Frame Building the "Social Digitization" in the German Press

Pablo Porten-Cheé 1 *
More Detail
1 Weizenbaum Institute for the Networked Society, Germany
* Corresponding Author
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp. 96-117. https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/2612
OPEN ACCESS   2557 Views   346 Downloads   Published online: 10 Oct 2017

ABSTRACT

This article is retracted by the author's request. Retraction Note: https://doi.org/10.30935/ojcmt/9302


In recent years, digital technologies have developed rapidly and have consequently been adopted for wider social purposes. It follows that digitization has economic and political consequences to the extent that it generates new forms of production, distribution and regulation. This study shows how print media present the interface between digital technologies and society. Arguing with a theoretical framework consisting of political parallelism at the media system level, editorial lines at the media outlet level and diverging values and sociological structures at the journalistic level, systematic differences in the frame building of digitization between outlets are assumed. The findings of a content analysis of print media from 2003 and 2008 indicate that social digitization framing was partially ideologically motivated. A content analysis of German print media shows that left-leaning press reports social digitization critically by highlighting the negative consequences of political actions. Conversely, right-leaning press portrays social digitization more often and in a more positive light by slightly emphasizing its economic characteristics.
Keywords: digitization, frame building, agenda building, political parallelism, print media, content analysis

CITATION

Porten-Cheé, P. (2017). Frame Building the "Social Digitization" in the German Press. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 7(4), 96-117. https://doi.org/10.29333/ojcmt/2612

REFERENCES

  • Arceneaux, N., & Schmitz Weiss, A. (2010). Seems stupid until you try it: press coverage of Twitter, 2006-9. New Media & Society, 12(8), 1262 – 1279.
  • Beck, K., & Vowe, G. (1995). Multimedia aus der Sicht der Medien. Argumentationsmuster und Sichtweisen in der medialen Konstruktion. Rundfunk und Fernsehen, 43(4), 549 – 563.
  • Berkowitz, D., & Adams, D. B. (1990). Information Subsidy and Agenda-Building in local television news. Journalism Quartely, 67(4), 723 – 731.
  • Breckenridge, J. N. (2000). Validating cluster analysis: Consistent replication and symmetry. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35(2), 261 – 285.
  • Carvalho, A. (2007). Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: rereading news on climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 16(2), 223 – 243.
  • Cogan, B. (2005). “Framing usefulness:” An examination of journalistic coverage of the personal computer from 1982 – 1984. Southern Communication Journal, 70(3), 248 – 265. Routledge.
  • D’Angelo, P., & Kuypers, J. A. (2009). Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives. New York: Routledge.
  • Donsbach, W. (1990). Wahrnehmung von redaktionellen Tendenzen durch Zeitungsleser. Medienpsychologie, 2(4), 275 – 301.
  • Donsbach, W., & Klett, B. (1993). Subjective objectivity. How journalists in four countries define a key term of their profession. International Communication Gazette, 51(1), 53 – 83.
  • Donsbach, W., Wolling, J., & Blomberg, C. von. (1996). Repräsentation politischer Positionen im Mediensystem aus der Sicht deutscher und amerikanischer Journalisten. In W. Hömberg & H. Pürer (Eds.), Medien-Transformation. Zehn Jahre dualer Rundfunk in Deutschland. (pp. 343 – 356). Konstanz.
  • Downes, L. (2012). Who really stopped SOPA, and why? Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrydownes/2012/01/25/who-really-stopped-sopa-andwhy/
  • Eilders, C. (2004). Von Links bis Rechts - Deutung und Meinung in Pressekommentaren. In C. Eilders, F. Neidhardt, & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Die Stimme der Medien (pp. 129 – 166). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
  • Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51 – 58.
  • Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411 – 426.
  • Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems : three models of media and politics - Communication, society, and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hänggli, R. (2012). Key factors in frame building: How strategic political actors shape news media coverage. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 300 – 317.
  • Härdle, W., & Simar, L. (2007). Applied multivariate statistical analysis (2nd ed.). Berlin, Heidelberg, New York: Springer.
  • Hart, J. A. (2011). The Net Neutrality debate in the United States. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 8(4), 418 – 443. Routledge.
  • Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among Western publics. Princeton University Press.
  • Jones, J., & Himelboim, I. (2010). Just a guy in pajamas? Framing the blogs in mainstream US newspaper coverage (1999 - 2005). New Media & Society, 12(2), 271 – 288.
  • Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1955). Personal Influence. The part played by people in the flow of mass communication. New York: Free Press.
  • Kelly, J. P. (2009). Not so revolutionary after all: the role of reinforcing frames in US magazine discourse about microcomputers. New Media & Society, 11(1-2), 31 – 52.
  • Kepplinger, H. M. (1979). Angepaßte Außenseiter. Ergebnisse und Interpretationen der Kommunikatorforschung. In H. M. Kepplinger (Ed.), Angepaßte Außenseiter. Was Journalisten denken und wie sie arbeiten (pp. 7 – 28). München, Freiburg: Karl Alber.
  • Köcher, R. (1986). Bloodhounds or missionaries: Role definitions of German and British journalists. European Journal of Communication, 1(1), 43 – 64.
  • Kohring, M., & Matthes, J. (2002). The face(t)s of biotech in the Nineties: How the German press framed modern biotechnology. Public Understanding of Science, 11(2), 143 – 154.
  • Korte, K.-R. (2009). Wahlen in Deutschland (6th ed.). Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
  • Lipset, S. M., & Rokkan, S. (1967). Cleavage structures, party systems and voter alignments. In S. M. Lipset & S. Rokkan (Eds.), Party systems and voter alignments: Cross-national perspectives (pp. 1 – 64). New York, London: Free Press.
  • Löblich, M., & Karppinen, K. (2014). Guiding principles for Internet policy: A comparison of media coverage in four western countries. The Information Society, 30(1), 45 – 59.
  • Matthes, J., & Kohring, M. (2004). Die empirische Erfassung von Medien-Frames. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 52(1), 56 – 75.
  • Matthes, J., & Kohring, M. (2008). The content analysis of media frames: toward improving reliability and validity. Journal of Communication, 58(2), 258 – 279.
  • Nisbet, M. C., Scheufele, D. A., Shanahan, J., Moy, P., Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2002). Knowledge, reservations, or promise?: A media effects Model for public perceptions of science and technology. Communication Research, 29(5), 584 – 608.
  • Oggolder, C. (2012). Inside - outside: Web history and the ambivalent relationship between old and new media. Historical Social Research, 37(4), 134 – 149.
  • Patterson, T. E., & Donsbach, W. (1996). News decisions: Journalists as partisan actors. Political Communication, 13(4), 455 – 468.
  • Pfetsch, B., Eilders, C., & Neidhardt, F. (2004). Das „Kommentariat“: Rolle und Status einer Öffentlichkeitselite. Die Stimme der Medien. Pressekommentare und politische Öffentlichkeit in der Bundesrepublik. (pp. 39 – 73). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
  • Rogers, E. M. (1962). The diffusion of innovations (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
  • Rössler, P. (2001). Between online heaven and cyberhell: The framing of “the Internet” by traditional media coverage in Germany. New Media & Society, 3(1), 49 – 66.
  • Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103 – 122.
  • Schönbach, K. (1977). Trennung von Nachricht und Meinung: Empirische Untersuchung eines journalistischen Qualitätskriteriums. Freiburg: Alber.
  • Seymour-Ure, C. (1974). The political impact of mass media. London, Beverly Hills: Sage.
  • Weaver, D., & Elliott, S. N. (1985). Who sets the agenda for the media? A study of local agenda-building. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 62(1), 87 – 94.
  • Zeller, F., Wolling, J., & Porten-Cheé, P. (2010). Framing 0/1: Wie die Medien über die „Digitalisierung der Gesellschaft“ berichten. Medien Und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 58(4), 503 – 524.