Zero-sum game: Does the professionalisation of PR lead to
the decay of objective journalism?
A content analysis of the use of frames in press releases and its influence on media messages
Name: Hannah van Soelen Student number: 0518948
Track: Corporate Communications Supervisor: P.H.J. Schafraad
This study researches the presence of frames in press releases and the way this influences the use of frames in media messages. Results show not only that press releases have a limited influence on media releases, but also that press releases provide a more diverse and balanced message than newspaper articles do.
Introduction
What's the big deal? The media are down- sizing every digital second. It's a miracle reporters have the time to cut and paste up press releases, let alone insert them in their stories and columns. (Wolper, Keepers of the public trust, 2012)
Over the past two decades there has been significant pressure on journalists to increase output. Newspapers have had substantial growth in their pagination however the number of employed journalists has remained the same (Lewis, 2008). At the same time, professional public relations have been on the rise. PR professionals and their skills have quickly spilled over from the political into the public arena (Davis, 2000). As a result of these changes public relations
practitioners have an increased capacity to influence news production. In his book Flat Earth News (2008) Nick Davies considers this phenomenon to be ‘truly alarming’. “Where once journalists were active gatherers of news, now they have generally become mere passive processors of unchecked, second-hand material, much of it contrived by PR to serve some political or commercial interest.” According to Davies we have gone from ‘journalism’ to ‘churnalism’, a form of journalism in which press releases are used to create media articles, without fact checking or performing further research. Proper journalism and autonomous media are of great importance to society. According to the World Bank the existence of independent media is a vital component of any democratic society, contributing to higher levels of political and civil liberties. A free media is also instrumental for economic development, as shown by the positive correlations between media penetration in society and national wealth measured in gross domestic product (Kostadinova, 2012). Therefore, copying press releases and publishing them without further investigation is a violation of the public trust (Prenger & Van Vree, 2004; Wolpers, 2012). This practice brings into question the autonomous function the media performs, reporting on news independent
from third parties. After all “the media are the major primary sources of national (political) information; for most, mass media provide the best – and only- easily available approximation of ever changing (political) realities“ (McCombs & Shaw, 1972).
The prominence of themes in the news influences the prominence of these themes in the public imagination (Caroll & McCombs, 2003). When PR is successful at shaping the media agenda, they indirectly shape the public agenda. Therefore, when a PR professional utilises a specific frame in their press release this frame does not merely provide the journalist with information on the issue itself, a frame also contributes to the defining and understanding of an issue. It shapes the way the media will report the issue. When media report on an issue, the salience of this issue is transmitted to the public. The media does not only tell people what to think about, it also tells the public how to think about these issues. Due to the influence PR has on the media, when used as a news source, PR and the frames it employs are actually at the foundation of this process of agenda setting. By building the media agenda with issues important to the organisation and framing these issues in a specific manner, PR influences how the public assess these issues. This is a three-step process: issues are transferred from the corporate agenda, to the media agenda and eventually they will reach the public agenda. These agenda-setting effects - the successful transfer of salience from the media agenda to the public agenda - occur wherever there is a reasonably open political system and a reasonably open media system (Mccombs, 2004).
However, not everyone agrees about this deterioration of the media. According to Davis (2000) an increase in PR practitioners according will lead to a plurality of voices since alternative sources are also able to get their content into the media (Davis, 2000). Also, whilst numbers might indicate that a growing amount of media articles is based on press releases, this does not automatically mean the quality of these media articles has diminished (Scholten & Ruigrok, 2009). However, it cannot be denied that professional public relations is influencing patterns of source access and this influence requires further attention (Davis, 2000).
The goal of this research therefore is to find out if and how the media copies press material frames. This study identifies competing frames in these
press and media releases. It also focuses on organisations and researches if and how organisations employ specific frames. This is done order to establish how public relations makes use of framing and frames in its information
subsidies, and to see if the media is able to maintain its independence in a time of an increasingly professional PR sector.
This research is structured as follows: the study will start out by explaining the theoretical frameworks that are key to this research. The study will move on to describe the research sample and the research methods employed. This is followed by a description of the results found, which is supported and analysed in the conclusion and discussion section. Finally, the importance of this research and its findings will be explained and some recommendations for future research will be provided.
Theoretical Framework
What is Public Relations?
The Public Relations Association of America defines public relations as “a strategic communication process that builds mutually beneficial relationships between organisations and their publics”
(http://www.prsa.org/AboutPRSA/PublicRelationsDefined/#.UrBpnCgTk2M, accessed on December 10, 11.13am). This definition emphasises the strategic nature of PR, implying the use of tactics in order to establish ‘mutually beneficial relationships’.
In corporate communications PR focuses on the relationships between the organisation represented and its many stakeholders. It is the PR
professional’s job to establish a favourable corporate reputation with stakeholder groups upon which the organisation is dependent (Cornelissen, 2011, p. 5). In order to successfully realise these objectives PR professionals attempt to use the media as a way of communicating with their target audience, the organisation’s stakeholders (Hallahan, 1999). “Through the use of
information subsidies, such as news conferences, news releases, and interviews, public relations programs and campaigns can have a profound impact on shaping news content” (Kiousis, Popescu & Mitrook, 2007). The PR professional in this case has become a news source from which the media obtains its information. PR
professionals intentionally try to shape the media agenda, in order to craft a good reputation for the organisation. The overall process of shaping mass media agendas is what we call ‘agenda building’ (Berkowitz, 1990). Agenda building research focuses on the relation between the news source and the media, which is also the focus of the current research.
When PR professionals are successful in convincing journalists to publish the information subsidies they provide, practitioners influence and shape the media agenda (Curtin, 1999). Previous research on agenda building has mainly concentrated on political news Turk, 1986, Turk & Franklin 1987). The current research aims to apply the notion of agenda building to corporate actors. By studying the process of agenda building in corporate communication we can assess the magnitude of the news source power on the media.
