Mass Media Framing American Politics

In recent decades, well-established, conventional methods of political participation in the United States have begun to be uprooted and replaced by new forms of interaction between the government and the American people, accompanied by changing trends in which groups of Americans seem to most participate and influence our political system. An increase in media coverage of politics, as well as vast expansion of social media networks, have resulted in more youth participation and discussion of current events in politics. Unfortunately, online interaction seems to replace more effective means of political participation, and the media in general has a tendency to cause Americans to lose trust in the

With technology ever changing in today’s society, social media has become a driving force for people (especially the millennial generation) to educate themselves on current events, Canadian, and U.S. politics. As Arthur Siegel states in his book Politics and the Media in Canada, “the media, preoccupied with their own economic interests, have not placed sufficient emphasis on their political and social functions in society.” This does not necessarily mean that mainstream media (newspapers, magazines, radio) is irrelevant in the Canadian and U.S. political arena, but it does seem that they are losing touch with the Canadian and U.S. public and the technological advances. Siegel states that “even in the 19th century, electronic media was envisaged

In United States politics, it is evident that the media helps persuade or dissuade peoples’ perceptions of presidential candidates. Traditionally, the media coheres to a baseline ideology and covers news, politics, and stories based on that platform. For instance, a very liberal news outlet could characterize a story about raising taxes in a very appealing fashion while a very conservative news outlet could cover the same information negatively. This phenomena is also known as framing. Framing is the way in which media and other groups organize and perceive events in daily society. Framing is an important tool that is used to bring people to a common similarity and ideology. Liberal and conservative news stations use framing daily, either

The media can link people to the government by spreading opinions, ideas, or facts about political subjects that could affect policy or behavior for example, “heavy users of social media, relying on platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to connect them with more than just friends and family. Eighty-eight percent … said they use Facebook to find news. This reliance on social media has fueled debates about how social media and personalized web searches influence political polarization. At the same time, social media also provides opportunities for people to actively engage in politics,”(Kelsh 1). This example proves the reliance that society and the American people have on the media, including the opinions and bias found in many online

The development of opinions, attitudes and political values results from the interaction that occurs within the social environment of an individual through contact with family, friends, at school, work and church. Families especially help shape interest in politics and party affiliation while educational institutions encourage support of the political system. The mass media also influences public opinion through newspapers, radio, television and the Internet by reaffirming attitudes and opinions that individuals have already established. According to Doris Graber, author of Mass Media and American Politics, “people do not necessarily adopt the precise attitudes and opinions that earn the media’s praise: rather, mass media information provides the ingredients that people use to adjust their existing attitudes and opinions to keep pace with a changing world” (11). Therefore, the news media focuses the attention of the public on certain issues or individuals, which causes individuals to form opinions on these particular topics.

It is the chaotic month of November, and the fate of America lies in one candidate’s hands. With the election coming to its scandalous end, the country has been a tremendous user of television, internet, newspaper, and radio. Presidential nominee, Donald Trump has not hesitated in releasing numerous shocking statements, and the reporters have not resisted their urge of publishing his words. Nevertheless, it is evident that, “By decreasing the effort necessary for journalists to gather information, politicians can garner substantially more media attention for themselves” (Niven). But, as one inspects the features of all mass media closely, a pattern of specific contents and people constantly being under the radar can be noticed. The boundless attention from viewers, reporters and advertisers bring fame, and support to candidates, whether it being for negative or positive purposes. While covering every aspect of candidates, “The mass media’s representation of campaign discourse influences whether voters have the opportunity to scrutinize the candidates’ issue priorities and policy proposals” (Hayes). High ratings, biased opinions, exaggerated news, and politically incorrect expressions are usually the type of contents drawing the society to itself. Similarly, due to his erratic and unexpected behavior, Trump has gained vast news coverage, risen to fame through social media, and gotten both honored and dishonored simultaneously throughout his candidacy.

