Bias

Agenda Setting, Priming, and Framing

In a 2007 article called “Framing Bias,” Robert Entman suggested that future studies on media bias should incorporate previous work on the [Page 158]effects of agenda-setting, priming, and framing. Agenda-setting research has shown a strong, positive relationship between the amount of attention the media give certain issues and which issues the public regards as important. Priming research suggests that the more prominently an issue is featured in the media, the more important that issue becomes in citizens' evaluations of political leaders. Finally, framing is a matter of selection and salience—highlighting certain aspects of an issue and featuring them more prominently.

So how does all of this relate to bias? Entman argues that by use of framing, political actors prime audiences to think a certain way about an issue. In other words, the existence and amount of coverage (agenda-setting) and the way it is framed will prime news consumers to think a certain way. News slant exists when news stories feature the preferred framing of one group (say, the administration) over another (i.e., the opposition party) in a dispute. In order to demonstrate bias, one would have to show a consistent pattern of slanted news coverage of a certain issue.

One key determinant of a frame's success or failure is cultural congruence. These types of messages resonate with the public, falling in line with accepted ideas and attitudes within the dominant political culture. Culturally congruent messages are more likely to be accepted by the general public and the media. Incongruent messages are likely to block mental associations and may even discourage further thinking.

An incumbent administration enjoys an advantage in setting the dominant frame given its resources and media reliance on it as a source. One might call this an “official source” bias. However, presidential administrations have had mixed success in framing certain initiatives. The demise of the 1993 Clinton health care plan is one example of culturally incongruent framing. By highlighting the redistributive impact of the plan and promoting it as a boon to the poor and the uninsured, the administration opened themselves up to counter-frames highlighting individual liberty, effort, and responsibility, which are more culturally congruent notions within dominant political culture in the United States.

Criticism has been leveled that media are too critical of government policies or are not critical enough; favor “horse-race” over substantive coverage; or oversimplify complex events. While lacking empirical evidence of “bias” as defined by Entman, researchers have identified a conservative slant in media coverage of certain cases, such as social movements, unions' tax policy, and, oddly enough, media bias (more on this below).

...