The Discourse of Globalization: Framing and #2117-ASR 70:1 … · 2016. 10. 10. · The Discourse of Globalization: Framing and Sensemaking of an Emerging Concept Peer C. Fiss Paul

AAMMEERRIICCAANN SSOOCCIIOOLLOOGGIICCAALL RREEVVIIEEWW 22000055 VVOOLL 7700 ((FFeebbrruuaarryy2299ndashndash5522))

2117-ASR 701 filename70103-fiss

How major events are constructed in publicdiscourse continues to be a topic of inter-

est across disciplines Particularly large-scaletransformations such as industrialization the

emergence of capitalism democratization orglobalization are marked by discursive strugglesover their social and cultural impacts and theoutcome of these struggles may facilitate orimpede the transformationsrsquowidespread accept-ance1 Such large-scale changes may not beexperienced equally or directly encountered bythose who interpret and act upon them Insteadsuch changes can best be dealt with throughshared understandings primarily shaped and

TThhee DDiissccoouurrssee ooff GGlloobbaalliizzaattiioonn FFrraammiinngg aannddSSeennsseemmaakkiinngg ooff aann EEmmeerrggiinngg CCoonncceepptt

Peer C Fiss Paul M HirschQueenrsquos University Northwestern University

While the literature on framing has importantly expanded our understanding of frame

creation and contests from an interpretive point of view previous studies have largely

neglected the structural contexts in which framing activities occur In this study we

propose extending the framing approach by incorporating insights from the literature on

sensemaking to examine how and when opportunities for meaning creation open up and

how this affects subsequent discursive processes Connecting framing and sensemaking

better enables us to examine how structural factors prompt and bound discursive

processes affecting when and where frame contests emerge We demonstrate the utility of

this approach by examining changes in the discourse of globalization Using qualitative

and quantitative analyses of newspaper articles and corporate press releases we trace

the emergence of globalization discourse its diffusion and the increasing contention

that surrounds it Our findings show how and where globalization discourse emerged in

response to greater US involvement with the international economy and how later

frame contests over the meaning of globalization have depended on the interests of the

actors involved

Direct correspondence to Peer C Fiss QueenrsquosSchool of Business 143 Union Street KingstonOntario Canada K7L 3N6 (fissbusinessqueen-suca) or Paul M Hirsch Department ofManagement and Organizations Kellogg School ofManagement 2001 Sheridan Road Evanston IL60208 (paulhirschnorthwesternedu) The authorsthank Wayne Baker Marcus Britton BruceCarruthers Peter DeWan Gary Alan Fine GeorgiDerluguian Steven Hoffman Mark Jacobs MarkKennedy Rodney Lacey Ryon Lancaster AmitNigam Ann Shola Orloff Joseph Porac CharlesRagin Art Stinchcombe Marc Ventresca LihuaWang Christopher Winship Edward Zajac MarkZimny and the ASR editors and anonymous review-ers for their comments and suggestions Specialappreciation goes to deputy editor Myra Marx Ferreefor her insight and guidance An earlier version of thispaper was presented at the American SociologicalAssociationrsquos Annual Meetings in Washington DCAugust 2000

1 Research on how events are constructed in pub-lic discourse has come from a variety of disciplinesincluding sociology media studies organization the-ory and economics and researchers have examinedevents such as riots (Ellingson 1995) labor disputes(Steinberg 1999) protest events (Oliver and Myers1999) industrial accidents (Gephart 1993) and pro-gressive political reforms (Hirschman 1991)Regarding the literature on large-scale societalchanges see for example Hobsbawm (1975) forindustrialization Chirot and Merton (1986) or Polanyi(1944) for the emergence of capitalism (Giddens1999) for democratization and Giddens (2000) orHeld et al (1999) for globalization

Delivered by Ingenta toQueens University (cid 1992) Queens University (cid 77011973)

IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

expressed through a collective public vocabu-lary (Andsager 2000 Condit 1990) How col-lective vocabularies are constructed isconsequential since these vocabularies exertinfluence on actorsrsquo understandings of whatactions are legitimate and appropriate

The process by which the meaning of eventsis socially constructed and negotiated has beenprimarily addressed in two related yet largelyseparate literatures The first known as theframing perspective focuses on the processesby which actors produce frames of meaning tomobilize support for their respective positions(Klandermans 1992 Snow and Benford 19881992 Snow et al 1986)

A second literature generally referred to asthe sensemaking perspective emphasizes thesocial psychological and epistemologicalprocesses by which actors form an understand-ing of the situations they find themselves in(Morgan Frost and Pondy 1983 Weick 19951999) In this paper we suggest that the fram-ing perspective can be fruitfully extended byincorporating some of the insights from thesensemaking approach While framing focuseson how different meanings compete for supportsensemaking stresses how the identification ofpatterns of meaning depends on salient cuesfrom the environment (Weick 1999)Incorporating insights from the sensemakingliterature better enables frame analysis to includeboth how meaning is contested in discourse andhow structural factors prompt and bound theemergence of such discourse We use the exam-ple of globalization to show how discursiveframing of globalization presents a crucial strug-gle over the legitimacy of change and that thisframing is the outcome of a process that com-bines both material change and symbolicconstruction2

FFRRAAMMIINNGG AANNDD SSEENNSSEEMMAAKKIINNGG

The concept of framing captures the processesby which actors influence the interpretationsof reality among various audiences3 Framesconstitute ldquoschemata of interpretationrdquo thatldquoorganize experiences and guide actionrdquo (Snowet al 1986464) providing coherence to a set ofidea elements (Benford 1993 Ferree et al2002) This process of giving meaning is fraughtwith conflict as interested actors and entrepre-neurs articulate particular versions of reality topotential supporters bystanders media andtargets of change (eg Coles 1998 Gamson andModigliani 1989 Haines 1996) Frame disputesare inherent to public discourse erupting espe-cially when events undermine hegemonic inter-pretations of reality (Benford 1997 Coles 1998Swidler 1995) The concept of frame disputesthus ldquorepresents society and culture as contest-ed terrain and depicts various social groups andmovements as struggling for powerrdquo (Kellner199258) Furthermore while the dynamics offrame contests are important in their own right(Gamson and Modigliani 1989) the outcomesof these contests frequently have profound con-sequences for policy formation (Andsager 2000Ferree et al 2002 Gamson 1988 Hilgartner andBosk 1988 Pan and Kosicki 1993)

Within the social movements literature con-cern has been recently expressed about studiesof framing that focus almost exclusively onmeaning construction but fail to connect to thestructural context in which this meaning-mak-ing occurs (Bartholomew and Mayer 1992Benford 1993 1997 Diani 1996 Ellingson1995 Kubal 1998) In response to this concernseveral researchers working in the framing per-spective have aimed to show how frames areembedded in historical and material contexts(Ferree et al 2002 Oliver and Johnston 2000Steinberg 1999) It thus appears much may begained from moving toward an approach thatsees struggles over meaning as not exclusivelythe outcome of processes ldquoin the sphere of sym-bolic codesrdquo but as also shaped by larger eco-

3300mdashmdashndashndashAAMMEERRIICCAANN SSOOCCIIOOLLOOGGIICCAALL RREEVVIIEEWW


2 Because of the scope and scale of globalizationdiscourse our analysis focuses on its economic aspectas the one that has arguably drawn the most attentionand is most central to the discourse of globalizationWe also examine the social political and culturaldimensions but only insofar as they affect the dis-course of economic globalization

3 For an overview and discussion of the framingliterature see eg Benford 1997 Benford and Snow2000 Ellingson 1995 Oliver and Johnston 2000Scheufele 1999 Snow and Benford 1992 andSteinberg 1999


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

nomic and political structures (Bartholomewand Mayer 1992152) Such an approach wouldaim to integrate social structure and culturemore closely and thereby explore how andwhen opportunities for meaning creation openup and how this affects subsequent discursiveprocesses

To establish such an approach better linkingthese structural and cultural elements we drawon the sensemaking perspective (Wagner andGooding 1997 Weick 1995 1999) By ldquosense-makingrdquo we mean a response to events in whichldquopeople develop some sort of sense regardingwhat they are up against what their own posi-tion is relative to what they sense and whatthey need to dordquo (Weick 199942) As Weicksuggests ldquoThe basic idea of sensemaking isthat reality is an ongoing accomplishment thatemerges from efforts to create order and makeretrospective sense of what occursrdquo (1993635)Actors are thus ldquotheorists of a pragmatic sortrdquo(Levinson 1983 White 2000) they self-con-sciously develop notions about cause and effectthus ldquotheorizingrdquo their world and the relation-ships within it (Berger and Luckmann 1966Strang and Meyer 1993) In sensemaking actorscreatively arrange and reassemble cues that theyget from the ldquorealrdquo world providing structureand guidance in an ongoing process of realityenactment (Neuman 1990 Weick 1995) Thesesensemaking processes are bounded by the dis-cursive fields in which the actors operate and areaffected by structures and events ldquobeyond thenoosphere of informationrdquo (Steinberg1999772)

Sensemaking and framing are conceptuallycompatible In fact some key works in the fram-ing tradition acknowledge or implicitly assumethat framing involves some aspects of sense-making For example Gamson and Modigliani(19893) state that frames are the central organ-izing idea for ldquomaking sense of relevant eventsrdquoSimilarly Gitlin (19807) argues that mediaframes ldquoorganize the world both for journalistswho report it and for us who rely on theirreportsrdquo Gamson et al (1992385) observe thatframes bring order to events because they ldquomakethe world make senserdquo

Like framing the concept of sensemakingimplies that the world does not come to us inldquoraw formrdquo but that we actively construct itoften using pre-fabricated vocabularies orschemas (Benford 1993 Gamson et al 1992)

The concept of sensemaking however offers astronger linkage to the role of material structurein prompting and bounding discourseSensemaking stresses the internal self-con-scious process of developing a coherent accountof what is going on while framing emphasizesthe external strategic process of creating spe-cific meaning in line with political interests4

Framing and sensemaking thus focus on dif-ferent aspects of the meaning-creation processIf framing focuses on whose meanings win outin symbolic contests sensemaking shifts thefocus to understanding why such frame con-tests come into being in the first place as wellas how they are connected to ldquohardrdquo structuralchanges and over which territory they arefought

Combining insights from sensemaking witha framing approach acknowledges the role ofstructural factors but leaves discourse and fram-ing open to symbolic cultural and politicaldeterminations In other words while ldquorealityrdquoprovides some structural constraints the auton-omy of meaning and meaning creation remainsOur goal here is to favor neither materialisticaccounts that see discourse as derived from anddetermined by economic circumstances noridealist accounts that see discourse as largelydisconnected and detached from economic lifeInstead we aim to examine how the discursiveand material combine to create discourseembedded in larger structures Such an approachdoes not deny agency but on the contrary shiftsattention ldquoaway from what structures have doneto actors to what actors do within the spaceproduced by the limits and possibilities thrownup by structuresrdquo (Bartholomew and Mayer1992153)

As an example of how framing and sense-making combine to create the meaning ofevents we examine the emergence and diffusionof the discourse of globalization in US news-paper and press release coverage between 1984and 1998 First we show that there are changesin structural conditions namely US-globalintegration that explain when discourse onglobalization occurred and why its volumeincreased pointing to sensemaking processesSecond we show that as the discourse spread

TTHHEE DDIISSCCOOUURRSSEE OOFF GGLLOOBBAALLIIZZAATTIIOONNmdashmdashndashndash3311


