FRAMING MUSIC FESTIVALS
A Content Analysis of UK and French Newspapers’ Coverage of Music Festivals Colin Ingo Chris Volvert – 11108231
Thesis Supervisor : dhr. R.J. (Rinaldo) Kühne Graduate School of Communication
2 Abstract
In an attempt to advance an understanding of the factors that account for frame variation and in order to shed unprecedented lights on music festivals’ press coverage, the present research investigated the impact of media systems and newspapers’ type on the framing of music festivals. To do so, a content analysis of 205 articles from two serious newspapers, Le Monde and The Guardian, and two tabloids, The Sun and Le Parisien, issued in France and in the UK was conducted. Results showed that, regardless of their nature and media system, news stories reflected the human interest, the (economic) consequence and the conflict frame more than the responsibility and the morality frame. Additional analyses indicated differences in the frequency of the frames across the two countries: British newspapers were more likely to use the human interest frame and the conflict frame than French newspapers. Finally, an analysis of the influence of newspapers’ nature on the use of the human interest frame and the (economic) consequence frame showed that, as expected, broadsheet newspapers used the (economic) consequence frame more than their tabloid-style counterpart. Expectations in regards to the more important use of the human interest frame by tabloid-style newspapers were, however, not confirmed. Given that The Guardian was found to be the newspaper yielding the highest mean score for the human interest frame, these findings raise the question of the greater impact of countries of origin, and their inherent media systems, over the type of outlets in the factors that account for differences in the use of frames. Finally, it also raises the question of the impact of hard news and soft news on the use of frames.
3
Introduction
Since the dawn of the digital age, the way we produce and consume music changed dramatically. De facto, with the rise of digital recordings, peer to peer file sharing, illegal downloading and sharing networks, album sales have decreased greatly over the past decades. Despite the rise of piracy, digital sales revenues exceeded even physical sales. This resulted in a paradigm shift in the music industry forcing its main actors to find new business models (Tschmuck, 2009).
Thus, music festivals and live performances became key solutions to ensuring and continuing a thriving business (Tschmuck, 2009). As a result, music festivals have flourished in Europe recently. They have increased in number while their audience has increased in size (Koranteng, 2004). Music festivals as a cultural and economics phenomenon have been widely studied in the literature. Previous research on music festivals has outlined their
economics as well as their cultural significance: music festivals have now become a new type of tourism attraction and they are said to be highly beneficial for young adults’
social-wellbeing (Frey, 1994, 2000; Packer & Ballantyne, 2010).
But along with their economics and cultural significance comes another relevant feature of music festivals, namely their newsworthiness (Frey, 2000). In his research, Frey (2000) suggests that, in addition to their great offer of economics opportunities, music festivals are a favourite topic for media coverage. As a matter of fact, festivals have been in the media crosshairs since their very first appearance, and not always for good reasons. Sheehy (2012) argues that newspapers and festivals have a long and troublesome relationship. In his analysis of news framing of Woodstock in 1969, he found that it all began when the New York Times finally decided to cover the Woodstock festival. Under such a negative frame, though, that its edition only reported negative aspects of the event such as logistic problems and public health
4 safety issues. By doing so, they dramatically missed the historic angle of the event and
ignored Woodstock’s cultural perspective and its innovative features (Sheehy, 2012). Sheehy’s (2012) findings provide an example of the problem caused by the news coverage of music festivals. It appears to be a disadvantage as much as it is an advantage because festivals are like any other for-profit organizations, they must deal with issues related to brand equity to ensure a thriving business (Leenders, van Telgev, & Gemser, 2005). Brand equity heavily relies on audiences’ perceptions and attitudes towards the organization and its brand. Therefore, a positive brand image is crucial as it is associated to music festivals’ success. As a positive brand image is highly dependent on press coverage and news framing (Leenders, 2010), the analysis of the coverage of music festivals is a first and necessary step for festivals organizers to gain a better understanding of how music festivals are framed in the news.
Generally speaking, framing theory analyses how issues are depicted in the news and how this may affect recipients. In other words, framing theory studies the extent to which the use and selection of particular news frames has implications on media audiences’ perception as of this issue. In this sense, de Vreese (2005) points out that the framing of an issue affects public opinion as well as public policy. Therefore, differences in framing have consequences on audiences’ perceptions of this issue but also on governments’ support and authorisations, on which music festivals rely heavily. Given this, variations in the use of frames have essential implications for music festivals’ brand image.
There are two main factors that account for differences in the frequency of the frames in the news. First, media systems have been found to have impact on frames variations (Vliegenthart & Van Zoonen, 2011). Therefore, the coverage of music festivals in two countries was analysed in the present study: France and the United Kingdom (UK). This country selection allows the present study to put two antagonistic and competing journalistic
5 models in perspective. That is the ‘Liberal’ model of British newspapers and the ‘Polarized
Mediterranean model’ of the French newspapers (Esser & Umbricht, 2013; Siebert, Peterson & Schramm, 1954). This selection gains even more relevance as France and the UK are the most prolific in terms of music festivals in Europe. The UK is the leading country in Europe with 389 festivals and France closely follows with 329 festivals hosted each year (List of music festivals in the United Kingdom, n.d.; Festival de musique en France, n.d.).
Second, as literature reports, medium characteristics are also an influencing factor in frame variation (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Hence, the present paper analyses the impact of medium characteristics in the coverage of newspapers from different type – broadsheet vs tabloid-style newspapers (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000; Vliegenthart & Van Zoonen, 2011).
The goal of the present study is analyse the use of frames while covering music festivals in four major French and British newspapers and then to compare their use of news frames cross-nationally and per type of outlets (serious vs sensationalist). To do so, the present paper finds builds its theoretical background in framing theory and more especially around the five generic news frames developed by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000). The value in examining the particular case of music festivals is its ability to shed light on the media treatment of major cultural events of the creative industry.
Given this, the research questions of the present paper states as follow: How do
newspapers cover music festivals in Europe? And this main research question is specified in two sub-questions: first, which frames do newspapers predominantly use to cover music festivals in Western countries? Second, does this coverage vary significantly by outlet (broadsheet vs tabloid newspapers) and by country?
