406 / 658
404
Saturday, November 12
0 9 : 0 0 – 1 0 : 3 0
JOS24
Framing (in) Journalism
PP 529
How to Operationalize the Theory of Framing in Journalism Studies. A Case Study: Journal of Communication (2009–2013)
E. Saperas
1
, Á. Carrasco-Campos
2
1
Rey Juan Carlos University, Department of Communication Sciences and Sociology, Fuenlabrada Madrid, Spain
2
University Of Valladolid, Department of Sociology and Social Work, Segovia, Spain
International scholarly associations and peer-reviewed academic journals have always been involved in the main debates in the field of communication,
and so they have become the most influential institutional agents for the evolution of communication research in the last decades.Therefore, both reference
journals and international conferences can be considered two of the most dynamic forums for the debate on the disciplinary status of communication, and
for the advance on theoretical construction and methodological operationalization of the great paradigms of empirical research. The aim of this paper is
to present first results of a work in progress (part of a broader on-going research project funded by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness)
focused on the analysis of the processes of operationalization and theoretical construction carried out in research articles published by major international
journals. Specifically, this report expounds findings on the case of framing research published in the Journal of Communication. On the one hand, the selec‑
tion of framing as case study is because this notion is one of the concepts with more theoretical discussion and presence in empirical research in nowadays
media studies and journalism studies. On the other hand, the Journal of Communication is taken as object of study by taking into account not only its
international leading position, but also for being a publication closely related to the International Communication Association, and for the core role of its
papers and special issues in the discussion and systematization of the field of communication in general and, in particular, of the notion of framing itself.
Therefore, this study points to observe (i) the research objects, (ii) the methodological operationalization, and (iii) the theoretical construction of framing
in papers published in the Journal of Communication during the period 2009–2013. A content analysis has been specifically designed for the observation
of empirical research, and applied to a total of 50 original articles distributed in 26 issues of this journal. Findings reveals some uniformity in the objects
of study investigated by the concept of framing, particularly in relation to those considered "classics" in journalism studies: media coverage of current
events, news and information; all of this considering the partial transformation of these classic objects regarding the changes occurred in a digital context
(journalism professional activity in change: journalism 2.0, citizen journalism, the crisis of journalism). Regarding the theoretical and methodological
operationalization processes, is observed a significant standardization in the framing studies analysed, taking into account the broad recognition of framing
as standard theory, and also considering its main empirical character, by means of quantitative and experimental research modalities with high analytical
complexity through elaborated statistical analyses and digital research instruments: original design experiments, online questionnaires, internet surveys,
digital polls. Therefore, framing research published by a top journal such as the Journal of Communication can be currently defined as an empirical program
in terms of quantitative and experimental analytically sophisticated research, with a clearly delimitated theoretical framework, focused on journalism in its
different forms (news media coverage, political information, electoral campaigns, etc.).
PP 530
Partisan Journalism and the Issue Framing of the Euro Crisis: Comparing Political Parallelism of German and Spanish Online News
J. Kaiser
1
, K. Kleinen-von Königslöw
1
1
University of Zurich, IPMZ - Institute of Mass Communication and Media Research, Zurich, Switzerland
According to Hallin and Mancini (2004), political parallelism is a central dimension for distinguishing different media systems. Based on their theoretical
systemization of historical developments, they proposed that in countries of the Mediterranean Model and the North/Central European Model political
parallelism should be high due to the historically important party press, whereas political parallelism should be low in countries of the North Atlantic Model
without a party press tradition. This systematization has been criticized by various authors (cf. Hallin and Mancini, 2012), mostly on the theoretical level.
Explicit empirical investigations of political parallelism in a comparative manner are still rare and often focused on a too narrow understanding of political
parallelismmeasuring solely media’s alignment with a specific party (van Dalen, 2012; van Dalen et al., 2012; Vliegenthart and Mena Montes, 2014). Faced
with the decline of the party press, press/party parallelism has been re-conceptualized as political parallelism, i.e. as the alignment with superordinate
ideologies (Mancini, 2012) which can be held and disseminated by other political actors than parties alone. As a consequence, empirical investigations
of political parallelism need to go beyond the measurement of party actors in the news and instead take into account media’s ideologically guided issue
interpretations.Therefore, this study investigates the strength of political parallelism in online newspapers of Germany and Spain using a newmethodolog‑
ical approach focusing on the alignment of media’s issue interpretations with political ideologies as guiding principles to interpret the social world (Jost et
al., 2009). More precisely, we identify issue-specific news frames of 7.256 statements in 961 articles in a quantitative, data-driven procedure and investigate
whether and how their argumentative structures mirror political ideologies. The issue under investigation is the Euro crisis – a highly relevant issue which
is especially useful for analyzing political parallelism across countries because it is discussed in different countries at the same time allowing synchronous
comparisons in political parallelism for the same issue. Results show that issue frames can tie up with superordinate political ideologies, making it possible
to use such issue interpretations as a measurement of political parallelism that goes beyond the salience of party actors in the news and reflects media’s
alignment with superordinate political views better. Doing so, our results show substantially lower but still medium political parallelism in the North/
Central European compared to the Mediterranean Model with its high political parallelism. This lesser political parallelism may be the result of the higher
degree of professionalization in the North/Central European Model (Hallin and Mancini, 2004) which could have fostered the general homogenization
process towards the Liberal Model more strongly than in the Mediterranean Model. This is supported by the results of Hanitzsch (2011) on professional
role perceptions of journalists as two out of three journalists in Germany display the liberal tradition of a detached watchdog compared to only one in four
Spanish journalists. Taken together, our study contributes to the empirical verification of the revised Hallin/Mancini-model introduced by Brüggemann et
al. (2014). Here, only the Mediterranean Model is characterized by high political parallelism.