Running Head: RHETORIC AND FRAMING 1 RHETORIC AND FRAMING: INFLUENCE ON PUBLIC OPINION...

Running Head: RHETORIC AND FRAMING 1

RHETORIC AND FRAMING: INFLUENCE ON PUBLIC OPINION IN THE

MARTIN/ZIMMERMAN CASE

A Thesis

Presented to the Faculty in Communication and Leadership Studies

School of Professional Studies

Gonzaga University

Under the Supervision of Dr. Heather Crandall

Under the Mentorship of Professor Kristina Morehouse

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts in Communication and Leadership Studies

By

Milagros Figueredo-Sowers

May 2013

RHETORICAL STRATEGIES AND MEDIA 2

Gonzaga University

MA Program in Communication and Leadership Studies


ABSTRACT

This study seeks to analyze the importance of framing on public opinion. This analysis looks at

the characteristics of communication and how they are conveyed. It also seeks to examine

underlying themes in cases where public opinion was radically shifted and perceptions changed.

This style of qualitative measurement is able to provide suggestions on why a media source

would present a specific topic one way and then slant a similar topic in a different manner or

format . Mass media is looked at in a critical manner with an attempt to hypothesize as to its

purpose in use of framing. In addition, this study recommends further fields of study that could

indicate larger effects from purposeful use of framing on population, government, and overall

cultural morays.

Key terms: Bias, Framing, Media Bias, Zimmerman/Martin Case, Media, sensationalism,

polarization, Social Judgment Theory, Social Responsibility, Media Fatigue, O.J. Simpson,

Hennesy Case, Fark,


TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 5

Importance of the Study 5

Statement of the Problem 6

Definition of Terms Used 6

Organization of Remaining Chapters 8

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 9

Philosophical Assumptions 9

Theoretical Basis 9

Framing 10

Social Judgment Theory 11

Media Bias and Framing 12

Creation of Polarization 17

Big News Leads to Advertising Dollars 17

Research Question and Rationale 18

CHAPTER 3: SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 20

The Scope of the Study 20

Methodology of the Study 21

Research Design 22

Reliability 23

Validity 23

CHAPTER 4: THE STUDY 24

Introduction 24

Data Analysis 24

Results 25

Discussion 27

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS 29

Limitations of the Study 29

Further Study Recommendations 29

Conclusions 31

REFERENCES 33

APPENDIX 37


Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION: PROBLEM AND DEFINITION OF TERMS USED

Importance of the Study

The news media as we know it must fill a quota of news every day. Even as recent as 25

years ago the television news was only 30 minutes long. However, in today’s world the media

has expanded coverage to include 24 hour news channels, up to the minute on-line newspapers,

social websites, and news casts have grown to over an hour in some cities (Curtis, 2007). As a

result, this has lead to what some term “Fark” (Curtis, 2007, p. 4). “Fark is supposed to look like

news…but it’s not news” (Curtis, 2007, p. 4). The media culture of today demands information

24 hours a day regardless of actual news events or coverage needed (Curtis, 2007). Because of

this the smallest of news stories can be blown out of proportion in order to boost ratings.

In addition, over the past several years the media outlets including print, social and

television have seen an increase in competition for media dollars such as advertising (Goldberg,

2002). As competition increases so does the use of rhetorical strategies in order to garner ratings

and consumers for their product. As a result, reality shows have become commonplace, talk

shows about common citizens liter the airways, and superficial entertainment reigns the airways.

The news media in order to compete have turned simple cases into high market reality shows

causing sensationalism in an effort to create more ratings and better media market base resulting

in a drastic change in perception and landscape of how framing shapes news. Therefore, this

study seeks to reveal how framing was used to create disparities in cases like Zimmerman/Martin

case and stories like it.


The Problem

“Trayvon Martin, 17, was shot to death by 28 year old George Zimmerman on February

26 as he walked back from a convenience store to the home of his father’s fiancé in a gated

community outside Orlando” (News-Press, 2012). When the shooting occurred it was barely a

blip on the local six o’ clock news, however, social and print media circulated details about the

shooting including a picture of the suspect and the victim. As a result, television media picked up

the story and began replaying it. The photograph had Mr. Zimmerman wearing an orange shirt,

similar to the colors found on a mug shot juxtaposed against a youthful Trayvon Martin (Gray,

2012). News sources throughout the media environment latched on to the story and repeatedly

cast Mr. Zimmerman as a white male who shot a black youth who was doing nothing more than

carrying a bag of Skittles and an iced tea. In addition, the story was systematically played

repeatedly at the top of every hour ingraining the information into viewers. It played out on

screen like a reality show complete with characters and major highlights.

The media’s purposeful creation of entertainment instead of news has affected public

opinion. This in turn will affect our society at large. Therefore, a further inspection on how

framing by the media has influenced public opinion in the cases like that of George Zimmerman

is significant in its impact on society as a whole. In addition, a closer look at how media has

repeated this trend due to advertising and money is warranted.

Definitions of Terms Used

1. Bias: A particular tendency or inclination, especially one that prevents

unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice.

2. Fark: Idea coined by author Drew Curtis that indicates what fills space when mass

media runs out of news. It is supposed to look like news..but it’s not news.


3. Framing: The selection of a restricted number of thematically related attributes for

inclusion on the media agenda when a particular object or issue is discussed.

4. Media: The means of communication as radio, television, newspapers, and

magazines that reach or influence people widely.

5. Media Bias: Selective omission, choice of words, and varying creditability ascribed

to the primary source.

