- Email: [email protected]
An evidence of frame building: Analyzing the correlations among the frames in Sierra Club newsletters, national newspapers, and regional newspapers
Public Relations Review 35 (2009) 130–132
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Research in brief
An evidence of frame building: Analyzing the correlations among the frames in Sierra Club newsletters, national newspapers, and regional newspapers Qingjiang Yao ∗ School of Journalism and Mass Communication, The University of Iowa, W339 Adler Journalism Building, Iowa City, IA 52242-2004, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 27 April 2008 Received in revised form 26 September 2008 Accepted 12 January 2009 Keywords: Sierra Club newsletters Newspapers Frame building Environment
a b s t r a c t Based on the data reported in a published article, this study finds that the percentages of articles that have particular frames in Sierra Club newsletters correlate with those in national and regional newspapers. Partial correlation analysis also reports such a correlation between the national newspapers and the regional newspapers, which disappears when the Sierra Club newsletters are controlled. Moreover, the correlation between the newsletters and the newspapers exists when the pro-environment master frames are analyzed, but not when the pro-development competing frames are analyzed. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Framing is probably the most popular media effects theory (Chang & Tai, 2005; Weaver, 2007), which usually explores three basic questions: how the media set frames for audiences, how social establishments influence the building of media frames, and how the public consumes the media frames (Pan & Kosicki, 1993). Scheufele (1999) synthesizes previous research and proposes a process model of framing research. The first process, frame building, predicts that elites, social ideology, news organizational norms, and journalists’ individual preferences influence the building of the media frame. Several influential qualitative studies have identified the social establishments’ function of shaping the media’s frame building (e.g., Gans, 1980; Gitlin, 1980; Tuchman, 1978). Few empirical studies, however, have been contributed to test the hypothesis. Reber and Berger (2005) provide some evidence to support this hypothesis, but their analysis has little statistical support. This study, based on the data that they report, furthers their analysis and tests the hypotheses of frame building. It also tests Iyengar and Valentino’s (2000) finding that a source’s credibility is a mediator of that source’s informational influence. 2. Data and method Reber and Berger (2005) identify twelve pro-environment master frames and sixteen pro-development competing frames about the drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the use of coal-fired power plants (CFPP), and urban sprawl in metropolitan areas (Sprawl) from the website and newsletters of the Sierra Club, a leading environmental Non-Government
∗ Tel.: +1 319 335 3360. E-mail address: [email protected]. 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.009
Q. Yao / Public Relations Review 35 (2009) 130–132
131
Organization. They consequently content analyzed 79 articles in Sierra Club newsletters from spring 2001 through spring 2002, as well as 102 articles in The New York Times and the Washington Post (which represent the national newspapers) and 82 articles in regional newspapers, all from January 2001 to April 2003. The national newspaper articles were searched from LexisNexis with keywords “Sierra Club” and one of the three study issues (e.g., ANWR). In the search of regional newspaper articles another keyword, one of the states whose Sierra Club newsletters were represented in the newsletter sample (e.g., California), was added. Reber and Berger (2005) reported the percentages of articles that contain the master frames and competing frames except a few cases. Correlation analysis is usually used to examine media’s influence on audiences. Winter and Eyal (1981), for example, use partial and zero-order correlations to analyze how public opinion shown in 27 public opinion polls is associated with the media coverage. In their study that examines the relationship between the media agenda and public agenda on eight aspects of the Afghanistan war, with a small sample size that cannot ensure normality, Craft and Wanta (2004) use Spearman rankorder correlation analysis, a distribution-free procedure. Given that the data distribution normality is not warranted, this study mainly uses the rank-order correlation analysis. Partial correlation, nevertheless, is also used to provide more evidence. Kerlinger (1964) has argued that, when data are not normally distributed, the Pearson’s r can still be used to examine the relationship between two variables in studies not emphasizing generalization. Partial correlation analysis, Wimmer and Dominick (2000) point out, “enable the researchers to determine the influence of the controlled variable” (p. 284).
