Does the Media Send Mixed Messages? a Case For
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOES THE MEDIA SEND MIXED MESSAGES? A CASE FOR COMPETITIVE FRAMING by SEAN MITCHELL A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Political Science in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2011 Copyright Sean Mitchell 2011 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT Based upon the work of John Zaller, the way people receive information can at least temporarily affect their opinions. Considering that most people get at least some of their information from broadcast/print news outlets, the way in which those organizations present, or frame, the information is incredibly important. The news media can activate predispositions by how they provide and/or do not provide information. This in turn can affect how the public feels about a news topic. This dissertation builds upon the work of Zaller, Druckman, Kahn and Kenney, and other leading researchers to show that different media sources use different framing techniques in their coverage of news events. Whereas previous studies into competitive framing have concentrated primarily upon political campaigns, this dissertation analyzes how the media uses various framing techniques in covering an issue. The analysis concentrates on the broadcast/print news media coverage of President Bush’s “60 Stops in 60 Days” tour to promote his Social Security initiative during the spring of 2005. The analysis of competitive framing within the “Length”, “Placement”, “Frame Strength”, and “Tone” variables is included. In a more traditional study, Length and Placement might be thought of as “agenda setting” rather than as framing variables; however, the fact that this study is on a major Presidential initiative means that the news media is expected to cover the issue. How much they cover it and where they place the coverage is a result of their own gate- keepers’ perceptions of the importance level, or weight, relative to other stories. The interest ii here is with the actual content of media coverage. Specifically, this study examines whether or not there is variation in the way a political topic is framed within various news outlets. That is, in framing political issues, do various news outlets engage in “competitive framing.” iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS Alternate News Programs Those news programs not carried on one of the three networks ABC American Broadcasting Corporation Broadcast News Media Televised news programs (network, public, and cable) Cable News News programs televised on stations available only on cable CBS Columbia Broadcasting System CNN Cable News Network Commercial Broadcast Televised programs that are paid for by commercials inserted at different times during the programs Competitive framing The way in which a writer/editor chooses to frame a news story through a variation in style, technique, and importance level (weight), including the determination of who and what is covered and who and what is omitted. This variation in style, technique, and/or importance level (weight) among and within the various news outlets resulting in a dispersed pattern. Editorials “Opinion-based” stories written by the newspaper’s editorial staff and/or “letters to the editor” located on the Editorial Page. FOX News FOX Cable News Network Framing “The words, images, phrases, and presentation styles that a speaker (e.g. a politician, a media outlet) uses when relaying information about an issue or event to an audience” (Chong & Druckman, 2007, p. 100) Gatekeeper “Someone who makes decisions about what passes through the various gates separating potential media contents from their audience” (Perry, 2002, p.64). Hard News All coverage that is traditionally considered to be a straight- forward, “fact based” story located somewhere in the newspaper other than on the Editorial Page. iv Network News News programs televised on one of the three networks (ABC, CBS, AND NBC) Non-Network News All televised news programs other than those on one of the three primary news networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) NBC National Broadcasting Corporation PBS Public Broadcasting System Print News Media Newspapers SME Subject Matter Expert – People and/or organizations considered experts on Social Security v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank those professors who helped me through this long journey, from undergraduate to PhD, especially those who were kind enough to participate on my committee. I consider them both my mentors and my friends. In fact, of all of those on my committee, Dr. Gonzenbach is the only one that I have not known for the better part of a decade. He is indeed a rare individual for being kind enough to help. While we met for the first time on the