Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis paper explores the philosophical orientations within which agenda setting operates, and agenda setting's place within the broader framework of the media effects tradition, specifically in comparison with framing and priming. It also responds to earlier criticisms of agenda setting for its supposed lack of theoretical richness and narrowly understood underlying mechanisms.Both ontological and epistemological statuses of the agenda-setting theory are analyzed in order to place agenda setting into the communication discipline's broader context. This paper demonstrates that the most important distinction between framing and agenda setting is that they are based on different ways of knowing. While the epistemological bases of priming are similar to the theory of agenda setting, the paper argues that further progress will depend not only on practical studies of different aspects of agenda setting, but also on theoretical and philosophical conceptualizations in the future.

This article intends to present the main similarities and differences between Greece and the EU in respect to the framing of gender inequality in political decision making as a policy issue, based on the ways that the problem is diagnosed. It also aims at the formulation of a hypothesis which argues that beyond the above similarities and differences, which may tint in a different colour measures and policies showing one case more gender sensitive or more «traditional» than the other, there exists one basic underlying similarity, relative to the conceptualisation of the notion of gender it-self, which frames all gender related policies, but also their comparison. A framing which cannot but show the existence of inherent boundaries to the out-come of gender mainstreaming as a strategy, since the way we conceptualise gender is determining for the degree to which the promoted policies are disruptive or legitimating in the end, of the existing gender order. ; This article intends to present the main similarities and differences between Greece and the EU in respect to the framing of gender inequality in political decision making as a policy issue, based on the ways that the problem is diagnosed. It also aims at the formulation of a hypothesis which argues that beyond the above similarities and differences, which may tint in a different colour measures and policies showing one case more gender sensitive or more «traditional» than the other, there exists one basic underlying similarity, relative to the conceptualisation of the notion of gender it-self, which frames all gender related policies, but also their comparison. A framing which cannot but show the existence of inherent boundaries to the out-come of gender mainstreaming as a strategy, since the way we conceptualise gender is determining for the degree to which the promoted policies are disruptive or legitimating in the end, of the existing gender order.

Although access to the Internet in the United States has reached parity among males and females, over time gender differences in terms of usage, agency, and representation with technology are becoming evident. Early thinking about the Internet indicated a more liberating and equalizing effect than previous media because of its decentralized nature, reduced structural barriers to entry, and potential for diversity of voices. But over time, mainstream sites that have been developed for women are primarily interested in their value as consumers. Many sites have adopted a women's magazine model, using essentially feminine stereotypes to promote and position their content. This includes the ways in which these sites represent the ideas of technology and the Internet. This study compares two gendered spaces, iVillage and AskMen.com, and analyzes the differences in the ways that technology is framed and discussed.

Background:Taxation of sugar and sugar-sweetened beverages is considered a key policy for improving population-level nutrition. Implementation is influenced by the way evidence is used and framed in public debates. At this time, no sugar tax has been implemented in Germany.
Aims and objectives:This study aims to deepen the understanding of the political dynamics that influence the adoption of sugar taxes by analysing the use of evidence in the German media debate on sugar taxation and comparing its findings with analyses from other countries.
Methods:In 114 German newspaper articles, published between 01/2018 and 03/2019, we analysed the use and framing of evidence with an abductive thematic analysis approach. We compared our findings with analyses on the framing around sugar taxation from Mexico, the US and the UK.
Findings:Evidence was a salient component of the German debate. As in the comparison countries, evidence was used by both tax proponents and opponents but framed differently, for example, regarding problem definitions. However, the German debate relied more strongly on examples from other countries and less on economic arguments.
Discussion and conclusions:Our findings suggest that German tax proponents should proactively consider economic arguments and counter spurious arguments made by tax opponents. Researchers should be aware of their work's potential international spillover effects, and public health advocates should correct expectations regarding the evidence on, and health effects of, isolated measures against obesity. To deepen the understanding of the German policy process, further research should involve social media, public documents and stakeholder networks.

