Attention Cycles and Frames in the Plant Biotechnology Debate

Abstract

Power in policy making revolves in part around the ability to control media attention to an issue while framing an issue in favorable terms. These two characteristics of media coverage both reflect and shape where an issue is decided,by whom,and with what outcomes. In understanding this process, a number of studies have observed cyclical waves in media attention and historical shifts in how an issue is framed,linking these features to policy decisions. Yet there has been little theoretical specification and testing of the social mechanisms that drive these cycles. With this in mind, this study outlines a model for understanding “mediated issue development.” The theoretical components of the model include the type of policy arena where debate takes place,the media lobbying activities of strategic actors,the journalistic need for narrative structure,and the competition from other issues for attention across policy and media environments.Related factors include the type of journalist assigned coverage and the level of attention from opinion pages. Using data from a content analysis of twenty-five years of coverage at the New York Times and Washington Post,the model is applied and tested against the issue of plant biotechnology. Generalizability of the model is the primary goal,and the authors conclude with comparisons to other issues such as the Human Genome Project and intelligent design. Understanding, however, why plant biotechnology remains at low levels of controversy in the United States compared to the rest of the world remains the object of considerable curiosity, and the focus of this study posits several explanations.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 242 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.