4 In this sense framing is similar to sense-giving(cf Gioia and Chittipeddi 1991)


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

its ldquotonerdquo shifted markedly and frame contestsbegan as various actors aimed to influence inter-pretation of changes in accordance with theirdifferent interests Third we explain this shift interms of the diversity of discursive actors aswell as these actorsrsquo interests and positioningwithin the discourse

TTHHEE DDIISSCCOOUURRSSEE OOFF GGLLOOBBAALLIIZZAATTIIOONN

Since the appearance of the term ldquoglobalizationrdquoin the early 1970s the scholarly and popular dis-course of globalization has grown steadily inboth amount and complexity There is little con-sensus on what it does or should encompass oreven on the termrsquos definition For example anegative perspective on globalization highlightsits destructive effectsmdashon democratic process-es (Held 1995 Martin and Schuman 1997)workersrsquo rights (Tilly 1995) the earthrsquos naturalresources (Shiva 2000) and the authority ofthe nation-state (Cox 1996 Kennedy 1993Kobrin 1997) A second group of authors morepositively proposes that growth in internation-al trade leads to widely shared benefits and agenerally civilizing effect (Levitt 1983 Ohmae1990) A third set challenges the reality of glob-alization arguing that both its extent and effectshave been vastly exaggerated (Doremus 1998Hirst and Thompson 1996 Wade 1996) Afourth group conceives globalization as a mat-ter of degree a process long under way butaccelerated by the diffusion of new technologyinformation practices free capital and transna-tional organizations (Boli and Thomas 1997Guilleacuten 2001 Sassen 1996 Sklair 1995)Globalization has also been praised or con-demned for increasing (Featherstone Lash andRobertson 1995) or decreasing (Hamelink 1994Latouche 1995) cultural heterogeneity aroundthe world Finally globalization has been char-acterized both as a condition of modernity (Beck2000 Giddens 1990) and as ushering in a newand distinctly different ldquoglobal agerdquo (Albrow1997)5

Globalization has thus become a grand con-test of social constructions and an ldquoumbrellaconstructrdquo (Hirsch and Levin 1999) that enablesconflicting claims to coexist and coevolveBecause the material facts at hand are ambigu-ous the public discourse that develops to sup-port and legitimate particular interpretations ofthese ambiguous data is of great importance Toillustrate this point consider economic global-ization an area where there are plenty of sup-posedly hard data The skeptical viewmdashthat itsextent and importance are exaggeratedmdashdrawssupport from statistics showing that currentflows of goods across borders are only slightlygreater than during the ldquogolden agerdquo of tradebefore World War I (Hirst and Thompson 1996Krugman 1994 Wade 1996) An opposing per-spectivemdashasserting globalizationrsquos strongeffectmdashpoints to figures on the increasingmobility of financial capital and growing invest-ments across national boundaries (Eichengreen1996 Karunaratne and Tisdell 1996 Ohmae1990) Such contradictory conclusions illus-trate how divergent interpretations of global-ization can selectively cite and assert empiricalsupport

Precisely because globalization as a conceptis poorly defined it requires substantial inter-pretation Discursive struggles over the inter-pretation of globalization however need to beexamined alongside changes in the structure ofthe international economy We therefore distin-guish between globalization as a structuralprocess and globalization as a symbolic dis-course (cf Chase Dunn Kawano and Brewer2000 Dirlik 2000 Kayatekin and Ruccio 1998)Research has mainly focused on the first aspectof globalization as a historical trend that can bemeasured by such structural changes as shiftsin trade patterns or flows of capital Much lessattention has been devoted to the second aspectof globalization as a ldquodiscursive conditionrdquo(Franklin Lury and Stacey 2000) and to spec-ifying how the material process and symbolicconstruction of globalization are related

GGLLOOBBAALLIIZZAATTIIOONN AANNDD TTHHEE MMEEDDIIAA

Sensemaking about globalization and its effecton economic and social relations largely takesplace within public discourse Far from being theproperty of the social scientist globalization isbeing defined by claims-making and contention



5 The list presented here is far from complete andserves only to sketch the outlines of a vast scholar-ly debate For an overview of this debate and for alter-native ways of clustering the respective positions seeSklair (1999) and Guilleacuten (2001)


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

in the public realm exemplified through influ-ential books by journalists such as Friedman(1999) Klein (1999) Greider (1997) andDanaher and Burbach (2000) Journalists andpublic relations experts are ldquobrokersrdquo betweensocial reality and public consciousness (Nelkin1989) they organize stories in ways that providemeaning to related events and make sense outof real world cues and information (Andsager2000 Gamson and Modigliani 1989 Scheufele1999)

Similarly studies of managerial discoursehave argued for a linkage between symbolicsystems and material practices (Bendix 1956Guilleacuten 1994) For example in their analysis ofmanagerial discourse Barley and Kunda (1992)showed how managerial theorizing has alter-nated between rational and normative discoursesin parallel with broad cycles of economic expan-sion and contraction Abrahamson (1996 1997)also suggests that managerial discourse fluctu-ates as the result of both current performancegaps and long waves of macroeconomic activ-ity In fact there appears to be broad agree-ment that waves of managerial discourse areconnected to identifiable technical or econom-ic issues (Abrahamson and Fairchild 1999Edelman Fuller and Mara-Drita 2001)although these structural issues do not determinecontent

In drawing on these findings we suggestsimilar mechanisms apply to the emergence ofglobalization discourse We hypothesize thatthe discourse of globalization will be related tomacroeconomic fluctuations specifically to USintegration within the global economy The logicfollows Barley and Kunda (1992) andAbrahamson (1996) changes in the economicor international competition create preferencesfor certain explanations that actors find usefulin relation to problems created by these envi-ronmental changes This nondeterminist argu-ment proposes a ldquolooserdquo coupling betweenspecific problems and proposed explanationsThe correlation of macroeconomic changes andpublic discourse on globalization emerges as asensemaking response to new opportunities andhighly uncertain developments Note that ourhypothesis relates to volume but not ldquopitchrdquo ofdiscourse that is it does not make assumptionsabout how the fluctuating discourse will eval-uate integration with the global economy

Since globalization does not affect all actorsin a society evenly a natural question is whichactors find globalization a particularly coherentor attractive explanation of what is going on Tolocate the emerging discourse on globalizationmore precisely and to embed it in concretesocial relations we draw on the concept of thediscursive field (Bourdieu 1992 Spillman 1995Wuthnow 1989) According to Wuthnow thediscursive field is a symbolic space that ldquopro-vides the fundamental categories in which think-ing can take place It establishes the limits ofdiscussion and defines the range of problemsthat can be addressedrdquo (198913) Discursivefields help actors organize their world anddefine ldquoa space or field within which discoursecan be framedrdquo (1989555) They emerge fromrepeated patterns of social relations (Spillman1995148) Discursive fields are thus consti-tuted by and adapted to the everyday ground-ed activity of their specif ic discursivecommunities

If macroeconomic changes initiate sense-making about globalization then globalizationdiscourse should emerge in those fields wheresuch fluctuations are most prevalent and glob-alization is perceived to be the most advancedOne may conceive of these structural changesas forming ldquoa pile of cues in need of someframe to organize themrdquo (Weick 199941) withldquoglobalizationrdquo providing that very frame Wepropose that the discourse of globalizationshould emerge first in discursive fields whereeveryday activity is most directly affected bymacroeconomic changes which is the financialsector and foreign-exchange trading in partic-ular (Helleiner 1994 Ohmae 1990 Walter 1988Zaheer 1995) The early globalization of thefinancial sector is illustrated by data on changesin the ratio of US foreign-exchange turnoverto total trade in goods (cf Held et al 1999)While this ratio was already 211 in 1986 it hadgrown to 421 in 1992 and 551 in 1998 (Bankfor International Settlements various yearsFederal Reserve Bank of New York 1986) sug-gesting that international integration grew muchmore rapidly in the financial sector as com-pared to trade in goods We therefore hypothe-size that the discourse of globalization will firstemerge in the discursive field of finance

Regarding the framing of the globalizationdiscourse what are the main views that domi-nate Even a casual observer of ldquoglobalizationrdquo




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

in the news media will have noticed the fiercedebate over its apparent positive or negativeeffects that arose at the end of the 1990s Whataccounts for this apparently widening disputeover the nature of globalization

As the discourse of a phenomenon expandsin volume it also diffuses across discursivefields (Fishman 1978 Hilgartner and Bosk1988) which increases what Fairclough (1992)calls interdiscursivity participants in one dis-cursive field bring in terms from another Themore a discourse incorporates terms from else-where the greater its interdiscursivity The pro-duction of discourse however is regularlyfraught with conflict (Coles 1998 Ferree et al2002 Gamson and Modigliani 1989) Themedia in particular are ldquoa site on which varioussocial groups institutions and ideologies strug-gle over the definition and construction of [its]social realityrdquo (Gurevitch and Levy 198519)As a result the extent of interdiscursivity andstruggle over the construction of reality are con-nected greater interdiscursivity allows agentsto challenge existing understandings (Fairclough1995)

As the discourse of globalization diffusesacross discursive fields greater heterogeneityof discourse communities not only generatesmore points of view but also allows problemsin these discursive fields to attach themselvesto ldquoglobalizationrdquo as a sensemaking termAccordingly we hypothesize that the more het-erogeneous the communities that employ ldquoglob-alizationrdquo as an explanation the more weshould observe contention in framing by theactors in these fields

DDAATTAA AANNDD MMEETTHHOODDSS

To analyze public discourse on globalization weuse a variety of primary and secondary sourcesbut most importantly a full-text dataset of news-paper articles and press releases addressing thetopic For the newspaper articles we selected assources the New York Times (NYT) the WallStreet Journal (WSJ) and the Washington Post(WP) These are arguably the most importantnewspapers in the United States and are knownfor their agenda-setting influence For the pressreleases we chose PR Newswire the largestelectronic distributor of news releases PRNewswire contains the complete text of pressreleases from US companies governmentagencies industry associations labor unions

universities and colleges human rights groupsand other organizations thus offering a widerange of sources It is particularly appropriatefor an analysis of frames since these releases areespecially designed for dissemination to themedia and are stored in the original uneditedform (Miller 1997)

Using the Dow Jones Interactive database weextracted from these sources all newspaper arti-cles and press releases that contained the wordldquoglobalizationrdquo or any of its derived forms suchas ldquoglobalizerdquo ldquoglobalizedrdquo ldquoglobalizingrdquo andldquoglobalityrdquo After we removed duplicates thenewspaper segment of this dataset contained1805 documents covering the period fromJanuary 1984 to December 1998 Before 1984it is unlikely that ldquoglobalizationrdquo was featuredin newspaper articles or press releases since theterm barely entered public discourse then Thepress release segment contained 1753 pressreleases Data for PR Newswire are available asof the start of 1985 and this dataset thereforecovers the time period from January 1985 toDecember 1998

DDEEPPEENNDDEENNTT VVAARRIIAABBLLEESS

The volume location and framing of global-ization discourse are operationalized using threedifferent dependent variables To measure thevolume of globalization discourse we use annu-al and monthly counts of newspaper articlesand press releases referring to ldquoglobalizationrdquoor its derived forms