Mainstream media has changed the view of American politics. It has turned into an “echo chamber,” filtering results around bias and personal opinion. Overtime, media has slowly, but surely polarized the American people. Researchers tend to have a significant amount of evidence backing the issue. Examples of which include Nicholas Carr, James Fallows, Eli Pariser, Brian Resnick, and Hannah Holmes in their articles, “How Social Media is Ruining Politics”, “Learning to love the (Shallow, Divisive, Unreliable) New Media”, “Beware of Online Filter Bubbles”, “How Politics Breaks Our Brains and How We Can Put Them Back Together”, and “ Red Brain Blue Brain.” All five of the authors seem to express some concern about

Media has influence the political system many different ways in the United States. Talking about politics, it is very complicated because there are so many public opinions. Not knowing which candidate is lying or passing a bill and not knowing what is on it. Because most Americans own a smartphone, social media is so enormous and having access to almost anything. While Americans are on the internet, watching television, and listening to the radio or even reading the newspaper, at some point the word politics comes around and we have our own public opinions.

The impact of web based communication on public attitudes and political policy making has grown from small to large. With web based communication, people are able to get information out to a larger quantity of people throughout the world. The impact is so great because we no longer need to rely on word of mouth or the media and their personal views. Now everyone can get involved and go online to get information. As stated in the article (the impact of web based communication on election and political policy making). Technology allows for the mass distribution of a one way message from one to many.

The main goal of this article was to evaluate how voters participated on the internet during the 2004 election. Unlike previous years, the 2004 election saw an increase in voter participation amongst the younger crowd. One of the contributing factors to this increase was the Internet. The internet as a whole has helped restructure how political campaigns are run and set forth a new objective: to gain the young vote. The problem was that young voters, when compared to older generations, were not as active in the presidential campaigns and lacked the motivation to participate. The solution to this problem was to redefine how the internet connected with the voters and to encourage involvement with the campaign itself. The traditional television

In the 21st century publication has advanced through the news source’s ability to now express personal opinions while supporting a direct political agenda. Now more than ever, media manipulation has been examined by viewers throughout the nation. However the forms of bias are much more than simply liberal or conservative beliefs, it is all about the profit and viewer ratings. Without realization many Americans watch the news, unaware that news anchors are now pushing one's beliefs in order to receive the praise and respect from others who believe in the same statement. The three major news sources are considered to be extreme left, left, and right; as a result, many of these stations include CNN, ABC, and Fox News. By discreetly exposing political

Over the past thirty years there has been an increase in power throughout the media with regard to politics. The original purpose of the media was to inform the public about relevant events that occured around the country regarding politics in the United States. The job of the media is to search out the truth and relay that news to the people. The media has the power to inform the people but often times the stories given to the people are distorted for one reason or another whether they are good or bad for the candidates. Media is now not only Newspapers, radio, magazines, etc but now media includes social media applications such as Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, etc where Media is now not only used to inform but as well

In this day and age, it’s assumed that our information is unfiltered and uncut. This should hardly be a surprise in the internet era, with popularized search engines that provide unbiased information in a matter of seconds. To that end, society has numbed itself to biases found in media and tends to follow what is proclaimed to be true and ethical. This is particularly true in regard to print and televisual media. Due to society’s failure to question these media forms, it frequently becomes coaxed into converting its ideas to those made by the media. In other words, media outlets consistently have political leanings that manipulate our understanding of information, particularly in regards to the public’s political beliefs.

The way the media frame issues has a subtle yet significant effect on the general public. Studies have shown that frames can help determine which procedures we find medically necessary (Edwards, Elwyn, Covey, Matthews, & Pill, 2001), can influence our ability to recall critical details of a news story (Valkenburg, 2000), and can even subtly influence elections (Shah, Domke, & Wackman, 1996). Given the impact frames can have on the general public, it is important to have a clear way to conceptualize and measure their effects.

The research for this article was conducted within a framework of Framing theory. The theory was first put forward by a Canadian-American sociologist Erving Goffman. Media framing, to put it bluntly, is a term that points to a presence of a certain bias in any media outlets’ output. All choices made in a newsroom collectively form the frame through which media decides to show the world to the audiences. Everything matters: Covering one event and ignoring another, covering one event more than the other, deciding what words to use to cover an event, what photographs or video clips to include, whom to give a voice, etc. At the same time, framing theory goes far beyond newsroom policies. Framing is not necessarily a delibirate choice. Journalists themselves look at the world through frames: their education, upbringing, gender, ethnical background, knowledge of the issue, and so on. Audience members apply their own frames as well, not just to media content, but to everything they hear and see.