6. Media Fatigue: Phenomena that occurs when no news is available to report so

news agencies are forced to repeat the same stories with creative angles which corrupt

the original story.

7. Sensationalism: Language, subject matter, or style producing startling or vulgar

impression.

8. Social Judgment Theory: Theorist Sherif’s idea that we hear messages and

immediately judge where it should be placed in our minds.

9. Social responsibility: Ability of society to become involved and create cultural

change.

10. Rhetoric: The art of using words effectively in speaking or writing; the art of prose

composition.


Organization of Remaining Chapters

The thesis is divided into five chapters. Commencing with chapter two the review of the

literature, framework, and the examination of research questions are conveyed. Chapter three

describes the methodology, scope of study and explains the data collection procedures. Chapter

four includes results and a discussion of the implications of the findings. Finally, Chapter five

summarizes and discusses the strengths and limitations of the study while also discussing final

questions and conclusions.


Chapter 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Philosophical Assumptions

In dealing with news ethics a certain unspoken social contract is instituted. The audience

trusts that the information received is accurate and reflects the truth of the story. However,

modern news agencies clearly reflect the opposite set of ideals. Philosophically news agencies

should operate on W.D. Ross’s ideas of ethics. His ideas include the notion that “ethics involves

doing your duty” (Griffin, 1994, p. 462). There is always fairness, always truth, reparation,

justice, beneficence, and self-improvement. Instead, current media operates on the philosophy of

ethical egoism.

Ethical egoism introduced by Epicurus believes that “it is right and good for us to look

out for number one”(Griffin, 2009, p.120). This is relevant in several cases. For example, in the

Hennessey case a play on existing cultural stereotypes was used in order to propagate that all

Italians are involved with organized crime. While in the Zimmerman/Martin case erroneous

reports of Zimmerman’s race fueled the current culture of fervor of wrongs against Blacks in

America. This misinformation was disseminated when the reports that a White man had killed a

Black teen over iced tea and a bag of Skittles. Both of these examples of philosophical

implications are significant because it alters the rudimentary job of mass media and affects every

message received by the population at large. If a news agency is indeed looking out for itself

then it sways from its standard of ethics thus opening the door to understanding that framing can

be manipulated to influence public opinion.

Theoretical Basis

For the past several decades, communication theorists have been interested in just how

much influence the news media has on its audience and how it leads to the shaping of the society


in which the public inhabits. Many theories can be used to explain the dynamic of interest that

develops between an audience and a particular news story. The theory of Framing will be used

as a tool to study the media’s use of sensationalism in order to garner viewership and ultimately

profits. In addition, the theory of social judgment will be studied in order to understand human

psychology and how perceptions are made instantaneously.

Framing

The mass media, by definition, is “the means of communication as radio, television,

newspapers, and magazines that reach or influence people widely” (dictionary.com). It is also,

“the reaching of a large audience using different kinds of communication methods”

(dictionary.com). Using both of these definitions a synthesis or understanding arises of society’s

perception of what makes up mass media and how it functions within our everyday lives. Mass

media functions to inform, persuade, and entertain in a variety of different methods (Basu, 2011).

As such, “this highlights the crucial role of the communication sector in shaping societal

processes: the forming of public opinion and civil society movements” (Middleton, 2009, p. 2).

In addition, it plays a substantial role within someone’s every day existence (Basu, 2011). Since

the media is not only in our lives in a perfunctory manner, but because the media shapes what we

think and how we perceive the world around us, all the information we receive has an influence.

Media framing is as a leading rhetorical strategy. The ability to transfer specific attributes

to news stories creates the framework where this takes place. A media frame is “the central

organizing idea for news content that supplies a context and suggests what the issue is through

the use of selection, emphasis, exclusion and elaboration” (Griffin, 2009, p. 64). Another

definition is that framing is a process of “culling a few elements of perceived reality and

assembling a narrative that highlights connections.to promote a particular interpretation”


(Entman, 2007, p. 164) It isn’t the story that is at issue it is the underlying theme the story would

suggest. The way that media’s use of framing is “responsible for the almost perfect correlation

they found between the media and public ordering of priorities” (Griffin, 2009, p. 360).

Rhetoric is defined in one way as an “an ability, in each particular case, to see the

available means of persuasion (Griffin, 2009, p. 276).” Further, it is defined by Aristotle as the

means or study of audience psychology (Griffin, 2009, p. 276). Therefore, rhetorical devices are

an integral part of framing and involve the use of language, symbols or any means to persuade an

audience (Griffin, 2009, p. 276). Methods such as analogies, images, metaphors, fallacies,

repetition, emotional appeals, logical appeals, and appeals based form rhetorical devices.

Social Judgment Theory

Another theory that can be used as a tool to understand the influence on public opinion is

Sherif’s theory on Social Judgment. Muzafer Sherif’s research essentially states that “we hear a

message and immediately judge where it should be placed in our minds.” (Griffin, 2009, p. 182)

“It is unthinkable that media, be it newspaper, television or radio won’t acquire a schedule in an

individual’s agenda for the day” (Basu, 2011, p .2). Because the mass media are ever present,

the subconscious sorting occurs instantaneously and allows a human being to “weigh every new

idea by comparing it with our present point of view” (Griffin, 2009, p. 183). Furthermore, Sherif

also states that “we use our own anchored attitude as a comparison point when we hear a

discrepant message” (Griffin, 2009, p. 185) this is then shifted into an egocentric mechanism that

separates into latitude of acceptance, rejection and non-commitment. Within these parameters an

agency with an agenda can and does affect those who repeatedly are exposed to the same

message. Sherif pointed out that there is evidence that allows for acceptance to occur. This

evidence is made up of three parts: a highly credible speaker can stretch the hearer’s latitude of


acceptance, ambiguity of facts or information can often serve better than clarity, and there are

always individuals that feel they are right on every issue thus creating a dogmatic effect (Griffin,

2009, p. 189). These basic types of subconscious adjustments in latitude play into the news

media’s transference of ideas. This transference and instigation of moral judgments can affect

how a story is perceived in turn affecting society. This way of thinking coupled with framing

alters our perceptions. Shabarni Basu (2011) solidified these ideas in her studies. She concluded

that social responsibility plays a role within mass media. Its purpose can then be positive or

negative and it can influence how we react and reach out to others in our immediacy.

