Framing Dissent

Framing Dissent: News Coverage of Occupy and the

Egyptian Revolution

Christopher Fers cjfers@syr.edu

Imon Edmonsoniimon@syr.edu

Syracuse University, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communication

Background

Protests

Occupy

Egyptian Revolution

Portrayal in the News

Theory – News Framing

Patterns of treatment

Create Narrative Structure

Facilitate Audience Engagement

Emphasis of values, facts, etc.

“Framing essentially involves selection of salience” - (Entman, 1993)

Theory – Protest Paradigm Excessive critique = axiomatic of

countercultural protest.

Gitlin’s “The Whole World is Watching” – Study of SDS treatment.

Frames used to delegitimize, marginalize, demonize.

E.g. Violence disproportionately reported.

Methods Quantitative Content Analysis

Inter-coder Reliability - Cohen’s Kappa

Sample - FoxNews.com, CNN.com, MSNBC.com & Aljazeera.com (n = 63)

Codes - Frames, Location, Time & Revolution

Absent or Present

Unit of Analysis - Whole Article

Level of Analysis – Institutional

Frames Injustice - how the people who are in involved in a

movement are treated immorally or wrongfully discriminated against

Legitimacy - Understanding and justification for the actions of the protest

Delegitimizing - discounting of the protestor’s position

Spectacle - allows for protestors to be viewed as deviant and wayward in their actions

Contextual - gives past history and references creation of the movement.

Time

U.S.

Non- US (Qatar)

Location

Event

Egypt Composite Week – 1/26/2011- 3/8/2011

Occupy Composite Week – 10/4/2011 – 11/21/2011

All Contemporary Composite Week - 1/29/2012 – 3/17/2012

OccupyEgyptian Revolution

Hypothesis 1, 2 & 4

Injustice (62.5 %), x2 = 14.38 , Cramer’s V= .53

Legitimacy (75%), x2 = 6.297, Cramer’s V= .35

Contextual (68.8%), x2 = 12.44, Cramer’s V= .294

US based news coverage of the Egyptian Revolution will contain more injustice, legitimizing, contextual frames than US based coverage of the Occupy movement.

Hypothesis 3 & 5

Delegitimizing (65.7%), x2 = 12.44 , Cramer’s V= .494

Spectacle = Not Significant X

US based news coverage of the Occupy Movement will contain more spectacle and delegitimizing frames than US based coverage of the Egyptian Revolution.

Hypothesis 6 & 7

Injustice (40 %), x2 = 2.801, Cramer’s V= .265

Legitimizing (100 %), x2 = 6.984, Cramer’s V= .418*

*(n = 5)

Non U.S. based news coverage of the Occupy movement will contain more injustice and legitimizing frames then U.S. based coverage.

Hypothesis 8 & 9

Delegitimizing (65.7 %), x2 = 7.731, Cramer’s V= .440

Spectacle (71.4 %), x2 = 9.52, Cramer’s V= .448

US based news coverage of the Occupy movement will contain more delegitimizing and spectacle frames than non-US based news coverage.

Hypothesis 10 & 11

Not Significant X

Early coverage of the Occupy Movement will contain more delegitimizing and spectacle frames than later coverage.

Hypothesis 12

Not Significant X

Later coverage of Occupy will contain more legitimizing frames than earlier coverage

Discussion & Future Research Foreign pro-democracy movements with

positive frames

Primarily anti-status quo movement with oppositional frames

Frames over time

Limitations

Suggestions for future research

News Coverage of Occupy and the Egyptian Revolution

Syracuse University, S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communication

Framing Dissent: Christopher Fers cjfers@syr.edu

Imon Edmonsoniimon@syr.edu