Location of the globalization discourse meansthe discursive field to which an article or pressrelease belongs operationalized as the sectionsof the newspaper Each section limits the rangeof problems it addresses for example thefinance section will usually not discuss sportsevents and vice versa With the exception of thegeneral news and editorial sections newspapersections form fairly coherent fields as theirspecialization is their reason for existingComplete information on article sections wasavailable for two publications (NYT and WP)accounting for 66 percent of the total 1805articles Analyses of the role of discursive fieldsfocus on this subset of articles Separate analy-ses showed that this reduced dataset is repre-sentative of the full dataset across all otherindependent and dependent measures

For press releases we use industry member-ship of the issuing organization to define the




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

boundaries of discursive fields (Anand andPeterson 2000 Creed and Scully 2000 Hoffman2001) Because industries tend to share impor-tant characteristics (such as their technology orthe customers they sell to) we examine devel-opments at a more aggregate level of majoreconomic sectors using codes provided by DowJones For example the ldquobasic materialsrdquo mar-ket sector combines the producers of raw mate-rials such as commodity chemicals steel andmining while the ldquotechnologyrdquo sector com-bines industries with frequent product changesbecause of scientific advances such as aero-space computers and software Furthermorepress releases issued by not-for-profit organi-zations for which Dow Jones has no industryor market sector information were coded intothe following categories unions communityand activist organizations trade and employerassociations government entities and educa-tional institutions These not-for-profit organi-zations accounted for about 9 percent of allpress releases

To assess the framing of globalization weextracted from the newspaper articles and pressreleases all sentences containing the word ldquoglob-alizationrdquo or its derivatives We chose the sen-tence as the most meaningful unit of analysisbecause of its uncomplicated semantic structureand used computerized content analysis to detectthe occurrence of frame key words in these sen-tences (Fan 1988 Miller 1997 Porac Wade andPollock 1999) This approach assumes thatframes manifest themselves by the presence orabsence of certain keywords and concepts(Entman 1991 Gamson et al 1992)mdashan actorrsquosview will be marked by ldquoa vocabulary ofmotivesrdquo or rationales for taking action (Benford1993 Mills 1963) We likewise assume thatcertain key concepts consisting of different butconceptually synonymous lexical items willcluster to denote the presence of a higher-orderframe (Ferree et al 2002 Porac Wade andPollock 1999) Through continuous cross-check-ing among the texts we created coding cate-gories that were increasingly refined to reveala particular frame resulting in fifteen keyconcepts that cluster into three higher-orderevaluative frames6

The negative frame depicts globalization asincreasing the potential for economic crisisthreatening the livelihoods of workers resultingin unemployment and poverty For exampleglobalization may be seen as ldquothinning statepower and responsibility creating not onlywealth but chaos and indifferencerdquo (WP82898) as ldquothe villain behind increased pover-ty unemployment and inequalityrdquo (NYT2997) or as ldquocausing mass poverty anddestroying the earthrsquos ecologyrdquo (WSJ 51898)This framing also points to an emerging resist-ance to globalization

The neutral frame describes globalization asa natural evolutionary and largely inevitabledevelopment characterized primarily byincreasing cross-national flows of capital Forexample this frame suggests that the ldquoglobal-ization of equity investment was gatheringmomentumrdquo (WSJ 10287) that ldquothe issue ofharmonizing banking rules has grown in impor-tance with the globalization of financial mar-ketsrdquo (WSJ 93087) and that ldquowe no doubt willsee dramatic changes in the [securities] indus-try brought about by the inevitable globalizationof the marketplacerdquo (AMEX Stock Exchange121989)

Finally the positive frame points to the poten-tial gains and benefits of globalization Thisframe suggests that ldquothe globalization of oureconomy has provided us with new and excit-ing opportunitiesrdquo (Dash Industries 7990)that ldquoover all the effects of globalization havebeen goodrdquo (WSJ 2898) and that modern-ization will allow US firms ldquoto take full advan-tage of opportunities arising from the globalizedeconomyrdquo (Citicorp 71389) After we estab-lished the validity of these frames we coded thenewspaper articles and press releases for thepresence or absence of these frames

IINNDDEEPPEENNDDEENNTT VVAARRIIAABBLLEESS

A central focus of our analysis is on how thematerial process of globalization affects its dis-course Regarding this material process thereis considerable evidence that over the past 25years the American economy has becomeincreasingly integrated with the global one (egChase Dunn et al 2000 Hirst and Thompson1996) To measure this integration with theglobal economy the three most important indi-cators used by the World Bank (2001) as wellas others (Held et al 1999 Hirst and Thompson



6 This process is described in more detail on theASR website


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

1996) are foreign trade as a percentage of goodsGDP international private capital flows divid-ed by GDP and foreign direct investment divid-ed by GDP7 All three indicators of economicglobalization show significant increases since1985 As an example trade as a percentage ofgoods GDP increases from 428 percent in 1985to 583 percent in 1991 and 736 percent in1996

To simplify the analysis of ldquostructuralrdquoeffects and since we use these three indicatorsas reflecting a latent construct we standard-ized them and combined them into an index ofintegration with the world economy a procedurethat has been frequently used in research onglobalization (eg Ageacutenor 2002 Dreher 2003Milanovic 2002) This globalization indexshowed excellent reliability with a Cronbachrsquosalpha of 085 To confirm our measure we con-ducted a factor analysis of the three indicatorswhich resulted in one factor that loaded posi-tively and highly on all three variables (loadingsranged between 94 and 84) and accounted for78 percent of the variance The correlationbetween this factor and the globalization indexwas 99 and highly significant which furtherconfirmed this data reduction heuristic Factorloadings and eigenvalues for this analysis areavailable from the ASR website

To facilitate analysis of changes over time wecreated a periodization based on two key eventsaffecting both process and discourse of global-ization The first event is the US stock marketcrash in 1987 which marked a turning point forglobal financial markets (Tesar and Werner1998) and created attention for their increasinginterdependence due to globalization (OECD1991 Baylis and Smith 2001) The second eventis the establishment of the World TradeOrganization (WTO) on January 1 1995 which

created a permanent institution for advancingand enforcing global trade agreements (Held etal 1999 Hoekman and Kostecki 1995) TheWTO has also become one of the major pointsof contention in the globalization discourseThe year 1995 is furthermore convenient sinceit marks the beginning of a large-scale anti-globalization movement (Klein 1999330ndash35)We thus created dummy variables for period I(1984ndash87) period II (1988ndash94) and period III(1995ndash98)

We also created variables to measure diver-sity within and across discursive fields To meas-ure diversity within discursive fields we useddummy variables assuming the general newsand editorial sections to be more heterogeneousthan most other sections Thus we expect a neg-ative framing to occur significantly more oftenin these sections As a measure of across-fielddiversity we computed a diversity index foreach year The index is defined as an inverseHerfindahl index (a widely used measure ofconcentration) calculated by squaring the shareeach section has of the total discourse and thensumming those squares The formula for ourindex is as follows

Diversity = 1 ndash Σn1 (section sharei)2

The index ranges from zero to one with ldquo0rdquoindicating concentration of the discourse in asingle section and ldquo1rdquo indicating that the dis-course is distributed evenly across all sectionsFor example if all articles mentioning global-ization occurred in only two equal sections thevalue of the diversity index would be 1 ndash (052

+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05

PPLLAANN OOFF AANNAALLYYSSIISS AANNDD

AADDDDIITTIIOONNAALL CCOONNTTRROOLL VVAARRIIAABBLLEESS

Since we examine three different dependentvariables (volume location and framing of thediscourse) our analysis proceeds in three stepsthat employ different statistical procedures

In the first step we model the volume ofglobalization discourse using negative binomi-al regression This model is appropriate whenpredicting a non-negative count variable such asthe number of article and press releases (Long1990 1997) To control for the overall level ofdiscourse we include the total number of news-paper articles and press releases per year Sinceit is possible that the overall state of the econ-



7 Trade in goods as a percentage of goods GDP isthe sum of merchandise exports and imports divid-ed by the value of GDP after subtracting value addedin services (cf World Bank 2001323) Gross privatecapital flows is the sum of the absolute values ofdirect portfolio and other investment inflows andoutflows while gross foreign direct investment isthe sum of the absolute values of inflows and outflowsof foreign direct investment (cf World Bank 2001)Both variables are calculated as a ratio to GDP Allvariables are measured in current US dollars


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

omy will influence discourse about greater US-global integration we control in our analyses forthe general level of economic activity using theNew York Stock Exchange (NYSE) index8 Wefurthermore control for time using a continuousvariable Since the globalization and generaleconomic indicators were highly correlated withtime we residualized these measures by regress-ing them on the linear time variable and thensubtracting their predicted values from theiractual values leaving them with only theirunique variation while assigning all confound-ed variation to the time variable This methodprovides conservative estimates for our sub-stantive variables but avoids multicollinearityproblems

In the second step we estimate a series oflogistic regression models to analyze the loca-tion where globalization discourse emergedThe dependent variable is the respective news-paper section or market sector in which a glob-alization-related article or press releaseappeared with all other sectionssectors servingas the reference category The independent vari-ables of interest are the periods in which arti-cles appeared with period III (1995ndash98) servingas the reference category We report robust stan-dard errors using the HuberWhite sandwichestimator (White 1980) Standard errors arecorrected for repeated observations from thesame newspapers To control for the baseline fre-quency of a section or sector we include itsvolume as a percentage of the total discourse inthat medium per year All models again controlfor the overall levels of US-global integrationand economic activity As a measure of overallinterest in globalization the models also con-trol for the number of books on globalizationpublished annually We collected these datafrom the Books in Print database9

In the third step we use multinomial logis-tic regressions to predict the occurrence of thethree frames in newspaper articles and pressreleases (cf Miller and Denham 1996) We esti-mate the effect of discursive fields using news-paper section and market sector dummies Tocontrol for the effect of structural changes on theframing of globalization we include the glob-alization index and the NYSE index in the mod-els Furthermore to guard against the possibilitythat changes in frame prevalence were the resultof more academic works on globalization infil-trating public discourse we again control for theannual number of books published on global-ization The models also control for time andpublication effects

RREESSUULLTTSS

For the volume of discourse we find a sub-stantial increase in awareness of globalizationin the United States As shown in Figure 1 thediscourse of globalization emerged in the early1980s showed a slight peak around 1989ndash90and then receded again to previous levels By1995 however the number of newspaper arti-cles and press releases referring to globalizationbegan to increase exponentially both in rawcounts and as a percentage of the total dis-course Also while the percentage of pressreleases exceeds that of newspaper articles formost of the study period the pattern remainslargely the same for both

DDIISSCCOOUURRSSEE AANNDD SSTTRRUUCCTTUURRAALL CCHHAANNGGEE

Our first hypothesis anticipated that the vol-ume of globalization discourse would rise inrelation to increased integration of the UnitedStates within the global economy Table 1reports the results of negative binomial regres-sion models predicting the number of newspa-per articles and press releases per month thatrelate to globalization Descriptive statistics andcorrelations for the variables used here and infurther analyses are available from the ASRwebsite

Our findings show that material process andpublic sensemaking of globalization are indeedcoupled As predicted the coefficient for the



8 We considered a number of alternative meas-ures namely the Nasdaq-100 Index the Dow JonesIndustrial Average and NYSE trading volume Allthese measures of economic activity however are cor-related at 98 and above and using them leads toessentially identical results

9 As alternative measures we also collected dataon the number of academic articles mentioning glob-alization in four other databases Sociofile EconLitPAIS and Historical Abstracts (cf Guilleacuten 2001)Correlations among all five measures of overall glob-alization discourse however were very high (between