Furthermore, “the media world in today’s era sets the agenda for discussions and helps in

interpretation of events. They greatly mold the thinking process of readers, viewers and

listeners, thereby, contributing in building of public opinion” (Basu, 2011, p. 2).

Media Bias and Framing

“Democracy as a political system for self-governance requires a media system that

provides the information people need to be free and self-governing” (Stromback, 2007, p. 51).

Democracy’s purpose is to have public forum and the ability for discussion to take place with an

agency that acts as a protector of the rights of citizens. In the United States, that protector is the

constitution. The freedom of the press is covered under amendment 1 of the United States

Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or

prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the

press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the

Government for a redress of grievances (Bill of Rights).


However, when does freedom of speech go too far? The media’s use of rhetorical

devices such as an imaging can lead viewers or consumers of media in the direction of what to

think about concerning a story. It isn’t the story that is at issue it is the underlying theme the

story would suggest. In fact, the way that media sets agendas are “responsible for the almost

perfect correlation…found between the media and public ordering of priorities” (Griffin, 2009,

p. 360). Because the media ,which is a watchdog and the ultimate protector of this most basic

right, “is not only in the business of providing information, but also in the business of making

money” (Stromback, 2007, p. 51). Therefore, does money corrupt the news media’s intended

purpose?

The most recent example of a story where the media’s use of framing “has become more

interpretive and less descriptive” (Stromback, 2007, p .52) and has lead to an impact on public

opinion is the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case. The transfer of ideas regarding this case

created an outcry that lead to the arrest of George Zimmerman and created changes in

perceptions regarding race and cultural morays. In addition, the competition between news

agencies, sometimes owned by the same parent company, created a corrupted ethical

environment. “Bias in news media …can be defined as selective omission, choice of words, and

varying creditability ascribed to the primary source” (Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93).

Therefore, media bias is purposeful and significant in determining why some stories get more

airplay than others. In television and print media a correlation has also been made to advertising

dollars. A study conducted by Mullainathan and Shleifer in 2005 directly addressed this

dynamic. They determined that as “newspapers attempt to increase their readership to attract

advertisers, they moderate slanting to appeal to readers having moderate opinions” (Gal-or,

Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93). The same analogy can be made to television media. In a


further extension of Mullainathan and Shleifer’s studies a look at how media targeted certain

stories over others was examined. Therefore, if media in general can “moderate bias…they are

forced to compete more aggressively, not only for subscriptions but for advertisers as well” (Gal-

or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93). As a result, we can conclude that media outlets in order to

make their advertisers happy would have to use more “selective omission” (Gal-or, Geylani &

Yildrim, 2012, p. 93 ) in order to create sensationalism.

In order to further understand their studies we must examine similar cases where

“selective omission” (Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93) takes place. In the 1990’s the O.J.

Simpson case dominated the airways. The racial stereotypes played right into what the media

needed to make the story more marketable for the public. Viewers from both races saw the

Simpson case with a “collective memory of what happens to black men who step out of bounds”

(Shipp, 1994, p. 41). The Simpson case also used framing in order to play the race card for more

ratings. The racial explanation of their particular marriage and its downfall created a lynching.

A lynching “not by mobs with baying hounds, but most assuredly by mainstream newspapers

and network television” (Shipp, 1994, p. 41). In fact, many felt that Simpson’s race was the

primary reason that his case created such fervor among networks, newspapers, and other media

sources. The use of his images juxtaposed to his wife’s created outrage in the white community

while creating a culture of hate within the black community. “Within hours of the killings, many

blacks were convinced that the police and the mainstream media was working on bringing

Simpson down” (Shipp, 1994, p.41).

Bias is not uncommon in the media industry. Another illustration of the use of framing

and race as a rhetorical strategy in order to have more of an audience involves the shooting of a

police chief in October of 1890. New Orleans Chief of Police, George Hennessey, was shot


after having dinner on normal work day. When his partner asked him who shot him; the chief

replied, Dagos (a racial slur for Italians). This lead to the most popular paper of the time picking

up the story and repeatedly declaring that Chief Hennessy was a “victim of a vendetta…who was

murdered by Italians of a criminal class” (Merritt, 2010, p. 31). As interest in the story soared

other papers owned by the same parent company across the country picked up the story and used

more sensationalized language. It was reported that “Hennessey was said to be investigating the

mafia at the time of the murders” and was going to be part of a large trial against a group of

Sicilians (Merritt, 2010, p. 33). As a result of this portrayal, Italians were linked to the Mafia

interchangeably and over time this lead to correlation between Italians and the mafia in general.

The newspapers at the time were precursors to our modern day 24 hour news channels. They too

had to compete for ratings and advertising dollars. Additionally, they too used selective omission

of facts to disseminate the story. Moreover, during their reporting they made no significant

distinction between law-abiding Italian citizens and criminals which contributed to riots in the

city of New Orleans and rude and rough treatment of Americans of Italian descent in general.

