A Case in Issue Framing
This week, an interesting story emerged about a filmmaker who attempted to infiltrate Sen. Mary Landrieu’s office. I’ll be the first to admit, my political leanings are left of center, but I am always intrigued by the way news is positioned, depending on the network writing it.
I’ll compare two news stories, one from MSNBC and another for FOX News. These articles are not considered to be commentaries, but they rather are hard news pieces on the same topic for both news organizations.
FOXNews.com – Filmmaker Who Targeted ACORN Arrested in Alleged Phone Scheme
The independent filmmaker who brought ACORN to its knees last year with an undercover expose was arrested this week along with three others, including the son of a federal prosecutor, and accused of trying to interfere with the phones at Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu’s office.
MSNBC.com – Activist filmmaker arrested in senator’s office
A conservative filmmaker who posed as a pimp to target the liberal activist group ACORN was arrested with the son of a federal prosecutor and two other men and accused of plotting to tamper with the New Orleans offices of Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La.
Now, the first thing you’ll notice is the choice of words in each opening paragraph. FOX: “the independent filmmaker who brought ACORN to its knees last year with an undercover expose was arrested,” while MSNBC says “A conservative filmmaker who posed as a pimp to target the liberal activist group ACORN.”
The key here is labeling; FOX deems him an independent, while MSNBC paints him as a conservative. Additionally, FOX chooses much more dramatic language than MSNBC, stating he “brought ACORN to its knees.”
Additionally, FOX covers the story from a different angle, giving context for the event:
Flanagan recently criticized Landrieu for her vote on the Senate health care bill after securing a Medicaid provision estimated in value at up to $365 million for Louisiana. Conservatives accused her of selling her vote but she insisted no “special deals” were made.
“Do not be fooled into believing Landrieu is helping the state of Louisiana,” Flanagan wrote in a Nov. 25 post on the Web site for the Pelican Institute, a Louisiana think tank that promotes the free market and limited government. “If the proposed healthcare legislation were to be signed into law, the $300 million allocated to Louisiana will pale in comparison to the long-term debt Louisiana citizens will ultimately shoulder.”
A source close to O’Keefe told Fox News that “he would not want to do anything wrong.”
On the converse, MSNBC tells us:
O’Keefe was the brains behind a series of undercover videos that have caused major problems for ACORN
— the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now.
He managed to do what Republicans have been trying to for years — hurt the political affiliates of ACORN, which have registered hundreds of thousands of voters in urban and other poor areas of the country.
While you may or may not find these comparison’s interesting, it has a lot to do with public relations. The data is the same for both news organizations; O’Keefe tried to break into the Senator’s office. However, they paint very different pictures of what his motivations were.
FOX paints him as semi-heroic, while MSNBC paints him as a homewrecker.
We make these choices as practitioners every day. How will we portray the information that is given to us? Will we take a side, be objective, or advocate for something specific?
These are choices that must be made at the individual level, guided by the ethical compass that most individuals follow.