Outbound public relations communications are sometimes considered an effort to define reality, regarding organisations, for the many publics on whom the organisation depends. This construction process might be dismissed as manipulation. However, because defining reality is the very essence of communication, this process is neither inherently good nor bad (Hallahan, 1999).
What is framing?
The most widespread definition of framing is designed by Entman, (1993) and states: To frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described. When a PR professional embeds a frame in their information subsidy, they provide the journalist not only with
information on the issue itself, but also indicate how this should be interpreted. Defining framing this way contributes a lot of agency to the individual. Entman considers framing to be a ‘tool’ used by the PR practitioner or journalist to promote a certain version of reality. In general ‘framing’ refers to the manner in which issues and stories are organised, the way they emphasize the salience of certain aspects, and actively neglect other aspects in the text (Iyengar, 1999). Framing is important for the way people understand certain issues. By ‘defining’
an issue it shapes peoples attitudes towards those issues. A frame is thus a conceptual tool on which media and individuals rely to convey, interpret and evaluate information (Neuman, Just, & Crigler, 1992). However, frames are not simply the product of the PR professional’s mind. Frames are located in culture (Van Gorp, 2007). Culture is the shared set of assumptions, values, and beliefs of a group of people by which they organize their common life (Zald, 1996). A frame gets embedded in content during the frame building process, when the message is constructed in such a way that many elements refer to that frame. These elements could be metaphors, a specific manner of constructing a
sentence, references and the use of certain words, which will invite the audience to consider an issue through a certain frame. (Van Gorp, 2007, p. 64).
Frame building refers to the factors that influence the structural qualities of news frames. We can identify internal and external factors to frame building. The internal factors can be characteristics individual to the PR practitioner, like gender, economic background or education level. External factors include: other actors in the field, cultural values, and organizational procedures. All of these factors play an important role in the process of building a frame. Thus, frames are not only the product of the PR professional’s mind, frames are the outcome of an interactional process, between collective and individual actors (Vliegenthart & Van Zoonen, 2011).
Framing is an important tool for the PR professional. They employ frames as a tool, in order to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient for the audience. Framing operates by biasing the cognitive
processing of information by individuals (Hallahan, 1999). However, a frame is only successful at doing so because it is embedded in culture. This is what enables the audience to recognize a frame. This is also the reason the audience allows itself be influenced by the frame, letting it define the salience of certain issues. The true power of framing comes from its ability to define the terms of an issue or debate without the public realizing that framing is taking place
(Tankard, 2001). The success framing has in shaping the audience’s opinion makes this process extremely influential. The current research aims to answer to the following research questions:
RQ 1a. Which frames can we identify in press- and media releases?
RQ 1b. Which frame found in press releases is most often copied into the media? RQ 1c. Do certain corporations favour certain frames?
RQ 1d. What are the frames that are used most/least in press releases?
What is journalism?
The power of the press arises from both from its capacity to inform and its ability to give or withhold publicity (McQuail, 1983, p. 168, Deephouse, 2000). McCombs and Shaw argue that “The media are the major primary sources of national political information; for most, mass media provide the best – and only- easily available approximation of ever changing-political realities“ (McCombs & Shaw, 1972, Deuze 2004). This statement not only applies to politics, but also to corporations. Business news is of great importance to corporations. Most of what consumers learn about a business comes from the news media (Deephouse, 2000; Dutton & Dukerich, 1991). It is fundamental for the proper functioning of society that the media should meet the needs and interests of their audience. The existence of independent media is a vital component of any democratic society, contributing to higher levels of political and civil liberties (Kostadinova, 2012). Five ideal-typical traits of journalism have been identified (Deuze, 2005). Firstly, journalists should provide a public service. As active collectors and
disseminators of information they should add critical analysis to the information gathered. Secondly, journalists should be objective. They are impartial to the information they report, and this provides them with credibility. This concept is closely related to the third ideal trait of journalism, which is autonomy.
Journalists should not be influenced by third parties and therefore biased in their judgment by these parties. Journalism should also have a sense of immediacy. Inherent to the concept of ‘news’ is the fact that the information relayed to the public in a speedy fashion. Finally, journalism should be ethical. This is the manner in which the profession obtains legitimacy from its audience.
However, even when attempting to adhere to these five ‘ideal’ traits, journalism never merely ‘reports’ news. Vasterman (1995) argues that
journalism is actually busy producing news. “They construct it, they construct facts, they construct statements and they construct a context in which these facts
make sense. They reconstruct ‘a’ reality.” Journalists construct news by emphasising some aspects of an event, whilst at the same time ignoring other aspects of these events. The journalist does not decide on the selection of ‘newsworthy’ events all by himself, as suggested by White (1950). Multiple factors play a role in this process, including: news values (Galtung and Ruge, 1965, Harcup, 2001), news sources (Berkowitz, 1990) and Public Relations Models (Seletzky et al. 2012). Reese (2001) has identified five different levels on which these factors influence the news making process: the individual, routine, organisation, extra-media and ideological levels.
This research aims to take into consideration the characteristics of the media outlet in the process of selecting ‘newsworthy’ events. It is expected to conclude that the frames will have different success rates in the different newspapers. Characteristics of the media organization significantly influence how the news is framed (Kostadinova, 2012). Each paper has its own profile; the tone of the articles needs to reflect this profile. In order to provide a clear display of the different profiles this research focuses on the following three newspapers: De Telegraaf is considered a more ‘popular’ newspaper, which leans to the political right. De Volkskrant is a left oriented ‘quality’ newspaper, and Het Financieele Dagblad has a financial focus (Bakker & Vasterman, 2007). These newspapers are expected to treat the information subsidies provided by the PR-professional according to the character of their newspaper. It is expected that these newspapers will adapt frames provided by PR professionals to their own profile. These considerations prompt the following research question:
RQ 2. Do the differences in newspaper profiles lead to significant variation in frame adopting?