Despite the potential promise of agricultural biotechnology, consumers' trust and acceptance varies in some parts of the world. To develop a deeper understanding of the differences in news media coverage of agricultural biotechnology in U.S. and British newspapers, a framing analysis study was conducted, focusing on the news coverage of three major national "newspapers of record" during the calendar year 2002: The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Guardian. No single frame was dominant in U.S. or British national newspaper coverage of agricultural biotechnology in 2002. Some of the prominent frames were contamination of the food supply, human risk, environmental risk, scientific progress, and world hunger. There were more different frames used in The Guardian (concepts as consumer choice, dependency, and politics) than in the U.S. newspapers. Additionally, this study reiterated findings that British news coverage included more editorial coverage of agricultural biotechnology.

This article analyses the framing approaches of the Voice of America and Sputnik in the context of international framing competition since these are significant public diplomacy channels for the foreign policies of the United States and Russia. The paper questions how VOA and Sputnik frame the YPJ women by considering those countries' policy objectives in Syria. Thematic content analysis and Robert Entman's framing approach were applied. The paper indicates that there is a connection between policies of US and Russian governments during the Syrian civil war, particularly towards ISIS and framing tendencies of those government-sponsored media outlets over the YPJ women. While there was a consensus over the responsible agent (ISIS), framing competition has seen through factors affecting problem definition, solutions to this problem and moral justifications for the solution.

Anti-Americanism is a growing tendency among people in Turkey, and the media is one source of this negative sentiment. After the failed military coup attempt in Turkey on 15 July 2016, more than 150 domestic media outlets were shut down, including television channels, daily newspapers, radio stations, news websites, and even social media. Local affiliates of international media companies such as Deutsche Welle Turkish, however, have remained immune to such government interventions to some extent. Considering the difference in the level of independence from Turkish government influence, this study aims to explore how the anti-American sentiment in the news varied across different media outlets. With the content of 690 online news reports, a sentiment analysis compared the pro-government Sabah and Yeni Şafak daily newspapers with two internationally owned and more independent media outlets, BBC News Turkish and Deutsche Welle. The results showed a significant discrepancy between the two groups in terms of how they framed news related to the United States. The domestic media framed and reported the US-related news with a more negative slant, including the use of offensive and pejorative narratives about the United States and its politics. BBC Turkish and Deutsche Welle, however, reported news about the United States with a relatively more neutral and objective language.

Analogies have captivated philosophers for millennia, yet their effects on modern public opinion preferences remain largely unexplored. Nevertheless, the lack of evidence as to whether analogies aid in political persuasion has not stopped politicians from using these rhetorical devices in public debates. To examine such strategic attempts to garner political support, we conducted survey experiments in the United States that featured the analogical arguments being used by Democrats and Republicans as well as some of the policy rationales that accompanied their appeals. The results revealed that analogies—especially those that also provided the underlying policy logic—increased support for individual health coverage mandates, the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and even single payer national health proposals. However, we demonstrated that rebutting flawed analogies was also possible. Thus, within the health care arena, framing proposals with analogies can alter policy preferences significantly, providing a way to deliver policy rationales persuasively.

This article explores key US and European Union policy documents to identify the similarities and differences in the way that the digital divide has been defined in both contexts in recent years. To that purpose, a computer-assisted text analysis was conducted, which identified not only the most frequent relevant terms in each document, but also patterns of semantic association among them. While significant differences related to the political specificities of each context were found, both sets of documents revealed a tendency over time to frame access in economic and market-based terms. The article argues that these results provide useful insights into the study of the globalization and homogenization of telecommunications policymaking.

Research suggests family meals are associated with positive outcomes for children, leading scholars to recommend their public promotion. Several organizations have created campaigns promoting family meals, but little research has been done on their efficacy. This article compares framing strategies of family meal campaigns with parents' understandings of feeding work, based on content analysis of 10 campaign websites and interviews with 46 American parents. The analysis suggests that while the motivational and diagnostic frames campaigns use are likely to resonate with parents, their prognostic framing does not align with parents' experiences. Campaign frames are least likely to resonate with single parents, who face more barriers to having the kinds of meals they want and have fewer ideas for overcoming them. To be more effective, organizations promoting family meals should focus on innovative but relatable strategies for improving family meal frequency and quality, with a particular emphasis on single parents.