It is widely known that the public in the U.S. counts on the mass media to get information about political affairs these days (Pew Research Center 2010: 1), not only because it is hardly possible for people to gather all the political information they get from the media by themselves but also because political issues are usually very complex and difficult to compre-hend without any guidance (cf. Berinsky/Kinder 2006: 641). What the public knows about politics – which is the basis of public debate and can shape public opinion – therefore depends to a large extent on what journalists convey in the news (cf. Simon/Xenos 2010: 363; de Vreese 2005: 51). This is also a crucial fact for political actors because they have to take the media into account whenever they want to convey a message or opinion about a political con-cern to the public.
Among the most important messages from political actors to the people are presidential speeches because they very often include vital decisions for the country or new strategies in an ongoing conflict. By giving a speech to the nation a president can not only justify political plans but also shape those plans in a way that makes them worthy of support among the public and the Congress. Thus, a president’s “message is constructed in such a way as to contain certain associations rather than others” (Simon/Xenos 2010: 367) in order to accentuate aspects of the message that the president thinks are likely to attract support. This is called framing and serves the purpose of promoting a certain “interpretation and evaluation” of a political issue by an audience (Entman 2004: 26). However, unless people watch the speeches themselves, a president cannot entirely determine how the public perceives the content of a speech. Whether a presidential speech comes across the way a president communicated it, depends heavily on whether journalists pick up the president’s framing and put the emphasis on the same information that the president did. If the media doesn’t do that, the public might not judge the political matter the way a president intended, which could result in less support for a policy.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Theoretical Background – Approaches, Definitions and Influences of Framing
3 Framing of Obama’s Speech and Conveyance in the News - Methodology and Results
3.1 Introduction to the Frame Categories
3.2 Frame Categories in the Speech and Its Coverage: Results of Analysis
3.3 Comparison of Results
4 Conclusion
5 Bibliography
6 Appendix
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This paper investigates the extent to which the Washington Post's news coverage of President Barack Obama's speech regarding the new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan aligned with the framing originally established by the President. The study aims to determine if the media accurately reflected the President’s intended emphasis on various policy aspects or if the news coverage disproportionately highlighted specific frames, thereby potentially altering public perception and evaluation of the proposed strategy.
- Theoretical foundations of framing analysis in political communication.
- Methodological approach to identifying and coding frame categories in political speeches.
- Comparative analysis of frame prominence in presidential rhetoric vs. newspaper coverage.
- The influence of media gatekeeping and journalistic routines on political messaging.
- Implications of media framing for public and congressional support of foreign policy.
Excerpt from the Book
1 Introduction
It is widely known that the public in the U.S. counts on the mass media to get information about political affairs these days (Pew Research Center 2010: 1), not only because it is hardly possible for people to gather all the political information they get from the media by themselves but also because political issues are usually very complex and difficult to comprehend without any guidance (cf. Berinsky/Kinder 2006: 641). What the public knows about politics – which is the basis of public debate and can shape public opinion – therefore depends to a large extent on what journalists convey in the news (cf. Simon/Xenos 2010: 363; de Vreese 2005: 51). This is also a crucial fact for political actors because they have to take the media into account whenever they want to convey a message or opinion about a political concern to the public.
Among the most important messages from political actors to the people are presidential speeches because they very often include vital decisions for the country or new strategies in an ongoing conflict. By giving a speech to the nation a president can not only justify political plans but also shape those plans in a way that makes them worthy of support among the public and the Congress. Thus, a president’s “message is constructed in such a way as to contain certain associations rather than others” (Simon/Xenos 2010: 367) in order to accentuate aspects of the message that the president thinks are likely to attract support. This is called framing and serves the purpose of promoting a certain “interpretation and evaluation” of a political issue by an audience (Entman 2004: 26).
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter contextualizes the importance of media framing in shaping public opinion regarding U.S. foreign policy and defines the research objective: comparing President Obama’s speech frames with the Washington Post's reporting.
2 Theoretical Background – Approaches, Definitions and Influences of Framing: This section reviews the literature on framing, tracing its origins to Goffman and Entman, and establishes the conceptual framework for identifying how political messages are constructed and interpreted.
3 Framing of Obama’s Speech and Conveyance in the News - Methodology and Results: This chapter outlines the inductive coding methodology used to analyze the speech and news coverage, presenting the data on frame frequencies and their respective representations.
3.1 Introduction to the Frame Categories: This section defines the nine specific frame categories identified in the analysis, such as "Threat," "Military Effort," and "Benefits of Strategy," which form the basis for the empirical study.
3.2 Frame Categories in the Speech and Its Coverage: Results of Analysis: This chapter provides the quantitative results of the frame analysis, comparing the prevalence of different frames within Obama’s address and the subsequent Washington Post articles.
3.3 Comparison of Results: This section evaluates the alignment between the presidential rhetoric and the media coverage, discussing striking differences in emphasis and the potential implications for policy support.
4 Conclusion: The concluding chapter synthesizes the research findings, confirming that while the Washington Post often followed Obama’s framing, significant deviations occurred that likely influenced how the strategy was perceived by the public and Congress.
5 Bibliography: This section lists the primary presidential sources and the secondary literature on media effects and framing used throughout the research.
6 Appendix: This section contains detailed coding tables showing the frequency and distribution of the identified frames in the speech and the news articles.
Keywords
Framing, Political Communication, Mass Media, Presidential Speech, Foreign Policy, Obama, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Washington Post, Public Opinion, Agenda-setting, News Coverage, Message Framing, Media Effects, Strategy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this academic paper?
The paper examines the relationship between a presidential foreign policy speech and its subsequent news coverage, specifically looking at how frames constructed by the President are reflected or altered by the media.
What are the primary thematic areas covered?
The study centers on political communication, media framing, foreign policy strategies, the role of journalistic routines, and the psychological impact of information presentation on public opinion.
What is the main research question?
The paper aims to answer whether the Washington Post conveyed President Obama's speech on the strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan with the same proportional emphasis as the President intended.
Which scientific method is utilized in this study?
The author uses an inductive framing analysis, coding specific sentences from both the speech and newspaper articles into nine defined frame categories to compare their respective salience.
What is discussed in the main body of the work?
The main body details the theoretical background of framing, explains the methodology of sentence-based coding, and presents a comparative quantitative analysis of how different policy frames were presented in the speech versus the news media.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
Key terms include Framing, Political Communication, Presidential Speech, Foreign Policy, Media Effects, and News Coverage.
How does the media influence the perception of the war strategy?
The study suggests that by overemphasizing "Military" and "Civilian Effort" frames over others, the newspaper may shift public attention toward the costs and risks of the strategy rather than its intended benefits, potentially reducing overall support.
Why were the "Military" and "Civilian Effort" frames so prominent in the news?
The author identifies these as areas where journalists likely exercised independent selection, moving away from the President's focus on "Benefits of Strategy" to report more on the specific implementation plans, which might influence audience skepticism.
- Quote paper
- Sophia Schulze (Author), 2011, Recalling Political Messages: About the Framing of a Presidential Speech and Its Subsequent News Coverage, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/206437
