Coverage of the pre-Iraq War debate as a case study of frame indexing

Abstract

This study examined critical coverage, substantive news frames, and news sources in The New York Times and Washington Post coverage of the pre-Iraq War debate. This content analysis evaluated media coverage before and after Congress passed the resolution that authorized the use of military force in Iraq. Results demonstrated that Congressional consensus was related to diminished frequencies of critical and substantively framed paragraphs in coverage yet the ongoing international debate sustained relatively more intense levels of critical coverage after the resolution passed than before. Substantively framed coverage, however, declined across all source types and levels of measurement after the Congressional resolution. In sum, the observed increase in the level of consensus within the US government seemed to influence coverage of the pre-Iraq War debate as it continued within and among other groups, such that substantive news frames were indexed to this shift in the tone, intensity, and focus of the policy debate. These findings therefore suggest a level of integration between indexing and framing in which an increased level of official consensus may be predictive of not only certain tones of coverage but also certain news frames being adopted over others.