Relationship between PR and journalism
Multiple metaphors have been employed to describe the relationship between PR professionals and journalists. The most well known is probably from Gans (1979, p. 116) who stated that in the interaction between PR and the media ‘it takes two to tango, but it is usually PR that takes the lead’. In stating this Gans implies that journalists are more reliant on PR than vice versa. They follow the
cues PR supplies when crafting a news story. A more explicit metaphor is offered by Jenkins “When a big story is running the best metaphor is of news and public relations in constant artillery exchange, with ordnance hurled into the air in the hope that some of it hits a target” (Jenkins, 2006). This metaphor seems to imply that PR randomly ‘shoots off’ information, hoping to get a ‘hit’ in a newspaper. Much of the literature on the source/media relationship portrays the relation between PR and journalism as adversarial (Cameron et al., 1997). It is argued that journalists have a cautious attitude toward public relations. They question the news values and professional status of the PR professionals. However, while journalists accuse PR professionals of being self-interest, opacity and
manipulating information (Neijsens & Smit, 2006), some surprising similarities between the two fields have been identified such as shared news values (Aronoff, 1975; Kopenhaver, 1985; Kopenhaver et al., 1984; Sallot et al., 1998) and skills both groups must master (Curtin, 1999; Sallot, 2006).Another similarity is their relationship to the truth. Journalists are not only concerned with actively
gathering and disseminating information in an objective and autonomous
manner, they are also always attempting to sell as many newspapers as possible in order to beat the competition and securing profits. In order to gain the
attention of the audience for their content, journalismis under huge competitive pressure to tell the truth selectively.
Public relations’ main task is getting certain issues on the agenda and trying to create a favourable reputation for the organisation represented. This also requires them to tell the truth selectively. Both professions are under constant pressure to tell the truth selectively (Hobsbawm, 2006).
A more realistic view on PR and journalism would be that the two
professions are highly dependent on each other (Hobsbawm, 2006). This is why this research will to consider an economic model, in which news is identified as a product to be traded in the market place. PR professionals and sources can trade their information with journalists in exchange for attention. Both parties
consider this trade to be beneficial (Russ-Mohl, 2006). This relationship is based on quid pro quo. Both players can provide something for the other. The PR professional provides news content and the journalist provides the appropriate space to display this content. In this information exchange process the
relationship between journalist and PR professional is “antagonistic” as well as “symbiotic” (Russ-Mohl, 2006, p. 193). Both sides try to get as much as possible out of the deal at the expense of the other. We are interested in the outcome of this trade model between PR and journalism: to what extent are frames
‘exchanged’? Therefore the following research question will be answered:
RQ 3a. Are the different frames equally present in both press releases and media releases?
RQ 3b. Can we identify competing frames in the same newspaper article?
Based on the information about the trade model between PR and journalism the following hypothesis is proposed:
H1. The frame most often employed by the organisation will also be the frame most often copied into the media.
Further inspired by the five ideal-typical traits (Deuze, 2005) of journalists we assume that journalists gather information autonomously. PR professionals are employed by a single organisation and are thus partial to this organisation
H2. In the newspapers we will identify ‘competing frames’ more often than in press releases, and vice versa.
Ethics in PR
Professional public relations societies and associations throughout the world have "codes of ethics" which call upon their members to be honest, moral, to work in accord with the public interest, and so forth (Wright, 1989). These normative codes of ethics provide practitioners with a set of guidelines that help them understand what should be done in certain situations (Kim, 2003). The most well known and cited of existing public relations standards is the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA)’s Code of Ethics. The PRSA Code
“emphasises serving the public interest; avoiding misrepresentations to clients, employers and others; and the continuing development of public relations
practitioners” (Fitzpatrick, 2002, p. 90). Cutlip et al. (2000) argue that the principle behind professional ethics is that one’s actions are designed to create the greatest good for both the client and the community as whole, rather than to enhance the position and power of the practitioner.
The PRSA Code Of Ethics asserts that the free flow of information is “protecting and advancing the free flow of accurate and truthful information, which is essential to serving the public interest and contributing to informed decision making in society” (Kim, 2003). Serving the public interest should be inherent to the profession of public relations. In their attempts to maximise the process of meaning creation, and establishing a favourable reputation for the organisation, PR professionals produce public legitimacy for the organisation. The purpose of public relations should not be to simply influence public opinion for the good of the institution. Rather, it is to help organizations and their publics accommodate each others’ interests with the goal of mutual benefit (Grunig, 1992). Public relations practitioners should share journalists’ goal of objectivity (Fitzpatrick & Gauthier, 2001), as this will allow the audience to make informed decisions. The PR professional should actively display that there is no singular truth by acknowledging competing frames in the press release. The measure to which the PR professional displays competing frames in their press release indicates how ethical the professional really is.
Method
This study is based on a quantitative content analyses of the frames used in press releases and newspaper articles (total n = 397) from January 1 to December 31 2012.
Press releases (n = 158) from five different economic organisations were coded: Post NL, Vroom & Dreesman, Unilever, NDC media group and bol.com. These companies are part of the Elsevier 500 ranking of Dutch companies
generating the most revenue and provide a sufficient sample of the Dutch market environment. The press releases were published on the company websites.
Articles from three national newspapers (n = 239) were coded: The Telegraaf, de Volkskrant and Het Financieele Dagblad. Bakker and Scholten (2005) consider The Telegraaf to be a right wing oriented, populist newspaper.
De Volkskrant focuses more on culture and Het Financieele Dagblad is a business oriented newspaper (Bakker & Scholten, 2005). Together these papers provide a sufficient sample of both quality and popular news media. The newspaper
articles are gathered through Lexis Nexis. A search was performed for newspaper articles regarding the five companies in the three newspapers throughout the year 2012. The messages were examined to establish which press release they were based on. Media articles were considered to be based on a press release if they were both published within 5 working days after the release was distributed and if the source organisation was mentioned frequently in the article. Articles not based on one of the press releases were discarded.