90 and 99) and resulted in substantially identicalresults


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

index of US-global integration is positive andhighly significant indicating that greater inte-gration with the world economy is positively

associated with the volume of globalization dis-course even after controlling for the overallvolume of discourse time and the general level



Table 1 Negative Binomial Regressions Predicting the Number of Newspaper Articles and Press ReleasesMentioning ldquoGlobalizationrdquo per Month

X Number of Number ofVariable Newspaper Articles Press Releases

Index of US-Global Integration 070 058(014) (014)

Total Number of Newspaper Articles 001(001)

Total Number of Press Releases 000(000)

Time 017 019(002) 001

NYSE Index 004 ndash099(011) (017)

Constant 081 051(016) (012)

Log Likelihood ndash45718 ndash44199

Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4

Note N = 168 Robust standard errors are in parentheses significance levels are one-tailed where predicted two-tailed for control variables NYSE = New York Stock Exchange p lt 05 p lt 01 p lt 001

Figure 1 Articles and Press Releases Referring to ldquoGlobalizationrdquo


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

of economic activity10 These results confirm thehypothesized positive association between thestructural and discursive elements of globali-zation

EEMMEERRGGEENNCCEE AANNDD DDIIFFFFUUSSIIOONN

AACCRROOSSSS FFIIEELLDDSS OOFF DDIISSCCOOUURRSSEE

We suggested that globalization discourse wouldemerge first in the discursive fields of financeTable 2 shows descriptive data on the distribu-tion of globalization discourse across discursivefields confirming this hypothesis During peri-od I the vast majority (73 percent) of newspa-per articles dealing with globalization appearedin the financial news section Another 9 percentappeared in the general news section and the

remaining 18 percent in the editorial book andother sections Period II shows a slight decreasein the number of articles appearing in the finan-cial news section but it clearly remains thedominant section This changes significantlyin period III which is marked by the diffusionof the term across a variety of discursive fieldsIn this period only 26 percent of the articlesappear in the financial news section whereasboth the general news and the editorial sectionshave grown substantially increasing to 23 and29 percent of all articles respectively The per-centage of articles appearing in all other sectionshas also increased now making up about 17percent of total coverage11 Using the diversity



10 The pattern of positive significant relationshipsalso holds for the individual components of our indexwith the exception of the coefficient for private cap-ital flows in the newspaper dataset and the coefficientfor gross foreign direct investment in the press releasedataset which are in the predicted direction but donot reach significance

11 The diffusion of the term across different areasof discourse is also apparent when examining the het-erogeneity of this residual category During period Ionly five different sections appeared in this catego-ry In period II the number of sections had increasedto fourteen and in period III some seventeen sectionsare combined in this category including theAutomobile Cultural Food Education Health RealEstate Science Sports and Travel

Table 2 Percentages of Newspaper Articles and Press Releases Mentioning ldquoGlobalizationrdquo by SectionMarketSector

X Period I Period II Period III

Newspaper ArticlesmdashNewspaper SectionmdashmdashFinancial 73 64 26mdashmdashNews 9 7 23mdashmdashEditorial 4 9 29mdashmdashBook 2 5 5mdashmdashOther 12 15 17mdashTotal 100 100 100

mdashNumber of articles 84 342 760mdashDiversity index 032 052 079Press ReleasesmdashMarket SectormdashmdashFinancial 49 21 12mdashmdashConsumer cyclical 22 23 21mdashmdashBasic materials 10 8 4mdashmdashIndustrial 7 16 20mdashmdashTechnology 5 10 18mdashmdashConsumer noncyclical 4 11 9mdashmdashOther 3 11 16mdashTotal 100 100 100

mdashPress Releases (n) 72 622 1059mdashDiversity Index 070 083 085Delivered by Ingenta to

Queens University (cid 1992) Queens University (cid 77011973)IP 127001

Thu 05 May 2005 171250

index as an alternative measure of increasingdiffusion the index for newspaper discourselikewise increased from a value of 32 in peri-od I to a value of 52 in period II and 79 in peri-od III

Table 3 reports the results of the logisticregression models predicting the location ofdiscourse in newspapers confirming our find-ings Articles mentioning globalization fromperiod I have a significantly greater likelihoodof being published in the finance section usingperiod III as the reference category This is stilltrue for articles published in period II but thecoefficient is slightly smaller though still sig-nificant In contrast articles published in peri-ods I and II are significantly less likely to appearin the news or editorial sections as comparedwith period III

A similar pattern emerges for the press releasedataset but diffusion appears to proceed some-what more rapidly than in the newspaper sec-tions As Table 2 shows almost half of all pressreleases during period I came from financialfirms making the financial sector clearly thedominant one In period II that share haddeclined to 21 percent and in period III only 12

percent of press releases came from financialfirms By period II we already see a fairly widediffusion of globalization discourse across mar-ket sectors with the largest increases in theindustrial sector Period III is marked by wide-spread diffusion with no dominant sector Thisdevelopment is again mirrored in the diversityindex for press releases which increased from70 in period I to 83 in period II and to 85 inperiod III Examining press releases by indus-try shows an even more pronounced trend withthe number of distinct industries increasingfrom 22 in period I to 78 in period II and to over100 in period III Note also that the residual cat-egory again shows significant increases whichcame mostly from more press releases by gov-ernment educational institutions conglomer-ates and utilities firms as well as trade andemployer associations Overall this remainsvery much a ldquocorporaterdquo discourse however aspress releases issued by community and activistorganizations accounted for only about 8 per-cent of all releases in the third period

Logistic regression models again confirmedthat press releases from periods I and II are sig-nificantly more likely to be issued by organi-



Table 3 Logistic Regressions Predicting Newspaper Section in Which Articles Mentioning ldquoGlobalizationrdquoAppeared

Variable News Section Finance Section Editorial Section

Period I (1984ndash87) ndash135 183 ndash256(059) (038) (066)

Period II (1988ndash94) ndash190 136 ndash125(048) (029) (027)

News Section ArticlesTotal Articles ndash014(016)

Finance Section ArticlesTotal Articles 025(013)

Editorial Section ArticlesTotal Articles ndash004(048)

Index of US-Global Integration ndash090 085 075(077) (036) (028)

NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)

Books in Print 000 ndash001 000(001) (001) (001)

Constant 192 ndash362 ndash278(350) (134) (071)

Log Likelihood ndash53032 ndash69806 ndash57510Wald χ2 67768 17320 6469df 6 6 6

Note Robust standard errors are in parentheses significance levels are two-tailed NYSE = New York StockExchange p lt 05 p lt 01 p lt 001 (two tailed)


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

zations in the financial sector with the coeffi-cient again declining from period I to period IIResults of these analyses are available from theASR website

FFRRAAMMEE PPRREEVVAALLEENNCCEE

IINN TTHHEE GGLLOOBBAALLIIZZAATTIIOONN DDIISSCCOOUURRSSEE

After considering volume and location of theglobalization discourse we now examine in

more detail the contexts surrounding its emer-gence and the related prevalence of differentframings of globalization Figures 2a and 2bgraphically show the prevalence of the threeframes in newspapers and press releases usingthree-year moving averages

The association of ldquoglobalizationrdquo withfinance presented with a largely neutral or pos-itive framing continued to dominate discourse



Figure 2 Frame Comparison in (a) Newspaper Articles and (b) Press Releases

a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

on globalization throughout period II (1988ndash94)with the exception of a few doubts raised innewspapers after the stock market crash of 1987The appearance of the term also expandedbeyond the financial sector attracting a positiveassociation with other industries such as air-lines chemical and automobiles Negative eval-uations of globalization emerged as an importanttheme only in the mid-1990s when newspa-pers in particular began to discuss the adverseeffects of globalization in such diverse areas asjob losses cultural homogenization publichealth and international crime

Table 4 provides an overview of the threeperiods in the discourse of globalization Withthese broad developments as a background wenow turn to a more detailed discussion of thethree periods

PPEERRIIOODD II ((11998844ndashndash8877)) TTHHEE EEMMEERRGGEENNCCEE OOFF ldquoldquoGGLLOOBBAALLIIZZAATTIIOONNrdquordquo

Since the early 1980s monetary deregulationand technological change have greatly increased

international financial flows (Held et al 1999)A seminal development was the ldquoBig Bangrdquo theliberalization of the London stock exchange inOctober 1986 which soon led a number of otherstock exchanges in Germany France theNetherlands and Norway to liberalize theirtrading systems in similar ways The under-standing of globalization in this period mostlydepicted global integration as inescapable Forexample the liberalization of the London stockexchange was frequently described as a logicalstep initiated by a prudent government thatldquorecognized that the globalization of financialmarkets was an irresistible forcerdquo (NYT121185) The forces identified as driving theglobalization of financial marketsmdashgreater inte-gration of the major nationsrsquo economiesadvances in communications and computertechnology and deregulation of financial mar-ketsmdashwere seen as a ldquotrend towards globaliza-tion that is irreversiblerdquo (NYT 121687)Figures 2a and 2b show the prevalence of thisneutral framing in newspaper and press releasediscourse Until 1989 the neutral frame was



Table 4 Periods in the Discourse of Globalization

X

XX

Relevant Fields of Discourse

Period I1984ndash87Emergence and Rise ofConcept

Financial industry dominantespecially internationalsecurities markets

Period II1988ndash94Setback and Consolidation

Importance of financial indus-try declines other industriesemerge especiallybull Airlinesbull Automotivebull Chemicalbull Foodbull Telecommunications

Period III1995ndash98Further Spread andContestation

No dominant industry termnow prevalent in the follow-ing industriesbull Airlinesbull Automotivebull Chemicalbull Film bull Financialbull Food and Beveragesbull Mass Mediabull Sportsbull Telecommunications

Term also emerges in connec-tion with non-economicissuesbull Citizenshipbull Crimebull Diseasebull Povertybull Culture and Consumption

(Music Literature Cuisine)


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

the dominant albeit declining frame in news-paper articles and press releases Both media pri-marily depicted globalization as a naturaldevelopment and part of a more general processof technological advancement Resistance waslargely seen as futile and attempts to regulate theglobalization as detrimental to national interests(WSJ 8687) Newspaper articles and pressreleases regularly depicted globalization as a factof ldquorealityrdquo brought about mainly by technol-ogy and innovation so ldquoit cannot be reversed inany material way by regulation or legislationrdquo(WP 72687) While a low level of contestationhad been present in globalization discoursefrom the start it was not until the end of 1987that themes of containment and control tookon greater importance

PPEERRIIOODD IIII ((11998888ndashndash9944)) SSEETTBBAACCKK AANNDD CCOONNSSOOLLIIDDAATTIIOONN

On October 19 1987 the stock market on WallStreet collapsed For the discourse of global-ization the ensuing losses in international finan-cial markets were perceived as a serious setbackto the idea of globalization Newspaper arti-cles in particular began to voice concerns aboutmarkets spinning out of control and the trendtoward ldquoglobalizationrdquo and the interconnected-ness of international financial markets wereidentified as the main reason for the severity ofthe crisis (eg WP 112087)