The paper is structured as follows. Firstly, a definition of music festivals as analysed in the present study is suggested. Then, an overview of the literature related to music festivals, framing theory and the generic news frames developed by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000)
6 will be introduced as well as the two factors that explain differences in the frequency of news
frames in the coverage of a given issue. These factors are different media systems and newspapers type. The literature will be reviewed in order to derive hypothesis about the prevalence of certain frames whether between countries or between media of different type. In the method part of this research, data and measures used to conduct a quantitative content analysis are described. Finally, the results of the statistical analysis that were conducted to test the hypotheses will be presented and discussed. The study will then conclude, point out its limitations, and consider implications for future research.
Theoretical Framework Music Festivals
To begin with, the present paper analyses modern music festivals as defined by Krupnova (2011) as: “entertainment events oriented towards music with series of performances of DJs, artists or bands that may play different music (genres) and it is organized around an idea or specific theme which is usually changes every year” (p. 5).
Festivals and in particular music festivals represent number of opportunities for society: first, according to Holt (2010), they enhance a region’s image and touristic appeal and
contribute to local and regional pride and culture. In addition, research suggests that live music performances and festivals have become a major force in the music industry in the digital era because of their great economic significance (Tschmuck, 2009; Leenders, 2010).
Although no precise count exists, their number increases everyday as does their size, starting from small gathering and growing into mega-events, sometimes hosting more than 80.000 attendees (Leenders, 2010). In addition, music festivals have further benefits. They are said to be highly beneficial for festivals-goers and regions in terms of identity
7 Ballantyne, 2010). Last but not least, salient feature of music festivals is their newsworthiness. Though relatively heavy, common press coverage of music festivals has rarely been studied in the literature. To analyse the coverage of music festivals, framing theory appears to be most relevant approach as it provides a means to fulfil the present study’s main objectives.
Framing As A Theory To Explain How Music Festivals Are Depicted In The News
According to Vliegenthart (2012), framing analysis offers three main assets. Firstly, it allows the systematic analysis of media content and the description of the frames used as well as their frequency of occurrence. Second, it provides researchers with the opportunity to assess frame variations, between media and on a cross-national level. Finally, supplemented by other mass communication theories such as agenda-setting and priming, it provides a means of measurement for the impact of media on individuals’ attitudes and perceptions (Vliegenthart, 2012). Thus, the first two above-mentioned assets make framing analysis the most appropriate approach in order to answer the present study’s research questions.
Although there exists a wide range of definitions as to what framing is, according to Vliengenthart (2012), the most widely-cited definition is Entman’s (1993). He suggests that framing, or making use of news frames, a concept inherent to the dynamic process of
communication, “is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment recommendation” (Entman, 1993, p. 52).
According to de Vreese (2005), framing is a process. It is non-static and involves two components: frame-building and frame-setting. On the one hand, frame-building refers to the causes or factors of influences that impact on structural qualities of news frames, the reasons behind journalists’ use of particular frames. As Vliengenthart (2012) suggests, the
explanations for the use of particular frames are usually more often due to higher-level elements such as media systems or types of media rather than to journalists’ individual
8 choices. Herein lies the interest of the present paper: the factors that can explain differences
in framing across outlets and countries. Therefore, these factors are developed below and hypotheses are drawn in regards to these. Frame-building, on the other hand, refers to the outcome of frame-setting, the effects of frames on the individual and societal level (de Vreese, 2005).
Issue specific news frames and generic frames. A crucial distinction between issue
specific news frames and generic news frames is found in the literature. Whereas the former are pertinent only to specific topics or events, the latter may be applied to different topics and time periods (Vliegenthart & Van Zoonen, 2011). Most commonly accepted generic news frames are Iyengar’s (1994) episodic and thematic news frames. While an episodic news frames refers to an event-oriented only news, a thematic news frames relates to news placed in a broader interpretation or context, often conceptualized as an abstraction (Iyengar, 1994). In the case of music festivals, the frames used are part of the episodic news frames, as they usually cover music festivals on a case by case basis. These are indeed event-oriented only news.
Following the path of Iyengar (1991), a tradition of research aimed at developing frames that were inclined to be generally applicable to variety of issues, time periods and context: the generic frames. The present study builds its theoretical background around these. As Vliegenthart (2012) reports: “generic news frames can be applied to any news coverage – irrespective of the topic or context – and thus offer more opportunities for systematic
comparisons and theory building” (p. 939). Back then, this line of research aimed at locating one frame at a time in media content (Cappella & Jamieson, 1997; Iyengar, 1991; Patterson, 1993). An exception is the research of Neuman, Just and Crigler (1992), in which they aimed at locating more than one frame at a time. Semetko and Valkenburg extended their research and developed five generic frames, which are central to the present research. By analysing
9 previous research, they found that, regardless to the period, place or subject covered,
journalists were inclined to use general mannerisms or “generic frames” (Dirikx and Gelders, 2010).
According to Vliengenthart (2012), these generic frames are a reliable tool of analysis which enable the comparison of frames and framing practices across countries and media outlets. This standard set of media content analytic indicators are described by Semetko and Valkenburg (2012) as follow: “the conflict frame, which “emphasizes conflict between individuals, groups, institutions or countries” (p.95), the human interest frame which “brings a human face, an individual’s story, or an emotional angle to the presentation of an event, issue or problem” (p.95). The responsibility frame, which “presents an issue or problem in such a way as to attribute responsibility for causing or solving to either the government or to an individual or group” (p.96). The morality frame which “puts the event, problem, or issue in the context of religious tenets or moral prescriptions” (p.96). Finally, the (economic) consequence frame that “presents an event, problem or issue in terms of the (economic) consequences it will have on an individual, group, institution, region or country.” (p.96).
Framing music festivals
Soft news and hard news. In the literature, a distinction is made between soft news
and hard news. Soft news is defined by Tuchman (1973) as stories “centering around ‘lighter’ topics such as entertainment, culture, education or social issues” (p. 113). Hard news, on the other hand, covers “events potentially available to analysis or interpretation” (Tuchman 1973, p. 113), a category of news that covers economic, politic, war or natural disasters. According to Aalberg and Beyer (2015), soft news is increasingly present in newspapers. They argue that covering how individuals are affected by an experience, personalising the story and going into personal lives of actors allows journalists and editors to capture and retain
10 stories covering music festivals typically fall in the soft news category as these events are
entertainment and cultural events.
