Journalistic Frames One of the more useful approaches to analyzing content and its production can be found in looking

at the journalistic frames, or frames produced by journalists to present a bigger picture when writing a story about an event, situation, or person. This is basically the same process that Goffman (1974) and others observed at the audience level, however the average person does not frame issues for distribution in the mass media as do journalists, who also employ certain sets of schema to make sense of events for themselves and for their audience. Bronstein (2005) noted that the central logic of framing is that journalists construct the symbolic representations of society that members of the public use to make sense of events and issues (p.785). Entman (2004) even suggested that the frames journalists construct and use are heavily influenced by the frames used by their information sources, particularly those with political interests: The White House, its supporters, and its critics peddle their messages to the press in hopes of gaining political leverage (p.4). Definitions of journalistic frames vary throughout the media literature and are generally related to recurring themes in the content. Many researchers have identified and used different frames to analyze content. Despite some differences that may exist among the operational definitions of the frames found throughout the literature, some are more commonly used for analysis than others. Iyengar (1991) and Iyengar and Simon (1993) observed that news organizations tend to frame events as either thematic (part of a larger picture or ongoing situation) or episodic (specific events). They argue that in television news, there simply is not enough time during a broadcast to be able to use thematic frames, therefore much of the news is presented as episodic. This was well documented during the 1991 Persian Gulf War, as news coverage was presented day-to-day and as news and other information were released from journalistic sources. Iyengar and Simon (1993) also acknowledged that very little historical information, cultural analysis, or other context was offered by the media to further explain the

war and recurring images of anti-aircraft fire in the Baghdad night sky. Hook and Pu (2006) also invoked the episodic vs. thematic frame distinction in studying the Chinese spy plane crisis of 2001. They found that the Chinese media tended to use thematic frames to present a broader picture of the situation around the spy plane crash whereas U.S. news outlets followed a day-by-day episodic approach to presenting the news. It is noteworthy that in portraying the spy plane controversy in this manner, news outlets in both countries reinforced the publics amity toward its own government and enmity toward the other (p. 176). It is also noteworthy for purposes of this study that Hook and Pu (2006) suggest that episodic and thematic framing occurs and may be analyzed across government systems and societies. Not all framing studies have relied upon frames established from previous research. In fact, framing studies frequently derive their frames of analysis from recurring themes found within their news samples. Kim (2003) analyzed news stories about selling cigarettes to Asian countries and found the following themes: trade-economy, health, antismoking, and, resistance and anti-American sentiments. Ross and Bantimaroudis (2006) looked at the framing of Israels leader Sharon and Syrias leader Arafat as friends or foes of the United States after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Manusov and Milstein (2005) examined the framing of non-verbal cues--the famous handshake between Rabin and Arafat in particular. The most notable meanings for the frames in which the handshake was presented by journalists through the media were peace/hope/optimism, authority/legitimacy, agreement/promise, violence, betrayal, and dislike. Chyi and McCombs (2004) developed a time-space two-dimensional measurement scheme for analyzing articles on the Columbine High School shootings. Articles were classified according to frames derived from a temporal state (past, present, future) and geographic location (individual, community, regional, societal, international). Later, Bichard (2006) examined the blog content of 2004 presidential candidates John Kerry and George Bush using a multidimensional model derived from the Chyi and McCombs work, but added the dimensions of tone (negative, positive, or

neutral) and blog post topic (campaign ideology, campaign trail, supporters, call to action, and opponent attack) for categorizing the content. Neuman et al. (1992) and Valkenberg, et al. (1999) provide an excellent summary of the journalistic frames most commonly used in the production of newspaper and magazine content in the United States: conflict, human interest, economic consequences, and responsibility. The conflict frame emphasizes conflict between groups or individuals; the human interest frame is frequently used to address an individuals or groups current life situation from an emotional standpoint; the economic consequences frame emphasizes the economic consequences of an issue or event; and the responsibility frame is used to attribute responsibility for an issue or event to an individual or group. Later, de Vreese (2004) used the conflict and responsibilities frames (those found to be most common in U.S. journalism) to write simulated television news casts as part of an experiment to determine the effects of journalistic frames on audience opinion. With such a variety of approaches to identifying the frames used by journalists, framing study can appear confusing, and at best, an immature science. A perusal of the literature also with reveals scheme that or the term frame Chyi and is frequently McCombs used (2004) interchangeably theme.

acknowledged this problem and noted that many frames are not immediately comparable to other frames because they are derived from fluctuating content. Bichard (2006) similarly argues that research is needed to find the best way to categorize and analyze different attributes of news frames. As any reader can see, news content varies by medium, topic, culture, and many other factors. This makes it very difficult to compare the frames regarding articles about apples and articles about oranges, hence Entmans (1993) argument for the standardization of framing analysis.