The f inancial community also saw theOctober crash as ldquoa bloody nose for the wholeidea of globalizationrdquo and globalization as hav-ing ldquolost a lot of its steamrdquo (WSJ 92388) TheWorld Bank treasurer Donald Roth suggestedthat ldquopeople got carried away with the rhetoricof globalizationrdquo (WSJ 32988) But eventhough the crash slowed globalization discourseit left the framing of globalization as an irre-versible process largely unchanged the trendtoward global integration of markets had gonetoo far to be reversed (NYT 121687) Calls fortighter regulation of the stock market also sub-sided as major figures such as Alan Greenspanchairman of the Federal Reserve Bank sug-gested that large-scale interference with theglobalization of financial markets would harmnational interests since ldquoexcessive regulationcould lead to a drain of business out of thecountryrdquo (NYT 12188) In the early 1990sconcerns over globalization continued to fade

and the trend toward international trade andinterconnectedness again seemed natural andinevitable but the prominence of this neutralframing of globalization declined during thisperiod

In press release discourse we observe asomewhat different picture Company pressreleases paid significantly less attention to thestock market crash but continued to depict glob-alization as unavoidable A Salomon Brothersreport on global equity investment strategiessums up this view by suggesting that ldquothe trendtoward globalization has survived intact andhas perhaps been strengthened by the marketrsquoscollapserdquo (Salomon Brothers 121087) Otherpress releases similarly stressed that globaliza-tion is ldquoinevitablerdquo (AMEX 121089 Mazda51090 Reichold Chemicals 4488) ldquoinex-orablerdquo (Chartered WestLB 102491) and ldquoafact of liferdquo (Land OrsquoLakes 22494 TimeWarner 41191) At the same time a positiveframing of globalization strengthened and agrowing number of firms began to point to theperceived benefits of a global economy Pressreleases increasingly portrayed globalization asoffering increased opportunities for growth(eg ATampT 92890 Dow Corning 3191IMF 10893 MasterCard 3892 Maytag32890 Procter amp Gamble 10891 TimeWarner 8190) and profitability (eg Allied-Signal 42090 Readerrsquos Digest 9991Rubbermaid 12594 Sony 9194 Witco42491) particularly after the fall of the SovietUnion and the opening of Eastern Europeaneconomies By 1991 this positive frame dom-inated press releases while the neutral framingdeclined

PPEERRIIOODD IIIIII ((11999955ndashndash9988)) DDIIFFFFUUSSIIOONN AANNDD

IINNCCRREEAASSIINNGG CCOONNTTEENNTTIIOONN OOFF GGLLOOBBAALLIIZZAATTIIOONN

The third discourse period is marked by diffu-sion of globalization discourse across a numberof different industries and increasing contesta-tion in newspaper articles Since 1995 a grow-ing anti-globalization movement had beenforming bringing together a broad spectrumof interests and culminating in the disruptiveprotests that characterized the 1999 World TradeOrganization (WTO) conference in SeattleWhile press releases continued to depict glob-alization as a positive or at least neutral devel-opment newspapers began to emphasize the




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

negative effects of globalization pointing toincreasing unemployment corporate downsiz-ing decreasing workersrsquo rights and rising pover-ty as well as growing popular resistance toglobalization

The most important theme in the growingnegative framing of globalization is the erosionof wages and living standards of Americanworkers Faced with untamed globalizationAmerican workers increasingly ldquoget caught upin the job-churningrdquo of international competi-tion and are ldquodriven into poorer-paying jobsrdquo(NYT 111397) particularly from such tradeliberalization as the NAFTA agreement Theldquorelentless erosion of workerrsquos rightsrdquo that goeswith globalization ldquodampens demand for high-er payrdquo and ldquoleaves many workers feeling inse-curerdquo (NYT 102097 WSJ 111197)Globalization is framed as reducing the bene-fits to workers and their families from eco-nomic growth turning them into victims of aldquoglobalization with pauperizationrdquo (WP22996)Another theme stresses the negativeconsequences of globalization stemming froma growing homogenization of culture and con-sumption with the untamed market forces lead-ing to the ldquodeath of national culturerdquo (NYT21197) and the emergence of an undifferenti-ated world culture a ldquoglobalization of cookingrdquo(NYT 11796) a global television and adver-tising culture (WP 101798 WSJ 92498)and even loss of the ldquoEuropean model of civi-lizationrdquo (NYT 92197)

The picture that emerges from Figures 2aand 2b shows a striking divergence betweennewspaper and press release discourse In bothmedia we observe the same initial dominanceand then decline of the neutral framing of glob-alization In newspapers however the negativeframing emerges as the most important frameat the end of the observation period but amongpress releases a positive framing of globaliza-tion predominates


IINN DDIIFFFFEERREENNTT DDIISSCCUURRSSIIVVEE FFIIEELLDDSS

Table 5 reports the results of the multinomiallogit models predicting occurrence of frames innewspaper articles and press releases Model 1shows the baseline model for newspaper articleswith control variables only The time coeffi-cients confirm that prevalence of a negative

framing increases significantly over time whilethat of a neutral framing decreases significant-ly There are also differences in coverage amongnewspapers Using the WSJ as a reference cat-egory the model shows that the NYT and theWP are significantly more likely to carry arti-cles on the negative aspects of globalization

Model 2 shows results for the reduced set ofarticles for which complete information onnewspaper sections was available (NYT andWP) Regarding within-category diversity ofdiscursive f ields we f ind support for ourhypothesis The coefficients for the news andeditorial sectionsmdashthe two most heterogeneoussectionsmdashare positive and significant indicat-ing that a negative framing of globalizationindeed occurred significantly more often inthose sections than in all other sections Piecesin the editorial section in particular emphasizedthe negative aspects of globalization while arti-cles in the news section were equally likely tocarry any one of the three frames This findingreflects the role of the editorial section as aplace for normative claims about current affairswhile the news section presents a more dispas-sionate account that includes the diverging viewsof all actors commenting on globalization12 Aneutral framing of globalization on the otherhand occurred significantly more often in thefinancial section supporting our previous find-ing that the neutral framing of globalizationemerged in finance The results of model 2 alsosupport our assumption that greater discourseheterogeneity across discursive fields increas-es the likelihood of a negative framing As pre-dicted the coefficient for the diversity index ispositive and significant

While heterogeneity within and across dis-cursive fields is associated with a negative fram-ing of globalization note that we find this effectin the absence of a surge in press releases fromanti-globalization organizations In separateanalyses we confirmed that a negative framing



12 We further examined whether coefficients dif-fered for the three periods To estimate such periodeffects we created interaction variables using ouroriginal independent variables and period dummiesPeriod interactions however were not significantfor the globalization index the diversity index or thethree newspaper sections (editorial news and finan-cial)


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

of press releases was not a significant predic-tor of a negative framing in newspaper articlesThis suggests that editorial sections did notmerely reflect claims made in press releasesfrom the counter-globalization movementInstead it points to a more active sensemakingprocess that reflects how actors across a varietyof domains connect globalization with issues ofworkersrsquo rights environmental degradation andcultural homogenization Note also that struc-tural factors show little ability to explain frameoccurrence With the exception of the correla-tion between the globalization index and a neg-ative framing neither the measure ofglobalization nor that of overall economic activ-ity are significant predictors of frame occur-rence indicating that the discursive framing ofchange is not explained by the structural changesin the economy but rather emerges from thediversity in discursive actors and their diverg-ing interests in relation to globalization

Model 3 presents the results for the pressrelease data For press releases however wedo not observe a robust relationship between dis-course heterogeneity and negative frame preva-lence One probable reason is reluctance bycorporations to discuss negative events in pressreleases as reflected in fewer negative terms intheir discourse To compare more closely theeffect of discursive fields on frame prevalencein press releases the model shows the effect forthe financial market sector and the non-corpo-rate sector using the remaining sectors as thereference category The model indicates thatfirms in the financial sector are significantlymore likely to issue press releases exhibiting aneutral framing In contrast press releases fromnon-corporate actors such as unions or com-munity and activist organizations are signifi-cantly more likely to contain a negative framingof globalization This finding further demon-strates how the framing of globalization is notdetermined by structural factors alone butinstead depends on the social position of actorsinvolved in discursive contests Finally we notethat the performance of the logit model par-ticularly for predicting a positive framing ofglobalization is not very good indicating thatmdashexcept for financemdashpositive discourse on glob-alization seems not to be determined by thediscursive fields of market sectors or by theoverall performance of the economy

DDIISSCCUUSSSSIIOONN AANNDD IIMMPPLLIICCAATTIIOONNSS FFOORR FFUUTTUURREE

RREESSEEAARRCCHH

While previous research in the framing per-spective has mainly focused on the strategies ofdifferent actors engaged in framing contestsour study has argued that more attention needsto be paid to the interpretive sensemaking thatenables the expansion and diffusion of framingdiscourse in the first place By integratinginsights from the sensemaking literature into aframing perspective our approach provides afuller account of the social construction of real-ity in public discourse showing how explana-tory scripts and frames emerge in fields whereeveryday practice comes to adopt them as sen-sible accounts We have shown that contextualand structural factors such as economicchanges are quite strong in predicting whendiscourse will occur and increase in volumeThese factors also help explain where discoursefirst emerges and how it spreads across discur-sive fields gathering momentum and invitingcontestation as actors with different interestsbecome involved While these structural changesset the stage and open up opportunities formeaning creation the discursive contests thatsubsequently emerge are by no means prede-termined by them Rather this discourse and itsintensity of contention result from the activeinterested meaning creation by different actorsvying for support for their respective positionsIn the case of globalization a varied discursivelandscape emerged in which the structural anddiscursive factors combined to create assorteddomains of meaning with actors in some dis-cursive fields supporting a positive framingwhile others emphasized a negative or neutralframing

The current study opens up several promis-ing perspectives for future research on structureand discourse While elite US newspaper andpress release coverage was our focus of analy-sis there are other potentially relevant sourcesand mediators of public discourses not examinedhere These include television news (Gamsonand Modigliani 1989 Wood and Peake 1998)congressional committees (Hilgartner and Bosk1988) and increasingly such electronic mediaas the Internet Research on intermedia agendasetting (Mazur and Lee 1993 Trumbo 1995)suggests that the emergence and diffusion ofdiscourse in these media may well follow sim-ilar patterns However to learn more about their




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

role in framing issues and discourse moreresearch is needed on how the various media dif-fer in terms of their discursive opportunity struc-ture (Ferree et al 2002 Koopmans and Statham2000) and how such differences may benefit ordisadvantage various actors and framingsFurther questions along this line include whatis the relationship between discourses in dif-ferent media Does frame emergence in onemedium lead or lag that in another If journal-ists are at the same time both disseminators andaudiences for frames (Fishman 1980 Scheufele1999) how does framing discourse emerge andmove through different media

Regarding globalization the current paperhas shown that initially frame prominence innewspaper articles and press releases was quitesimilar but as the discourse developed differ-ent frames achieved dominance in these mediaAn important question here is whether thisincreasing contention of globalization in news-paper articles is perhaps related to a growingactivity of non-corporate actors using pressreleases and electronic media (Keck and Sikkink1998) In keeping with the classic concerns ofthe framing perspective one might ask whichactors successfully introduced a negative fram-ing into public discourse and why they suc-ceeded While our study has focused mainlyon the structural factors in which a framing dis-course is embedded future work may shift thefocus to the identities and strategies of the actorsengaged in framing contests over globalization