Furthermore, by analysing soft news and hard news on microblogging websites, Horan (2010) found that soft news primarily covered human interest stories. Finally, as Aalberg and Beyer (2015) argue that human interest-framed stories are also similar to episodic news frames, a category in which music festivals-related stories fall, one expects music festivals to be prominently covered under the human interest frame, which leads to H1a:
H1a: Newspapers articles reflect the prominently the human interest frame.
When covered under the human interest frame, news stories present the event with a human face, by reporting personal experiences and how individuals are affected by music festivals, either positively or negatively.
Additionally, as the morality frame refers to religion, morality. One does not expect such frame to appear in the coverage of music festivals as it relates to more sensitive issues, usually part of the hard news category. Furthermore, this was found to be the least used framed amongst European newspapers in previous research (Dirikx and Gelders, 2010; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000).Therefore, H1b states as follow:
H1b: The morality frame is the least likely to appear in newspapers articles.
The morality frame relates to coverage where stories are presented in using a religious angle. In line with the literature and given the soft news feature of the topic and its nature, these are the least likely to appear in newspaper articles.
11
Sources of Variation in Media Coverage
The explanation of frame variation is found in the literature, though it is rather scant. Shoemaker and Reese (1996) argue that there are at least four influential factors, divided in 2 categories: external and internal factors to journalism. On the one hand, internal factors consist of factors that are related to individual journalists (social norms and values, ideologies), to journalist’s professional routines such as news values and audience consideration as well as factors related to organizational pressures. On the other hand, pressures from advertisers, policy makers, and interest groups are considered to be external factors (Shoemaker & Reese, 1996).
Previous research looked into cross-national differences (e.g. Benson, 2004; Benson and Saguy, 2005; Saguy, 2002) and media characteristics (e.g. Dirikx & Gelders, 2010; Vliegenthart, Boomgaarde, Van Aelst, & De Vreese, 2010) as the cause of frame variation. Other research focused on factors influencing journalists’ choice of frames directly, such as Vliegenthart’s (2012) reports (e.g. Bennett et al. 2007; Domke 2004; Lewis and Reese 2009).
Framing across countries. As Camaj (2010) stresses, country characteristics, and
more especially media systems, may account for differences in the frequency of news frames. Research investigating this phenomenon is nevertheless rather scant. If previous research compared the use of frames on a cross-national level, only a few did so using the present study’s generic frames of interest. No clear pattern, however, was found in this regard. According to Guendez and Schedler (2016), part of the factors that shape press coverage and the use of frame in any given national context are differences in culture and media systems.
Therefore, the present study puts two antagonistic and competing media systems following Hallin and Mancini’s (2004) distinction. They distinguish between the ‘Liberal’ model of British newspapers and the ‘Polarized Mediterranean model’ of the French newspapers (Esser & Umbricht, 2013; Siebert, Peterson & Schramm, 1954). Hallin and
12 Mancini (2004) suggest that, given their different historical developments, these two media
systems’ typologies have an increasing importance in communication science as their
structural differences impact frame variation (Boomgarden, Claes Van Aelst, & Vliengenthart, 2010). Being more commercially driven, British newspapers (built around the so called
Anglo-American liberal model) might make more use of certain frames in order to reach a larger audience through more sensationalised media content, the French tradition (or
Mediterranean model), on the other hand, tends to put greater emphasis on interpretation than factual reporting (Hallin & Mancini, 2004) in order to provide their educated and limited readership with sober news. Likewise, by analysing the use of frames of countries from the two above-mentioned media systems, Boomgarden, Claes Van Aelst, & Vliengenthart (2010) have found significant differences in framing. Given this, one expects British and French newspapers to significantly differ in the use of news frames to cover music festivals:
H1c: The UK and French newspapers significantly differ in their use of the frames to cover music festivals.
Framing across media. As Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) suggest, a distinction is to
be made between sensationalist and serious newspapers. This is because the type of the newspaper appears has more influence on the use of frames than the medium itself, according to Semetko and Valkenburg (2000). De facto, research has found that the nature of
newspapers, serious vs sensationalist, impacts on the use of frames to cover a given issue (e.g. Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000; Boomgarden, Claes Van Aelst, & Vliengenthart, 2010).
According to Seal, Lowe and Boden (2007), this difference in nature is explained by researchers as the consequence of several factors. These are external to journalism. They are of importance because they define newspapers’ nature. Thus, organisational pressures,
13 marketing needs, competition with other media are factors that make tabloid-style
newspapers different from serious ones in nature. As a consequence, tabloid-style newspapers have taken such direction in terms of news coverage that it makes them fail to provide
relevant and prudent evaluations of public events. This difference in nature results in frame variation (Seale et al., 2007). As Sparks (2000) suggests, sensationalist outlets, being more commercially driven, tend to focus on soft news, mostly publishing human interest stories, entertainment, sports and scandal. Thereby, they tend to cover events by going into
individuals’ private lives, reporting scandals and producing a mix between information and entertainment in the forms of testimonies. As stated above, this is a feature of news which fall in the category of soft news. On the other hand, serious newspapers focus more on the
economics and politics (C. Seale et al., 2007, Tuchman, 1973), or hard news, which relates to the (economic) consequence frame.
The impact of media characteristics on the use of frames was empirically supported in previous research (Boomgarden, Claes Van Aelst, & Vliengenthart, 2010; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). For instance, Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) found that the human interest frame was the most prevalent frame in tabloid-style newspapers, which leads to H2a, whereas they found that serious newspapers emphasized on the (economic) consequence, which leads to H2b.
H2a: sensationalist newspapers more frequently frame music festivals as human interest than their serious counterpart.
H2b: Serious newspapers more frequently frame music festivals as (economic) consequence than their tabloid counterpart.