Framing measures
The method of induction was used to establish which frames were found in press and media releases. 32 articles were scanned for possible questions. The article was thoroughly read and questions were formulated based on the topics
mentioned in the articles. With these questions a questionnaire was constructed. Then a principal component factor analysis (PCA) with orthogonal (Varimax) rotation was employed. A deductive method was used to find to which extend the identified frames are present in the sample (Van Gorp, 2007). Together 18 of the 21 items on the initial questionnaire form five components (table 1). These five components are part of the codebook in which all relevant concepts are operationalised into measurable variables.
Five items are consistent with component one (eigenvalue 3.85). The items refer to societal issues like corporate social responsibility (CSR). We will call this frame the corporate social responsibility frame. An example of a question is “Does the message refer to larger societal problems?” The scale is reliable for Cronbach’s alpha .90
Four items are consistent with component two (eigenvalue 2.91). All of these items refer to the assessment or evaluation of the company. An example of a question is “Does the message refer to the financial performance of the
organisation?” We thus call this frame the assessment frame. It has a reliable scale for Cronbach’s alpha is .87
Four items are consistent with component three; these items all refer to the presentation of the image (eigenvalue 2.40). This scale measures the way the organisation aims to profile itself. An example of a question is “Does the message inform the reader about the organisation’s products and services?” We call this the profiling frame, and it has a Cronbach’s alpha of .82.
Three items are consistent with component four (eigenvalue 2.04). These items identify the organisation as an employer. An example of a question is “Is the employee central to the message?” We call this frame the employer frame and it has a reliable scale for Cronbach’s alpha .83.
Two items are consistent with component five (eigenvalue 1.74), which refers to the informal presentation of events. An example of a question is “Is the message linked to a current event?” We call this frame the event frame, and it has a Cronbach’s alpha of .85
We formed multi-item scales by averaging the unweighted scores on the
individual items in each factor. The values of each framing scare ranged from .00 (frame not present) to 1.00 (frame present). The higher the article scores on this scale the more explicitly the frame is present in the article.
Table 1. Principal component factor analysis
Component
Item 1 2 3 4 5
Is the message linked to... 0,77
Is there an explicit link in the... 0,47
Does the message contain... 0,64
Does the message refer to larger... 0,57 Does the organisation state... 0,79
Does the message inform about... 0,49 Does the message refer to CSR? 0,71
Does the message mention an award 0,50 Does the message mention a
partne...
0,82
Does the organisation position... 0,78
Are employees mentioned personal...
0,79 Is the employee central to the
mess...
0,70 Does the message inform about pro.. 0,67
Does the message refer to external.. 0,66 Does the message refer to criticism... 0,88
Are personal anecdotes found... 0,73
Does the story show two sides.. 0,81
Eigenvalue 3,85 2,91 2,40 2,04 1,74
% total variance 14,42 13,99 12,09 10,55 10,49
Number of items loading on comp. 5 4 4 3 2
Note. Loadings < 0,45 not presented
Operationalisation
First, some general questions about the sample are answered identifying the nature of the message. The message is categorised into either ‘press release’ or ‘media release’. The subject of the message is identified. In case of a media message it is also assessed whether this subject matches the profile of the
newspaper the message appears in. Also the name of the source organisation, the size of the message, how often a press release is followed up by a media message and how prominently the organisation is present in the message is coded here. Then it is measured which of the five identified frames is present in the sample by using the 18 items that make up the questionnaire. For every question the answer can be either ‘yes’ or ‘no’. (Full questionnaire can be found in appendix A.)
Procedure
With the questionnaire a codebook was constructed. This codebook consists of two sections; a general section, where the nature of the message is identified, and a section dedicated to identifying the presence of frames in the articles. This codebook was tested several times in order to get a clear phrasing of the
questions. This was done in order to ensure there could be no ambiguity in the coding of the messages. One coder (the author) was trained to code both media
and press releases. This was done by repeatedly coding articles, in order to obtain some practice in the process. Intracoder reliability was ensured by performing preliminary testing on 40 randomly selected messages (10%). For this sample Cohen’s Kappa ranged from 0,66 to 0,93. It was noticeable how variables like ‘organisation name’ and ‘newspaper name’ were on the higher end of the reliability scale. The questions for identifying frames showed to be less reliable. However, the questions regarding the identification of frames were all > 0,66 and thus consistently reliable. Overall, intracoding reliability for all variables was sufficient for Kappa > 0,68 which indicates the manner by which the researcher codes is consistent (Wester, 2006).
Results
In order to identify what frames can be found in press and media releases cross tabulations were used. All five frames identified are present in both press and media releases in differing amounts. The frame identified in the press releases that is most often copied into the media is the assessment frame. This frame is present in 87% of all media releases. The frame that is used least in press
releases is the corporate social responsibility frame. This is also used least in the newspaper articles. The frame that is used most in press releases is the profiling frame. An overview of these results can be found below in table 2 (below).
Table 2. Presence of frame in press and media releases CSR Assessment Profiling Employer Event
Press 28,9 50,9 82,4 69,2 32,7
Media 13,7 87 35 50 15,1
All values in percentages
When asking if certain corporations favour certain frames it can be positively confirmed that some frames are used more frequently than others in the press releases (results are presented in table 3). The employer frame is present to a certain extent in 100% of the press releases of NDC Media. This is in contrast to the events frame, which is present in none (0%) of this organisation’s press
releases. Bol.com has a specific preference for the profiling frame; it is present to a certain amount in all (100%) of the organisation’s press releases. The profiling frame is also popular with PostNL (84,6%) and V&D (80%).
