We argue that during the financial crisis, economic news served as a dominant source of information for the public and as an influential factor in legitimating economic policy. We analyze (1) how German news broadcasts treated governmental intervention during the crisis and (2) selected effects on public opinion. Drawing on results from a content analysis of television news broadcasts (n = 980), we show that governmental intervention was covered substantially, focusing on fiscal measures. To investigate possible effects of the news coverage, we conducted an online experiment with subjects differing in their degree of involvement with the consequences of the crisis (n = 293). A news article treating governmental debt guarantees within a supportive frame induced subjects to approve of governmental intervention, as contrasted with an adverse version of the article. However, the effects of the media coverage were partially moderated by subjects’ involvement.
AltmanRoger C.2009. “The Great Crash, 2008: A Geopolitical Setback for the West.” Foreign Affairs88:2–14.
2.
BAFA: Bundesamt für Wirtschaft und Ausfuhrkontrolle2009. Umweltprämie – Statistik. Zwischenbericht. Eschborn: BAFA.
3.
Ball-RokeachSandra J.DeFleurMelvin L.1976. “A Dependency Model of Mass-media Effects.” Communication Research3:3–21.
4.
BarkerDavid C.2005. “Values, Frames, and Persuasion in Presidential Nomination Campaigns.” Political Behavior27:375–94.
5.
BloodDeborah J.PhillipsPeter C. B.1995. “Recession Headline News, Consumer Sentiment, the State of the Economy and Presidential Popularity: A Time Series Analysis 1989-1993.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research7:2–22.
6.
BorahPorismita. 2011. “Conceptual Issues in Framing Theory: A Systematic Examination of a Decade’s Literature.” Journal of Communication61:246–63.
7.
BrewerPaul R.2003. “Values, Political Knowledge, and Public Opinion about Gay Rights: A Framing-based Account.” Public Opinion Quarterly67:173–201.
CarrollCraig E.McCombsMaxwell. 2003. “Agenda-Setting Effects of Business News on the Public’s Images and Opinions about Major Corporations.” Corporate Reputation Review6:36–46.
10.
ClawsonRosalie A.WaltenburgEric N.2003. “Support for a Supreme Court Affirmative Action Decision: A Story in Black and White.” American Politics Research31:251–79.
11.
DemersDavid P.CraffDennisChoiYang-HoPessinBeth M.1989. “Issue Obtrusiveness and the Agenda-Setting Effects of National Network News.” Communication Research16:793–813.
12.
de VreesClaes H.2004. “The Effects of Frames in Political Television News on Issue Interpretation and Frame Salience.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly81:36–52.
13.
de VreesClaes H.PeterJochenSemetkoHolli A.2001. “Framing Politics at the Launch of the Euro: A Cross-National Comparative Study of Frames in the News.” Political Communication18:107–22.
14.
DonsbachWolfgang. 1999. “Sieg der Illusion: Wirtschaft und Arbeitsmarkt in der Wirklichkeit und in den Medien.” In Meinungsklima und Medienwirkung im Bundestagswahlkampf 1998,ed. Noelle-NeumannElisabethKepplingerHans M.DonsbachWolfgang, 40–77. Freiburg: Verlag Karl Alber.
15.
DruckmanJames N.2001. “The Implications of Framing Effects for Citizen Competence.” Political Behavior23:225–56.
16.
DruckmanJames N.NelsonKjersten R.2003. “Framing and Deliberation.” American Journal of Political Science47:728–44.
17.
EastonDavid. 1975. “A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support.” British Journal of Political Science5:435–57.
18.
EntmanRobert M.1993. “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication43:51–58.
19.
ErbringLutzGoldenbergEdie N.MillerArthur H.1980. “Front-Page News and Real-World Cues: A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media.” American Journal of Political Science24:16–49.
20.
GavinNeil T.SandersDavid. 1997. “The Economy and Voting.” Parliamentary Affairs: A Journal of Comparative Politics50:631–40.
21.
GrossKimberlyD’AmbrosioLisa. 2004. “Framing Emotional Response.” Political Psychology25:1–29.
22.
HagenLutz M.1993. “Opportune Witnesses: An Analysis of Balance in the Selection of Sources and Arguments in the Leading German Newspapers’ Coverage of the Census Issue.” European Journal of Communication8:317–45.
23.
HagenLutz M.2005. Konjunkturnachrichten, Konjunkturklima und Konjunktur: Wie sich die Wirtschaftsberichterstattung der Massenmedien, Stimmungen der Bevölkerung und die aktuelle Wirtschaftslage wechselseitig beeinflussen; eine transaktionale Analyse. Köln: Halem.
24.
HeinrichJürgenMossChristoph. 2006. Wirtschaftsjournalistik: Grundlagen und Praxis. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
25.
HetheringtonMarc J.1996. “The Media’s Role in Framing Voters’ National Economic Evaluations in 1992.” American Journal of Political Science40:372–95.
26.
IyengarShantoKinderDonald R.1987. News That Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
27.
JacksonSally. 1992. Message Effects Research: Principles of Design and Data Analysis. New York: Guilford.
28.
