Donald Trump has been a vocal critic of the news media. This study content analyzes how Trump tweeted about the news media as the Republican nominee through his first year in office. Results revealed that Trump privileged conservative media via praise and media appearance frames, mentions, and retweets, while denigrating nonconservative and general media via attack and bias frames. In addition, Trump employed attack frames more as president than nominee. Finally, Trump’s attack and bias frames generated more retweets and favorites than other frames. Given Trump’s influence, such framing could strongly contribute to the public’s polarized perceptions of the news media.
AbramowitzA. I.WebsterS. (2016). The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. elections in the 21st century. Electoral Studies, 41, 12-22. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2015.11.001
boydD.GolderS.LotanG. (2010, January). Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter. Paper Presented at the International Conference on System Sciences, Honolulu, HI.
4.
BudakC.GoelS.RaoJ. M. (2016). Fair and balanced? Quantifying media bias through crowdsourced content analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(Suppl. 1), 250-271. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw007
ChadwickA. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
7.
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
8.
CohenJ. E. (2008). The presidency in the era of 24-hour news. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
D’AlessioD.AllenM. (2000). Media bias in presidential elections: A meta-analysis. Journal of Communication, 50, 133-156. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x
DomkeD.WattsM. D.ShahD. V.FanD. P. (1999). The politics of conservative elites and the “liberal media” argument. Journal of Communication, 49(4), 35-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02816.x
12.
DruckmanJ. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23, 225-256. doi:10.1023/A:1015006907312
13.
DruckmanJ. N. (2011). What’s it all about? Framing in political science. In KerenG. (Ed.), Perspectives on framing (Ch. 13, pp. 279-302). New York, NY: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis.
EntmanR. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
16.
EntmanR. M. (2003). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame after 9/11. Political Communication, 20, 415-432. doi:10.1080/10584600390244176
17.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL: Aldine.
18.
GoidelR. K.ShieldsT. G.PeffleyM. (1997). Priming theory and RAS models: Toward an integrated perspective of media influence. American Politics Quarterly, 25, 287-318. doi:10.1177/1532673X9702500303
19.
GrahamJ. (2016, August12). Trump vs. Clinton: How the rivals rank on Twitter, Facebook, more. USA Today. Retrieved from http://usat.ly/2aFmmBu
20.
HemphillL.CulottaA.HestonM. (2013). Framing in social media: How the US Congress uses Twitter hashtags to frame political issues. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2317335
KernellS. (1986). Going public: New strategies of presidential leadership. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
23.
KoopmansR. (2004). Movements and media: Selection processes and evolutionary dynamics in the public sphere. Theory and Society, 33, 367-391. doi:10.1023/B:RYSO.0000038603.34963.de
24.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
MerazS.PapacharissiZ. (2013). Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18, 138-166. doi:10.1177/1940161212474472
MonroeB.ColaresiM.QuinnK. (2008). Fightin’ words: Lexical feature selection and evaluation for identifying the content of political conflict. Political Analysis, 16, 372-403. doi:10.1093/pan/mpn018
RikerW. (1986). The art of political manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
38.
RossA.RiversD. (2018). Discursive deflection: Accusation of “fake news” and the spread of mis- and disinformation in the tweets of President Trump. Social Media+Society, 4(2). doi:2056305118776010
39.
RozinP.RoyzmanE. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296-320. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
40.
ShahD. V.McLeodD. M.RojasH.ChoJ.WagnerM. W.FriedlandL. A. (2017). Revising the communication mediation model for a new political communication ecology. Human Communication Research, 43, 491-504. doi:10.1111/hcre.12115
41.
SnowD.BenfordR. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197-217.
Van DuynE.CollierJ. (2019). Priming and fake news: The effects of elite discourse on evaluations of news media. Mass Communication and Society, 22, 29-48. doi:10.1080/15205436.2018.1511807
45.
WantaW.FooteJ. (1994). The president-news media relationship: A time series analysis of agenda-setting. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38, 437-448. doi:10.1080/08838159409364277
46.
WattsM. D.DomkeD.ShahD. V.FanD. P. (1999). Elite cues and media bias in presidential campaigns: Explaining public perceptions of a liberal press. Communication Research, 26, 144-175. doi:10.1177/009365099026002003
47.
WellsC.ShahD. V.PevehouseJ. C.YangJ.PelledA.BoehmF.SchmidtJ. L. (2016). How Trump drove coverage to the nomination: Hybrid media campaigning. Political Communication, 33, 669-676. doi:10.1080/10584609.2016.1224416
48.
WihbeyJ.ColemanT. D.JosephK.LazerD. (2017). Exploring the ideological nature of journalists’ social networks on Twitter and associations with news story content. In Proceedings of Data Science + Journalism at KDD. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8CcT_0LwJ8QVnJMR1QzcGNuTkk/view
49.
WoolleyS. C.GuilbeaultD. R. (2017). Computational propaganda in the United States of America: Manufacturing consensus online (Working Paper 2017.5). Oxford, UK: Project on Computational Propaganda.
