This study of the 2014 U.S. midterm congressional elections examined whether connections across sources within newspaper coverage predicted framing outcomes. Conceptualized as an aspect of frame building, symbolic source networks within articles were examined using social network analysis and multilevel modeling. Results suggest network density within a given article predicted the likelihood that a source was linked to the strategic game frame and issue frame in election coverage. By nesting sources within networks, this study extends our understanding of frame building and collective sense-making in politics. It also demonstrates the utility of social network concepts and measures for research on news production.
AalbergT.StrömbäckJ.de VreeseC. H. (2012). The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13, 162-178. doi:10.1177/1464884911427799
2.
AdamsS.CozmaR. (2011). Health care reform coverage improves in 2009-10 over Clinton era. Newspaper Research Journal, 32, 24-39.
3.
AlbækE. (2011). The interaction between experts and journalists in news journalism. Journalism, 12, 335-348. doi:10.1177/1464884910392851
4.
AlbækE.Elmelund-PraestekerC.KlemmensenR. (2011). Experts in election news coverage: Process or substance?Nordicom Review, 32, 45-58.
5.
BartholoméG.LechelerS.de VreeseC. (2015). Manufacturing conflict? How journalists intervene in the conflict frame building process. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20, 438-457. doi:10.1177/1940161215595514
6.
BedingfieldS.AnshariD. (2014). Thinking about Romney: Frame building in a battleground state in the 2012 presidential election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91, 78-97. doi:10.1177/1077699013514417
7.
BennettW. L. (2017). Press-government relations in a changing media environment. In KenskiK.JamiesonK. H. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political communication (pp. 249-262). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.40
8.
BorahP. (2011). Conceptual issues in framing theory: A systematic examination of a decade’s literature. Journal of Communication, 61, 246-263. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01539.x
9.
BroP. (2010). When newsmen make networks. Journalism Practice, 4, 17-32. doi:10.1080/1751278903119669
10.
BrüggemannM. (2014). Between frame setting and frame sending: How journalists contribute to news frames. Communication Theory, 24, 61-82. doi:10.1111/comt.12027
11.
CappellaJ. N.JamiesonK. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
12.
CarrageeK. M.RoefsW. (2004). The neglect of power in recent framing research. Journal of Communication, 54, 214-233. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02625.x
13.
ChongD.DruckmanJ. N. (2007). A theory of framing and opinion formation in competitive elite environments. Journal of Communication, 57, 99-118. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00331.x
14.
CrossK. (2010). Experts in the news: The differential use of sources in election television news. Canadian Journal of Communication, 35, 413-429.
15.
D’AngeloP. (2002). News framing as a multiparadigmatic research program: A response to Entman. Journal of Communication, 52, 870-888. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02578.x
16.
de VreeseC. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal & Document Design, 13, 51-62. doi:10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
17.
de VreeseC. S. (2014). Mediatization of news: The role of journalistic framing. In EsserF.StrömbächJ. (Eds.), Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of western democracies (pp. 137-155). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
18.
DruckmanJ. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225-256. doi:0.1023/A:1015006907312
19.
DunawayJ.LawrenceR. G. (2015). What predicts the game frame? Media ownership, electoral context, and campaign news. Political Communication, 32, 43-60. doi:10.1080/10584609.2014.880975
20.
EneM.LeightonE. A.BlueG. L.BellB. (2014). Multilevel models for categorical data using SAS® Proc Glimmix: The basics (Southeast SAS Users Group). Retrieved from http://analytics.ncsu.edu/sesug/2014/SD-13.pdf
21.
EntmanR. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
22.
EntmanR.MatthesJ.PelicanoL. (2009). News, sources, and effects of news framing. In Wahl-JorgensenK.HanitzchT. (Eds.), The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 175-190). New York, NY: Routledge.
23.
EricsonR. V.BaranekP. M.ChanJ. B. L. (1989). Negotiating control. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
24.
FerreeM. M.GamsonW. A.GerhardsJ.RuchtD. (2002). Shaping abortion discourse: Democracy and public sphere in Germany and the United States. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
25.
FreemanL. C. (2004). The development of social network analysis: A study in the sociology of science. Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: Empirical Press.
26.
GamsonW. A.ModiglianiA. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In BraungartR. D. (Ed.), Research in political sociology 3 (pp. 137-177). Greewich, CT: JAI Press.
27.
GitlinT. (1980). The whole world is watching: Mass media and the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley: University of California Press.
28.
GraberD. A. (1994). Why voters fail information tests: Can the hurdles be overcome?Political Communication, 11, 331-346. doi:10.1080/10584609.1994.9963044
29.
HänggliR. (2012). Key factors in frame building: How strategic political actors shape news media coverage. American Behavioral Scientist, 56, 300-317. doi:10.1177/0002764211426327
30.
HänggliR.KriesiH. (2010). Political framing strategies and their impact on media framing in a Swiss direct-democratic campaign. Political Communication, 27, 141-157. doi:10.1080/10584600903501484
31.
HopmannD.ShehataA. (2011). The contingencies of ordinary citizen appearances in political television news. Journalism Practice, 5, 657-671. doi:10.1080/17512786.2011.603967
32.
