Degree Type

Thesis

Date of Award

2010

Degree Name

Master of Science

Department

Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication

First Advisor

Raluca Cozma

Abstract

Communication researchers largely condemned news coverage of the 1993-1996 health care reform debate, producing empirical proof that the American media offered citizens little useful information about the issues involved, the substance of proposed legislation, or the potential consequences of passing or not passing legislation. This study seeks to determine whether the "elite press" followed suit in its coverage of the 2009-2010 health care reform debate, or if it fared better. It applies paragraph-by-paragraph content analysis to investigate the framing and sourcing of fourteen months' worth of articles in The Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, and The Washington Post. Results show that the game frame was dominant, yet was not significantly more prominent than the issue/economic consequences frame, and the conflict frame was rare; both framing and sourcing change significantly over the course of the debate; and many significant relationships exist between specific sources and frames.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31274/etd-180810-1924

Copyright Owner

Steven James Adams

Language

en

Date Available

2012-04-30

File Format

application/pdf

File Size

88 pages

Included in

Communication Commons

Share

COinS