study discussed the background of the hydraulic fracturing issue, the problem statement, study limitations, assumptions, definition of terms, and the significance of the study. Chapter two provided theoretical groundwork for the study by examining framing theory, which guided the study, as well as possible influences on frame construction, and literature regarding scientific and agricultural literacy. Chapter three discussed the methodology used to complete this content analysis study and

65 includes the research design, information on the sample, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis. Results and findings from the data were reported in chapter four.

Results explained in this chapter focus on the implications and possible reasons for the increasing number of articles throughout the years examined in the study, the primary and secondary frames identified, sources cited, and the regional frame analysis.

This chapter also identifies recommendations for future research and implications for the field of agricultural communication.

Conclusions

The study found the number of articles used to communicate the issue of hydraulic fracturing increased each year examined in the study. Bauer (1995) suggested that science and technology issues build up to a peak of press coverage and then decline.

The timeframe examined in this study appeared to reveal no signs of articles regarding the practice of hydraulic fracturing to be tapering off. In fact, the increase of articles in each passing year examined in this study may suggest the issue has not yet reached its point of maximum coverage.

It is possible that the significant increase in articles between 2010 and 2013 may be attributed to an increase in entertainment and documentary pieces that focused on the issue of hydraulic fracturing. The motion picture Gasland (Fox, 2010) was released in

September, 2010, and Promised Land (Van Sant, 2012) was released in 2012 which both emphasized hydraulic fracturing as negative. Bringing the issue to the public’s attention via entertainment pieces may have attributed to the increased news coverage.

The finding that 144 (70.9%) of the articles were news stories and only 59

(29.1%) were feature stories is consistent with other research indicating the media’s preference of news stories over features when subject matters were time sensitive (King et al., 2006).

Articles examined in the study were found in 14 different sections of the various newspapers included in the study. While Dyer and Whittaker (2000) found in their study that some articles were “often printed in sections of the publication that appeared to have no relationship to the nature of the article,” (p. 125), given the variety of frames presented in the articles included in this study, the variety of sections in which the articles appear is somewhat unsurprising.

Conclusions related to Objective 1. A total of 22 different frames were indentified in the articles included in this study by researchers. Community activism was a primary or secondary frame in 24.1% of the articles, closely followed by government involvement at 23.6%. Policy development was the next most common frame occurring in 12.8% of articles as a primary or secondary frame.

The prominent frames mentioned above suggest that hydraulic fracturing is a science issue with many political implications. As the most commonly featured frame, community activism suggests that a variety of people are taking a stand on the issue of hydraulic fracturing. The frequent use of community activism as a frame likely corresponds with citizen distress regarding the threat of values identified by Nelkin

(1995), which include intrusion on individual right, potential for social control, threat to

67 democratic values, affected interests and resistance, possibility of biohazards, morality, and tampering with nature.

Additionally, the recognition of community activism as the most commonly featured frame is consistent with findings by other scholars who suggested promotional events receive a high rate of media coverage (Oliver & Myers, 1999). The way the public reacts to the issue of hydraulic fracturing may assist in predicting the future of the issue, as public acceptance is essential to the success of any emerging technology

(Druckman & Bolsen, 2011). The lack of a secondary frame in most of the articles may be due to the complicated nature of the issue. Because hydraulic fracturing is a multi- dimensional issue with many implications, it is possible that journalists choose to cover issues associated with the practice one at a time. Additionally, because most of the articles in the sample were news stories, the articles tended to be shorter and the need for brevity and focus may have been in play.

The majority (77.3%) of articles were in a neutral tone, but more articles were framed negatively than positively. Most articles were classified as neutral because for the most part, articles presented both sides of the issue or cited sources representing various views the majority of the time. This finding is consistent with other research that has concluded that the news media has a tendency to report controversial and conflicting issues (Andsager (2000), Lindsey (2011), King, et al., (2006).

At the same time, the result that more articles were framed in a negative manner rather than positive can be explained by Davis (1995) who found that emphasizing potential negative consequences was more likely to influence citizens’ perceptions.

Additionally, it is likely that articles printed before the time period examined in this study may have been framed more positively, as science and technology issues are framed in ways that demonstrate market development or economic potential until opponents redefine the issue in negative ways (Nisbet & Huge, 2006).