morning of my defense, his comments and suggestions on my proposal were extremely helpful. When I first started to pursue my PhD in 2004, I met Dr. Borrelli when he taught research design. He was incredibly talented in making research “seem” easy to accomplish. Fortunately, or unfortunately as the case may be, I later found that it was not as it appeared. I met Dr. Baldwin in the spring of 2000 when I took his Public Administration class. The experience was so enjoyable that it lead me to pursue, and eventually obtain, an MPA. I believe I took every class he taught. I met Dr. Cassel a year later in 2001 when I took her Political Parties and Elections class. It would have been one of my favorite undergraduate classes if it had not been tainted by finding out why class was cancelled the morning of September 11th. Dr. Cassel is not only a great teacher, but one of the kindest and most patient people I know. She taught me Quant One and Two, and that is all that needs to be said. She became Co-Chairman of my committee when Dr. Cotter retired. With her knowledge of Public Opinion, she was the only person I thought would be appropriate in helping vi me complete this project. Luckily, she agreed to become more involved with the project, and I sincerely thank her for helping me. Most importantly, I want to thank Dr. Cotter whom I met in 2000 when I took his Southern Politics class. I made an A- , but I forgave him because, at the time, I thought it was the best class I had ever taken. He introduced me to V.O. Key that semester, the first of many that made me admire political scientists. Later on in my senior year, he introduced me to John Zaller whose premises are the starting point for this study. Dr. Cotter has been invaluable to me working as the Chairman of my committee, including over a year on his own time after he retired. I truly believe that without his continued commitment this dissertation would never have come to fruition. Lastly, I want to thank my parents for their love and support as well as the University Of Alabama for providing me with the best years of my life. Roll Tide!!! vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vi TABLE OF CONTENTS viii LIST OF TABLES xi LIST OF FIGURES xiii CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION 1 Framing and Policy Issues 2 Framing Dimensions 3 Literature Review 7 Framing and Opinion Formation 7 Competitive Framing Based Studies 11 Research on Framing 19 When and How Framing Affects Occur 19 Accessibility and Weights of Considerations Used in Forming Opinions 22 President Bush’s “60 Stops in 60 Days” 24 Social Security Background 24 President Bush’s “60 Stops in 60 Days” Tour 27 viii Timeline of Media News Dissemination 33 CHAPTER TWO – METHODOLOGY 46 Procedure 49 Coding of Variables 61 Definition of Variables and Categories 63 Analysis 65 CHAPTER THREE - BROADCAST NEWS MEDIA INTRODUCTION 68 Broadcast Data Information 69 Length Variable 71 Placement Variable 76 Frame Strength Variable 80 Tone Variable 85 Multivariate Analysis 90 Broadcast News Media Conclusions 96 CHAPTER FOUR - PRINT NEWS MEDIA INTRODUCTION 104 Print Data Information 104 Length Variable 106 Placement Variable 112 Frame Strength Variable 116 Tone Variable 120 Multivariate Analysis 125 Print News Media Conclusions 130 ix CHAPTER FIVE - BROADCAST/PRINT NEWS MEDIA COMPARISON 139 Introduction 139 Length Variable Comparison 141 Placement Variable Comparison 143 Frame Strength Variable Comparison 145 Tone Variable Comparison 147 CHAPTER SIX – CONCLUSIONS 149 Attitude Changes 150 Gate-Keeping 150 Niche Markets 152 Broadcast vs Print Observations 153 Going Public 154 Original Contribution 154 Areas for Future Research 157 REFERENCES 159 APPENDICES 165 Appendix A – Consent Form 166 Appendix B – Sample Instructions 167 Appendix C – Checklist 168 x LIST OF TABLES CHAPTER THREE Table 3-1 Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Broadcast Media Length 75 Table 3-2 Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Broadcast Media Placement 79 Table 3-3 Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Broadcast Media Frame Strength 84 Table 3-4 Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Broadcast Media Tone 89 Table 3-5 Broadcast Media (Placement Multivariate Analysis) 95 Table 3-6 Broadcast Media (Frame Strength Multivariate Analysis) 95 CHAPTER FOUR Table 4-1a Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Editorial Print Media Length 111 Table 4-1b Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Hard News Print Media Length 111 Table 4-2 Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Hard News Print Media Placement 115 Table 4-3 Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Hard News Media Frame Strength 119 Table 4-4a Chi Square Test of Competitive Framing Based Upon Editorial Print Media Tone 124 Table