3. Results According to the frame-building hypothesis, and Iyengar and Valentino’s (2000) study we have H1. The frames in the Sierra Club newsletters are positively correlated with the frames in the national newspapers and the regional newspapers. Spearman rank-order correlation between the percentage of articles in Sierra Club newsletters that have each master or competing frame and the percentage of articles in the national newspapers that have each of these frames is 0.586 (N = 26, p = .002). The rank-order correlation between Sierra Club newsletters and the regional newspapers is 0.680 (N = 24, p < .001). This same correlation between the national newspapers and the regional newspapers is not statistically significant. Pearson’s r analysis confirms the above-mentioned pattern. While the zero-order correlations among all three variables are substantial and significant, the partial correlation between the national newspapers and the regional newspapers is not significant when the newsletters are controlled. The partial correlations between the newsletters and the national newspapers (r(20) = .71, p < .001), and between the newsletters and the regional newsletters (r(20) = .48, p = .024), however, are still substantial and significant when the other variable is controlled. This is suggesting that it is the newsletter, not the two types of newspapers, that serves as the influencing factors. H1 is supported. H2. For master frames, the Sierra Club newsletters are positively correlated with the newspapers, but for competing frames not. Splitting the pro-development competing frames from the pro-environment master frames, the rank-order correlations of the percentages of articles containing the master frames between the newsletters and the national newspapers ( = .70, N = 13, p = .007), and between the newsletters and the regional newspapers ( = .60, N = 13, p = .030), are still substantial and significant. None of the rank-order correlations of the percentages of articles containing the competing frames is significant. H2 is supported.
4. Discussion This study, using the data reported by Reber and Berger (2005), provides evidence consistent with but much stronger than the result in the original study that the Sierra Club has substantial influence on the frame building of the national and the regional newspapers. When the influence of Sierra Club newsletters is controlled, even the national newspapers have no influence upon the regional newspapers in how to frame environmental issues. Meanwhile, although this is essentially a cross-section study that cannot provide evidence on time order, readers can still identify from Reber and Berger’s (2005) method description that part of the newspaper articles (from January 2001 to April 2003) were published after the newsletters (from spring 2001 through spring 2002). This provides some evidence of time-order in the causation from the newsletters to the newspapers. Also consistent to Iyengar and Valentino’s (2000) finding, this study shows that Sierra Club has influence on the national and regional newspapers when they build pro-environment frames, on which the Sierra Club has credential. This leading environmental NGO, however, has no influence on these newspapers when they build pro-development frames. This study has the same limitation that the original study has. The generalizability is not strong because the data are not from a probability sample. Besides, enough evidence has not been provided to establish a relationship of influence and causality. Further research design should formally take into consideration the time factor required by the causality.