The data revealed that negatively written articles were most likely to feature water contamination or pollution frames. This may be due in part to the environmental impact because of the industry, and the possible fear held by citizens concerning the endangerment of the environment and natural resources.

The findings regarding the general tone of the articles in this study also lend support to Cacciatore et al. (2012) who argued issues of science tend to become increasingly negative and driven by conflict over time. The variety of frames and sources presented provided varying viewpoints on the issue of hydraulic fracturing, but may not have always communicated factual information on the issue. This study supports the notion that newspapers can be used as sources of information, but citizens should not consider every sentence in a news or feature story to be objective and factual information

(Hagins, 2001).

Conclusions related to Objective 2. Interest groups were the most commonly cited sources as they appeared in 51.2% of the articles. The fact that interest groups were cited in over half of the articles analyzed in this study suggests that interest groups may be easily accessible for reporters. The frequency of interest groups cited also suggests the strength of the relationship between interest group leaders and the media. It is not

69 surprising that the use of interest groups as sources corresponds with community activism as the most common frame observed in the study.

Industry reps were cited as sources in 45.8% of articles included in the study. The heavy reliance on industry representatives as sources is consistent with Andrews and

Caren’s (2010) finding that the news media favors professional groups that utilize advocacy tactics. Given the classification of hydraulic fracturing as industry and its common association with the oil and gas industry, the use of industry representatives as sources seems appropriate.

The reliance on political leaders or elected officials as sources suggests the political aspects of hydraulic fracturing. Much like the commonality between interest groups and community activism, the use of political leaders as sources is not surprising as government involvement and policy development were commonly observed as frames.

The use of elected officials and political leaders lends support to Leiss’ (2001) assertion that government elites ultimately control political debate. Such an argument seems to apply to the idea of hydraulic fracturing as a political issue.

Lastly, while not in the top rankings of cited sources, it is important to note the significance of university or scientist citations within the sample. University professors or researchers were cited over fifty times, and scientists were cited about 30 times within the sample. While Extension itself was mentioned only one time within the sample, it is interesting to note the reliance of the media on university affiliated persons overall. Past framing analysis studies have noted the lack of use of university and extension

70 professionals (Meyers & Rhoades, 2006). Therefore, this study suggests that reporters may be relying upon university researchers and scientists more often.

Conclusions related to Objective 3. The northeastern and western regions of the

United States appeared to be similar in the way stories were primarily framed, as the articles included in the study in both regions featured community activism as the primary frame. The articles from the study that were featured in the southern and midwestern regions of the United States were both primarily framed in terms of economic benefits and environmental impact.

It is possible that the midwest and south have not yet experienced as much opposition as the northeast and west, as many articles are framed in terms of economic impact until opponents redefine the issue negatively (Nisbet & Huge, 2006). The midwest, especially, has not practiced fracking for more than a few years. However, the presence of the environmental impact frame as primary suggests that the shift to more negative stories may be forthcoming. It is not surprising that there were no common secondary frames revealed when regional articles were compared, given the variety and amount of frames identified within the study.

Post Hoc: Despite the fact that the midwest has not practiced fracking as long as some of the other regions, it is somewhat surprising that none of the articles within the sample were framed positively. This could be due in large amount to the nature of the sample and demonstrates a limitation of the study. Additionally, given that the articles in the sample were neutral overall, it is unsurprising to see that the regions were all written mostly in a neutral tone.

Recommendations

Public acceptance is essential to the success of any new or emerging technology

(Druckman & Bolsen, 2011). Therefore, the hydraulic fracturing industry needs to be willing and open to discussions with the various stakeholders involved in the issue, and demonstrate empathy for those who express concern about the issue. The data revealed that many stakeholders have varying opinions on the issue. Now is a time for meaningful conversations between groups. Lack of attention to public concern may only amplify opposition and increase resistance to new technology. The industry should strive to be transparent in its practices as much as possible and research should be done to monitor opinions and perceptions regarding industry practices.

The political implications of hydraulic fracturing cannot be ignored.

Environmental and other policies that may develop in regard to the practice of hydraulic fracturing will have effects on varying groups of people, from industry representatives to community members. It is likely that the general public will have a say in determining future policy for this issue, and because the public generally lacks total scientific understanding (Leiss, 2001), it is important for education efforts on the issue to take place. Therefore, it is recommended that community members, political leaders, and others are given access to unbiased educational information to assist in their decision making process as it pertains to the issue of hydraulic fracturing.