14
Research Questions and Hypotheses
In light of the foregoing literature review, this study poses the following research question: How do newspapers cover music festivals in Europe? And this main research question to be answered by looking into two sub-questions: first, which frames do
newspapers predominantly use to cover music festivals in Western countries? Second, Does this coverage vary significantly by outlet (serious vs sensationalist) and by country?
To answer these research questions, the present paper put forward several hypotheses: H1a: Newspapers articles reflect prominently the human interest frame.
H1b: The morality frame is the least likely to appear in newspapers articles.
H1c: The British and French newspapers significantly differ in their use of the frames to cover music festivals.
H2a: Sensationalist newspapers more frequently frame music festivals as human interest than their serious counterpart.
H2b: Serious newspapers more frequently frame music festivals as (economic) consequence than their tabloid counterpart.
Method
Research Design. The main aim of the present cross-sectional study is to analyse the
coverage of music festivals in British and French newspapers. The research period spans over three months (from 15/06/16 to 15/09/16) which corresponds to the Summer season, a period also called “the festival season”.
The present study used a quantitative design and gathered data through a content analysis of articles from four newspapers, namely, The Sun, Le Parisien, Le Monde and The Guardian to analyse the press coverage of music festivals in Europe. The present research’s sampling
15 unit is newspapers’ articles, the registration unit is « music festivals» and the context unit is
the whole article.
Deductive approach. As far as identifying news frames is concerned, de Vrees (2005)
reports that two approaches are found in the literature. The first is inductive in nature and tends to identify news frames in the course of analysis. By doing so, researchers have to refuse priori defined news frames.
By working deductively, researchers are looking for components that constitute news frames. These components are priori defined. Hence, to locate it, “all decisions on variables, their measurement, and coding rules must be made before the observation begins”
(Neuendorf, 2002, p. 11)”.
The present study works with the latter approach as it enables to assess the presence of these frames in the news. It can also be easily replicated and allows researcher to cope with larger samples. But more importantly to detect differences in the use of frames on the cross-national level and within media (e.g. serious newspapers vs tabloid-style media) (Semetko & Vakenburg, 2000).
Sample. The present study’s s consists of 205 articles (N=205) from four newspapers,
issued in France, and The United Kingdom. Country selection was based on their affiliation to the two above-mentioned media systems. France typically belongs to the Mediterranean Model whereas the UK falls in the Liberal Model.
Newspapers selection was based on two criterion. First, their type of outlet, second their circulation rate. Based on Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) who argued that more
important than the medium is its nature when it comes to frame variation, two newspapers per country were chosen in regards with the nature they belong to: one broadsheet newspaper and one sensationalist per country. All in all, the sample consists of 4 newspapers from France and the UK. It includes 2 serious newspapers, namely, The Guardian and Le Monde, and 2
16 sensationalist newspapers, namely, The Sun and Le Parisien. The Guardian and Le Monde
are relevant examples of serious newspapers, as they are directing their political and
economic content towards an educated readership of high social class (Le Monde, 2016; The Guardian, 2016). Le Parisien and The Sun represent the typical tabloid-style press, serving a popular readership of lower social class with sensational content (Le Parisien, 2016; The Sun, 2016).
Alongside this distinction in nature, newspapers were also selected in regards with the importance of their circulation (number of copies distributed on average daily). First, because they cover a significant part of their country’s readership: all four are the biggest newspapers in their respective genre, across both countries. For instance, in France, the total circulation of the tabloid with the highest circulation rate Le Parisien is 212 546 copies delivered daily whereas Le Monde’s is 286,466 (Le Parisien, 2016, Le Monde, 2016). In the UK, The Sun circulation rises to 1,672,217 copies while 157,778 of The Guardian are delivered daily (The Sun, 2016, The Guardian, 2016). Furthermore, the fact that these newspapers are either sensationalist or serious in nature provides a broad picture of music festivals in British and French newspapers (Børstad, 2013). Thereby, it improves the generalisability of the present study’s findings.
205 articles (N=205) were retrieved on LexisNexis using the following search string: (“music” or “musique”) And ("festival!"). The Guardian research yielded n=69 articles which were relevant to the present study; The Sun research yielded n=54 articles; Le Monde search produced n=39 relevant stories and finally, Le Parisien research resulted in n=43 articles.
17 Table 1.
Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) items to measure the appearance of frames in the news. Attribution of responsibility
– Does the story suggest that some level of government has the ability to alleviate the problem? – Does the story suggest that some level of government is responsible for the issue/problem? – Does the story suggest solution(s) to the problem/issue?
– Does the story suggest that an individual (or group of people in society) is responsible for the issue/problem?
Human interest frame
– Does the story provide a human example or “human face” on the issue?
– Does the story employ adjectives or personal vignettes that generate feelings of outrage, empathy, caring, sympathy, or compassion?
– Does the story emphasize how individuals and groups are affected by the issue/problem?
– Does the story go into the private or pers– Does the story offer specific (social) prescriptions about how to behave? onal lives of the actors?
Conflict frame
– Does the story reflect disagreement between parties/individuals/groups/countries? – Does one party/individual/group/country reproach another?
– Does the story refer to two sides or to more than two sides of the problem or issue? – Does the story refer to winners and losers?
Morality frame
– Does the story contain any moral message?
– Does the story make reference to morality, God, and other religious tenets?
(Economic) consequences frame
– Is there a mention of (financial) losses or gains now or in the future? – Is there a mention of the costs/degree of expense involved?
– Is there a reference to (economic) consequences of pursuing or not pursuing a course of action? – Does the story suggest the problem requires urgent action?
18
Variables
A set of content analytic indicators of the five generic frames (dependent variables) developed by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) were used in order to assess how their use was influenced by the newspaper’s nature and countries (independent variables). This operationalisation was used by several other studies in which they found that the twenty questions reliably reflect the underlying frames (e.g. d’Haenens and de Lange, 2001; de Vreese et al., 2001; Kline et al., 2006). One question out of the original twenty was, however, discarded from the original set of content analytic indicators as it related to visual cues, which could not be retrieved using LexisNexis.
