Post on 04-Jul-2020
Kantar Media News Intelligence
Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (ACA)
Corporate Mandate Delay – Sample Report
July 2013
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
Introduction
The following report analyzes reporting on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, within the context of the
government’s announcement in early July that the “employer mandate” – the mandate for corporations with more than
50 employees to provide health insurance options for their workers – was being postponed by one year until 2015.
Often spurred by this news, the decision intensified media and public scrutiny on the controversial law.
Coverage was sourced from top-tier print and broadcast media based from the month of July 2013 and put through a
thorough human analysis to assess content and tone regarding key aspects of the legislation, specific messaging and
important players in the debate.
All charts have been produced using the Kantar Media News Intelligence Media Influence Index unless otherwise
stated. This measure reflects the potential influence of each item of coverage on the reader due to the location of an
article within a publication and the length of the story, the size of the headline and space occupied by the photography,
as well as the circulation of the publication. Similar metrics are applied for Internet coverage, considering the size of the
exposure, the profile of the site and the use of visual content. Thus, this measure is not merely a count of the number of
stories or mentions, but rather a consolidated reflection of the factors that combine to create media impact. (See
Appendix B for full explanation.)
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
Key Findings
Tough Climate for the ACA
•As the clock ticked toward the 2014 mandates that all Americans be covered by health insurance, including the requirement that businesses with 50+ employees provide insurance for their full-time (30+ hours per week) workers, the Obama Administration announced it would give employers an additional year to comply. This announcement drove increased media coverage, scrutiny and debate of the controversial Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), commonly referred to as Obamacare. Republicans and conservative groups seized on the news as an opportunity to further criticize the law, claiming its complexity and the financial burden it places on employers will make it unworkable.
•The Administration defended the move, saying it was responding to the business community, which had indicated more time was needed to put compliance systems in place. This itself presented an issue for President Obama and ACA supporters as it highlighted the lack of timely specifics provided to employers.
Sticking Points
•Republicans in Congress and at the state level used the delay to highlight the faults they see in the ACA and to renew the call to do away with the law completely, through continued threats of repeal and defunding of its implementation. In addition to what they see as an inevitable spiraling of costs, they stoked fears of long waits for care, new taxes and fewer choices for consumers. It was noted that many states were putting up roadblocks to the establishment of the exchanges required for the implementation of the individual mandate. Some accused them of essentially creating a self-fulfilling prophecy – whereby the lack of funding and support necessary for the law’s programs would invariably result in its failure.
•Defendants of the ACA pointed to this obstructionism, with several making comparisons to the Medicare Part D supplemental drug coverage program rolled out in 2006, and in fact, to Medicare itself. They claimed that a program of such scope by its very nature is complicated and said that hiccups in implementation are to be expected and would ultimately be worked through. While supporters had some success in communicating the improved accessibility to care through government subsidies, this itself created controversy regarding cost. They were not very successful, however, in getting across one of the programs core messages that greater access to preventative care would result in longer-term cost savings.
Implications
•As we move closer to the implementation of consumer health insurance exchanges for 2014 – with enrollment beginning October 1 – the rhetoric will likely only get louder and more partisan. Research by Kantar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group already has shown more than $500M in political and advocacy TV advertising. For the Administration, it will be crucial that this roll-out go smoothly and that patients realize real savings and better access to quality healthcare. There appears to still be much confusion among citizens regarding the details – an issue upon which anti-ACA advocates are capitalizing – so public outreach will be critical in the months ahead.
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
• Reporting on the ACA and the implementation of the corporate mandate spiked on July 3, following the news that implementation of
the corporate mandate would be delayed. Notably, this initial coverage was neutral overall toward the law, with more opinionated
pieces beginning to emerge days later. The majority of media attention was overall neutral toward the ACA. This did not mean that
these stories did not contain criticism, but rather that this was typically balanced with other opinions and factors. Where coverage
was clearly biased, negative outweighed positive by a factor of more than 3:1, driven in part by editorials and op-eds, particularly
published in the Wall Street Journal.
Reporting Trend
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
The administration, recognizing that Obamacare is a ticking bomb, earlier
this month announced that it would delay until 2015 the requirement that
businesses offer health-care insurance to their employees or pay a fine. Yet
the administration didn’t also grant relief to individuals. Think about that for a
moment: The Obama team, for now, has spared employers but not
employees. (Bobby Jindal and Scott Walker Op-Ed, Wall Street Journal)
We have seen the Obama administration announce a one-year delay in
fines for medium and large companies that fail to provide health coverage to
workers … Why are congressional Republicans so determined to repeal
Obamacare? They’re terrified that, once Americans have it, they might want
to keep it. (Chicago Tribune)
Themes
• Informational news stories dominated reporting on the delay, with
the majority of these having a political focus. As the administration
claimed the delay of the corporate mandate was due to their
wanting to provide the business community ample opportunity to
set up programs for compliance, critics of the law blamed problems
inherent in the law itself.