Recommendations for Future Research

The conclusions of this study, like most studies, raise more questions on the issue at hand, but also provide useful information for the future. In general, there is a need for more studies on news framing in agriculture, and there is much that can be done in terms of the issue of hydraulic fracturing specifically.

The data revealed no apparent peak in coverage on the issue of hydraulic fracturing. Therefore, it is probable that the increasing number of articles by each year examined in this study may suggest the issue has not yet reached its point of maximum coverage. As it is likely that more articles on hydraulic fracturing will be printed in the news media, scholars should complete future studies to examine any changes in frames on the issue over time.

Newspapers examined in this study, while the largest in the nation by daily circulation rate, presented limitations when frames were examined regionally. Although many different regions were represented, future studies should select newspapers more representative of various regions to draw better conclusions on any differences between frames in different parts of the United States. At the same time, regions throughout the

United States should also compare frames on the issue at different periods of time.

Lastly, future pieces of research on issues similar to hydraulic fracturing should be communicated to citizens in a way that is understandable and relevant to them. To better communicate the issues to citizens, researchers should work to build relationships with the news media as the news media serves as the main mode of science education for

73 many adults in the United States. A better-informed public will assist in alleviating the issues associated with advancements in technology.

References

Aller, L., Zwierschke, K., Weatherington-Rice, J., Houston, M., Dougherty, T., Shaner, J., and Johnson, N. Shale Gas Development in Ohio. Columbus: Ohio Environmental Council, 2013. Print.

Andrews, K. T., & Caren, N. (2010). Making the News Movement Organizations, Media Attention, and the Public Agenda. American Sociological Review, 75(6), 841-866.

Andsager, J. L. (2000). How interest groups attempt to shape public opinion with competing news frames. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(3), 577-592.

Antilla, L. (2005). Climate of scepticism: US newspaper coverage of the science of climate change. Global environmental change, 15(4), 338-352.

Bar-On, S., & Frank, M. (Producers). (2010, November 14). Shaleionaires [Television broadcast]. In Shaleionaires. New York, New York: CBS.

Bauer, M. (1995). Resistance to new technology and its effects on nuclear power, information technology, and biotechnology. In Resistance to new technology (pp. 1-44). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual review of sociology, 611-639.

Brader, T. (2006). Campaigning for hearts and minds: How emotional appeals in political ads work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bruland, K. (1995). Patterns of resistance to new technologies in Scandinavia: An historical perspective. In Resistance to new technology (pp. 125-146). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Buford, Talia. "California Is New Fracking Battleground." Politico.com. Politico, 21 Apr. 2013. Web.

Burkey, P. (Executive Producer). (2012, October 18). In Ohio, a modern day gold rush fueled by oil [Television broadcast]. In NBC Nightly News. New York, New York: 75

NBC.

Cacciatore, M. A., Anderson, A. A., Choi, D. H., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Liang, X., & Dudo, A. (2012). Coverage of emerging technologies: A comparison between print and online media. New Media & Society, 14(6), 1039-1059.

Cartmell, D. D., Dyer, J. E., Birkenholz, R. J., & Sitton, S. P. (2003). Publishing agricultural news: A study of Arkansas daily newspaper editors. Journal of Applied Communications, 87(4), 7.

Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., 10, 103- 126.

Davis, J. J. (1995). The effects of message framing on response to environmental communications. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 72(2), 285-299.

DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of research in science teaching, 37(6), 582-601.

DiFonzo, N., & Bordia, P. (2007). Rumor psychology: Social and organizational approaches. American Psychological Association.

Doerfert, D. L. (Ed.) (2011). National research agenda: American Association for Agricultural Education’s research priority areas for 2011-2015. Lubbock, TX: Texas Tech University, Department of Agricultural Education and Communications.

Druckman, J. N., & Bolsen, T. (2011). Framing, motivated reasoning, and opinions about emergent technologies. Journal of Communication, 61(4), 659-688.

Dyer, J. E., & Whittaker, B. K. (2000). Identifying sources of bias in agricultural news reporting. Journal of Agricultural Education, 41(4), 125-133.

Filipic, Martha. "News: Ohio State to Conduct Wide Range of Shale-related Research." Cfaes.osu.edu. College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences, 26 Aug. 2013. Web.