JarrenOtfriedDongesPatrickWeßlerHartmut. 1996. “Medien und politischer Prozess: Eine Einleitung.” In Medien und politischer Prozess, ed. JarrenOtfriedSchatzHeribertWeßlerHartmut, 9–37. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
29.
KinderDonald R.KiewietRoderick D.1981. “Sociotropic Politics: The American Case.” British Journal of Political Science11:129–61.
30.
LangGladys E.LangKurt. 1981. “Watergate: An Exploration of the Agenda-Building Process.” In Mass Communication Review Yearbook 2, ed. WilhoitG. CleavelandDe BockHarold, 447–68. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31.
LockeJohn. (1690) 1980. Second Treatise of Government, ed. McPhersonCrawford B.Indianapolis: Hackett.
32.
LowryDennis T.2008. “Network TV News Framing of Good vs. Bad Economic News under Democrat and Republican Presidents: A Lexical Analysis of Political Bias.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly85:483–98.
33.
McCombsMaxwell E.1977. “Newspapers versus Television: Mass Communication Effects across Time.” In The Emergence of American Political Issues: The Agenda-Setting Function of the Press, ed. ShawDonald L.McCombsMaxwell E., 89–105. St. Paul, MN: West.
34.
MeierChristianWinterbauerStefan. 2008. Die Finanzkrise und die Medien: Nagelprobe für den Wirtschafts- und Finanzjournalismus. Rengsdorf: MGS.
35.
MondakJeffery J.MutzDiana C.HuckfeldtRobert. 1996. “Persuasion in Context: The Multilevel Structure of Economic Evaluations.” In Political Persuasion and Attitude Change, ed. MutzDiana C.SnidermanPaul M.BrodyRichard A., 249–66. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
36.
NeumanRussel W.JustMarion R.CriglerAnn N.1992. Common Knowledge: News and the Construction of Political Meaning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
PhilipPalmgreenClarkPeter. 1977. “Agenda-Setting with Local and National Issues.” Communication Research4:435–52.
38.
QuiringOliver. 2003. “Die Fernsehberichterstattung über die Arbeitslosigkeit und ihr Einfluss auf wahlrelevante Vorstellungen der Bevölkerung: Eine Zeitreihenanalyse 1994 bis 1998.” Publizistik48:1–24.
39.
QuiringOliver. 2004. Wirtschaftsberichterstattung und Wahlen. Konstanz, Germany: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft.
40.
RidderChrista-MariaBernhardEngel. 2010. “Massenkommunikation 2010: Funktionen und Images der Medien im Vergleich.” Media Perspektiven11:537–48.
41.
RösslerPatrick. 1997. Agenda-Setting: Theoretische Annahmen und empirische Evidenzen einer Medienwirkungshypothese. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
42.
ScheufeleBertram. 2005. “Mediale Legitimierung von Kriegen durch Rollenzuschreibung: Eine explorative Studie zur Berichterstattung deutscher Nachrichtenmagazine über den Kosovo-Krieg.” Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft53:352–68.
43.
ScheufeleBertramGasteigerCarolin. 2007. “Berichterstattung, Emotionen und politische Legitimierung: Eine experimentelle Untersuchung zum Einfluss der Politikberichterstattung auf die Legitimierung politischer Entscheidungen am Beispiel von Bundeswehreinsätzen.” Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft55:534–54.
44.
ScheufeleBertramHaasAlexander. 2008. Medien und Aktien: Theoretische und empirische Modellierung der Rolle der Berichterstattung für das Börsengeschehen. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
45.
ScheufeleDietram A.1999. “Framing as a Theory of Media Effects.” Journal of Communication49:103–22.
46.
ShahDhavan V.DomkeDavidWackmanDaniel B.1996 . “‘To Thine Own Self Be True’: Values, Framing, and Voter Decision-Making Strategies.” Communication Research23:509–60.
47.
ShenFuyuanEdwardsHeidi H.2005. “Economic Individualism, Humanitarianism, and Welfare Reform: A Value-Based Account of Framing Effects.” Journal of Communication55:795–809.
48.
TewksburyDavidScheufeleDietram. A. 2009. “News Framing Theory and Research.” In Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, ed. BryantJenningsOliverMary B.17–33. New York: Routledge.
49.
TewksburyDavidJonesJenniferPeskeMathewRaymondAleshaWilliam VigW. 2000. “The Interaction of News and Advocate Frames: Manipulating Audience Perceptions of a Local Public Policy Issue.” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly77:804–29.
50.
USDT (United States Department of Transportation). 2009. Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Act of 2009: Report to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. Washington, DC: USDT.
51.
Van GorpBaldwinVettehenPaul H.BeentjesJohannes W. J.2009. “Challenging the Frame in the News: The Role of Issue Involvement, Attitude, and Competing Frames.” Journal of Media Psychology21:161–70.
52.
WeberMax. 1976. Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft: Grundriss der verstehenden Soziologie. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.
53.
ZubayrCamilleGerhardHeinz. 2011. “Tendenzen im Zuschauerverhalten: Fernsehgewohnheiten und Fernsehreichweiten im Jahr 2010.” Media Perspektiven3:126–38.
54.
ZuckerHarold G.1978. “The Variable Nature of News Media Influence” In Mass Communication Yearbook 2, ed. RubenBrent D., 225–40. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