This was an obvious case of unethical behavior for the sake of profit. No apology was ever

issued which violated international journalism ethics’ rules.

More recently the use of framing is found in the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman

case from Sanford, Florida. “Trayvon Martin, 17, was shot to death by 28 year old George

Zimmerman on February 26 as he walked back from a convenience store to the home of his

father’s fiancé in a gated community outside Orlando” (News-Press, 2012). When the shooting

occurred it was barely a blip on the local six o’ clock news, however, social and print media

circulated details about the shooting including a picture of the suspect and the victim. As a result,

television media picked up the story and began replaying it. The photograph had Mr.


Zimmerman wearing an orange shirt, similar to the colors found on a mug shot juxtaposed

against a youthful Trayvon Martin (Gray, 2012). News sources throughout the media

environment latched on to the story and repeatedly cast Mr. Zimmerman as a white male that

shot a black youth who was carrying a bag of Skittles and an iced tea.

Although Zimmerman was later revealed to be multi-racial the images used still posed

him as a White man that had shot a Black boy. This set off anger due to ingrained stereotypes

within the United States. This perception further fueled the latitude of acceptance created which

challenged moral viewpoints and made some viewers feel like an unjust act was committed.

Furthermore, the continuous media portrayal of Zimmerman as someone from the White race

further ignited pre-existing social issues within the United States regarding race. The outrage

caused by the use of these photographs only grew as all mainstream news outlets circulated the

story. Another photograph was run on the cover of both Time and People Magazines with the

headline: An American Tragedy. While there were many photographs available portraying

Zimmerman in an upstanding manner instead they ran the same photograph as the television

media (Smith, 2012, p. 44) This again involved viewers, many of whom felt the need to make

an immediate judgment call. All anyone remembers is the picture of the much older, heavier

supposedly White Zimmerman and the younger innocent looking Black Martin. The question

becomes why Time Magazine and other news agencies use this particular photograph? The

“cover isn’t so much about showing reality, but rather presenting what they want people to

believe. It’s about creating the story that their readers want, rather than what might have

happened. It presents a story that sells magazines” (Smith, 2012, p .44). The use of these

photographs is a direct correlation to the definition of bias. The news source opted to use

selected photographs without any type of clarification and allowed the viewer to make their


decision solely on a limited piece of information. This idea is supported by studies conducted by

Oliver and Armstrong (1998). They concluded that “most people report their information about

crime and their understanding of law enforcement comes from the media rather from direct

experience” (Prosaise, 2004, p. 74). Since every television newscast was leading with the story

while radio and social networking were vying for their share of viewership, audiences used those

images for form an opinion regarding Zimmerman and Martin. This type of media

sensationalism leads to polarization of involved audiences.

Creation of Polarization and Advertising

Framing is part of the process of creating polarization. Polarization involves three

factors, the first is rhetorical setting, the second is language/symbol and finally the genre is

identified by its outcome (Scott, 1981, pp. 53-61). Rhetorical settings involve the use of a

stereotype or an existing polarizing agent. Then the use of language that involves motivational

agents and confrontation leads to the outcome or desired polarization (Scott, 1981, pp. 63-61).

With that said, mythologies are pervasive in any culture and the media can play a role in

perpetuating these mythologies until such time as they become reality (Simmons, 2010, pp. 37-

45) In the Hennessey case the mythology created was that Italians are synonymous with the

mafia. While in both the Simpson and Zimmerman case these mythologies took us back to the

days of slavery and the Civil Rights movement. As a result, the Simpson, Zimmerman and

Hennessey cases are examples of this polarization framework.

Big News Stories lead to Big Advertising Dollars

Many media outlets count on advertising to for their revenue source. These cases provided

ample readership or viewing time which included advertisers vying for a prime spot in which

their product could be showcased. “It has been long established in the consumer behavior


literature that products reflect a person’s self-concept” (Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93) .

For example, green products such as recycling would be of greater interest to liberal consumers

(Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93). Since the correlation has been made between news

agencies and revenues they must have a large viewership in order to retain that particular

advertiser (Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93). Therefore, since stories that sensationalize

certain aspects of the American lifestyle garner more viewer ship it is essential to use framing to

showcase those stereotypes. An example of a study where this was proven was conducted by

Tansev, Geylani and Yildirm in 2012 who used newspaper media and drew a correlation

between the types of subscribers and the types of advertisers that drew their interest. They

essentially proved that you must have a story that garners interest particularly a story that “have

stronger incentives to polarize” (Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93) in order to retain

readership and that an audience that is uncertain “about the quality of an information source infer

that the source is of higher quality if its reports are consistent with their prior expectations”

(Gal-or, Geylani & Yildrim, 2012, p. 93 ). In other words, a slanted news item can influence a

viewer to the point that it impacts the viewership of an advertisement that follows that particular

story. Based on this idea news agencies would then purposely frame stories in order to select

those items which would appeal to viewers and garner more viewership in general.

Rationale and Question

The rationale of this study is that the use of textual and visual framing contribute

negatively to society’s viewpoint and how this happens should be investigated. Through the use

of framing the examination of the disparate representations in the Zimmerman/Martin Case can

be studied. Finally, the use and examination of prior cases add evidence that this practice has


become commonplace leading to adverse effects in society such as polarization of certain

audiences.

RQ: How does framing influence public opinion in high profile racialized cases?

RQ: How does this framing compare with the 1890 Hennessey case and the 1994 O.J.

Simpson case?


