Fracking Frames: a Framing Analysis and Comparative Study of Hydraulic Fracturing Coverage in American Newspapers
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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 By 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! v 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 vi 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 ix 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 x 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 xi Chapter 1: Introduction Background and Setting Hydraulic fracturing,