Table 3. Presence of frames in corporations' press releases
CSR* Assessment Profiling* Employer Events*
Unilever 51,5 30,3 60,6 69,7 6,1
NDC Media 0 75 75 100 0
PostNL 28,2 52,6 84,6 71,8 44,9
bol.com 5,9 61,8 100 61,8 32,4
V&D 50 60 80 60 40
All values in percentages, * = significant differences
Because the profiling frame is the most popular frame for three out of five organisations, it cannot be said that this frame is particular to a certain corporation. The profiling frame is the favoured frame for 60% of the
organisations studied in this research. The popularity of the profiling frame in press releases does not get picked up in media releases (see table 4). There is not such a strong correlation between the profiling frame and PostNL, bol.com and V&D in the media releases. In the media releases the company name is not connected to the profiling frame as often as one would predict based on the numbers in the press releases.
Table 4. Presence of frames in media releases CSR* Assessment Profiling* Employer* Events
Unilever 62,4 89,7 23,5 32,4 11,8
NDC Media 0 100 66,7 77,8 0
PostNL 5,6 84,8 38,9 46,8 14,7
bol.com 0 90 30 80 22,5
V&D 16,7 75 58,3 58,3 25
All values in percentages, * = significant differences
In order to establish if the differences in newspaper profiles lead to significant variation in the adoption of frames, Chi Square tests were performed. The differences in the adopting of the CSR frame (Chi Square (2, N=234) = 8.94, p = .011), the assessment frame (Chi Square (2, N=234) = 13.51, p = .001) and the profiling frame (Chi Square (2, N=234) = 7.13, p = .028) were significant. All
newspapers have strong preference for the assessment frame (results are presented in table 5). This frame is almost twice as popular as the second most popular frame, which for newspapers is the employer frame. The CSR frame is least present in all three newspapers. More so in de Volkskrant than in Het Financieele Dagblad which was expected.
Table 5. Differences in frame adopting by media outlet CSR* Assessment * Profiling* Employer Events
De Volksrant 22,8 89,9 32,8 52,5 15,3
De Telegraaf 16,7 75 47,2 50 18,1
Financieele Dagblad 6,7 93,5 28 48,6 13,1
All values in percentages, * = significant differences
An independent sample T-test was performed to find out if the different frames are equally present in both press releases and media releases. An overview of the results can be found in table 6. For every frame the difference between the press releases and the media releases is significant. The CSR frame is significantly more present in the press releases (n=159), M=0.12, SD=0.24, than it is in the media releases (N=238), M=0.05, SD=0.16, t(395)=3.30, p=.001. The assessment frame is significantly less present in the press releases (n=159), M=0.17, SD=0.20 than it is in the media releases (n=238) M=0.45, SD=0.28, t(395)=-10.7, p=.000. The profiling frame is significantly more present in the press releases (n=159), M=0.39, SD=1.90 than it is in the media releases (n=238), M=0.09, SD=0.13, t (395)=2.36, p=.019. The employer frame is slightly more often present in press releases (n=159) M=0.27, SD=0.21 than it is in media releases (n=238) M=0.19, SD=0.21 t(395)=3,66, p=.000, however the difference is still significant. The events frame is significantly more present in the press releases (n=159), M=0.20, SD=0.31 than it is in the media releases (n=238), M=0.09, SD=0.22, t(395)=4,26, p=.000. These results follow a similar pattern to the results presented
Table 6. Mean of frame presence in press and media releases Press Media CSR 0,12 0,05 Assessment 0,17 0,45 Profiling 0,39 0,09 Employer 0,27 0,19 Events 0,20 0,09
All differences are significant
The results of the T-test indicate that the use of frames in media releases is not similar to the use of frames in press releases. Thus, we can infer that press releases have a limited influence on the media releases.
To find out if it is possible to identify competing frames in the same newspaper article an independent sample T-test was employed. A variable was constructed which indicates how many frames are present in a single message. The variable is at a scale from one to five, where one indicates a single frame is present and five indicates all frames are present in the media release. Overall, the use of two different frames can be identified in the media releases for (n=238), M=2, SD=0.93. More specifically de Volkskrant has on average a little over 2 frames per message (M=2.12, SD= 0.97). De Telegraaf employs 2.06 frames per message with a standard deviation of 1. Only Het Financieele Dagblad uses less than 2 frames per message for M = 1.89 and SD = 0.88. A post hoc Bonferonni test indicates that these differences are, in addition to being minor, also insignificant.
Hypothesis one stated that the frame most often employed by the
organisation will also be the frame most often copied into the media. This is not the case. Table 2 shows that organisation’s messages most often employ the profiling frame (84,4%). However this frame only occurs in 35% of media articles. The media most often use the assessment frame (87%), which only appears in 50,9% of the press releases. H1 is therefore rejected.
Hypothesis twois based on the assumption that journalists will gather information autonomously. Therefore in the newspapers we will identify ‘competing frames’ more often than in press releases. The opposite will also apply; due to PR professionals being biased towards the organisation they work
for we expect to find less variation in framing in press releases than in media messages.An independent sample T-test was performed to identify the amount of frames in both press and media releases. The amount of frames in press releases (n=159), M=2.6, SD=0,92, was higher than the amount of frames in media releases (n=238), M=2, SD=0,93. Contrary to what was hypothesised press releases appear to provide a relatively balanced message. H2 must be accepted.
Conclusion and discussion
In this study quantitative content analyses was performed on 397 press and media releases. This was done in order to establish the effect that frames in press releases have on the use of frames in corresponding media releases. This study finds that the use of frames in media releases corresponds to the use of frames in press release to a limited extent. Frames used in press releases do not have such a significant influence on media releases as commentators have previously assorted (Davies, 2008). Journalists do not simply partake in ‘churnalism’. Additionally, contrary to what was hypothesised press releases appear to provide multiple aspects of a story.