• Because the corporate mandate was the impetus for most
reporting, there was a strong focus on the potential impact of the
ACA on the economy and the business community. In particular,
requirements in the law regarding the definition of full-time work
and number of employees, spurred discussion of threats and
actions by businesses to curb hiring and work hours in order to
avoid needing to provide insurance to their employees.
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
Benefits and Drawbacks
• As categories, benefits and drawbacks were discussed fairly
equally within reporting, each appearing in slightly less than half
of all analyzed placements.
• Often, both gained attention within the same coverage. This was
particularly true to the most common benefit, the fact that the
government will provide subsidies and tax credits for citizens to
purchase insurance through the state-level exchanges. This
drove commentary regarding the potential high cost to both
consumers and government.
• As noted, the potential impact of ACA requirements on employers
was a focus due to news of the corporate mandate delay. The
requirement was seen to pose a particular hardship to the retail
and hospitality industries.
The mandate was expected to have the biggest consequences for major
chain hotels, restaurants and retail stores that employ many low-wage
workers. Some had threatened to cut workers hours, and others said they
were putting off hiring, so those plans may be delayed. (Houston
Chronicle)
In some cases, analysts say, lower-income individuals may be eligible for
cheaper coverage on the exchange than through employer-offered policies
… Q: Does that mean more Americans will purchase coverage through the
exchanges, therefore driving up the amount the government will pay out in
premium and cost-sharing subsidies? A: Most likely. (Chicago Tribune)
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
Details and Messaging
But many businesses had complained that it was simply unaffordable and that
the paperwork required was too confusing. Some companies, many companies
across the country said that they would be forced to lay off employees to get
under 50 or rely more on part-time workers. So the White House said they
heard those complaints by giving another year … But, Amy, a very important
point here is that other parts of the health care law will still go into effect,
including the so-called individual mandate. (ABC Good Morning America)
Although the law is long and complex, its interlocking goals are the right ones:
to improve the healthcare system by making insurance available to more
people, encouraging prevention and wellness, slowing the rise in costs and
promoting high-quality care. As with any major change, the Affordable Care Act
is bound to yield some unintended and unwelcome consequences. We’ve seen
a few already, as some companies have limited or reduced their workers hours
to avoid having to offer them coverage. (Los Angeles Times)
• Slightly less than half of coverage clearly stated that just the
employer requirement was delayed, but not other elements of the
law’s implementation. Some attributed the decision to pressure
from the business community, who were reported struggling to
put compliance measures in place. Confusion regarding specifics
and the slow flow of detailed information were said to complicate
the situation. Also cited was political and public criticism and fear
that problems with implementation could hurt Democrats in the
upcoming mid-term elections.
• Among messages, the confusing nature of the law resounded
most often, although the Administration was able to communicate
that the vast majority of affected businesses already provide
employee insurance. Republicans, however, were on message
with their descriptions of the ACA as a “train wreck.”
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
Commentators / Influencers
As governors, we have been expressing concern about the unworkability of
ObamaCare since its passage in 2010. We have seen the trouble the law
poses for our own state economies. The most recent evidence: The
government now says that it will not verify the eligibility of individuals who
apply for subsidized insurance on the health-care exchanges. (Bobby
Jindal and Scott Walker Op-Ed, Wall Street Journal)
Restaurant owners have been among the most vocal critics of the employer
mandate, saying it could hurt them more than other businesses in part
because their profit margins tend to be low. Some have said they will lay off
workers or shift more of them to part-time status to avoid having to comply.
(Abby Goodnough, New York Times)
• The business-focused daily, the Wall Street Journal was
responsible for the most – and most negative– coverage on the ACA.
Similarly, the New York Times, a more traditionally liberal outlet,
had the most favorable reporting toward the law, although the
majority of coverage in both publications was balanced in tone. With
six articles referencing the delay during the month, the Los Angeles
Times had the most proportionately favorable coverage. An editorial
in the paper near the end of the month accused ACA critics of
attempt to bring about their predicted “dire outcome” through their
obstructionist tactics.
