Theory 4: Agenda-Setting and Framing Theory (Week 6)

Heading – “Country X confronts a dilemma of urinating and spitting in public”

The Minister of Health of country “X” is very concerned that the older citizens are spitting and urinating in public places and the younger generation believes that to be a cultural norm. This will adversely affect the image and economy of the country as foreign companies will be less willing to invest in a country that cannot manage public deviance that fosters an unhealthy environment. The government believes that public education must start immediately.

At the same time, a public survey was recently conducted by an independent body and the predominant public concern is the lack of primary schools for younger children who are working and running amok in the streets, which is causing a rise in criminal activities. The public believes that public education must begin with the development of schools so that a higher educated population will curb the acts of social deviance. In the long run these changes will attract investors and help the economy.

PRIORITY: POLICY/GOVERNMENT AGENDA

Agenda – Image and economy of the country depends on the standard of living of the people and its environment.

Framing Amplification : Firstly, the journalist could point out the main issue which concerned the government. In this case, a problem of urinating and spitting in public is seen as a drawback to the government where an unhealthy environment could affect the economy of the country as the foreign investor might withdraw themselves to invest from country X.

Framing Extension : Next, the journalist also might need to convince the public that their act of deviance would affect their future well-being as it is affected by the image and economy of the country. Thus, through this explanation, the reader/public is alert that how their inappropriate action could contribute to an adverse effect to their country and this attempt is to ensure that they listen to the government.

Framing Bridging : Lastly, after persuading the reader to listen to the government, the journalist could suggest that the government are trying to solve the problem where they need the support of the public. Also, the journalist could say that with the cooperation of the public and government, government X would be able to maintain and improve the economy as well as the image of the country.

Solutions:

The government needs to provide free public education for every citizen. In this case, the government must successfully convince the public by explaining and emphasizing on how the act of urinating and spitting in public could affect their well-being. By educating the public, it is also hoped that it can change the younger generation’s way of thinking in which the act of deviance is not seen as social norm. Thus, this will indirectly. Although the government might need to spend more to educate the public as it involve high cost, they might see it as future investment where through this public education, it will indirectly improve the image of country X as well as boost the economy of the country – through foreign investment. However, government X might also face some difficulties to handle the citizen where they need gather all the citizens and approach them to attend for public education. Thus, again, the government might need to offer them something so that they listen to the government. Alternatively, instead of offering something to the public for them to listen to the government, the government might need to use sanction approach where the government made a compulsory public education to everyone or they need to impose fines or taxes for those who did not attend the public education and those who urinate and spit in public.

ANALYSIS:

Media effects could influence the audience depending on the effectiveness of the content of the message being presented and delivered. Scheufele D. A. and Tewksbury D. (2007) once quotes Frank Luntz (1997), “It is not what you say; it is how you say it”. Journalists struggle on how to attract the attention of the audience where the audience no longer perceived certain issue as urgent or they might see other issues as more urgent. [McLeod, B. & Byrnes (1974/1991)]. Thus, it is important for a journalist to influence the society to prioritize that particular issue in which it must be handled immediately which refer to agenda and the journalist must reduce the complexity of the issue in order for the audience to understand the issue called framing.

In order to attract the audiences’ attention, according to Entman (1993), the journalists need to select certain aspect which could be perceived in real life and make them more salient when using communicating text, where the journalists could explain the definition of the problems, recognize the causes, moral evaluation and also recommendation for that particular issue. He further explained on how the media provide the audiences with plan for interpreting events.

 In the case of country X, as a journalist where he prioritize a national agenda, he should points out the issue of urinating and spitting in public and explain the major effects of such action. Since it is related to the people of country X, thus there is a possibility the audience is aware that the article might refer to them. Once the audience is alert, the journalist should take this opportunity to convince the audience that they should listen to the government as they are responsible with their action.

Apart from that, Kahneman (1979) and Tversky (1984) examined how the differences in presentations of essentially identical decision-making scenarios are able to influence people’s preferences as well as their evaluation on various option presented to them. Meanwhile, Goffman (1974) assumed that individuals cannot understand the world as a whole and they continuously struggle to express their life experiences and how to make sense the world around them.

On the other hand, agenda setting does not always work. Em Griifin (2011) use the idea of Gerald Kosicki (1993), in which he stated that agenda only engage in active construction of messages but they do not merely keep watch over information. Kosicki (1993) also raised a question whether framing could be considered as a valid topic to study under an agenda- setting. He sees nothing in McCombs and Shaw’s original model which anticipate the importance of interpretive frames.

In conclusion, media will only give long term effects to audience if the message is presented effectively. According to Entman (1993), to frame is to define the problem, recognize the causes and give solution to the problems. However, Kosicki (1993) questioned whether framing could be considered as valid in the study of agenda-setting theory.

REFERENCES:

Griffin, E., (2011) A First Look At Communication Theory, 8^th Edition. Pp.388-389. New York: McGraw Hill.


Kalvas, F., Vane, J., Stipkova, M., Kreidl, M. (n.d). Framing and Agenda – Setting: Two Parallel Processes in Interaction. Pp. 3-4

Scheufele, D. A., (1999). Framing as a Theory of Media Effects. Pp. 107.

Scheufele, D. A., Tewksbury D. (2007). Framing, Agenda Setting, and Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models. Pp. 9-12.