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