Additional research should also examinemore closely the narratives that emerge as theresult of sensemaking processes in newspapersand particularly in the editorial sections Forexample how is editorial sensemaking relatedto stories in the financial and news sectionsWhat is the lag time of editorial coverage inrespect to these sections and how do differentframings enter and interact with coverage inother discursive fields Furthermore how isthis process embedded in organizational con-straints (eg Demers 1996) resulting in dif-ferences both within and across newspapersHow does newspaper discourse of globalizationdiffer in smaller versus larger cities and how dosuch differences relate to editorial attentioncycles and the intensity or uniqueness of eventscovered (Myers and Caniglia 2004) Answersto these questions would help us gain a fuller

understanding of how sensemaking and fram-ing play out in the news media

Another fruitful avenue of research concernsthe relationship between media frames and read-er opinion Previous studies of media coverageon public opinion strongly suggest that mediaframes become part of the publicrsquos tool kit inmaking sense of public affairs (Andsager 2000Gamson 1988 McCombs Einsiedel and Weaver1991 Pan and Kosicki 1993) but more remainsto be learned on how this process plays outRegarding public opinion on globalization thereare unfortunately no continuous data for ourtime period The earliest polls mentioning glob-alization were conducted for the AmericansTalk Issues Foundation which found that thepercentage of Americans who believed global-ization to be negative had risen from 9 to 14 per-cent between 1991 and 1993 while thepercentage of those who believed it to be pos-itive remained the same at 41 percent (Programon International Policy Attitudes 20004) Adifferent poll in 1998 found that the number ofthose who believed globalization to be mostlybad had risen to 20 percent while the number ofthose who believed it to be mostly good hadrisen to 54 percent (Chicago Council on ForeignRelations 2000) While these do not make upenough data points to allow a reliable estimateof changes they do support our claim that glob-alization has become more contested It alsoappears that Americans became more opinion-ated on globalization In 1993 more than 40 per-cent of respondents said they were not familiarwith the concept of globalization but in 1998only 11 percent did not provide an opinion whenasked whether globalization was good or bad

Our findings furthermore speak to a criticalldquoprojectrdquo conception of globalization as a polit-ical-economic construct promoted mainly byfinancial actors and institutions with the ideaof the free market at its center (eg McMichael2000 Soros 2002 Stiglitz 2003) This concep-tion suggests that neo-liberal rhetoric of marketliberalization masks the negative political andsocial consequences of globalization especial-ly relating to labor and the environment In thisstudy we have traced the developing discourseof globalization rather than examine whetherstructural globalization has mainly negativeneutral or positive effects for the world at largeor for the United States in particular Withoutengaging in the debate over the ldquotruerdquo nature of




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

globalization our findings show how the neu-tral frame that developed in the finance com-munity and dominated globalization discoursethroughout the 1980s is being replaced by adiscourse on both its negative and positiveeffects The mobilization of an anti-globaliza-tion movement and the proliferation of protestevents such as those during the WTO confer-ence in Seattle in 1999 would indicate that thenegative framing of globalization has strength-ened since the end of our study period At thecurrent time however the outcome of theframe contest over globalization is still largelyundecided

Future research should also continue to exam-ine the important role of agency and how cul-ture structure and situated action interact inshaping understandings and contention in dif-ferent national contexts (eg Ferree et al 2002Pieterse 2003) Using the example of global-ization it would be particularly informative toexamine its discourse in countries that occupydifferent locations in the global arrangements ofpower Are there differences in how globaliza-tion is framed in economically developednations such as the United Kingdom Franceand Germany or in emerging markets such asMalaysia and Indonesia which have at timesequated globalization with the imposition of anew economic world order that favors industri-alized players One suspects so Such interna-tional comparisons would help us better tounderstand the relationship between the fram-ing of transformative events and the wider sym-bolic order of societies If framing an issuedepends on cultural resonance as stressed by anumber of authors (eg Diani 1996 Kubal1998) then analyzing framing discourses shouldshow national differences that reflect differinglife situations and symbolic repertoires Thesesuggestions for further research invite morestudies of framing and sensemaking on con-tested issues with alternative frames and inter-pretations competing for legitimacy and publicsupport Our study of discourse on globalizationprovides but one example

Peer C Fiss is an Assistant Professor of Strategy andOrganization at Queenrsquos Universityrsquos School ofBusiness His research interests include corporategovernance the diffusion of practices among cor-porations framing and symbolic management andthe application of fuzzy set methods in managementand the social sciences His other recent articles

examine the diffusion of a shareholder-centered gov-ernance model (with Edward Zajac forthcoming inthe Administrative Science Quarterly) and the use ofset-theoretic methods for studying organizationalconfigurations (forthcoming in the Academy ofManagement Review)

Paul M Hirsch is the James Allen DistinguishedProfessor of Strategy and Organization atNorthwestern Universityrsquos Kellogg School ofManagement where he is also a member of theSociology and Communication Studies DepartmentsHirschrsquos research spans economic sociology insti-tutional theory culture and communication studiesHe has studied the discourse of corporate takeoversinterviewed Studs Terkel and addressed issues ininstitutional and organization theory and in masscommunication Hirschrsquos articles have appeared inAmerican Journal of Sociology Work andOccupations Theory and Society AdministrativeScience Quarterly and The New York Times He iscurrently reviewing studies of corporate downsizingand applying narrative theory to sociological ques-tions

RREEFFEERREENNCCEESS

Abrahamson Eric 1996 ldquoManagement FashionrdquoAcademy of Management Review 21254ndash85

mdashmdashmdash 1997 ldquoThe Emergence and Prevalence ofEmployee Management Rhetorics The Effects ofLong Waves Labor Unions and Turnover 1875 to1992rdquo Academy of Management Journal40491ndash33

Abrahamson Eric and Gregory Fairchild 1999ldquoManagement Fashion Lifecycles Triggers andCollective Learning Processesrdquo AdministrativeScience Quarterly 44708ndash40

Ageacutenor Pierre-Richard 2002 ldquoDoes GlobalizationHurt the Poorrdquo International Economics andEconomic Policy 121ndash51

Albrow Martin 1997 The Global Age State andSociety Beyond Modernity Stanford CA StanfordUniversity Press

Anand Narasimhan and Richard A Peterson 2000ldquoWhen Market Information Constitutes FieldsSensemaking of Markets in the Commercial MusicIndustryrdquo Organization Science 11270ndash84

Andsager Julie L 2000 ldquoHow Interest GroupsAttempt to Shape Public Opinion with CompetingNews Framesrdquo Journalism amp MassCommunication Quarterly 77577ndash92

Bank for International Settlements Various yearsTriennial Central Bank Survey of ForeignExchange and Derivatives Market Activity BaselSwitzerland Bank for International Settlements

Barley Stephen R and Gideon Kunda 1992 ldquoDesignand Devotion Surges of Rational and Normative




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

Ideologies of Control in Managerial DiscourserdquoAdministrative Science Quarterly 37363ndash99

Bartholomew Amy and Margit Mayer 1992ldquoNomads of the Present Meluccirsquos Contributionto lsquoNew Social Movementrsquo Theoryrdquo TheoryCulture amp Society 9141ndash59

Baylis John and Steve Smith 2001 TheGlobalization of World Politics An Introduction toInternational Relations 2nd edition OxfordEngland Oxford University Press

Beck Ulrich 2000 What Is GlobalizationCambridge England Polity

Bendix Reinhard 1956 Work and Authority inIndustry Ideologies of Management in the Courseof Industrialization New York Wiley

Benford Robert D 1993 ldquoYou Could Be theHundredth Monkey Collective Action Frames andVocabularies of Motive Within the NuclearDisarmament Movementrdquo The SociologicalQuarterly 34195ndash216

mdashmdashmdash 1997 ldquoAn Insiderrsquos Critique of the SocialMovement Framing Perspectiverdquo SociologicalInquiry 67409ndash30

Benford Robert D and David A Snow 2000ldquoFraming Processes and Social Movements AnOverview and Assessmentrdquo Annual Review ofSociology 26611ndash39

Berger Peter L and Thomas Luckmann 1966 TheSocial Construction of Reality Garden City NYDoubleday

Boli John and George M Thomas 1997 ldquoWorldCulture in the World Polity A Century ofInternational Non-Governmental OrganizationrdquoAmerican Sociological Review 62171ndash90

Bourdieu Pierre 1992 An Invitation to ReflexiveSociology Chicago University of Chicago Press

Chase-Dunn Christopher Yukio Kawano andBenjamin D Brewer 2000 ldquoTrade Globalizationsince 1795 Waves of Integration in the World-Systemrdquo American Sociological Review 6577ndash95

Chicago Council on Foreign Relations 2000American Public Opinion and US Foreign Policy1998 ICPSR 2nd version (March) [Computerfile] Ann Arbor MI Inter-University Consortiumfor Political and Social Research

Chirot Daniel and Robert K Merton 1986 SocialChange in the Modern Era San Diego CAHarcourt Brace Jovanovich

Coles Roberta L 1998 ldquoPeaceniks and WarmongersrsquoFraming Fracas on the Homefront Dominant andOpposition Discourse Interaction During thePersian Gulf Crisisrdquo The Sociological Quarterly39369ndash91

Condit Celeste M 1990 Decoding AbortionRhetoric Communicating Social Change UrbanaIL University of Illinois Press

Cox Robert W 1996 ldquoA Perspective onGlobalizationrdquo Pp 21ndash30 in Globalization

Critical Reflections edited by James H MittelmanBoulder CO Lynne Rienner

Creed W E Douglas and Maureen A Scully 2000ldquoSongs of Ourselves Employeesrsquo Deployment ofSocial Identity in Workplace Encountersrdquo Journalof Management Inquiry 9391ndash412

Danaher Kevin and Roger Burbach eds 2000Globalize This The Battle against the World TradeOrganization and Corporate Rule Monroe MECommon Courage Press

Demers David P 1996 ldquoCorporate NewspaperStructure Editorial Page Vigor and SocialChangerdquo Journalism amp Mass CommunicationQuarterly 73857ndash77

Diani Mario 1996 ldquoLinking Mobilization Framesand Political Opportunities Insights from RegionalPopulism in Italyrdquo American Sociological Review611053ndash69

Dirlik Arif 2000 Globalization as the End and theBeginning of History The ContradictoryImplications of a New Paradigm GHC WorkingPaper 003 Institute on Globalization and theHuman Condition McMaster UniversityHamilton ON Canada

Doremus Paul N 1998 The Myth of the GlobalCorporation Princeton NJ Princeton UniversityPress

Dreher Axel 2003 ldquoDoes Globalization AffectGrowthrdquo Working paper University ofMannheim Germany

Edelman Lauren B Sally Riggs Fuller and IonaMara-Drita 2001 ldquoDiversity Rhetoric and theManagerialization of Lawrdquo American Journal ofSociology 1061589ndash641

Eichengreen Barry J 1996 Globalizing Capital AHistory of the International Monetary SystemPrinceton NJ Princeton University Press

Ellingson Stephen 1995 ldquoUnderstanding theDialectic of Discourse and Collective ActionPublic Debate and Rioting in AntebellumCincinnatirdquo American Journal of Sociology101100ndash44

Entman R M 1991 ldquoFraming US Coverage ofInternational News Contrasts in Narratives of theKAL and Iran Air Incidentsrdquo Journal ofCommunication 416ndash27

Fairclough Norman 1992 Discourse and SocialChange Cambridge England Polity

mdashmdashmdash 1995 Critical Discourse Analysis TheCritical Study of Language London EnglandLongman

Fan David P 1988 Predictions of Public Opinionfrom the Mass Media Computer Content Analysisand Mathematical Modeling New YorkGreenwood

Featherstone Mike Scott Lash and RolandRobertson 1995 Global Modernities LondonEngland Sage

