Abstract
This article argues that in 1980, 1988, and 1992, our sense of presidential candidates' spoken messages differed depending on whether they were reported in issue or strategy frames. Messages in issue frames were more likely to be self-promotional and supported by evidence; messages in strategy frames were more likely to be oppositional and not supported by evidence. However, these differences disappeared in 1996 broadcast news coverage. In 1980, 1988, and 1992, candidates' messages in strategy stories were likely to be unsubstantiated attacks on their opponents. In 1996, stories in an issue frame adopted this tendency by including a higher proportion of attacks than in previous years. This change raised the level of reported negativity in candidate discourse included in 1996 broadcast news stories.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