Presence of frames in press and media releases
Five different frames were deducted from our sample. Of these five frames the profiling frame was used most often in press releases. This preference could be caused by the fact that organisations are preoccupied with the way the audience observes them. When PR professionals engage with news media they have to make sense of issues for themselves and others within the organization but they then also need to frame this issue in such a way that it is likely to be accepted by stakeholders outside of the organization including different news media
(Cornelissen, Carroll & Elving, 2009). By using the profiling frame the audience crafts a coherent image for itself that is presented to the audience (Cornelissen, 2011). The CSR frame is least present in press releases. This could result from the fact that communicating about CSR has proven to be problematic. It is challenging for companies to be perceived as socially responsible by the
audience. As previous research has indicated, communicating too visibly about CSR can lead to critical attention (Morsing & Schultz, 2006). This seems to lead
organisations carefully avoiding this negative attention by deciding to employ different frames in their external communication.
In media releases the assessment frame was used most often, concurrent with the notion that media have an autonomous function in society (Deuze, 2005). The assessment frame has an evaluating function: it allows the journalist to report objectively on an event or issue. When using the assessment frame the media discuss both sides of the story, whilst at the same time referring to
conditions external to the organisation. The use of this frame thus suits the autonomous function journalism ideally performs for society.
Framing in press releases
This research did not find that certain corporations favour certain frames. The profiling frame is the favourite frame with the majority of the organisations. A stated earlier the profiling frame can by used by the organisation to craft an image for itself and present this to the audience. It has been argued previously that an organisation’s image will become the biggest single factor in consumer choice between its products and services and those selected from competitors (Eales, 1990; Melewar & Saunders, 2000). In addition, it has been said that image does not only impact on consumer choice and behavior. It can also influence a variety of publics or stakeholders whose views and behaviors can markedly impact overall corporate performance (Schultz & Kitchen, 2004). The profiling frame plays an intrinsic role in this process, and it is not surprising it is the favourite frame for three out of five of the organisations studied in this research. However, the media do not seem to follow the organisations’ lead when it comes to the employment of the profiling frame. The profiling frame is present in slightly more than a third of all media messages. Whilst PostNL, bol.com and V&D spend both money and communication space trying to promote their organisation by using this frame, they are not able to successfully affect the media frame.
Framing in media releases
The current study finds that newspapers also have strong preference for one specific frame. The assessment frame is indiscriminately the most popular
frame used. It is almost twice as popular as the employment frame, which is the second most popular frame. This is an interesting result considering the specific choice of three newspapers with differing characteristics. With the selection of these three newspapers the research hoped to encompass a spectrum of views on society. However, this does not seem to be expressed by their choice of frames. The choice for the assessment frame conforms to the profile of Het Financieele Dagblad, as this paper focuses on financial and economic news. However, it is interesting to note that de Volksrant employs the assessment frame more often than De Telegraaf, as the latter also is known for having a special interest in the financial world. The large presence of the assessment frame in de Volkskrant might have something to do with the nature of the articles in this paper. This newspaper is known to provide quality background analyses of the news. The employment of the assessment frame fits its aim to provide elaborate and critical analyses.
The employment frame is the second most popular frame in media releases; it is used in half of the newspaper articles. For both Unilever and NDC media this is the most popular frame in their press releases. For these
organisations the focus lies not on providing information about their products and services, but about creating an image of themselves as an employer. They often inform the public about their employees, and aim to position itself as an ‘employer’ in the minds of the public. The use of this frame proves to be more successful for NDC than for Unilever. Only a third of media messages relates Unilever to the employment frame whilst more than three quarter of all messages links NDC Media to this frame.
The CSR frame is least present in all three newspapers. However, whilst these results indicate that none of the media outlets indiscriminately copy this frame into their articles, both Unilever and V&D use the CSR frame in about half of their press releases. Especially for V&D it could be interesting to utilise a different angle in their press releases as their organistion only gets linked to the CSR frame in a minor amount of the messages. Unilever is more successful at framing themselves as a socially responsible organisation; they are linked to the CSR frame in over half of all newspaper articles.
Influence of frames on media releases
We did not find that the different frames are equally present in both press releases and media releases. For every frame the difference between the press releases and the media releases is significant. However, the similarities between table 2 and table 6 allow us to identify congruent patterns between the press and media releases. With the exception of the assessment frame the four other
frames all follow the same pattern in press and media releases. When a frame is used more often or less often in a press release, the media release mirrors this pattern. We find in both table 2 and table 6 that the CSR frame is present twice as much in press releases as it is in media releases.The profiling frame is the most present in press releases, it is present twice as often in press releases than it is in media releases (this is valid for both table 2 and 6). The event frame is also present twice as often press releases as it is in media releases in both table 2 and 6. Whilst the employer frame is present in two thirds of the press releases in half of the media releases in table 2, we notice that these results are halved but present in the same proportions in table 6. These results fit into the agenda-building hypothesis, which states that the PR facilitates the transfer of issues from the corporate agenda to the media agenda. The results indicate that the press releases only influence media releases to a limited extent. This could be due to the fact that ‘the media themselves act not only as vehicles for advertising and mirrors of reality reflecting firms’ actions, but also as active agents shaping information through editorials and feature articles’ (Deephouse, 2000, pp. 1095). Thus, we do not need to fear the predicted decay of journalism into ‘churnalism’, and the endangered journalistic objectivity (Davies, 2000, Prenger & Van Vree, 2004; Wolpers, 2012). Whilst we find patterns that indicate that the framing in media articles is based on press releases, this does not mean that the media indiscriminately copy their frames from the media.
Competing frames were indeed identified in the same newspaper article. On average two different frames were present in the media releases. This result indicates that the media quite literally provide ‘both sides of the story’. However, the nature of the frames we identified is not as such that we are able to
confidently say the media provides more than one side to a story. It is more likely that they provide the audience with different aspects of a story. For
example, the media can report about the presentation that is organised when an organisation launches a new product. This story would have both the event frame (as it discusses an event organised by the source organisation) and the profiling frame (as it provides us with information about products and services). However, this story could still be a one-sided story, without any room for critical analyses, merely painting a picture of a product launch accompanied by
information about the product.