Thus, a total of nineteen questions were used to measure the frames. These were created by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000). They were borrowed for this study and added to the codebook so that coders, by answering yes or no, could determine whether articles subscribed to one of the frames’ features previously mentioned. Binary questions (dummy variables) allow an increased inter-coder consistency degree (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). All items are coded as 1 when the aspect was present in the text and as 0 otherwise. Practically, the coding was executed using the online survey software Qualtrics.
Intra-coder reliability
As data were retrieved using only one coder, an intra-coder reliability check was conducted. In order to establish intra-coder reliability, a check must be conducted to make to determine whether, when the same coder coded the sample unit with the same codebook, data produced were similar.
To ensure the validity of the test, I double-coded 10% of the sample (n=20 articles), as suggested by Neuendorf (2002), with 1 month interval. To do so, 5 articles per newspaper
19
Table 2.
Intracoder reliability for 19 double-coded variables.
Variable % of agreement Cohen’s Kappa (ϰ)
Q01-01 – Responsibility frame 1* 84.2 .65
Q01-02 – Responsibility frame 2* 89.5 .76
Q01-03 – Responsibility frame 3* 89.5 .79
Q01-04 – Responsibility frame 4* 78.9 .58
Q02-01 – Human interest frame 1* 89.5 .77
Q02-02 – Human interest frame 2* 89.5 .79
Q02-03 – Human interest frame 3* 94.7 .85
Q02-04 – Human interest frame 4* 73.7 .46
Q03-01 – Conflict frame 1* 68.4 .36 Q03-02 – Conflict frame 2* 78.9 .58 Q03-03 – Conflict frame 3* 100 1 Q03-04 – Conflict frame 4* 94.7 .89 Q04-01 – Morality frame 1* 94.7 .89 Q04-02 – Morality frame 2* 84.2 .71 Q04-03 – Morality frame 3* 84.2 .68 Q05-01 – Consequence frame 1* 78.9 .68 Q05-02 – Consequence frame 2* 94.7 .77 Q05-03 – Consequence frame 3* 100 1 Q05-04 – Consequence frame 4* 94.7 .88 Mean 87.4 .74 Valid cases :19 *n=20 double-coded items.
were randomly selected. Cohen’s Kappa for all variables as well as the percentage of agreement were calculated. Overall, the reliability check yielded an arithmetic mean of the reliability measures was found to be κ = .74 and %=87.4 for the nineteen variables, which satisfies the rule of thumb (Neuendorf, 2002). According to him, a Cohen's Kappa from .40 to .75 indicates a fair to good agreement beyond chance.
20
Index construction
Cronbach’s Alpha was conducted in order to assess internal constituency of the scales measuring the use of the above-mentioned frames. The attribution of responsibility yielded an Alpha value of .63, the human interest frame reached an alpha value of .58, the conflict frame rose up to .77, and an alpha value of .70 was found for the (economic) consequence frame. Finally, the morality frame reached a low Alpha value of .43. All in all, though questionable, these values were accepted and their implications discussed in the limitations section (Cortina, 1993). Once the reliability of the scale was assessed, new variables were computed. Based on Semetko and Valkenburg (2000), multi-item scales were formed by averaging the unweighted scores on the individual items in each scale. The values of the newly computed framing scales ranged from 0 (frame absent) to 1 (frame present) (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000).
Results
A total of 205 articles (n=205) were analysed in the present study: 69 stories from The Guardian, 54 from The Sun, 39 from Le Monde and 43 from Le Parisien. A descriptive analysis was conducted for the newly computed scales (see table 3).
H1a posited that, overall, newspapers would reflect the human interest frame more than the (economic) consequence, the conflict frame, the responsibility frame and the morality frame. An ANOVA with the frames as dependent variables and the newspapers as
independent variables was conducted in order to find out which frame was prominent in the coverage of music festivals. Results show that a significant main effect of the human interest frame (F(3,202)=3.4, p<0.05). The human interest frame (M=.33, SD=.31) was found to be significantly reported more than the consequences frame (M=.28, SD=.32), the conflict frame
21 (M=.15, SD=.27), the responsibility frame (M=.13, SD=.23) and the morality frame (M=.04,
SD=.14). In lights of this mean comparison (see Table 4), H1a is therefore confirmed, and its
Table 3.
Univariate statistics for frame indices.
Mean Standard Deviation
Responsibility Frame .13 .23
Human Interest Frame .33 .31
Morality Frame .04 .14
Conflict Frame .15 .27
(Economic) Consequence Frame .28 .32
valid cases: 205
effect size is small to medium η²=0.051. It should be noted, however, that the assumption of equal variances in the population was violated as Levene’s F(3,202)=6.5, p<0.01.
H1b, which assumed that the morality frame would be the least likely to appear in the coverage of music festivals, is also confirmed. Results show that the morality frame (M=.04, SD=.14), F(3,202)=4.9, p<0.05) appeared significantly less than the other frames in the newspapers.
H1c stated that British and French newspapers significantly differed in their use of each of the five frames to cover music festivals. To test this hypothesis, an independent T-test
1 η² = 𝑇𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 ∑ 𝑜𝑓𝑆𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑠
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 ∑ 𝑜𝑓𝑆𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑠 ==
63.11−31.667 63.11 = 0.04
22 was conducted in order to compare the use of frames (dependent variables) between two
groups: France and the UK (independent variables).
Analysis showed that H1c is not true for two of the five frames as the use of the
responsibility frame (t(189.42)=, p=0.059) and the consequences frame (t(203)=-2.71, p=.201) did not significantly differ in regards to newspapers’ country of origin. However, H1c is proven right for the use of the human interest frame (t(190.31)=-2.82, p=0.005), the morality Table 4. Average appearance of the frames in newspapers.
Human Interest
Frame
Consequences
Frame
Conflict Frame Responsibility
Frame Morality Frame The Guardian (N=69) .38 (.34) .41 (.36) .27 (.34) .18 (.28) .09 (.20) The Sun (N=54) .36 (.23) .14 (.23) .09 (.19) .12 (.19) .02 (.09) Le Monde (N=39) .19 (.20) .36 (.32) .10 (.18) .11 (.20) .01 (.07) Le Parisien (N=43) .32 (.29) .15 (.21) .04 (. 17) .12 (.21) .01 (.05) Total .33 (.31) .28 (.32) .15 (.27) .13 (.23) .04 (.14) valid cases : 205
Note: Cell entries = M (SD)
Framing scale from 0 (frame absent) to 1 (frame present).
frame(t(158.87)=-3.45, p<0.001) and the conflict frame (t(201.85)=-4.03, p<0.001), which did significantly differ between countries. This proves the influence of media systems on the use of frames.
