Framing Politicians

Abstract

This article argues that in 1980, 1988, and 1992, our sense of presidential candidates' spoken messages differed depending on whether they were reported in issue or strategy frames. Messages in issue frames were more likely to be self-promotional and supported by evidence; messages in strategy frames were more likely to be oppositional and not supported by evidence. However, these differences disappeared in 1996 broadcast news coverage. In 1980, 1988, and 1992, candidates' messages in strategy stories were likely to be unsubstantiated attacks on their opponents. In 1996, stories in an issue frame adopted this tendency by including a higher proportion of attacks than in previous years. This change raised the level of reported negativity in candidate discourse included in 1996 broadcast news stories.