132
Q. Yao / Public Relations Review 35 (2009) 130–132
References Chang, T. K., & Tai, Z. (2005). Mass communication research and the invisible college revisited: The changing landscape and emerging fronts in journalismrelated studies. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(3), 672–694. Craft, S., & Wanta, W. (2004). U. S. Public concerns in the aftermath of 9-11: A test of second level agenda-setting. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16(4), 456–463. Gans, H. J. (1980). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage Books. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Iyengar, S., & Valentino, N. A. (2000). Who says what? Source Credibility as a mediator of campaign advertising. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality (pp. 108–129). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kerlinger, F. N. (1964). Foundation of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55–75. Reber, B. H., & Berger, B. K. (2005). Framing analysis of activist rhetoric: How the Sierra Club succeeds or fails at creating salient messages. Public Relations Review, 31, 185–195. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: The Free Press. Weaver, D. (2007). Thoughts on agenda-setting, framing, and priming. Journal of Communication, 57, 142–147. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2000). Mass media research: An introduction (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Winter, J. P., & Eyal, C. H. (1981). Agenda setting for the civil rights issue. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 376–383.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Research in brief
An evidence of frame building: Analyzing the correlations among the frames in Sierra Club newsletters, national newspapers, and regional newspapers Qingjiang Yao ∗ School of Journalism and Mass Communication, The University of Iowa, W339 Adler Journalism Building, Iowa City, IA 52242-2004, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 27 April 2008 Received in revised form 26 September 2008 Accepted 12 January 2009 Keywords: Sierra Club newsletters Newspapers Frame building Environment
a b s t r a c t Based on the data reported in a published article, this study finds that the percentages of articles that have particular frames in Sierra Club newsletters correlate with those in national and regional newspapers. Partial correlation analysis also reports such a correlation between the national newspapers and the regional newspapers, which disappears when the Sierra Club newsletters are controlled. Moreover, the correlation between the newsletters and the newspapers exists when the pro-environment master frames are analyzed, but not when the pro-development competing frames are analyzed. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Framing is probably the most popular media effects theory (Chang & Tai, 2005; Weaver, 2007), which usually explores three basic questions: how the media set frames for audiences, how social establishments influence the building of media frames, and how the public consumes the media frames (Pan & Kosicki, 1993). Scheufele (1999) synthesizes previous research and proposes a process model of framing research. The first process, frame building, predicts that elites, social ideology, news organizational norms, and journalists’ individual preferences influence the building of the media frame. Several influential qualitative studies have identified the social establishments’ function of shaping the media’s frame building (e.g., Gans, 1980; Gitlin, 1980; Tuchman, 1978). Few empirical studies, however, have been contributed to test the hypothesis. Reber and Berger (2005) provide some evidence to support this hypothesis, but their analysis has little statistical support. This study, based on the data that they report, furthers their analysis and tests the hypotheses of frame building. It also tests Iyengar and Valentino’s (2000) finding that a source’s credibility is a mediator of that source’s informational influence. 2. Data and method Reber and Berger (2005) identify twelve pro-environment master frames and sixteen pro-development competing frames about the drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), the use of coal-fired power plants (CFPP), and urban sprawl in metropolitan areas (Sprawl) from the website and newsletters of the Sierra Club, a leading environmental Non-Government
∗ Tel.: +1 319 335 3360. E-mail address: [email protected]. 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.01.009
Q. Yao / Public Relations Review 35 (2009) 130–132
131
Organization. They consequently content analyzed 79 articles in Sierra Club newsletters from spring 2001 through spring 2002, as well as 102 articles in The New York Times and the Washington Post (which represent the national newspapers) and 82 articles in regional newspapers, all from January 2001 to April 2003. The national newspaper articles were searched from LexisNexis with keywords “Sierra Club” and one of the three study issues (e.g., ANWR). In the search of regional newspaper articles another keyword, one of the states whose Sierra Club newsletters were represented in the newsletter sample (e.g., California), was added. Reber and Berger (2005) reported the percentages of articles that contain the master frames and competing frames except a few cases. Correlation analysis is usually used to examine media’s influence on audiences. Winter and Eyal (1981), for example, use partial and zero-order correlations to analyze how public opinion shown in 27 public opinion polls is associated with the media coverage. In their study that examines the relationship between the media agenda and public agenda on eight aspects of the Afghanistan war, with a small sample size that cannot ensure normality, Craft and Wanta (2004) use Spearman rankorder correlation analysis, a distribution-free procedure. Given that the data distribution normality is not warranted, this study mainly uses the rank-order correlation analysis. Partial correlation, nevertheless, is also used to provide more evidence. Kerlinger (1964) has argued that, when data are not normally distributed, the Pearson’s r can still be used to examine the relationship between two variables in studies not emphasizing generalization. Partial correlation analysis, Wimmer and Dominick (2000) point out, “enable the researchers to determine the influence of the controlled variable” (p. 284).