Results from this study do not confirm that the frame most often
employed by the organisation is the frame most often copied into the media. This finding suggests that the media primarily have an ‘evaluating’ function. The assessment frame discusses both sides of the story and also makes reference to conditions external to the organisation. We can thus conclude this frame is used when judging an organisation. It is not surprising organisations tend to use the profiling frame, due to its traits being more suitable for use by an organisation. The profiling frame allows the organisation to discuss its products and services. It is therefore an excellent way for an organisation to present its corporate identity to the audience. Overall, it appears that the media are not corporate lapdogs. They function in an independent way, and are a clear judge of the organisation and its actions.
On average, press releases provide more than one frame per release therefore offering the reader different perspectives on a single issue. In addition to this interesting finding the results of this research show more framing
diversity in press releases than in media releases. Less frames were identified in media releases than in press releases. Therefore, press releases provide more variation in their use of frames than media releases do. This could be a result of the fact that media do not gather information as autonomously as previously thought. However, it could also be due to professional PR contributing to a ‘more dynamic process of contestation, in given fields of discourse’ (Davis, 2000). It is important for an organisation to present different aspects of itself in order to give the audience a wide impression. This could lead to organisations employing more frames than a media release does. Another explanation could be that journalistic routines result in media content that reinforces the status quo and limits media access to new ideas and organisations off the ‘beaten’ path. Media
are focusing more on providing a coherent story, which does not allow them to employ a multitude of frames in a single story.
Future research
This study indicates that the influence of press releases on the media is not as large as some academics fear. It also shows that there are multiple frames present in a single press release. This allows us to question previous claims about public relations. However, the frames deducted in this research might miss a certain level of ‘perspective’. The frames discussed can be quite broad, and it is worth to notice that at times they provide similarities to aspects of second level agenda building. It is a possibility that these frames were not frames but
indicated different aspects of a single story. This could have led to the multitude of frames present in both press and media releases. It would be useful for future research to improve the manner in which this research established the different frames.
However, the research does provide useful conclusions. Even if the frames at times provide merely an ‘aspect’ of a story the more frames present in the release the more extensive the image depicted in the release is. Also, numbers about the copying of frames from press to media releases still apply. The patterns defined in this research still inform us about the relationship between the press and the media. The content of the frames does not influence the conclusions made about the way and to what extent the press influences the media. That is where its usefulness for organisations lies. It depicts the ways in which organisations positions themselves in their press releases, and what the media does with these releases. For an organistion that spends a lot of money and resources on crafting an image of themselves in their press release it can be very helpful to find if this is picked up by the media. When the answer is
negative, they can look into spending their resources in a different manner and focus on alternative ways to present themselves.
The professionalisation of the PR sector cannot be denied. Davis (2000) argues that the dissemination of professional PR offers much potential to widen, rather than restrict media access for non-official source groups. Future research should widen its focus to include frames used in PR materials from non-official
resource groups. Their growing influence on the media should be investigated further, as PR can help them becoming significant players in the media
landscape. Research into framing effects is of great importance for both official and non-official resource groups as framing processes towards the media are of particular significance due to the amplifying effect of the media on a company’s reputation when ‘good’ or ‘bad’ news is reported (Carroll, 2004). This research can be considered a building block in the growing corpus of literature on framing effects on corporations.
Appendix A. Questions to deduct frames
1. Does the message have an explicit link to an event organised by the source? 2. Does the message refer to broad societal problems?
3. Does the organisation state they want to contribute to a solution for these broad societal problems?
4. Does the message refer to CSR (sustainability and environment)?
5. Does the message refer to a partnership/sponsorship with a social actor? 6. Does the message inform about the financial results of the organisation? 7. Does the message refer to external issues influencing the organistions? 8. Does the message refer to criticism on the organisation and its role? 9. Does the message show two sides of the story?
10. Does the message refer to a ranking of the source organisation?
11. Does the message refer to an award being presented to the source organisation? 12. Are employees mentioned personally in the message?
13. Does the message inform about products and services of the organisation 14. Does the message contain information about new initiatives?
15. Does the source organisation present itself as an employer? 16. Is ‘the employer’ (as an abstract) central to the message? 17. Is the message linked to a current event?
Bibliography
Aronoff, C. (1975) Credibility of public relations for journalists. Public Relations Review: A Journal of Research and Comment, 1(3), pp. 45–56.
Bakker, P., & Scholten, O. (2005). De communicatiekaart van Nederland: Overzicht van media en communicatie (5e druk). Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer.
Bakker, P., Vasterman, P. (2007) The Dutch Media Landscape. In G. Terzis (Ed.)
European media governance: national and regional dimensions, pp. 145 – 155,
Bristol
Berkowitz, D. & Adams, D.B. (1990) Information subsidy and agenda-building in local television news. Journalism & Mass Communication, 67(4), pp. 723-731. Cameron, G.T., Sallot, L.M., & Curtin, P.A. (1997) Public relations and the
production of news. Communication Yearbook 20, 111-155. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Carroll, G. E., & McCombs, M. (2003) Agenda-setting effect of business news on the public’s images and opinions about major corporations. Corporate Reputation Review, 6, pp. 36–46.
“Communication in Borderlands” Reflective Communication Management, a Public View on Public Relations 53rd Annual Conference of the International Communication Association May, 23-27, 2003, San Diego, CA, USA
Cornelissen, J. P. (2011) Corporate communication: A guide to theory and practice Sage Publications Ltd.
Cornelissen, J. P., Carroll, C., & Elving, W. J. L. (2009). Making sense of a crucial interface: corporate communication and the news media. In C. Chouliaraki & M. Morsing (Eds.), Media, organisation and identity (pp. 1‐22). Hampshire: Palgrave McMillan.
Curtin, P. A. (1999) Reevaluating public relations information subsidies: Market-driven journalism and agenda-building theory and practice. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11(1), pp. 53–90.
Cutlip, S.C., Center, A.H. & Broom, G.M. (2000) Effective Public Relations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Deephouse, D. L. (2000) Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of Management, 26, pp. 1091–1112.