Federal Reserve Bank of New York 1986 US




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

Foreign Exchange Market Turnover A Summaryof a Survey in April 1986 New York FederalReserve Bank of New York

Ferree Myra Marx William A Gamson JuumlrgenGerhards and Dieter Rucht 2002 ShapingAbortion Discourse Democracy and the PublicSphere in Germany and the United StatesCambridge England Cambridge University Press

Fishman Mark 1978 ldquoCrime Waves as IdeologyrdquoSocial Problems 25531ndash43

mdashmdashmdash 1980 Manufacturing the News AustinTX University of Texas Press

Franklin Sarah Celia Lury and Jackie Stacey 2000Global Nature Global Culture London EnglandSage

Friedman Thomas L 1999 The Lexus and the OliveTree New York Farrar Straus Giroux

Gamson William A 1988 ldquoA ConstructionistApproach to Mass Media and Public OpinionrdquoSymbolic Interaction 11161ndash74

Gamson William A David Croteau WilliamHoynes and Theodore Sasson 1992 ldquoMediaImages and the Social Construction of RealityrdquoAnnual Review of Sociology 18373ndash93

Gamson William A and Andre Modigliani 1989ldquoMedia Discourse and Public Opinion on NuclearPower A Constructionist Approachrdquo AmericanJournal of Sociology 951ndash37

Gephart R P 1993 ldquoThe Textual ApproachmdashRiskand Blame in Disaster Sensemakingrdquo Academy ofManagement Journal 361465ndash1514

Giddens Anthony 1990 The Consequences ofModernity Cambridge Polity

mdashmdashmdash 1999 The Third Way The Renewal ofSocial Democracy Malden MA Polity

mdashmdashmdash 2000 Runaway World How Globalizationis Reshaping Our Lives New York Routledge

Gioia Dennis and Kumar Chittipeddi 1991ldquoSensemaking and Sensegiving in StrategicChange Initiationrdquo Strategic Management Journal12433ndash48

Gitlin Todd 1980 The Whole World Is WatchingMass Media in the Making and Unmaking of theNew Left Berkeley CA University of CaliforniaPress

Greider William 1997 One World Ready or NotThe Manic Logic of Global Capitalism New YorkSimon and Schuster

Guilleacuten Mauro F 1994 Models of ManagementWork Authority and Organization in aComparative Perspective Chicago IL Universityof Chicago Press

mdashmdashmdash 2001 ldquoIs Globalization CivilizingDestructive or Feeble A Critique of Five KeyDebates in the Social Science Literaturerdquo AnnualReview of Sociology 27235ndash60

Gurevitch Michael and Mark R Levy eds 1985Mass Communication Review Yearbook vol 5Beverley Hills CA Sage

Haines Herbert H 1996 Against CapitalPunishment The Anti-Death Penalty Movementin America 1972ndash1994 New York OxfordUniversity Press

Hamelink Cees J 1994 The Politics of WorldCommunication A Human Rights PerspectiveLondon England Sage

Held David 1995 Democracy and the Global OrderFrom the Modern State to CosmopolitanGovernance Stanford CA Stanford UniversityPress

Held David Anthony McGrew David Goldblattand Jonathan Perraton 1999 GlobalTransformations Politics Economics and CultureStanford CA Stanford University Press

Helleiner Eric 1994 States and the Reemergence ofGlobal Finance From Bretton Woods to the 1990sIthaca NY Cornell University Press

Hilgartner Stephen and Charles L Bosk 1988 ldquoTheRise and Fall of Social Problems A Public ArenasModelrdquo American Journal of Sociology 9453ndash78

Hirsch Paul M and Daniel Z Levin 1999ldquoUmbrella Advocates Versus Validity Police ALife-Cycle Modelrdquo Organization Science10199ndash212

Hirschman Albert O 1991 The Rhetoric of ReactionPerversity Futility Jeopardy Cambridge MABelknap

Hirst Paul Q and Grahame Thompson 1996Globalization in Question Cambridge MABlackwell

Hobsbawm Eric J 1975 The Age of Capital1848ndash1875 London Weidenfeld and Nicolson

Hoekman Bernard and Michel Kostecki 1995 ThePolitical Economy of the World Trading SystemFrom GATT to WTO Oxford Oxford UniversityPress

Hoffman Andrew 2001 ldquoLinking Organizationaland Field-Level Analyses The Diffusion ofCorporate Environmental Practicerdquo Organizationamp Environment 14133ndash56

Karunaratne Neil Dias and Clem Tisdell 1996ldquoGlobalization and Its Policy RepercussionsrdquoIntereconomics SeptemberOctober248ndash60

Kayatekin Serap A and David F Ruccio 1998ldquoGlobal Fragments Subjectivity and Class Politicsin Discourses of Globalizationrdquo Economy andSociety 2774ndash96

Keck Margaret and Kathryn Sikkink 1998 ActivistsBeyond Borders Advocacy Networks inInternational Politics Ithaca NY CornellUniversity Press

Kellner Douglas 1992 The Persian Gulf TV WarBoulder CO Westview

Kennedy Paul M 1993 Preparing for the Twenty-first Century New York Random House

Klandermans Bert 1992 ldquoThe Social Constructionof Protest and Multiorganizational Fieldsrdquo Pp77ndash103 in Frontiers in Social Movement Theory




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

edited by A Morris and C McClurg Mueller NewHaven CT Yale University Press

Klein Naomi 1999 No Logo Taking Aim at theBrand Bullies New York Picador

Kobrin Stephen J 1997 ldquoThe Architecture ofGlobalization State Sovereignty in a NetworkedGlobal Economyrdquo Pp 146ndash71 in GovernmentsGlobalization and International Business editedby John H Dunning New York Oxford UniversityPress

Koopmans Ruud and Paul Statham 2000ldquoMigration and Ethnic Relations as a Field ofPolitical Contention An Opportunity StructureApproachrdquo Pp 13ndash56 in Challenging Immigrationand Ethnic Relations Politics ComparativeEuropean Perspectives edited by R Koopmansand P Statham Oxford England OxfordUniversity Press

Krugman Paul R 1994 Peddling ProsperityEconomic Sense and Nonsense in the Age ofDiminished Expectations New York Norton

Kubal Timothy J 1998 ldquoThe Presentation of PoliticalSelf Cultural Resonance and the Construction ofCollective Action Framesrdquo The SociologicalQuarterly 39539ndash54

Latouche Daniel 1995 ldquoDemocratie et national-isme agrave lrsquoheure de la mondialisationrdquo Cahiers derecherche sociologique 2559ndash78

Levinson Stephen C 1983 Pragmatics CambridgeEngland Cambridge University Press

Levitt Theodore 1983 ldquoThe Globalization ofMarketsrdquo Harvard Business Review 61(MayJune)92ndash102

Long J Scott 1990 ldquoThe Origins of Sex Differencesin Sciencerdquo Social Forces 681297ndash315

mdashmdashmdash 1997 Regression Models for Categoricaland Limited Dependent Variables Thousand OaksCA Sage

Martin Hans-Peter and Harald Schuman 1997 DieGlobalisierungsfalle [The globalization trap]Hamburg Germany Rowohlt

Mazur Allan and Jinling Lee 1993 ldquoSounding theGlobal Alarm Environmental Issues in the USNational Newsrdquo Social Studies of Science23681ndash720

McCombs Maxwell Edna Einsiedel and DavidWeaver 1991 Contemporary Public OpinionIssues and the News Hillsdale NJ LawrenceErlbaum

McMichael Philip 2000 Development and SocialChange A Global Perspective 2nd editionThousand Oaks CA Pine Forge

Milanovic Branko 2002 ldquoCan We Discern the Effectof Globalization on Income Distribution Evidencefrom Household Budget Surveysrdquo World BankPolicy Research Working Paper 2876 WashingtonDC

Miller M Mark 1997 ldquoFrame Mapping and

Analysis of News Coverage of Contentious IssuesrdquoSocial Science Computer Review 15367ndash78

Miller M Mark and Bryan Denham 1996 ldquoPublicOpinion Polls During the 1988 and 1992Presidential Election Campaigns An Analysis ofHorserace and Issue Coverage in PrestigeNewspapersrdquo Working paper University ofTennessee Knoxville TN

Mills C Wright 1963 Power Politics and PeopleThe Collected Essays of C Wright Mills NewYork Oxford University Press

Morgan Gareth Peter J Frost and Louis R Pondy1983 ldquoOrganizational symbolismrdquo Pp 3ndash35 inOrganizational Symbolism edited by L R PondyP J Frost G Morgan and T C DandridgeGreenwich CT JAI

Myers Daniel J and Beth Schaefer Caniglia 2004ldquoAll the Rioting Thatrsquos Fit to Print SelectionEffects in National Newspaper Coverage of CivilDisorders 1968ndash1969rdquo American SociologicalReview 69 519ndash43

Nelkin Dorothy 1989 ldquoJournalism and ScienceThe Creative Tensionrdquo Pp53ndash71 in Health Risksand the Press edited by Mike Moore WashingtonDC The Media Institute

Neuman W Russel 1990 ldquoThe Threshold of PublicAttentionrdquo Public Opinion Quarterly 54159ndash76

OECD 1991 Systemic Risks in Securities MarketsParis Organization for Economic Co-operationand Development

Ohmae Ken ichi 1990 The Borderless World Powerand Strategy in the Interlinked Economy NewYork HarperBusiness

Oliver Pamela E and Hank Johnston 2000 ldquoWhata Good Idea Frames and Ideologies in SocialMovements Researchrdquo Mobilization AnInternational Journal 537ndash54

Oliver Pamela E and Daniel J Myers 1999 ldquoHowEvents Enter the Public Sphere Conflict Locationand Sponsorship in Local Newspaper Coverage ofPublic Eventsrdquo American Journal of Sociology10538ndash87

Pan Zhondang and Gerald M Kosicki 1993ldquoFraming Analysis An Approach to NewsDiscourserdquo Political Communication 1055ndash75

Pieterse Jan Nederveen 2003 Globalization andCulture Lanham MD Rowman and Littlefield

Polanyi Karl 1944 The Great Transformation NewYork Farrar amp Rinehart

Porac Joseph F James B Wade and Timothy GPollock 1999 ldquoIndustry Categories and the Politicsof the Comparable Firm in CEO CompensationrdquoAdministrative Science Quarterly 44112ndash44

Program on International Policy Attitudes 2000Americans on Globalization A Study of US PublicAttitudes Washington DC Program onInternational Policy Attitudes

Sassen Saskia 1996 Losing Control Sovereignty




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

in an Age of Globalization New York ColumbiaUniversity Press

Scheufele Dietram A 1999 ldquoFraming as a Theoryof Media Effectsrdquo Journal of Communication49103ndash22

Shiva Vandana 2000 Stolen Harvest The Hijackingof the Global Food Supply Cambridge MA SouthEnd

Sklair Leslie 1995 Sociology of the Global SystemSecond edition Baltimore Johns HopkinsUniversity

mdashmdashmdash 1999 ldquoCompeting Conceptions ofGlobalizationrdquo Journal of World Systems Research5143ndash62

Snow David and Robert Benford 1988 ldquoIdeologyFrame Resonance and Participant MobilizationrdquoInternational Social Movement Research1197ndash217

mdashmdashmdash 1992 ldquoMaster Frames and Cycles ofProtestrdquo Pp 133ndash55 in Frontiers in SocialMovement Theory edited by A Morris and CMcClurg Mueller New Haven CT Yale UniversityPress