Fox, J. (Director), Adelsic, T., Fox, J., & Gandour, M. (Producers), & Fox, J. (Writer). (2010). Gasland [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: New Video Group.

Frick, M. J., Birkenholz, R. J., Gardner, H., & Machtmes, K. (1995). Rural and urban inner-city high school student knowledge and perception of agriculture. Journal of Agricultural Education, 36, 1-9.

Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American journal of sociology, 1-37.

Garrett, R. K. (2011). Troubling consequences of online political rumoring. Human Communication Research, 37(2), 255-274.

Goldston, J. (Executive Producer). (2011, April 21). Fracking connected to quakes? [Television broadcast]. In Nightline. New York, New York: ABC.

Granberg, A. (2013). What is hydraulic fracturing? ProPublica. Retrieved from http://www.propublica.org/special/hydraulic-fracturing-national

Hagins, S. A. (2001). Associated Press wire service coverage of agricultural issues: a content analysis.

Hays, R. G. (1993). Trends in urban newspaper use of farm news: A qualitative study. Journal of applied communications (USA).

Holbert, R. L. (2005). A typology for the study of entertainment television and politics. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(3), 436-453.

Howarth, R. W., Ingraffea, A., & Engelder, T. (2011). Natural gas: Should fracking stop? Nature, 477(7364), 271-275.

Jackson, D. J., & Darrow, T. I. (2005). The influence of celebrity endorsements on young adults’ political opinions. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10(3), 80-98.

Jasanoff, S. S. (1987). Contested boundaries in policy-relevant science. Social studies of science, 17(2), 195-230.

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1986). Choices, values, and frames. Smelser, Neil J./Gerstein Dean R.(eds.): Behavioral and Social Science: Fifty Years of Discovery. National Academy Press: Washington, DC, 153-172.

Kim, C. (2011, October 31). North Dakota Town Becomes Hot Job Market [Television broadcast]. In Rock Center with Brian Williams. New York, New York: NBC.

King, J. M., Cartmell, D. D., & Sitton, S. (2006). Newspaper coverage of the bovine spongiform encephalopathy outbreak in the United States: A content analysis. Journal of applied communications, 2006.

Kohut, A., Doherty, C., Dimock, M., & Keeter, S. (2012). As gas prices pinch, support for oil and gas production grows: Those aware of fracking favor its use (pp. 1-11, Rep.). Washington, D.C.: The Pew Research Center.

Kovar, K. A., & Ball, A. L. Two Decades of Agricultural Literacy Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of Agricultural Education, 54(1), 167-178.

Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and psychological measurement, 30(3), 607-610.

Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (Vol. 5). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790-816.

Leiss, W. (2001). In the chamber of risks: Understanding risk controversies. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.

Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and its correction continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106-131.

Lindsey, A. B. (2011). Framing the US Sugar Buyout to Restore the Florida Everglades: A Comparison of National Versus State Newspaper Coverage. Issues Management, 13.

Lulofs, Neal. "Top 25 U.S. Newspapers for March 2013." Auditedmedia.com. Alliance for Audited Media, 30 Apr. 2013. Web.

MacLeod, R. (1995). Resistance to nuclear technology: Optimists, opportunists, and opposition in Austrailian nuclear history. In Resistance to new technology (pp. 165-188). New York: Cambridge University Press.

McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public opinion quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.

McElhinney, A., McAleer, P., & Segeida, M. (Directors). (2013). Fracknation [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: Hard Boiled Films. 78

Meyers, C., & Abrams, K. (2010). Feeding the debate: A qualitative framing analysis of organic food news media coverage. Journal of Applied Communications, 94(3/4), 22-36.

Meyers, C., & Rhoades, E. (2006). Covering canker: A framing analysis of citrus canker coverage in Florida newspapers. Association for Communication Excellence Annual Research Conference, Quebec City, Quebec, Canada.

Miller, J. D. (1989). Scientific Literacy.

Miller, J. D. (1998). The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7(3), 203-223.

Moy, P., McCluskey, M. R., McCoy, K., & Spratt, M. A. (2004). Political correlates of local news media use. Journal of Communication, 54(3), 532-546.

Nelkin, D. (1984). Controversy, politics of technical decisions (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Nelkin, D. (1987). The culture of science journalism. Society, 24(6), 17-25.

