Political frames today political framing is also not

This preview shows page 11 - 13 out of 21 pages.

Political frames today Political framing is also not a new phenomenon. “Media therefore bring out frames that have been around for a long time and are apart of the culture” (Littlejohn, Foss and Oetzel, 2017, p.165). In his book the Road to Serfdom, Hayek (1944) asserted “governmental planning, by crushing individualism, would lead inexorably to totalitarian control” (Monbiot, 2016, p.2). “Due to their role as intermediaries between the political system and the public, media, organizations and journalists who produce and relay content to citizens play a major role in current democracies” (Wettstein and Wirth, 2017, p.262). It was their belief that journalists assert certain information that ultimately laid the foundation for individual belief systems. Entman (2007) explains framing is the “culling a few elements of perceived reality and assembling a narrative that highlights connections among them to promote a particular interpretation” (p.164). The day after President Donald Trump was inaugurated, half a million people participated in the Women’s March on Washington. Disproportionate votes among women caused a significant divide during the Trump/Clinton election. While a divide amid women’s rights groups is not new, “modern organizations can engage in strategic communication with the use of websites, social media, and other tools that state and share key messages about
MEDIA FRAMING THEORY 12 the causes, goals, and organizational leadership to better communicate their platforms” (Nicolini and Hansen, 2016, p. 2). Scholars explained that when “political organizations and causes initiate framing issues, they attempt to influence journalists coverage and interpretations” The authors explain the march organizers were successful in conveying their message to media, as is seen through the solidarity of communications repeated in coverage. They also found a strong correlation between “organization’s key messages and how media integrate, morph or reject such strategic communication efforts” (Nicolini and Hansen, 2016, p. 8). Similarly Entman (2007) explains that it is easier to sway political influence by telling people what to think about rather than how to feel about it. McAlister (2018) believes this is how Trump’s campaign became successful. “Drawing on a subtle gender norms supplied by the audience to attack his opponent indirectly in the presidential race while performativity bolstering his own masculine ethos was a crucial aspect of the Trump’s campaign media rhetoric, a slippery strategy that subverts conventional critique” (McAlister, 2018, p.8). McAlister added, “such maneuvering allowed the candidate to rely on the audience to fill in the gaps in his arguments.” What is most interesting about the 2016 presidential campaign is how much all news organizations missed the mark of who was actually going to win. Many stations projected Clinton winning by a landslide – upwards of 70 percent or more. It begs the question, why did so many miss read the American public? There are many factors that go into the actually winning of

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture