Feature Article

Media Frames and Our View of the World

By Natassja Kokonaski

How do we know what issues, events, and people play the most prominent roles in the world's political arena? The answer is quite simple-the media tells us. The media is not only an agenda-setter, emphasizing certain topics or individuals over others so that they dominate our perception of international affairs, but the media acts as an interpreter as well. This process is called framing. Framing involves the presentation of information so that it aids in interpretation of events and perception of public figures. In essence, framing 'suggests' how viewers should think about the information presented in news media. Frames characterize a problem and its cause in a way that implies a preferred solution.

In the context of international relations, media framing is often influenced by the government. For example in media coverage of the imminent invasion of Iraq in 2003, the press made frequent reference to the "axis of evil." The "axis of evil," a term coined by President Bush, referred to Iran, Iraq, and North Korea. These three countries, according to the Bush administration, were against the American ideals of freedom and democracy, and instead represented tyranny and terrorism, along with the threat of nuclear attack. Coverage of Iraq, especially in the months prior to U.S. invasion, followed all of the elements of this frame. First, the media identified a problem-Iraq, as a part of this "axis of evil" posed a threat to national security. Second, the media suggested a reason for this problem: Saddam Hussein. He both opposed American ideals and would be willing to attack the US using his stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. The solution? Iraq had to be disarmed. We must go to war and take out the "axis of evil," one rogue nation at a time. Through this process, and with the encouragement of the government, the media successfully painted Iraq as a worthy, and necessary, wartime opponent.

Key to the concept of framing is the idea that a frame does not always paint a complete picture of events. Often, in the quest to define a concept or individual, certain details are emphasized over others, inadvertently leaving some information out. This incomplete representation presents a problem for international relations. For example: American news frames often tend to either downplay American wrongdoing or attempt to lessen the severity of a potential shortcoming. To do this, media use framing as a form of damage control. One way they do this is to provide lopsided comparisons with other nations. This technique was employed in coverage of the Korean Air and Iran Air incidents during the late 1980s. In both cases, military mistakenly shot down civilian airliners. However, the KAL jet was downed by a Soviet missile, while the Iran Air plane succumbed to a U.S. weapon. Subsequent media coverage painted the Soviet action as a murderous attack, and the U.S. action as a tragic accident. The reason? To emphasize the fact that, while both governments killed innocent people, the U.S. would never do so on purpose, while the USSR would.

In another form of damage control, American news media often explains away negative U.S. behavior as an extreme or rare occurrence. Coverage of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal relied heavily on this technique. The press emphasized the reported cruelty as a reprehensible act committed by only a small percentage of disturbed individuals, rather than a potentially military-wide phenomenon. This frame, the government hoped, would serve to minimize the negative affects of the scandal, and minimize damage to the American image in the eyes of other nations. In minimizing the negative effects of these events, these frames carry the potential to create a false sense of American superiority.