Media framing is one of the tools that journalists actively use to cover publicly significant topics. Dan and Raupp (2018) underline that framing theory states “that communication is characterized by the articulation of coherent patterns of meaning resulting out of acts of selection and emphasis” (p. 205). In particular, framing theory arose from the observation that news is often presented in a predictable and similar fashion. In other words, frames are socially accepted structures that carry symbolic meaning and exist for a long time, and are also used to structure the social world (Dan and Raupp, 2018). These elements are utilized by journalists to categorize information and by the audience to interpret it. Framing has four key functions, including “problem definition, causal interpretation, treatment recommendation, and moral evaluation” (Dan and Raupp, 2018, p. 206). Thus, at each stage of the formation of a media frame, there is a connection between a socially significant topic from a certain position, which reflects how this subject should be perceived by society.
A media frame can be defined as any graphical, written, visual, or oral message with which the communicator contextualizes the topic. In particular, contextualization is “purposive behavior in which a communicator establishes a frame of reference for a topic” (D’Angelo, 2017, p. 1). This process can be conducted using several strategies in order to form a certain perception of a topic in society. One of the most popular options is emphasis framing which refers to the practice when the communicator deliberately associates particular information with the topic, omitting other relevant information (D’Angelo, 2017). Another common type of framing is equivalency framing, where the audience is asked to make a decision in favor of losses or gains (D’Angelo, 2017). Thus, the communicator forms in the audience a certain attitude towards the topic and determines the moral assessment that it is inclined to have. The main characteristic of a frame is its reoccurrence and constant repetition by the communicator (Dan and Raupp, 2018). Gradually, media frames shape how groups or individuals interpret information by placing it in a specific context.
The study of framing is one of the keys in sociology and touches upon the problems of the formation of social relations. The first most comprehensive work on framing theory is Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience by Erving Goffman (1972). In it, the author uses frames as labels that allow groups or individuals to interpret information about events to shape meaning, experience, and guide actions. Although Hoffman (1972) was not the first to consider the problem of frames in media, his work is one of the earliest in forming the theory. An important contribution to the development of framing research was made by Robert M. Entman (1993), who defined the concept of framing and its functions. In his later article, he continues to develop the theory of framing but changes some aspects (Entman, 2003). Overall, these works are considered the basis of modern research on framing and contain the most comprehensive information about the concept.
A significant contribution to the development of research on this process was also made by earlier works, which did not directly define the problem as framing. For example, Doctoring the media: The reporting of health and medicine by Anne Karpf (1988) focuses on how health issues are reported in the media. In particular, the author explores how news patterns shape society’s attitudes toward a problem. One of the most illustrative examples of framing described in the book is AIDS reporting in the United States, which has been associated with negative moral evaluations of society Karpf (1988). A significant contribution to the categorization and classification of frames was also made by Levin et al. (1998), which discussed the different types of frames and related functions. Later studies of this process turn to more specific aspects of the theory. For example, Van Gorp (2007) characterizes media frames as culturally related phenomena that function differently depending on society and its values. Thus, the author of the article proposes to consider frames from a different perspective, focusing specifically on the social and cultural context.
In the context of reporting, frames can be analyzed using current news bulletins, which provide live information. A fairly vivid example of framing in reporting can be found in the news presented by France 24. In particular, the title of the article recently published there is “Russia recognizes Taliban ‘efforts’ to stabilize Afghanistan” (2021). One may notice that the word effort is enclosed in quotation marks, which is an example of framing. In this situation, the reporter consciously forms the audience’s attitude to the problem by presenting the non-authoritative coloring of the Taliban’s activities. The author expresses skepticism about the intentions and operations of the current government, which could potentially affect the public’s evaluation. Another example of framing that is extremely popular when reporting on climate change news is from CNN. The article by Kottasová et al. (2021) is an emphasis framing, as the article advocates the point of view that the efforts of humanity are not enough to prevent climate change with vast opportunities effectively. However, the authors actively avoid reporting significant activities that people have used during the pandemic to maintain the ecological situation.
The most common frame that crops up in all the news sources is human activity as a major cause of climate change. The most important social consequence of this frame is a greater awareness of people about the problem and a focus on personal efforts to improve the situation. In this case, journalists and scientists constantly emphasize how human activity negatively affects the environment. This frame forms in people a stable association between climate change and the responsibility of society for them. In this case, framing leads to a certain interpretation of events when an increase in temperature or natural disasters is inevitably linked with anthropogenic impact.
The most closely related theory to framing is agenda-setting, which refers to how a certain topic is emphasized in the media. In particular, in regard to the social consequences, agenda-setting allows one to consider how the gradual strengthening of the topic of climate change in the public consciousness occurs. In this case, the problem of ecology becomes an integral part of the life of society, as it constantly arises in the information field. Agenda-setting, however, was relevant at an earlier stage in the formation of a topic in the media. In particular, only the fact of the existence of cymatic changes was emphasized, but no connection was made between human activity and this phenomenon. At the moment, there is real framing, as the media defines how groups and individuals relate to a given topic and how they interpret it. Now, the blame for climate change is attributed to humans as the main source of environmental pollution.
References
Dan, V., & Raupp, J. (2018). A systematic review of frames in news reporting of health risks: Characteristics, construct consistency vs. name diversity, and the relationship of frames to framing functions. Health, Risk & Society, 20(5-6), 203-226.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
Entman, R. M. (2003). Cascading activation: Contesting the White House’s frame After 9/11. Political Communication, 20(4), 415-432.
Goffman, E. (1972). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Northeastern University Press.
Karpf, A. (1988). Doctoring the media: The reporting of health and medicine. Routledge.
Kottasová, I., Gupta, S., & Regan, H. (2021). ‘The one chance we have’. CNN.
Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149–188.
Russia recognises Taliban ‘efforts’ to stabilise Afghanistan. (2021). France 24.
Van Gorp, B. (2007). The constructionist approach to framing: Bringing culture back in. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 60–78.