Chapter 3. SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

Scope of the Study

This study is qualitative, specifically a content analysis with a focus on rhetoric and

framing. A qualitative research study involves “analysis by extracting themes or generalizations

from evidence and organizing data to present coherent and consistent picture” (Neuman, 2006, p.

151). Further, comparisons are formed based on an event and observance of said event. Also, a

qualitative researcher develops further theories that are present and grounded in the topic which

they are researching. The nature of the Zimmerman/Martin case lends itself to this type of

research and study. Rhetorical analysis uses a democratic and open forum to investigate social

issues. Thus, rhetorical strategies are at their core generalizations and the use of them by media

to influence public opinion fits the definition and characteristic of a qualitative study. In

addition, qualitative researchers use a “case-oriented approach that places cases, not variables,

center stage” (Neuman, 2006, p. 152). The intent was to examine a myriad of cases that

exhibited the same pattern thus cementing that the use of framing gave stories causal effects that

lead to higher viewership and ultimately altered perceptions. Several cases were read that

exhibited the same types of issues that the Zimmerman case exhibited. Those cases included the

1890 Hennessey case and the 1994 O.J. Simpson case. Although there were others that had

manipulated framing the aforementioned cases results were almost identical to the

Zimmerman/Martin Case. The open date provided 30 possible cases where framing was used to

alter public perception. Those 30 cases were further narrowed to those that specifically had

common factors such as race, nationality and polarizing elements.


For example, the O.J. Simpson case involved a football star and pitchman who was

Black. He was accused of killing his wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, who was White and Ron

Goldman (also White), and who at the time was believed to be her lover. This case mirrors the

Zimmerman/Martin case because it involved the media’s use of framing to ultimately change

perceptions regarding color and interracial relationships. In addition, the media used framing as

a rhetorical strategy and televisions, print, and other media were tuned in almost 24 hours a day

in order to cover any event that related to the case. When the verdict was announced it affected

everyone down racialized lines.

The Hennessey Case in the 1890’s involved a sheriff that was shot by an Italian criminal.

Although dating back further than the 1990’s the case mirrors our Zimmerman/Martin case for

the same reasons than the O.J. Simpson case. Instead of color being the mitigating factor, race

relations were again at issue. The White sheriff accused his shooter of being a Dago, a racial

slur for Italians at the time. Because of newspaper coverage and use of framing, Italian

Americans were viewed as criminals and immediately associated with the mafia. A stereotype

that exists to this day.

Methodology of the Study

The sample for this study consisted of looking at the Zimmerman/Martin case. In

qualitative research sampling is purposive and indicative of how public opinion is continually

changed and motivated by rhetorical factors. In a purposive study “a non random sample in

which the researcher uses a wide range of methods to locate all possible cases of a highly

specific manner” (Neuman, 2006, p. 151). The Zimmerman/Martin case was analyzed by

investigating scholarly journals that dealt with similar properties. One of those properties used

was similar artifacts. An artifact involves the evidence of the actual symbolic act which is to be


studied (Foss, 2009, p. 6). The cases studied all involved either a photograph or text which

portrayed a set of individuals in a negative light thus influencing public opinion.

Rhetorical criticism involves the study of symbols, words, or artifacts and discovering

how they work (Foss, 2009). The type of study conducted was a critical/cultural analysis. This

type of analysis relies on “thorough historical gathering of facts” (Rubin, 2010, p. 215) . The

reliance on using particular criteria to analyze the event is critical. “Events, then , are understood

through a certain lens of observation” (Rubin, 2010, p. 215). In addition, a form of textual

analysis was used in order to better understand how framing impacted perception (Rubin, 2010,

p. 216). Both of these types of analysis use symbols or text as a means to understand media’s

use of repetition and other rhetorical devices. The identification of patterns also became

significant in how these types of cases altered perception. The combination of these qualitative

styles targeted rhetorical devices such as repetition, metaphors and omission of facts. This was

significant because metaphors “contain implicit assumptions, points of view, and evaluations”

which is inherently fits the qualitative research design model (Foss, 2009, p. 268). In addition,

the investigation into several different stories of the same nature plays into the fact that the media

uses framing in metaphor criticism for the purpose of “knowing the world, it plays a particular

role in argumentation” therefore creating not only support for an argument but the argument

itself. It allows you to “explicate the appropriateness of the associated characteristics of one

term to those of another…leading to the audience’s adoption of the resulting perspective” (Foss,

2009, p. 270).

Research Design

Articles were located using EBSCO and GALE using keywords such as “rhetorical

devices in Simpson Case” , “Framing”, and “framing and rhetorical devices” for cases in 2000’s,


1990’s and open date. The rationale for using an open date was to expand the probability of

finding a case where modern technology did not play a role but yielded similar results. The

search yielded varying results. The open date provided 20 possible cases where framing was

used to alter public perception. Those 20 cases were further narrowed to those that specifically

had common factors such as race, nationality and polarizing elements.

Reliability

According to Neuman, reliability is a word in everyday language that implies

dependability and responsibility (Neuman, 2006, p. 160). At its essence it is a quantitative term

thereby the different cases studied for this content analysis focus on the dependable outcome that

the media is able to influence public opinion which in turn meets the aforementioned definition.

Validity

Validity is a term used to refer to something being “true or correct” (Neuman, 2006, p.

160). Under the umbrella of validity there are several used throughout scientific circles. Since a

content analysis is qualitative in nature the focus was on one specific type of validity.