Snow David A E Burke Rochford Steven KWorden and Robert D Benford 1986 ldquoFrameAlignment Processes Micromobilization andMovement Participationrdquo American SociologicalReview 51464ndash81

Soros George 2002 George Soros on GlobalizationNew York Public Affairs

Spillman Lyn 1995 ldquoCulture Social Structure andDiscursive Fieldsrdquo Current Perspectives In SocialTheory 15129ndash54

Steinberg Marc W 1999 ldquoThe Talk and Back Talkof Collective Action A Dialogic Analysis ofRepertoires of Discourse among Nineteenth-Century English Cotton Spinnersrdquo AmericanJournal of Sociology 105736ndash80

Stiglitz Joseph 2003 Globalization and ItsDiscontents New York Norton

Strang David and John W Meyer 1993 ldquoInstitutionalConditions for Diffusionrdquo Theory and Society22487ndash511

Swidler Ann 1995 ldquoCultural Power and SocialMovementsrdquo Pp 25ndash40 in Social Movements andCulture edited by Hank Johnston and BertKlandermans Minneapolis MN University ofMinnesota Press

Tesar Linda L and Ingrid M Werner 1998 ldquoTheInternationalization of Securities Markets Since the1987 Crashrdquo Pp 281ndash372 in Brookings ndashWhartonPapers on Financial Services edited by R E Litan

and A M Santomero Washington DC BrookingsInstitution

Tilly Charles 1995 ldquoGlobalization Threatens LaborrsquosRightsrdquo International Labor and Working ClassHistory 471ndash23

Trumbo Craig 1995 ldquoLongitudinal Modeling ofPublic Issues An Application of the Agenda-Setting Process to the Issue of Global WarmingrdquoJournalism amp Mass Communication Monographs152 (August)

Wade Robert 1996 ldquoGlobalization and Its LimitsReports of the Death of the National EconomyAre Greatly Exaggeratedrdquo Pp 60ndash88 in NationalDiversity and Global Capitalism edited bySuzanne Berger and Ronald Dore Ithaca NYCornell University Press

Wagner J A and R Z Gooding 1997 ldquoEquivocalInformation and Attribution An Investigation ofPatterns of Managerial Sensemakingrdquo StrategicManagement Journal 18275ndash86

Walter Ingo 1988 Global Competition in FinancialServices Market Structure Protection and TradeLiberalization Cambridge MA Ballinger

Weick Karl E 1993 ldquoThe Collapse of Sensemakingin Organizations The Mann Gulch DisasterrdquoAdministrative Science Quarterly 38628ndash52

mdashmdashmdash 1995 Sensemaking in OrganizationsThousand Oaks CA Sage

mdashmdashmdash 1999 ldquoSensemaking as an OrganizationalDimension of Global Changerdquo Pp 39ndash56 inOrganizational Dimensions of Global Changeedited by David L Cooperrider and Jane E DuttonThousand Oaks CA Sage

White H 1980 ldquoA Heteroskedasticity-ConsistentCovariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test forHeteroskedasticityrdquo Econometrica 48817ndash38

White Harrison C 2000 ldquoModeling Discourse in andaround Marketsrdquo Poetics 27117ndash33

Wood B Dan and Jeffrey S Peake 1998 ldquoTheDynamics of Foreign Policy Agenda Settingrdquo TheAmerican Political Science Review 92173ndash84

World Bank 2001 World Development IndicatorsWashington DC World Bank

Wuthnow Robert 1989 Communities of DiscourseIdeology and Social Structure in the Reformationthe Enlightenment and European SocialismCambridge MA Harvard University Press

Zaheer Srilata 1995 ldquoCircadian Rhythms TheEffects of Global Market Integration in theCurrency Trading Industryrdquo Journal ofInternational Business Studies 26699ndash728




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

expressed through a collective public vocabu-lary (Andsager 2000 Condit 1990) How col-lective vocabularies are constructed isconsequential since these vocabularies exertinfluence on actorsrsquo understandings of whatactions are legitimate and appropriate

The process by which the meaning of eventsis socially constructed and negotiated has beenprimarily addressed in two related yet largelyseparate literatures The first known as theframing perspective focuses on the processesby which actors produce frames of meaning tomobilize support for their respective positions(Klandermans 1992 Snow and Benford 19881992 Snow et al 1986)

A second literature generally referred to asthe sensemaking perspective emphasizes thesocial psychological and epistemologicalprocesses by which actors form an understand-ing of the situations they find themselves in(Morgan Frost and Pondy 1983 Weick 19951999) In this paper we suggest that the fram-ing perspective can be fruitfully extended byincorporating some of the insights from thesensemaking approach While framing focuseson how different meanings compete for supportsensemaking stresses how the identification ofpatterns of meaning depends on salient cuesfrom the environment (Weick 1999)Incorporating insights from the sensemakingliterature better enables frame analysis to includeboth how meaning is contested in discourse andhow structural factors prompt and bound theemergence of such discourse We use the exam-ple of globalization to show how discursiveframing of globalization presents a crucial strug-gle over the legitimacy of change and that thisframing is the outcome of a process that com-bines both material change and symbolicconstruction2

FFRRAAMMIINNGG AANNDD SSEENNSSEEMMAAKKIINNGG

The concept of framing captures the processesby which actors influence the interpretationsof reality among various audiences3 Framesconstitute ldquoschemata of interpretationrdquo thatldquoorganize experiences and guide actionrdquo (Snowet al 1986464) providing coherence to a set ofidea elements (Benford 1993 Ferree et al2002) This process of giving meaning is fraughtwith conflict as interested actors and entrepre-neurs articulate particular versions of reality topotential supporters bystanders media andtargets of change (eg Coles 1998 Gamson andModigliani 1989 Haines 1996) Frame disputesare inherent to public discourse erupting espe-cially when events undermine hegemonic inter-pretations of reality (Benford 1997 Coles 1998Swidler 1995) The concept of frame disputesthus ldquorepresents society and culture as contest-ed terrain and depicts various social groups andmovements as struggling for powerrdquo (Kellner199258) Furthermore while the dynamics offrame contests are important in their own right(Gamson and Modigliani 1989) the outcomesof these contests frequently have profound con-sequences for policy formation (Andsager 2000Ferree et al 2002 Gamson 1988 Hilgartner andBosk 1988 Pan and Kosicki 1993)

Within the social movements literature con-cern has been recently expressed about studiesof framing that focus almost exclusively onmeaning construction but fail to connect to thestructural context in which this meaning-mak-ing occurs (Bartholomew and Mayer 1992Benford 1993 1997 Diani 1996 Ellingson1995 Kubal 1998) In response to this concernseveral researchers working in the framing per-spective have aimed to show how frames areembedded in historical and material contexts(Ferree et al 2002 Oliver and Johnston 2000Steinberg 1999) It thus appears much may begained from moving toward an approach thatsees struggles over meaning as not exclusivelythe outcome of processes ldquoin the sphere of sym-bolic codesrdquo but as also shaped by larger eco-



2 Because of the scope and scale of globalizationdiscourse our analysis focuses on its economic aspectas the one that has arguably drawn the most attentionand is most central to the discourse of globalizationWe also examine the social political and culturaldimensions but only insofar as they affect the dis-course of economic globalization

3 For an overview and discussion of the framingliterature see eg Benford 1997 Benford and Snow2000 Ellingson 1995 Oliver and Johnston 2000Scheufele 1999 Snow and Benford 1992 andSteinberg 1999


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250












IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250








+ 052) = 1 ndash (025 + 025) = 05









IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSUULLTTSS











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










Time 017 019(002) 001


Constant 081 051(016) (012)


Wald χ2 62873 57116df 4 4




IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250
















NYSE Index 035 014 ndash111(047) (032) (060)






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










a

b


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









X

XX











IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250













IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250














IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



Tab

le 5

M

ulti

nom

ial L

ogis

tic

Reg

ress

ion

Ana

lysi

s fo

r P

redi

ctin

g O

ccur

renc

e of

Fra

mes

in N

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

s an

d P

ress

Rel

ease

s

XN

ewsp

aper

Art

icle

sP

ress

Rel

ease

s

XM

odel

1 F

ram

esM

odel

2 F

ram

esM

odel

3 F

ram

es

Var

iabl

eN

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Neg

ativ

e N

eutr

al

Posi

tive

N

egat

ive

Neu

tral

Po

siti

ve

Tim

e0

14

ndash0

14

ndash0

04

016

ndash01

0

ndash00

30

01ndash0

07

ndash0

01

(00

2)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

2)(0

03)

(00

4)(0

02)

(00

2)In

dex

of U

S-

Glo

bal

Inte

gra

tion

130

008

029

107

ndash0

31

020

010

ndash01

9ndash0

22

(03

6)(0

35)

(03

9)(0

41)

(04

5)(0

48)

(07

6)(0

46)

(03

2)N

YS

E i

ndex

ndash00

5ndash0

19

011

025

ndash00

20

251

29

052

021

(03

7)(0

24)

(02

9)(0

36)

(03

3)(0

38)

(05

4)(0

37)

(02

5)B

ooks

in

Pri

ntndash0

01

002

000

ndash00

10

02

ndash00

1ndash0

03

ndash00

10

01(0

01)

(00

1)(0

01)

(00

2)(0

01)

(00

1)(0

02)

(00

2)(0

01)

Div

ersi

ty i

ndex

728

1

292

272

62ndash3

10

066

(29

1)(1

99)

(28

2)(5

43)

(22

4)(2

44)

New

Yor

k T

imes

049

ndash0

27

013

024

ndash00

4ndash0

07

(01

7)(0

15)

(01

9)(0

17)

(02

0)(0

21)

Was

hing

ton

Pos

t0

42

ndash02

90

30(0

19)

(01

8)(0

21)

New

s S

ecti

on0

69

067

0

69

(02

5)(0

32)

(03

3)E

dito

rial

Sec

tion

100

020

048

(02

4)(0

33)

(03

2)F

inan

cial

Sec

tion

011

084

033

(02

5)(0

27)

(02

9)F

inan

cial

Mar

ket

Sec

tor

064

206

051

(04

2)(0

18)

(01

8)N

on-c

orpo

rate

Sec

tor

149

046

ndash02

6(0

36)

(03

4)(0

26)

(10

4)(0

54)

(02

5)C

onst

ant

ndash33

8

041

ndash1

40

ndash3

66

ndash0

83

ndash16

4

ndash36

1

ndash17

0

ndash11

4

(03

2)(0

19)

(02

7)(0

48)

(03

8)(0

43)

(04

4)(0

24)

(02

1)L

og L

ikel

ihoo

dndash1

964

97ndash1

293

26ndash1

543

99N

1805

1186

1753

Wal

d χ2

203

46

13

931

222

47

df

18

27

21

Not

e R

obus

t st

anda

rd e

rror

s ar

e in

par

enth

eses

si

gnif

ican

ce l

evel

s ar

e on

e-ta

iled

whe

re p

redi

cted

tw

o-ta

iled

for

con

trol

var

iabl

es N

YS

E =

New

Yor

k S

tock

Exc

hang

e

plt

05

plt

01

plt

001


IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250




RREESSEEAARRCCHH






IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250










IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250



















IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250









































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250






































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250


































IP 127001Thu 05 May 2005 171250

Documents

The Discourse of Globalization: Framing and #2117-ASR 70:1 … · 2016. 10. 10. · The Discourse of Globalization: Framing and Sensemaking of an Emerging Concept Peer C. Fiss Paul