EDEC 262 Lecture Notes - Lecture 6: Media Consumption, Social Capital, Socalled
22 Jun 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power
-Bias is yet to be defined clearly, let alone received much serious empirical attention. The term
seems to take on three major meanings. Sometimes, it is applied to news that purportedly distorts
or falsifies reality (distortion bias), some-times to news that favours one side rather than
providing equivalent treatment to both sides in a political conflict (content bias), and sometimes
to the motivations and mindsets of journalists who allegedly produce the biased content
(decision-making bias).
-First, systematically employing agenda setting, framing, and priming under the conceptual
umbrella of bias would advance understanding of the media’s role in distributing power,
revealing new dimensions and processes of critically political communication.
-Second, such a project would offer normative guidance for scholars, for journalists striving to
construct more ‘‘fair and balanced’’ news, and for the many citizens and activists who feel
victimized by biased media.
-Scholars can shed new light on bias by examining linkages among the three concepts that have
received such intense scholarly scrutiny. We can define framing as the process of culling a few
elements of perceived reality and assembling a narrative that highlights connections among them
to promote a particular interpretation.
—> fully developed frames typically perform four functions: problem definition, causal analysis,
moral judgment, and remedy promotion
—> framing works to shape and alter audience members’ interpretations and preferences through
priming. That is, frames introduce or raise the salience or apparent importance of certain ideas,
activating schemas that encourage target audiences to think, feel, and decide in a particular way
-Agenda setting can be seen as another name for successfully performing the first function of
framing: defining problems worthy of public and government attention. Among other things,
agenda problems can spotlight societal conditions, world events, or character traits of a
candidate.
—> The second or ‘‘attribute’’ level of agenda setting centrally involves three types of claims
that happen to encompass the core business of strategic framing: to highlight the causes of
problems, to encourage moral judgments (and associated affective responses), and to promote
favoured policies. Priming, then, is a name for the goal, the intended effect, of strategic actors’
framing activities.
-The media may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but is
stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about. Although the distinction between
‘‘what to think’’ and ‘‘what to think about’’ is not entirely clear, the former seems to mean what
people decide, favour, or accept, whereas the latter refers to the considerations they ‘‘think
about’’ in coming to such conclusions.
-The best succinct definition of power is the ability to get others to do what one wants, ’telling
people what to think about’’ is how one exerts political influence in non-coercive political
systems (and to a lesser extent in coercive ones). And it is through framing that political actors
shape the texts that influence or prime the agendas and considerations that people think about
-Slant characterizes individual news reports and editorials in which the framing favours one side
over the other in a current or potential dispute
-Mainstream news organizations contend that they treat competing frames equivalently, ensuring
that their reports do not slant. Yet, political actors constantly (and strategically) complain that the
media favour their opponents.
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Framing bias: media in the distribution of power. Bias is yet to be de ned clearly, let alone received much serious empirical attention. The term seems to take on three major meanings. First, systematically employing agenda setting, framing, and priming under the conceptual umbrella of bias would advance understanding of the media"s role in distributing power, revealing new dimensions and processes of critically political communication. Second, such a project would offer normative guidance for scholars, for journalists striving to construct more fair and balanced"" news, and for the many citizens and activists who feel victimized by biased media. Scholars can shed new light on bias by examining linkages among the three concepts that have received such intense scholarly scrutiny. We can de ne framing as the process of culling a few elements of perceived reality and assembling a narrative that highlights connections among them to promote a particular interpretation.