Concurrent Validity. This type of measure relies “on a pre-existing and already accepted

measure that is already judged to be valid” (Neuman, 2006, p. 160). In this study the already

accepted measure was the outcome that that public opinion was influenced. For example, in the

Zimmerman/Martin Case opinion swayed in favor of the younger Martin because of race. In the

O.J. Simpson case opinion was swayed in favor of Nicole Brown-Simpson over her husband due

again to race. Finally, in the Hennessey case opinion was swayed in favor of race. All Italians

were equated to mafia hit men.


Chapter 4. THE STUDY

Introduction

The information presented in this study was conducted through the use of a content

analysis. A content analysis “ focuses on themes and patterns” (Eriksson/Kovaleainen, 2008, p.

187, 2008). Using the initial research question about impact on public opinion a focus on articles

containing similar patterns including the outcome of cases, reaction of audience, and use of

framing to create bias was initiated. Three cases in particular had the most patterns with respect

to these dynamics. Although the focus was on the more recent case of Zimmerman/Martin

research yielded other similar cases. The case of Sheriff Hennessey and O.J. Simpson carried

the same or similar properties as the Zimmerman/Martin case.

Data Analysis

The three articles were first reviewed to find a pattern where either text or pictures were

used repetitively. The articles were then reviewed systematically to look for elements where

media framing used sensationalism and bias that may cause polarization in some audiences was.

Once those indicators were found a focus on how media gauged reaction of audiences after the

stories were released was studied. The cases reviewed all addressed the common area of

framing’s influence on sensationalism and polarization. Notations were made regarding long

term impact on society, ongoing impact on society, impact on trial juries and movement of trials

to different cities. Articles focusing on these areas were scrutinized in order to ascertain whether

any of these elements varied too greatly in any given case. In addition, when audiences made

certain comments to the media regarding race, nationality or ethnicities notations were made as

to their reaction, ongoing impact or change to their original thought pattern regarding the

nationalities of those represented in the story.


Results of the Study

The research question in this study is multifaceted in that it seeks to address how rhetoric

and framing findings from previous research indicate an influence on public opinion. In other

words, what is the rhetorical element that reaches out from text or image to change the way an

individual thinks about a topic, nationality, or ethnicity? In this analysis all the cases did the

same thing. They changed the overall perception with relationship to a group of people. The

media’s use of framing heavily impacted the way stories’ elements were portrayed to an

audience leading to a change in public opinion which supports framing theory.

In order to select articles or news items that showed an impact on public opinion articles

were coded in three areas: use of framing, reaction of mass audience, and outcome of audience

perception. Out of the original 20 articles or news artifacts examined three yielded similar traits.

Those traits included repeated use of racial terminology in describing the incident, minorities

were the focus of the stories, and perceptions on a nationality or race were forever changed. The

other articles or news artifacts examined did not yield all the same results. Some included

descriptions of nationalities, but not the outcome of the case. In other news stories and articles

apologies were issued due to erroneous reporting and clear polarization did not take hold. In

other words, none of the other cases exhibited the same three elements that lead to a definitive

change in public perception.

The first item examined was any patterns that existed between the news stories. There

was one identified. Every case involved race. Similarly, each story challenged the public

perception of a minority group thought to be second class citizens.

The second item investigated was the use of imagery whether descriptive or through

television. In the Simpson and Zimmerman/Martin cases in particular framing used images to


slant the storyline in order to bring more viewers. These images played on stereotypes that

already existed within the American culture about Blacks and helped to create false perceptions

regarding each case. For example, the Simpson case the idea that he was Black and an athlete

was used to make the murder of his wife more racially motivated. In the Zimmerman/Martin

case the image of Zimmerman being a White man in an affluent gated community killing a

young Black man was used in order to evoke an emotion of the audience.

The third item investigated was the use of repetition. In all three cases repetition and

distribution of information was paramount to how the audience learned of the issue. All three

cases had mass dissemination of facts. For example, in the Hennessy case newspapers in order

to keep up with the clamor for news started disseminating the information without checking

facts. Each paper used framing to distort. This is evidenced by the fact that it was never proven

that the sheriff was shot by an Italian. He had been investigating the mafia who happened to be

Italian, but there was no definitive proof of the killer’s ethnic background. Another example

exists within the Zimmerman/Martin case. Because of the current underlying culture in

American society is to repair the wrong doings done to Blacks the consistent repetition of

Zimmerman’s race (White) created media fatigue that wore down audiences and ultimately

created enough emotion that lead to a change in public perception.

The final item analyzed was overall impact on public opinion. In all three cases public

opinion was irrevocably changed in some form. The Hennessy case resulted in taking a small

regional stereotype of Italians and criminals being synonymous into a cultural standard that is

now propagated in everything from advertising to movies. In the Simpson case, it equated to if a

man like Simpson was a success and found guilty that “it could get to the place that whites begin

to question their ability to judge black people….”(Shipp, p.40, 1994). Finally, for the


Zimmerman/Martin case is about how the racial inequality of the past still haunts our present.

This is evidenced by a quote from a guest on the O’ Reilly show saying: “the media commotion

would have been avoided if only the shooter were black”(Alam, 2012).

Discussion

Because framing is “stunningly successful in telling us what to think about” (Griffin, p.

364, 2009) the cases with the most common factors had framing as the largest rhetorical device.

For example, the Hennessey case was the first documented case that had took a regional cultural

stereotype and significantly impacted public opinion. The case focused on how a sheriff uttered

one racial slur that was carried as fact throughout mass media, eventually making Italians

synonymous with organized crime. This perception still exists today and manifests itself in

everything from movies to video games. In the O.J. Simpson case outrage was experienced by

certain audience groups who believed that despite the trial and case itself that Simpson killed his

wife. Through the media’s use of framing a division along racial lines was caused. Despite the

fact that Simpson had been a pitch man and well liked by all races, audiences took sides along

racial lines. Another interesting dynamic observed while analyzing these three cases was how

media fatigue played a role in the framing which is best exemplified with the Zimmerman/Martin

case.