On average, British newspapers (M= .38, SD=.32) are significantly more likely to use the human interest frame than French newspapers (M= .26, SD=.27). Though significant
23 (t(190.31)=-2.82, p<0.05) represents a small to moderate effect d =.402. Results also show
that British newspapers use the conflict frame (M= .38, SD=.32) significantly more than French newspapers (M= .06, SD=.18). This difference was found significant (t(201. 85)=--4.01, p<0.001) and its effect size is moderate to large d =.553. Finally, the morality frame was found to be use significantly more by UK newspapers (M=.64, SD=.17) than French newspapers (M=0.01, SD=0.06). This represent a big effect d =5.14. (t(158.87)=-3.45, p<0.001). Given this, H1c is proved right, media systems significantly affect the use of the morality frame, the human interest frame and the conflict frame which results in significant differences in the use of frames between countries and therefore between media systems.
H2a posited that sensationalist newspapers used the human interest frame more than their serious counterparts to cover music festivals. An ANOVA revealed a non-significant difference in the use of the human interest frame per outlets (F=(3,202)=3.43, p<0.05). The post-hoc Bonferroni test found that The Sun (M=.36, SD=.29, p) and Le Parisien (M=.33, SD=.30, p<0.05) used the human interest frame more than Le Monde (M=.19, SD=.21, p<0.05). But this difference was, however, not significant. On the other hand, the same is not true for The Guardian (M=.38, SD=.35, p>0.05), which was found to be the newspaper using the human interest frame the most and more than Le Monde (M difference= 16, p<0.05).
H2b assumed that serious newspapers used the consequence frame more than sensationalist newspapers. To test this hypothesis, an ANOVA was conducted in order to analyse the variance that occurred between each newspapers and their propensity to use particular frames. 2 Cohen’s d: 𝑑^ = 𝑋´1−𝑋´2 𝑠 = .376−.259 .294662 = .395707 3 Cohen’s d: 𝑑^ = 𝑋´1−𝑋´2 𝑠 = .0656−0.2 .24596 = .546507 4 Cohen’s d: 𝑑^ = 𝑋´1−𝑋´2 𝑠 = .640−0.008 .24596.124321 = 5.1
24 In testing H2b, results showed that there was a significant difference (F=(3,202)=12.54,
p<0.001) in the use of (economic) consequence frame per outlets. A post-hoc Bonferroni test enabled to spot key differences required to answer H2a. The Guardian (M=.42, SD=.36, p<0.001) and Le Monde (M=.36, SD=.32, p<0.005) were found to be more likely to use the (economic) consequence frame than Le Parisien (M=.15, SD=.21) and The Sun (M=.14, SD=.23). This confirms H2b, which posited that serious newspapers used the (economic) consequence frame more than their tabloid counterpart when covering music festivals.
Discussion & conclusion
The aim of the present study was to analyse the coverage of music festivals in British and French newspapers using a content analysis. By doing so, it provided an unprecedented area of analysis for framing research: music festivals. The deductive approach was chosen in order to empirically assess the prominence of Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) priori-defined generic frames.
First and foremost, the analysis revealed a significant feature of the articles produced to cover music festivals and their framing. These are part of the soft news category as they relate to entertainment and therefore, the frame used the most was found to be the human interest frame. The prominence of the human interest frame was found in all newspapers analysed, therefore confirming the present study’s expectations. These findings provide a better understanding of the coverage of soft news in UK and French newspapers and thereby, it confirms Horan’s (2010) findings, who suggested that soft news were predominantly covered with human interest stories. Indeed, the narrative format was used to depict how individuals were affected by festival attendance. Thus, good and bad experiences were often
25 reported by providing a human face to the news stories, delving into the personal lives of
festivals goers. The writing style of articles was often flourishing with figure of speech, analogies and adjectives in order to personalise and emotionalise the content of the stories, as soft news should take form. This study suggests therefore that music festivals are prominently covered using the human interest frame. This raises the influence of news category on the use of news frames.
On the other hand, the analysis showed that the morality frame was the least used frame by all newspapers. This confirms the present paper expectations and confirms the soft news features of stories covering music festivals. De facto, moral and religion are sensitive issues that are part of the hard news category. As soft news and hard news are in opposition, this finding is not surprising. Furthermore, this is also due to the unlikeliness of using a religious angle when reporting on music festivals. These findings are also supported by previous research in which the morality frame was the least prominent frame in their analysis of coverage of European newspapers accros variety of contexts (Dirikx and Gelders, 2010; d’Haenens and de Lange, 2001; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000).
Besides providing a description of the overall coverage of music festivals in UK and France newspapers, the present study also investigated cross-national differences in the use of frames. By comparing UK and France newspapers in perspective, it allowed the present paper to outline the influence of media systems on the use of frames. As expected, media systems were found to have influence on the use of the frames analysed. Results show that UK
newspapers were significantly more prone to use the human interest frame, the conflict frame, and the morality frame than their French counterpart.
Surprising is the important difference in the use of the morality frame between the two analysed countries. French newspapers appeared not to use the frame. This difference might be explained by the fact that the first two questions : “Does the story contain any moral
26 message?” and “Does the story make reference to morality, God, and other religious tenets?” were only answered positively in UK newspapers in articles reporting on a failed Islamic terrorist attack in a German music festival and in which the authors advised not to succumb to fear and hatred. This event was, however, not at all reported in French news, which might thereby explain the big difference in the use of this frame. One should bear in mind that events of such kind are fortunately extremely rare and therefore they do not represent the usual stories covering music festivals.