• Politicians of all stripes were associated with the issue, drowning out
the business community and other interested parties. This included
those specifically speaking out on the issues and references to
efforts and actions against and ins support of the law.
Medium News/Political Editorial/Op-Ed Debate/Conversation Other
Wall Street Journal 59.4% 40.6% 0.0% 0.0%
New York Times 90.5% 9.5% 0.0% 0.0%
Washington Post 79.5% 20.5% 0.0% 0.0%
USA Today 88.5% 0.0% 0.0% 11.5%
CBS 80.3% 0.0% 19.7% 0.0%
Chicago Tribune 84.6% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0%
ABC 77.5% 0.0% 22.5% 0.0%
NBC 72.0% 0.0% 28.0% 0.0%
Houston Chronicle 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Los Angeles Times 84.6% 15.4% 0.0% 0.0%
Fox News 15.0% 0.0% 85.0% 0.0%
The Economist 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
CNN 58.8% 0.0% 41.2% 0.0%
Dallas Morning News 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
Commentators / Influencers
Tuesday night Republicans who remain staunchly opposed to the law, which
passed without a single GOP vote, said the announcement was vindication.
House Speaker John Boehner said, “Even the Obama administration knows
the ‘train wreck’ will only get worse.” (CBS This Morning)
The debate over Obamacare often focuses on the law’s complexity. Senate
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has taken to pushing around a
seven-foot stack of paper showing the tens of thousands of pages of
regulations it has spawned. Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max
Baucus (D-Mont.) has warned that implementing such an intricate statute
could be a train wreck. (Ezra Klein, Washington Post)
• Overall, Democrats were more often associated with the ACA
discussion. However, much of this was due to President Obama
and his Administration. Government agencies were also
frequently referenced, especially those associated with the ACA’s
implementation, including the IRS and HHS.
• Politicians weighing in were typically members of Congress,
although occasionally governors and other state-level officials
appeared. Aside from the White House, the Republican heads of
both chambers – House Speaker John Boehner and Senate
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell – were most prominent, and
most negative. Criticism from the left was light, with Montana
Senator Max Baucus the most notable exception, as Republicans
co-opted his concerns regarding his prediction that
implementation would be a “train wreck” if not properly promoted.
Federal
State
General
Republicans
Democrats
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
APPENDIX A – Media List
The following media have been tracked for the purpose of this report.
Print Media
Chicago Tribune
Dallas Morning News
The Economist
Houston Chronicle
Los Angeles Times
New York Times
Newsweek
San Jose Mercury News
Time Magazine
Wall Street Journal
Washington Post
USA Today
Television
ABC Good Morning America
ABC Nightline
ABC This Week
ABC World News Tonight
CBS This Morning
CBS Evening News
CBS Face the Nation
CNN Newsroom
CNN The Situation Room
Fox News
NBC Meet the Press
NBC Nightly News
NBC Today
© 2013 Kantar Media ACA Sample Report
July 2013
APPENDIX B – Media Influence Index
The Kantar Media News Intelligence Media Influence Index is a computerized method of evaluating the impact of coverage of
selected material on a given target audience. This material may relate to competitors, competitors' products, key messages,
market issues, or any other topic of interest. The Impact Index is a sophisticated, comprehensive measure that encompasses
all the factors that contribute to the likelihood of the target audience assimilating the coverage analyzed.
Using information from articles fed into the system, it is possible to produce reports showing the physical impact of the
material on the selected target. This is done by using an algorithm that produces an impact measure based on a variety of
factors that have a role to play in determining impact. For print coverage, these are as follows:
Similar criteria are used for broadcast and online placements, taking into account the profile of the media and length/size of
the segment. Each item is attributed an impact value of between 1 and 100, based on the above parameters, thereby
providing a composite measure of impact. For each period, these individual impact scores are cumulated, thereby giving an
effective measure of the overall amount of "noise" on the issues, products, or companies analyzed during the period.
The circulation of each publication An article in a high-circulation title will have more impact than one without.
The percentage of the page occupied by the article
A large article will have more impact than a smaller article.
The percentage of the page occupied by a photograph
An article with a photograph will have a higher impact than one without.
The columnar spread of the article An article with a large headline will have more impact than one with a smaller headline.
The position of the articles on the page
An article in the upper-right of the page is more likely to be read than an article elsewhere
The location of the page (front, back, etc.)
A front- or back-page article will have a higher impact score than an article inside a publication.
For questions please contact:
Beth Desautels
Vice President, North America
Kantar Media News Intelligence
Email: beth.desautels@KantarMedia.com
Appendix