BREAKING FRAMING: AN ANALYSIS OF AUDIENCES COGNITIVE STRUCTURES AND THE MEDIATION OF PUBLIC OPINION FORMATION

Ebeze Victor Uche, Ugwuoke Nkechi Calister

Abstract


This discussion describes breaking framing as a negotiated paradigm of media effect on the audience against the all-powerful effects. This context demonstrates two main thrusts. First, media constructs social formations and even history itself by framing images of reality (in fiction as well as news) in predictable and patterned ways. On the other hand, audiences construct for themselves their own view of social reality, in line with some mediating influences like peer group and opinion leaders influences. In view of this, there is the power of media to frame issues and also the power of the people to choose, with a terrain of negotiation in between the issues framed by the media, audiences cognitive structure and other mediating factors. This discourse therefore implies that while the media evokes audiences attention by their interpretative symbols, the audience also tends to make sense of what the media says using a specific set of cognitive skills and expectations. Hence, the acceptance or rejection of certain frames by the audience will affect positively or negatively their attitudes, outlook, behaviour and opinion on political issues, candidates and events promoted in the media

Full Text:

PDF

References


Baran S.J and Davies D. K (2010) Mass communication theory; foundations, ferment and future. (6th ed) Canada: Wadsworth, Cengage learning.

Cappella J. N., Jamieson K. H. (1996). News frames, political cynicism, and media cynicism. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 71-84.

Eagly A. H., Chaiken S.(1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Edelman M.(1993). Contestable categories and public opinion. Political Communication, Vol 10, 231-242.

Entman R.(1993). Framing toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 10, 155-173.

Gamson W.(1992). Talking politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Gamson W., Modigliani A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95, 1-37.

Gitlin T.(1980). The whole world is watching. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Goffman E.(1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Hall.

Iyengar S.(1990). Framing responsibility for political issues: The case of poverty and Political Behavior, 12, 19-40(1999) in Mass media and the death penalty: Social construction of three Nebraska executions. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 43, 236-253.

Iyengar S.(1991). Is anyone responsible? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

McCombs M., Ghanem S. I.(2001). The convergence of agenda setting and framing. In Reese S. D., Gandy O. H., Grant A. E. (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

McLeod D.(2001). A multiperspectival approach to framing analysis: A field guide. In Reese S. D., Gandy O. H., Grant A. E. (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

McQuail Denis. (2010) McQuails Mass communication theory (6th ed). London: SAGE publications ltd.

Reese S. D.(2001). Prologue framing public life. In Reese S. D., Gandy O. H. Jr., Grant A. E. (Eds.), Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scheufele D. A.(1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, vol 48, 103-122. Retrieved 17/ 06/2015


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


(c)Rex Commpan Publishing Group