3. Results According to the frame-building hypothesis, and Iyengar and Valentino’s (2000) study we have H1. The frames in the Sierra Club newsletters are positively correlated with the frames in the national newspapers and the regional newspapers. Spearman rank-order correlation between the percentage of articles in Sierra Club newsletters that have each master or competing frame and the percentage of articles in the national newspapers that have each of these frames is 0.586 (N = 26, p = .002). The rank-order correlation between Sierra Club newsletters and the regional newspapers is 0.680 (N = 24, p < .001). This same correlation between the national newspapers and the regional newspapers is not statistically significant. Pearson’s r analysis confirms the above-mentioned pattern. While the zero-order correlations among all three variables are substantial and significant, the partial correlation between the national newspapers and the regional newspapers is not significant when the newsletters are controlled. The partial correlations between the newsletters and the national newspapers (r(20) = .71, p < .001), and between the newsletters and the regional newsletters (r(20) = .48, p = .024), however, are still substantial and significant when the other variable is controlled. This is suggesting that it is the newsletter, not the two types of newspapers, that serves as the influencing factors. H1 is supported. H2. For master frames, the Sierra Club newsletters are positively correlated with the newspapers, but for competing frames not. Splitting the pro-development competing frames from the pro-environment master frames, the rank-order correlations of the percentages of articles containing the master frames between the newsletters and the national newspapers ( = .70, N = 13, p = .007), and between the newsletters and the regional newspapers ( = .60, N = 13, p = .030), are still substantial and significant. None of the rank-order correlations of the percentages of articles containing the competing frames is significant. H2 is supported.
4. Discussion This study, using the data reported by Reber and Berger (2005), provides evidence consistent with but much stronger than the result in the original study that the Sierra Club has substantial influence on the frame building of the national and the regional newspapers. When the influence of Sierra Club newsletters is controlled, even the national newspapers have no influence upon the regional newspapers in how to frame environmental issues. Meanwhile, although this is essentially a cross-section study that cannot provide evidence on time order, readers can still identify from Reber and Berger’s (2005) method description that part of the newspaper articles (from January 2001 to April 2003) were published after the newsletters (from spring 2001 through spring 2002). This provides some evidence of time-order in the causation from the newsletters to the newspapers. Also consistent to Iyengar and Valentino’s (2000) finding, this study shows that Sierra Club has influence on the national and regional newspapers when they build pro-environment frames, on which the Sierra Club has credential. This leading environmental NGO, however, has no influence on these newspapers when they build pro-development frames. This study has the same limitation that the original study has. The generalizability is not strong because the data are not from a probability sample. Besides, enough evidence has not been provided to establish a relationship of influence and causality. Further research design should formally take into consideration the time factor required by the causality.
132
Q. Yao / Public Relations Review 35 (2009) 130–132
References Chang, T. K., & Tai, Z. (2005). Mass communication research and the invisible college revisited: The changing landscape and emerging fronts in journalismrelated studies. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(3), 672–694. Craft, S., & Wanta, W. (2004). U. S. Public concerns in the aftermath of 9-11: A test of second level agenda-setting. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 16(4), 456–463. Gans, H. J. (1980). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Vintage Books. Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching: Media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Iyengar, S., & Valentino, N. A. (2000). Who says what? Source Credibility as a mediator of campaign advertising. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of reason: Cognition, choice, and the bounds of rationality (pp. 108–129). New York: Cambridge University Press. Kerlinger, F. N. (1964). Foundation of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55–75. Reber, B. H., & Berger, B. K. (2005). Framing analysis of activist rhetoric: How the Sierra Club succeeds or fails at creating salient messages. Public Relations Review, 31, 185–195. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: The Free Press. Weaver, D. (2007). Thoughts on agenda-setting, framing, and priming. Journal of Communication, 57, 142–147. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2000). Mass media research: An introduction (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Winter, J. P., & Eyal, C. H. (1981). Agenda setting for the civil rights issue. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 376–383.