Finally, the conflict frame was used significantly more in UK newspapers. Two reasons might explain such difference. Firstly, festivals appear to double as a political arena where artists, activists and attendees can display their ideas, which results in a divergence of opinions, which are then reported in the news. Also, a seminal event occurred during the research period, namely, Brexit. As it happened during the festival season, newspapers often covered it through the feelings of festival goers. Given that the basis of Brexit is a
disagreement between the UK and Europe, the presence of such frame is not surprising. Overall, the analysis showed differences in the use of the human interest, the morality frame and the conflict frame, which were found to be used more by British newspapers. These dissimilarities might be explained by putting both media systems in perspective. Being more commercially driven, British newspapers (built around the so called Anglo-American liberal model) might make more use of the two above-mentioned frames in order to reach a larger audience through more sensationalised media content, the French tradition (or
Mediterranean model) on the other hand tends to put greater emphasis on interpretation than factual reporting in order to provide their educated and limited readership with sober news about politics and economics (Hallin & Mancini, 2004). Therefore, their strongly
commercialised character makes British newspapers more prone to focus on less substantial issues, thus using the human interest and the conflict frame more than their French
27 counterpart. This confirms Boomgarden, Claes Van Aelst, and Vliengenthart’s (2010)
findings, who found that media systems had great influence on frame variations. Factors accounting the more important use of the morality frame was explained above.
The last analysis explored the influence of the type of outlets on the use of news frame. The analysis showed that the nature of newspapers significantly affected the use of frames. H2a was confirmed as serious newspapers significantly used the (economic) consequence frame far more than their sensationalist counterpart. This confirms Semetko and
Valkenburg’s (2000) findings, which the researchers explained by the fact that more serious newspapers tended to report more political and economic news than sensationalist outlets.
Furthermore, based on their findings, predominance in the use of the human interest frame among tabloid-style newspapers was to be expected. H2b could not, however, be confirmed as, if both sensationalist outlets did use it more than Le Monde, this difference was not significant. Furthermore, the analysis proved the opposite for The Guardian. The latter actually yielded the highest mean score for the use of the human interest frame. This contradicts previous findings and raises the question of the country of origin’s, and
consequently the journalistic traditions’ discussed above potential greater influence over the nature of outlets in the use of news frames (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000).
The present study contributes to a better understanding of framing theory and to the factors that account for frame variations. It adds even more weight to the influence of
newspaper’s country of origin, and consequently of media systems, over newspapers’ natures in frame variations. Last but not least, it sheds unprecedented light on an unexplored area of analysis for framing research: music festivals. By doing so, it also provides a better
understanding of the news framing of key events from the creative industry relating to the soft news category and therefore prominently covered using the human interest frame.
28
Limitations and enquiries for further research
This study has certain methodological limitations that need to be addressed. First, though relatively in line with previous research, the present study’s findings can only be applicable to the particular case of music festivals. Music festivals are part of the soft news category and therefore they are prominently covered using the human interest frame. The belonging of music festivals to this type of news might have affected the presence of other frames. Had the study concentrated on a more political issue, findings would probably have been different. Given this, one could question the genuine generic and standardised features of Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) frames and their application to variety of context. The difficulty for such research to build its theoretical framework upon previous research is not surprising as no clear pattern was ever found. The present study’s findings suggests that the results of framing studies using the generic frames of Semetko & Valkenburg (2000) are inherently related to their topic of analysis and therefore by the type of news they belong: soft vs hard news. If various studies using the generic frames found the responsibility frame to be prominent when analysing the European Union (e.g. Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000, Borstad, 2010), the prominence of this frame in such studies could be explained by the highly politicised context of a particularly sensitive issue, covered by hard news.. However, a common point of such studies is the fact that, across variety of contexts, the morality frame is the least likely to be used.
Second, the reliability values of the latent variables used to measure the human interest and the responsibility frames, though not great, were acceptable. Cronbach’s Alpha values lower than the .7 rule of thumb were accepted in order not to remove items. This poor
internal consistency is, however, a threat to the present study’s validity. It should also be bear in mind that as Cortina (1993) rightfully suggests, when the latent variables used to measure a scall are relatively few (less than ten items), Cronbach’s Alpha value can be rather small. He
29 also adds that the more items, the better Alpha value, which can explain the small value for
the three above-mentioned scales and especially in the case of the morality frame (which was measured by only three items and yielded a surprisingly small Alpha value).
Further studies could conduct an analysis of other types of cultural events which would add on the literature and confirm the present study’s findings. An experimental model could complement such study in order to imitate the nature of news frames and their effects on audiences. Results of such experiment would help understanding how framing influences audiences’ perceptions of cultural events and allow organizers to adjust in regards to it.
Furthermore, it is needed to put the influence of newspapers nature and media systems in perspective in order to assess which one has more influence. To do so, a sample consisting in the same number of tabloid and broadsheets newspapers articles but also in the same number of articles per country is required.
Further studies could also examine other issues and other media coverage by adding issue specific frames to the five generic frames in order to gain a more in-depth understanding of the use of frames in newspapers. This would allow a bridge between studies using generic frames, or journalistic frames, and studies employing issue-specific frames, or advocacy frames and would therefore allow to look a them simultaneously and investigate how they might co-occur in coverage.
30
References
Aalberg, T., & Beyer, A. (2015). Human interest framing of irregular immigration: An empirical study of public preferences for personalized news stories in the United States, France, and Norway. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(7), 858-875.
Aalberg, T., Strömbäck, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2012). The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 162-178.
Bennett, W. L., Lawrence, R. G., & Livingston, S. (2008). When the press fails: Political power and the news media from Iraq to Katrina. University of Chicago Press.
Benson, R. (2004). Bringing the sociology of media back in. Political Communication, 21(3), 275-292.
Benson, R., & Saguy, A. C. (2005). Constructing social problems in an age of globalization: A french-american comparison. American Sociological Review, 70(2), 233-259.
31
Boyle, T. P. (2005). God willing? political fundamentalism in the white house, the" war on terror," and the echoing press. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(2), 461.
Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford university press.
Camaj, L. (2010). Media framing through stages of a political discourse: International news agencies’ coverage of Kosovo’s status negotiations. International Communication Gazette, 72(7), 635-653.
Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. Oxford University Press.
Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annu.Rev.Polit.Sci., 10, 103-126.
Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of applied psychology, 78(1), 98.
De Vreese, C. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal Document Design, 13(1), 51-62.
De Vreese, C. H., Banducci, S. A., Semetko, H. A., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2006). The news coverage of the 2004 european parliamentary election campaign in 25 countries.
European Union Politics, 7(4), 477-504.
d'Haenens, L., & De Lange, M. (2001). Framing of asylum seekers in dutch regional newspapers. Media, Culture & Society, 23(6), 847-860.
32
Dimitrova, D. V., & Strömbäck, J. (2005). Mission accomplished? framing of the iraq war in the elite newspapers in sweden and the united states. Gazette, 67(5), 399-417.
Dirikx, A., & Gelders, D. (2010). To frame is to explain: A deductive frame-analysis of dutch and french climate change coverage during the annual UN conferences of the parties. Public Understanding of Science, 19(6), 732-742.
Domke, D. S. (2004). God willing?: political fundamentalism in the White House, the" War on Terror", and the echoing press. Pluto Pr.
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.
Esser, F., & Umbricht, A. (2013). Competing models of journalism? Political affairs coverage in US, British, German, Swiss, French and Italian newspapers. Journalism, 14(8), 989-1007.
Festival de musique en France, N.D., In Wikipedia. Retrieved December 21th 2016 on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat%C3%A9gorie:Festival_de_musique_en_France.
Frey, B. S. (1994). The economics of music festivals. Journal of Cultural Economics, 18(1), 29-39.
Frey, B. S. (2000). The rise and fall of festivals-reflections on the salzburg festival.
Gelder, G., & Robinson, P. (2009). A critical comparative study of visitor motivations for attending music festivals: A case study of Glastonbury and V festival. Event
33
Guenduez, A. A., Schedler, K., & Ciocan, D. (2016). Generic frames and tonality: Mapping a polarizing issue in a multifaceted context. European Journal of Communication, 31(5), 584-599.
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge university press.
Horan, T. J. (2013). ‘Soft’versus ‘hard’news on microblogging networks: Semantic analysis of Twitter produsage. Information, Communication & Society, 16(1), 43-60.
Iyengar, S. (1994). Is anyone responsible?: How television frames political issues. University of Chicago Press.
Karlsen, S. (2008). Barents festivals and the development of local identity.
Kline, S. L., Karel, A. I., & Chatterjee, K. (2006). Covering adoption: General depictions in broadcast news. Family Relations, 55(4), 487-498.
Koranteng, J. (2004). Europe’s festivals expected to boom again in 2004. Billboard Magazine, 116(2), 47.
Krupnova, I. (2011). Does the line-up matter? A comparative analysis of dutch music festival line-up compositions and their influence on festival attendance.
Le Monde, 2016, In ACPM, Retrieved December 23th 2016 on http://www.acpm.fr/Support/le-parisien
Le Parisien, 2016, In ACPM, Retrieved December 23th 2016 on http://www.acpm.fr/Support/le-parisien
34
Leenders, M., van Telgev, J. , Gemser G, 2005. “Success in the Dutch music festival market: the role of format and content”. International Journal of Media Management, 7(3-4), 148-157.
Leenders, M. A. (2010). The relative importance of the brand of music festivals: a customer equity perspective. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 18(4), 291-301.
Lewis, S. C., & Reese, S. D. (2009). What is the war on terror? framing through the eyes of journalists. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(1), 85-102.
List Of Festivals In The United Kingdom, N.D., In Wikipedia. Retrieved December 21th 2016 on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_festivals_in_the_United_Kingdom.
Lowe, P. K., Seale, C., Boden, S., Steinberg, D. L., & Williams, S. J. (2007). Media constructions of sleep and sleep disorders: A study of UK national newspapers.
McCombs, M. E., Shaw, D. L., & Weaver, D. H. (1997). Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory. Psychology Press.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. Sage.
Neuman, W., Just, R., & Crigler, N. (1994). Common knowledge: News and the construction of political meaning. Public Opinion Quarterly, 58, 325-325.
Packer, J., & Ballantyne, J. (2010). The impact of music festival attendance on young people's psychological and social well-being. Psychology of Music.
Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. M. (1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political communication, 10(1), 55-75.
35
Patterson, T. E. (1993). Out of order: How the decline of the political parties and the growing power of the news media undermine the american way of electing presidents. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Reese, S. (2001). Framing public life: A bridging model for media research. SD reesch, OH gandy & AE grants (eds.), framing public life: Perspective on media and our
understanding of the social world (pp. 7-31).
Saguy, A. C. (2002). Sexual harassment in the news: The united states and france. The Communication Review, 5(2), 109-141.
Semetko, H. A., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2000). Framing european politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93-109.
Sheehy, M. (2012). Woodstock: How the media missed the historic angle of the breaking story. Journalism History, 37(4), 238.
Shoemaker, P., & Reese, S. (1996). Mediating the message. Theories of Influences On Mass Media Content 2nd ed.
Siebert, F. S., Peterson, T., & Schramm, W. (1956). Four theories of the press: The
authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility, and soviet communist concepts of what the press should be and do. University of Illinois Press.
Sparks, C. (2000). Tabloid tales: Global debates over media standards.
36
The Guardian, 2016. In Newsworks. Retrieved December 23rd 2016 from http://www.newsworks.org.uk/The-Guardian
The Sun, 2016. In Newsworks. Retrieved December 23rd 2016 from
http://www.newsworks.org.uk/The-sun
Tschmuck, P. (2009). Copyright, contracts and music production. Information, Communication & Society, 12(2), 251-266.
Vliegenthart, R., Boomgaarden, H. G., Van Aelst, P., & De Vreese, C. H. (2010). Covering the US presidential election in Western Europe: A cross-national comparison. Acta Politica, 45(4), 444-467.
Vliegenthart, R. (2012). Framing in mass communication research–an overview and assessment. Sociology Compass, 6(12), 937-948.
Vliegenthart, R., & Van Zoonen, L. (2011). Power to the frame: Bringing sociology back to frame analysis. European Journal of Communication, 26(2), 101-115.
