• DOI:10.1111/J.1460-2466.2004.TB02625.X
• Corpus ID: 19019198

The Neglect of Power in Recent Framing Research

@article{Carragee2004TheNO,
  title={The Neglect of Power in Recent Framing Research},
  author={Kevin M. Carragee and Wim Roefs},
  journal={Journal of Communication},
  year={2004},
  volume={54},
  pages={214-233}
}

• Kevin M. Carragee, Wim Roefs
• Published 1 June 2004
• Business
• Journal of Communication

This article provides a critique of recent developments in research examining media frames and their influence. We contend that a number of trends in framing research have neglected the relationship between media frames and broader issues of political and social power. This neglect is a product of a number of factors, including conceptual problems in the definition of frames, the inattention to frames sponsorship, the failure to examine framing contests within wider political and social contexts, and the reduction of framing to a form of media effects. We conclude that framing research needs to be linked to the political and social questions regarding power central to the media hegemony thesis, and illustrate this focus by exploring how framing research can contribute to an understanding of the interaction between social movements and the news media. Examinations of the production, character, and influence of news stories represent an enduring focus of media scholarship. A variety of approaches, including gatekeeping, agenda setting, organizational studies of news work, and analyses of news bias, have explored either the gathering of news or journalism’s political role. In recent decades, a rapidly expanding research literature on news frames has sought to provide a comprehensive perspective on the production, reception, and influence of news texts. This article provides a critique of recent developments in research examining media frames and their influence. We contend that a number of trends in framing research have neglected the relationship between media frames and broader issues of political and social power. This neglect is a product of conceptual problems in the definition of frames, the inattention to frame sponsorship, the failure to examine framing contests within wider political and social contexts, and the reduction of framing to a form of media effects. In keeping with early sociological research on framing (Gitlin, 1980; Tuchman, 1978), we suggest that framing processes need to be examined within the contexts of the distribution of political and social power. We, therefore, call for the integration of framing research with the