Nelkin, D. (1995). Forms of intrusion: Comparing resistance to information technology and biotechnology in the USA. In Resistance to new technology (pp. 379-392). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Nisbet, M. C. (2009a). Framing science: A new paradigm in public engagement. Understanding science: New agendas in science communication, 40-67.

Nisbet, M. C. (2009b). Communicating climate change: Why frames matter for public engagement. Environment Magazine. Retrieved from www.environmentmagazine.org

Nisbet, M. C., & Huge, M. (2006). Attention Cycles and Frames in the Plant Biotechnology Debate Managing Power and Participation through the Press/Policy Connection. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 11(2), 3-40.

Oliver, P. E., & Maney, G. M. (2000). Political Processes and Local Newspaper Coverage of Protest Events: From Selection Bias to Triadic Interactions1. American Journal of Sociology, 106(2), 463-505.

Oliver, P. E., & Myers, D. J. (1999). How Events Enter the Public Sphere: Conflict, Location, and Sponsorship in Local Newspaper Coverage of Public Events 1. American Journal of Sociology, 105(1), 38-87.

Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political communication, 10(1), 55-75.

Rabe, B. G., & Borick, C. (2011). Fracking for natural gas: Public opinion on state policy options (pp. 1-10, Rep.). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan - Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy.

Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. (1998). Analyzing media messages: Quantitative content analysis.

Russell, E. B., McCracken, J. D., & Miller, W. W. (1990). Position statement on agricultural literacy. The Agricultural education magazine (USA).

Ruth, A. M., Eubanks, E. E., & Telg, R. (2005). Framing of mad cow media coverage. Journal of applied communications, 89(4), 39-54.

Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of communication, 57(1), 9-20.

Schultz, E. J. (2011, October 30). Williston: The town the recession forgot. Williston, North Dakota: The Town the Recession Forgot. Retrieved from http://adage.com/article/news/williston-north-dakota-town-recession- forgot/230719/

Shen, F. (2004). Effects of news frames and schemas on individuals' issue interpretations and attitudes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(2), 400-416.

Sitton, S., Terry Jr, R., Cartmell, D. D., & Keys, J. P. (2004). Newspaper coverage of swine production issues: a closer look at reporters and their objectivity. Journal of applied communications.

Slothuus, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2010). Political parties, motivated reasoning, and issue framing effects. Journal of Politics, 72(3), 630-645.

Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical assessment, research & evaluation, 7(17), 137-146.

Tewksbury, D., Jones, J., Peske, M. W., Raymond, A., & Vig, W. (2000). The interaction of news and advocate frames: Manipulating audience perceptions of a local

public policy issue. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(4), 804- 829.

Tierney, S. F. (1984). The nuclear waste disposal controversy. In Controversy: Politics of technical decisions (2nd ed., pp. 91-110). Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

United States. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration. U.S. Census Bureau, (2010). "Census Regions and Divisions of the United States." Map. Census.gov. Web.

United States. Environmental Protection Agency. (2012). "Hydraulic Fracturing Background Information." Water.epa.gov. 9 May 2012. Web.

Van Sant, G. (Director), Moore, C., Damon, M., & Krasinski, J. (Producers). (2012). Promised Land [Motion Picture on DVD]. United States. Participant Media.

Weaver, D. A., & Bimber, B. (2008). Finding news stories: a comparison of searches using LexisNexis and Google News. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 85(3), 515-530.

Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (1997). Mass media research: An introduction (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Winslow, L. (Executive Producer) (2011, June 15). Fracking for natural gas continues to raise health questions [Television broadcast]. In PBS NewsHour. PBS.