KahnK. F.KenneyP. J. (2002). The slant of the news: How editorial endorsements influence campaign coverage and citizens’ views of candidates. American Political Science Review, 96, 381-394.
33.
KanissP. (1991). Making local news. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
34.
LewisS. C.ReeseS. D. (2009). What is the war on terror? Framing through the eyes of journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 85-102. doi:10.1177/107769900908600106
35.
LukeD. A. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
36.
MaherT. M. (2001). Framing: An emerging paradigm or a phase of agenda setting. In ReeseS. D.GandyO. H.GrantA. E. (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 83-94). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
37.
MatthesJ. (2009a). Frames in political communication: Toward clarification of a research program. In StewartA. (Ed.), Rethinking communication: Keywords in communication research (pp. 123-136). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
38.
MatthesJ. (2009b). What’s in a frame? A content analysis of media-framing studies in the world’s leading communication journals, 1990-2004. Journal of Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 349-367. doi:10.1177/107769900908600206
39.
MatthesJ. (2012). Framing politics: An integrative approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 56, 247-259. doi:10.1177/0002764211426324
40.
MongeP. R.ContractorN. (2003). Theories of communication networks. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
41.
NewmanM. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 98, 404-409. doi:10.1073/pnas.98.2.404
42.
NewmanM.BarabásiA. L.WattsD. J. (2006). The structure and dynamics of networks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
43.
PanZ.KosickiG. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55-75. doi:10.1080/10584609.1993.9962963
44.
PattersonT. (1996). Bad news, bad governance. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 546, 97-108. doi:10.1177/0002716296546001009
45.
PedersenR. (2012). The game frame and political efficacy: Beyond the spiral of cynicism. European Journal of Communication, 27, 225-240. doi:10.1177/0267323112454089
46.
ReeseS. D. (2007). The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited. Journal of Communication, 57, 148-154. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00334.x
47.
ReichZ. (2006). The process model of news initiative. Journalism, 7, 497-514.
48.
RheeJ. W. (1997). Strategy and issue frames in election campaign coverage: A social cognitive account of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 47, 26-48. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1997.tb02715.x
49.
RogersE. M.KincaidD. L. (1981). Communication networks: Toward a new paradigm for research. New York, NY: The Free Press.
50.
RossK. (2010). Danse macabre: Politicians, journalists, and the complicated rumba of relationships. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15, 272-294. doi:10.1177/1940161210367942
51.
ScheufeleD. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103-122. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x
52.
ScheufeleD. A.IyengarS. (2017). That state of framing research. In KenskiK.JamiesonK. H. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political communication (pp. 619-632). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.40
53.
SemetkoH. S.ValkenburgP. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50, 93-109. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02843.x
54.
SheaD. M. (1999). All scandal politics is local: Ethical lapses, the media, and congressional elections. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 4, 45-62. doi:10.1177/1081180X99004002005
55.
ShoemakerP.ReeseS. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influence on mass media content. White Plains, NY: Longman.
56.
SingerJ. D.WilletJ. B. (2003). Applied longitudinal data analysis. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57.
SnidermanP. M.TheriaultS. M. (2004). The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing. In SarisW. W.SniderrmanP. M. (Eds.), Studies in public opinion (pp. 133-165). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
58.
SnijdersT. A. B.BoskerR. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
59.
StrömbäckJ.EsserF. (2009). Shaping politics: Mediatization and media interventionism. In LundbyK. (Ed.), Mediatization, concepts, changes, consequences (pp. 205-223). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
60.
StrömbäckJ.NegrineR.HopmannD. N.JalaliC.BerganzaR.SeeberG. U. H.. . . MaierM. (2013). Sourcing the news: Comparing source use and media framing of the 2009 European Parliamentary elections. Political Marketing, 12, 29-52. doi:10.1080/15377857.2013.752227
61.
TrumboC. (1996). Constructing climate change: Claims and frames in US news coverage of an environmental issue. Public Understanding of Science, 5, 269-283. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/5/3/006
62.
TuchmanG. (1972). Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology, 77, 660-679.
63.
TuchmanG. (1978). The news net. Social Research, 45, 253-276.
64.
ValentinoN. A.BeckmannM. N.BuhrT. A. (2001). A spiral of cynicism for some: The contingent effects of campaign news frames on participation and confidence in government. Political Communication, 18, 347-367. doi:10.1080/10584600152647083
65.
Van AelstP.WalgraveS. (2011). Minimal or massive? The political agenda-setting power of the mass media according to different methods. International Journal of Press/Politics, 16, 295-313. doi:10.1177/1940161211406727
66.
WassermanS.FaustK. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
67.
WolfeM.JonesB. D.BaumgartnerF. R. (2013). A failure to communicate: Agenda setting in media and policy studies. Political Communication, 30, 175-192. doi:10.1080/10584609.2012.737419
68.
ZallerJ. R. (1999). A theory of media politics: How the interests of politicians, journalists, and citizens shapes the news. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.
69.
ZhaoX.BleskeG. L. (1998). Horse-race polls and audience issue learning. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 3, 13-34. doi:10.1177/1081180X98003004004