Media fatigue is when there is no new information to report and news agencies have to

find new information. As a result, new angles to a story start being explored (Curtis, 2007).

This is significant because it allows mass media to manipulate framing to find angles that would

entice an audience to watch, read, or listen to a particular piece of coverage at all costs. “The

challenge of reporting is to continually come up with new information on the issues on which

you’re reporting”(Curtis, 2007, p. 195). This pressure allows the alterations of perceptions


which causes polarization and other societal issues. In addition, the use of angles can lead to

erroneous reporting thus playing a significant role in perception. A lot of instances involve

headlines that contradict the actual news story. This is exemplified in the Zimmerman/Martin

Case. A multi-cultural Zimmerman was reported to be a White male. This type of error occur in

three ways: the first is simply that no one catches the mistake, a journalist mishears something

and reports it as fact, and finally, the journalist knows the article is incorrect but does not care

because it adds a “twist to get the audience’s attention” (Curtis, 2007, p. 196). Because the story

is repeated it becomes perceived as fact and news media does not correct it.

Another example of media fatigue is in the ways the stories were disseminated. In the

Hennessey case the fatigue centered on incorrect information, whereas in the Simpson case fear

mongering was used. Now in the Zimmerman/Martin case, incorrect information has again lead

to an influence of public perception. The culmination of media fatigue and framing are integral

in having an audience perceive information as fact.


Chapter 5. SUMMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS

Limitations of the Study

Why is understanding public opinion so important in this study? This idea is at the core

of this study. Mass media is the means that most individuals receive and accept their news,

information, and entertainment. Therefore, it is significant to study measures of what those

agencies use as a means to convey those ideas. It is also significant to study the motivations

behind the news they carry and the emphasis made in those messages. Through the use of

framing media plays into our fears, social judgments, and pre-conceived stereotypes in order to

imprint an idea and thus carry an agenda. This was evidenced in the three cases that were

analyzed and studied. However, this type of study has limitations.

One of the largest limitations is that this particular kind of study cannot be expanded to

include broader populations or areas of study. In a quantitative study questions or experiments

on a person’s reactions can be recorded. In a qualitative study with a focus on critical social

science the same is not possible. In addition, another limitation is that the very message being

investigated could have been altered without prior knowledge yielding results that are inaccurate.

Further Study Recommendations

This study has shed light that the media can alter the thought process of an individual. At

its most rudimentary level this alone would require a deeper look quantitatively. This would

entail research on the human brain’s reactions to sensationalistic messages and how an

individual’s thought patterns alter as a result. In addition, this would lead to a closer look at how

this impacts the legislative and governmental process.

Another reason why this is would be an important case to scrutinize is because of its

implications to media ethics. The cognizant decision to carry a story that is erroneous is a breach


of journalism ethics and creates a litany of issues. One of the largest issues that it creates is

polarization and division within our culture. That alone should warrant further study.

The study of how framing can bring populations together would be another interesting

field of study. One of those cases is that of Casey Anthony. Her story played out on all media

and instead of dividing Americans it brought them together. The case centered around a young

mother that was accused of murdering her 3 year old daughter. The road to her trial linked the

American public like no other event in recent history. Eventually she was found not guilty and

had to be swept into hiding because so many wanted to physically condemn her for her

daughter’s death.

Further still, this case study can lead to many other areas can of research. The areas of

advertising and the impact on how the media chooses stories it wants to cover plays another

important role. The media yields a lot of power and can be viewed as Orwellian in nature. This

too can be an area to research. Has the media gone beyond the power given to them to wield? Is

the constant coverage and barrage of innuendo associated with stories of any type really

necessary in order for information to be disseminated? Further still, research can be conducted

on the abuses of power that the media can produce and how those abuses adversely affect

government and society at large. More recently some articles have surfaced on how rhetoric

creates hate through indoctrination. In addition, the media can be used as a method of mind

control thus altering not only how someone thinks but how an entire society or culture behaves.

The reason that this particular study would be beneficial is not only to add to the already

large amount of evidence that exists regarding rhetoric and its uses, but how that rhetoric can

alter the consciousness of society. That altering of consciousness can be studied to view how


society is changing as a whole. This particular study can open a door to other studies that

involve critical social science issues.

Conclusions and Implications

The study of whether framing played a role in the Zimmerman/Martin case is significant

because the use of these strategies has so many far reaching effects. For example, in the United

States all citizens are innocent until proven guilty. However, because of the media’s consistent

repetition of a misrepresentation, individuals will make assumptions based on that

characterization thus, leading to the impact of public opinion. These influences cause a paradox

within our culture because it taints the very human beings that make up everything from jury

pools to legislative bodies. Framing then creates bias and removes objectivity from the

respective scenarios. For example, there are already cases where trials have been moved in order

to pull an untainted jury. Discussion of this dynamic has already been entertained in the

Zimmerman/Martin Case. In addition to promoting hate and conflict, economically framing’s

effects exhausts the resources of already over-burdened districts in a struggling economy. These

are simple conclusions drawn just on this content analysis alone.

