Framing of Major Events in News Media
The implications of news media on politics have grown in society and will continue to be the main source of knowledge in politics for the foreseeable future. However, the outlets and methods of news media are continuously changing. Two of the major characteristics of news media today is spin, how public officials want stories to be supported to gain support, and framing, the way stories are interpreted to put a certain perception in viewers’ minds. This can be seen on a daily basis out of the White House. Press releases by the Trump administration, or any past administration, try to gain favorability amongst the population. These stories are then framed in certain ways to meet the preferences of whatever news media outlet is reporting on it.
This method of the way news is reported is seen every day. A prime example would be the hurricane relief efforts of President Trump. Depending on what news media outlet was reporting, one might think that Trump was doing everything in his power to lead the relief efforts or that he was simply going “through the motions” of being a president during a catastrophe. GQ criticized many of Trump’s actions following the hurricanes. One of these actions included actually going to the site of disaster instead of being in Washington actually creating reform, but they gave him a “pass” on that. The article then critiques what he actually did at the site. Claiming he didn’t “meet with a single victim” and that he spent more time getting there then he did being there. This was then followed by the scrutiny that this was a publicity stunt to gain favorability and make himself seem like an ideal president, instead of making actions and putting policy in place to solve the issues.
On the other hand, Fox News displayed Trumps role in the relief efforts in a completely different light. They talk about how Trump was in Houston working hand in hand with the shelters and relief centers, and even describing an episode where he was giving out lunches at a shelter and “giving hugs and playing with kids.” The article then goes on to describe the funding President Trump approved including “75 percent of certain costs” and funding towards “debris damage” and “emergency protective control.” The article even says Trump did not want to be in the heavily damaged areas so he did not disturb the relief efforts.
It’s obvious that both sources took a different stance on how Trump handled the situation, but this brings up a very interesting point. Neither of the sources really conflict on what actually happened, but both look at different times and scenarios of the event. This leads to the question if news media is actually doing its job as the “4th branch of government.” The argument can be made that since that all these different perspectives are being offered that media is fulfilling its role as a provider through different. However, it brings up the conversation of who is exposed to what sources and how it may bias their opinions.