Appendix A: Code Book

Code Book for Fracking Frame Analysis

SOURCES REFERENCED

1. Activist – any concerned person who advocates for or against the issue. May or may not be affiliated with an interest group. 2. Business owner – one who owns or operates his or her own business. 3. Book author – person credited for writing a book or novel. 4. Community member – anyone cited as a person living in the community being discussed that does not fall into any of the other categories listed. 5. Consultant – a person who may or may not be specifically associated with an interest group or industry but one who comments on the issue at hand. 6. Economist – expert in economics or economic issues. May or may not be affiliated with a university or private research company. 7. Engineer – expert in engineering or engineering issues. May or may not be affiliated with industry. 8. Educator – one in the discipline of education. Could be a principal, teacher, guidance counselor, or other 9. Employee –one employed by a business who is not the owner or manager. 10. Extension / University – one affiliated with extension or university. Might also be classified as a scientist, researcher or other. 11. Government agency – any bureau, commission, agency, department or other government sponsored entity. Examples might include the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Health or other. 12. Industry representative – spokesperson for a business or corporation. The spokesperson may be a business owner, attorney, public relations professional, consultant or other. 13. Interest group – may or may not be a nonprofit organization, but has a clear position on the issue. The interest group is organized and established. 14. Investor – one who invests in a business, idea or corporation with hopes to gain a profit. 15. Land owner – one who owns land or property such as a farmer, home owner, or other. 16. Lawyer – attorney or spokesperson on legal issues. May or may not be affiliated with an interest group or particular industry. 17. Medical professional – one who practices in the medical profession such as a doctor or nurse. 18. Politician – elected official such as a mayor, commissioner, president, senator, or any other elected representative. 19. Scientist – one identified as scientist, expert in science. May be affiliated with a university or private research business.

OVERALL TONE / EVIDENCE

1. Positive – growth, independence, innovation, happiness 2. Negative – discomfort, fear, risk, danger, uncertainty 3. Neutral – neither positive nor negative

FRAME

1. Advertising spending – money spent on advertising for a certain issue or belief. 2. Community activism – an activist or interest group rallying to share beliefs / opinions. Community activism may also refer to issue involvement be local residents or community members. 3. Division or confusion – refers to confusion or division amongst a group of community members or stakeholders. 4. Economic benefits –opportunities to grow the economy, invest because of the issues, saving money or lowering prices, or other. 5. Energy source – alternative energy, promising energy, and will explain the benefits of the source. 6. Environmental impact – impact on the environment, such as earthquakes, that may be due in part to other factors taking place. 7. Fracking downfalls – any discussion of hydraulic fracturing impact that portrays the negative effects of an otherwise positive situation. An example is a community being unprepared for the boom in terms of housing or infrastructure. 8. Government involvement – support, opposition, or level of involvement otherwise on the issue from government / elected officials. 9. Health risk – sickness, potential for sickness, effects on health in question, or any sort of issue that might affect human health. 10. Innovation / Technology – potential benefits because of the newness or technologically advanced nature of the technique. 11. Job creation – new jobs have been developed or will be developed as a result of the issue. 12. Legal – an ongoing or forthcoming lawsuit, lack of law or policy, or other legal issue such as eminent domain. 13. Policy development – development (or potential development) of new law, policy or other regulation on the issue. 14. Pollution – air, water, and / or soil contamination, or any kind of pollution issue. 15. Protest – an activist or interest group sharing beliefs against the issue. 16. Relationships –refers to relationships between entities, such as nonprofit groups and for profit businesses. 17. Research controversy – discusses research that may be biased or somehow controversial or worthy of skepticism. 18. Safety – safety concern to any group of individuals because of the issue.

19. Trade secrets – information regarding practices that businesses, corporations, or other groups choose not to share with the general public. 20. Water contamination – water quality is in question, or water testing at abnormal levels. 21. Water rights – usually associated with lack of water resources, the water rights frame discusses who has rights to the available water.

Appendix B: Code Sheet for Fracking Frame Analysis

Fracking Analysis

Article #______Article Title: ______

Region or State featured ______

Name of Newspaper:  Wall Street Journal  New York Times  USA Today  New York Daily News  New York Post  Washington Post  Denver Post  Chicago Tribune  Los Angeles Times  Chicago Sun-Times  

Publish Year:  2010  2011  2012  2013

Month article was published Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Day article was published: ______

Section of Newspaper:  Business  Arts / Culture  Technology  Science  National  Region / Local  Politics  Health  Front Page  International/World  News  Money  Life  Entertainment  Other ______

Type of Article:  News  Feature

Word Length: ______

Number of Sources: ______

Sources Referenced  Scientist  Politician  Activist  Industry Rep  Economist  Land Owner  Interest  Ext / Univ. Group

Author:  Staff Writer  AP Newswire  Other

Overall Tone / Evidence  Positive: ______

 Negative: ______ Neutral: ______

Frame (Indicate Primary and Secondary)  Health risk  Water contamination  Energy source  Pollution  Community activism  Innovation / technology  Protest  Legal  Govt involvement  Economic benefits  Safety  Job creation  Policy development  Other

Frame Description: ______

Image accompanying story: ______