Another conclusion that can be drawn is that media’s obsession to make money is

tainting the very job that they carry out. The old adage that money is at the root of all evil is

evident throughout this analysis. Even though media seems to have always gone the route of

sensationalism for easy money as was evident in the Hennessey case, it is now that this becomes

a greater issue. In the 21st century mass media is the ultimate reality show. Therefore, then the

use of framing to create the perfect top story plays a paramount role. Because of this constant

competition small criminal cases such as Zimmerman/Martin become the lead story. The use of


this particular case and those like it to create a frenzy among the public supports my original

argument that framing does indeed influence public opinion.


References

Basu, S. (2011). Social responsibility: The obligation of mass media. Global Media Journal,

(June), 1.

Curtis, D. (2012). It's not news, ii's fark: How mass media tries to pass off crap as news. New

York, NY: Gotham Books.

Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of

Communication, 57, 163-173.

Em Griffin (Ed.). (1994). Communication: A first look at communication theory (2nd ed.). New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Em Griffin (Ed.). (2009). Communication: A first look at communication theory (7th ed.). New

York: McGraw-Hill.

Foss, S. (2009). Rhetorical criticism. Groveland, IL: Waveland Press.

Gal-or, E., Geylani, T., & Yildrim, T. (2012). The impact of advertising on media bias. Journal

of Marketing Research, XLIX(February), 92-99.

Goldberg, B. (2002). Bias: A CBS insider exposes how the media distort the news. Washington,

D.C.: Regenery.

Goldberg, B. (2004). Arrogance: Rescuing america from the media elite. New York: Warner.


Gray, M. (2012, March 19). Trayvon martin's killing: was it self-defense or racism? Time

Magazine, Retrieved from http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/03/19/trayvon-martins-killing-

was-the-motive-self-defense-or-racism?

Himelboim, I and Limor, Y. (2011). Media institutions, news organizations, and the journalistic

social role worldwide: A cross national and cross organizational study of codes of ethics.

Mass Media and Society, (14), 71-92.

International federation of journalists. (2012, November 20). Retrieved from

ww.ifj.org/en/articles/status-of-journalists-and-journalism-ethics-ifj-principles

Jackson, J. (2009, Institutional racism ignored. Extra!, 22, 5.

Lazaroiu, G. (2011). The language of journalism ethics. Linguistic and Philosophical

Investigations, 10, 162-168.

Merrit, H. (2010). Who killa da chief? how american newspapers encouraged the largest mass

lynching in U.S. history. Atlanta Review of Journalism, 11(4), 31-46.

Middleton, M. (2009). Social responsiblity in the media. (MA, Oxford University). Global

Media Journal, (June), 1-13. (71947173).

Neuman, W. L. (2006). Social research methods. (Sixth ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Nothstine, W., Blair, C., & Copeland, G. (2003). Critical questions: Invention, creativity, and the

criticism of discourse and media. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Panza, C., & Potthast, A. (2010). Ethics for dummies. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.


Protesters come to city of trayvon martin's death. (2012, April 1). News-Press, p. B14.

Reinemann, (2005). Unifying or polarizing? short-term effects and post debate consequences of

different rhetorical strategies in televised debates. Journal of Communication, 55(4), 775-

794.

Rubin, R., Rubin, A., Haridakis, P., & Piele, L. (2010). Communication research: Strategies and

sources. (7th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage.

Scott, D. W. (1981). James blaine and the amnesty debate of 1876: A case study of the rhetoric

of polarization. Communicator, 11(Spring), 53-61.

Shipp, E. R. (1994). OJ and the black media: Neither a typical hero nor a typical victim, he

challenges typical coverage. Columbia Journalism Review, (November/December), 39-41.

Simmons, G. (2010, May/June). Media ethics: Oxymoron or anti-oxidant? Screen Education, 36,

37-45

Stromback, J. (2007). Marketplace of ideas and marketplace of money. Nordicom Review,

(Jubilee), 51-62.

Souder, L. (2010). A free market model for media ethics: Adam smith's looking glass. Journal of

Mass Media Ethics, 25, 53-64.

United States Government, Archives office. (n.d.). Bill of rights. Retrieved from website:

www.archives.gov


Ward, S. J., & Wasserman, H. (2010). Towards an open ethics:Implications of new media

platforms for global ethics discourse. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 25, 275-291.

Yi, X., & Savary, M. (2007). News consumption and media bias. Informs, 26(5), 611-628.

Zimmerman's call: watch out for the druggie burglar. (2012). YouTube.com. Retrieved from

http://youtu.be/v-MMPdL5PP0

http://youtu.be/v-MMPdL5PP0


Appendix

Coding Instrument

Name of Case/Story Non-Racial Racial/Ethnic Impact on

Public Opinion

Terry Schiavo Case X X

Roe Vs. Wade X X

O.J. Simpson X X

Casey Anthony X X

Harvey Milk X

Amanda Knox X X

Elian Gonzalez X

Same-Sex (Variety) X (depended)

Joseph Hennessey/Italian x x

Texas Vs. Johnson (Flag

Burning)

X

Michael Jackson X X

Larry Flynt (Free Speech) X

James G. Blaine X x

Zimmerman/Martin X x

Climate Change X

War on Terror X X

9/11 Theories X X

Housing Crisis X x

Economic Downturn X x

Racial/Ethnic: Deals with race or ethnicity

Non-Racial – Does not deal with race or ethnicity issues

Impact on Public Opinion- Framing was used on some level to impact public opinion

Running Head: RHETORIC AND FRAMING 1 RHETORIC AND FRAMING: INFLUENCE ON PUBLIC OPINION...

Documents

Transcript of Running Head: RHETORIC AND FRAMING 1 RHETORIC AND FRAMING: INFLUENCE ON PUBLIC OPINION...