Deuze, M. (2005) What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalism reconsidered. Journalism 6 (4), pp. 442-464.
Deuze, M. (2004) Journalism studies beyond media: On ideology and identity, Ecquid Novi, African Journalism Studies, 25 (2), pp. 275-293.
Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. (1991) Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), pp. 517‐554.
Eales, R. (1990) ‘Multinational report: Multinational corporate communications, a growth sector’, Multinational Business, 4, pp. 28–31.
Entman, R (1993) Framing: towards clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43 (4), pp. 51‐ 58.
Fitzpatrick, K. (2002). Evolving standards in public relations: A historical examination of PRSA’s codes of ethics. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 17(2), pp. 89–110.
Fitzpatrick, K., & Gauthier, C. (2001) Toward a professional responsibility theory of public relations ethics. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 16, pp. 193–212.
Galtung, Johan and Ruge, Mari (1965) The structure of foreign news: the presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspapers, Journal of International Peace Research, 1, pp. 64–91. Gans, H., (1979) Deciding What’s News, New York: Random House.
Hallahan, K. (1999) Seven models of framing: Implications for public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 11(3), pp. 205‐242.
Harcup & O’Neill (2001) What is news? Galtung and Ruge revisited. Journalism Studies, 2 (2), pp. 261-280.
Hobsbawm, J., (2006) Inside out information Where the Truth Lies - Trust and Morality in PR and Journalism, pp. 118 – 129. Atlantic Books.
http://www.prsa.org/AboutPRSA/PublicRelationsDefined/#.UrBpnCgTk2M Accessed: December 10, 11.13am.
Iyengar, S. (1991) Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jenkins, S., (2006) PR and the press: two big guns in Hobsbawm, J. (Ed.) Where the Truth Lies - Trust and Morality in PR and Journalism, pp. 130 – 135. Atlantic Books.
Kim, Y., (2003) Ethical Standards and Ideololgy among Korean Public Relations Practitioners, Journal of Business Ethics, 42, (3), pp. 209-223.
Kiousis, S., Popescu, C., & Mitrook, M. (2007) Understanding influence on
corporate reputation: An examination of public relations efforts, media coverage, public opinion, and financial performance from an agenda‐building and agenda‐ setting perspective. Journal of Public Relations Research, 19(2), pp. 147‐165. Kopenhaver, L. L. (1985) Aligning values of practitioners and journalists. Public Relations Review, 11(2), pp. 34–42.
Kostadinova, P., (2012) Communicating policy change: Media framing of
economic news in post-communist Bulgaria, European Journal of Communication, 27, pp. 171–187.
Melewar, T.C. and Saunders, J. (2000) ‘Global visual corporate identity systems: Using an extended marketing mix’, European Journal of Marketing, 34(5/6), pp. 538–550.
McQuail, D., (1983) McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory. London: Sage Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility
communication: stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, pp. 323‐338.
Neijens, P. & Smit, E. (2006). Dutch public relations practitioners and journalists: Antagonists no more, Public Relations Review, 32, pp. 232-240.
Neuman, W. R., Just, M. R., & Crigler, A. A. (1992) Common knowledge. News and the construction of political meaning. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Reese, S. 2001. Understanding the global journalist: A hierarchy-of-influences approach. Journalism Studies, 2(2), pp. 173-187.
Russ-Mohl, S. (2006) The Economics of Journalism and the Challenge to Improve Journalism Quality. A Research Manifesto. Studies in Communication Sciences 6, pp. 189-208.
Sallot, L.M, Johnson, E.A., (2006) Investigating relationships between journalists and public relations practitioners: Working together to set, frame and build the public agenda, 1991–2004, Public Relations Review 32, pp. 151–159.
Sallot, L. M., Steinfatt, T. M., & Salwen, M. B. (1998) Journalists’ and public relations practitioners’ new values: Perceptions and cross-perceptions. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75, pp. 366–377.
Seletzky, M. & Lehman-Wilzig, S. (2012) Factors underlying organisations’ successful press release publication in newspapers: additional PR elements for the evolving “press agentry” and “public information” models. International Journal of Strategic Communicaton, 4 (4), pp. 244-266.
Schultz, D. E., & Kitchen, P. J. (2004). Managing the changes in corporate branding and communication: Closing and re‐opening the corporate umbrella. Corporate Reputation Review, 6, pp. 347‐366.
Tankard, J. W. (2001) The empirical approach to the study of media framing. In S. D. Reese, O. H. Gandy, & A. E. Grant (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives
on media and our understanding of the social world, pp. 95–106. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Turk, J. V. (1986) Public relations’ influence on the news. Newspaper Research Journal, 7, pp. 15–27.
Turk, J. V., & Franklin, B. (1987) Information subsidies: Agenda-setting traditions. Public Relations Review 13, pp. 29–41.
Van Gorp, B. (2007) The constructionist approach to framing: Bringing culture back in. Journal of Communication, 57 (1), pp. 60-78
Vasterman, P., (1995) Media hypes: A framework for the analysis of publicity waves. http://vasterman.blogspot.nl/1995/09/media-hypes-framework-for-analysis-of.html.
Vliegenthart, R., & van Zoonen, L. (2011) Power to the frame: Bringing sociology back to frame analysis. European Journal of Communication, 26 (2), pp. 101-115. Wester, F. (2006). Inhoudsanalyse. Theorie en praktijk. Alphen aan de Rijn: Wolters-Kluwer.
White, D.M. (1964 [1950]) The gatekeeper: a case study in the selection of news. In L.A. Dexter & D.M. White (eds) People, Society and Mass Communications, pp. 160-171 London: The Free Press of Glencoe.
Wright, D. K. (1989). Ethics research in public relations. Public Relations Review, 15(2), pp. 3–5.
Zald, M. N. (1996). Culture, ideology, and strategic framing. In D. McAdam, J.D. McCarthy, & M. N. Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements: Political opportunities, mobilizing structures, and cultural framing, pp. 262-274 Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
