This study examines the framing of economic news in national television newscasts during the height of the economic crisis of 2008. Specifically, the authors examine the manner in which the broadcast media presented the question of who is responsible for causing and fixing the problem. Agents responsible for causing or solving the economic crisis include government, businesses, individuals, and foreign entities. Other variables studied include the volume and scope of economic news coverage and source attribution. A content analysis of 357 broadcast news transcripts revealed that corporations were most commonly presented as causing the economic news being reported while government was most commonly framed as able to provide a solution to the economic news being reported. Implications of these findings in the context of the media’s tapping into public outrage toward corporations are discussed.
DeVreeseC.PeterJ.SemetkoH. (2001). Framing politics at the launch of the Euro: A cross-national comparative study of frames in the news. Political Communication, 18, 107–122.
5.
DurhamF. (2007). Framing the state in globalization: “The Financial Times’” coverage of the 1997 Thai currency crisis. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 24, 57–76.
6.
EntmanR. (1989). Democracy without citizens: Media and the decay of American politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
7.
EntmanR. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58.
8.
FriedmanD.Hoffman-GoetzL. (2003). Cancer coverage in North American publications targeting seniors. Journal of Cancer Education, 18, 43–47.
9.
FriedmanD.TannerA. (2007). Reading difficulty level of medical resources on television web sites: Recommendations for a social practices approach to consumer health literacy. Journal of Consumer Health on the Internet, 11, 43–60.
10.
GamsonW.ModiglianiA. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1–37.
JustS. (2009). No place like home? The role of the media in the framing of Europe. Journal of Language & Politics, 8, 244–268.
17.
KenskiK.HardyB.JamiesonK. (2010). The Obama victory: How media, money and message shaped the 2008 election. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
18.
KimS.-H.CarvalhoJ.DavisA. (2010). Talking about poverty: News framing of who is responsible for causing and fixing the problem. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 87, 563–581.
19.
KimS.-H.CarvalhoJ. P.DavisA. G.MullinsA. M. (2011). The view of the border: News framing of the definition, causes, and solutions to illegal immigration. Mass Communication & Society, 14, 292–314.
20.
KimS.-H.ScheufeleD.ShanahanJ. (2002). Think about it this way: Attribute agenda-setting function of the press and the public’s evaluation of a local issue. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79, 1–25.
21.
KimS.-H.WillisL. (2007). Talking about obesity: News framing of who is responsible for causing and fixing the problem. Journal of Health Communication, 12, 359–376.
22.
LandisJ.KochG. (1977). The measurement of agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
23.
Len-RiosM.HinnantA.ParkS.-A.CameronG.FrisbyC.LeeY. (2009). Health news agenda building: Journalists’ perceptions of the role of public relations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 315–331.
24.
LevyR. (2007). PR triumphs in a bad economy. Public Relations Quarterly, 52, 28–31.
25.
LewisS.ReeseS. (2009). What is the war on terror? Framing through the eyes of journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 85–102.
26.
LowryD. (2008). Network TV framing of good vs. bad economic news under Democrat and Republican presidents: A lexical analysis of political bias. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 85, 483–498.
27.
MatthesJ. (2009). What’s in a frame? A content analysis of media framing studies in the world’s leading communication journals, 1990-2005. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 349–367.
28.
McCombsM.ShawD. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34,167–187.
29.
McQuailD. (2008). McQuail’s mass communication theory. London, UK: Sage.
30.
MutzD. (1998). Impersonal influence: How perceptions of mass collectives affect political attitudes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Pew Research Center for People and the Press. (2008). Key news audiences now blend online and traditional sources: Audience segments in a changing news environment. Retrieved frompeople-press.org/report/444/news-media
Pew Research Center Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2011). The state of news media: An annual report on American journalism. Retrieved fromhttp://stateofthemedia.org/2011/
36.
RaghubirP.JoharG. (1999). Hong Kong 1997 in context. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 543–565.
37.
RiffeD. (2004). An editorial comment. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(2), 232–233.
SigalL. (1973). Reporters and officials: The organization and politics of newsmaking. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
40.
TannerA.FriedmanD.KoskanA.BarrD. (2009). Disaster communication on the Internet: A focus on mobilizing information. Journal of Health Communication, 14, 741–755.
41.
TannerA.ThrasherJ.BlakeC. (2012). Tracking beverage consumption trends in the news: An evaluation of beverage information on network television. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 51, 1–12.
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
. (2011). Retrieved fromwww.bls.gov
44.
WeaverD.BimberB. (2008). Finding news stories: A comparison of searches using LexisNexis and Google News. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 85, 515–530.
