Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Framing has gained increasing scholarly attention as it provides insight into how diverse actors discuss the same issues (Scheufele Vliegenthart, 2012). This interest extends to media framing, which plays a crucial role in influencing public opinion (Scheufele, 1999). Regula Hänggli's book significantly advances the framing literature by proposing a comprehensive framework that examines framing from multiple perspectives, including political actors, the media, and the public. Her study unifies the traditional dichotomy of frames in communication with frames in thought, providing a nuanced analysis of the conditions that foster framing dialogue between political actors and media, the mechanisms that drive this dialogue, and its impact on public opinion formation in the context of the direct democratic campaigns in Switzerland. The book consists of nine chapters that are unified into three larger parts: introduction and methodology, empirical outcomes, and conclusion. Chapter 1 delves into extensive literature on framing in communication, psychology, sociology, and political science, providing the context for a comprehensive model of frame building presented in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 describes the rigorous data collection and research design, introducingthe empirical cases: the asylum law referendum in 2004, the naturalization initiative, and the corporation tax referendums in 2008. The second part of the book is structured according to Hänggli's model of frame building in political communication, distinguishing between the processes of frame construction, frame promotion, and frame edition. Chapter 4 provides insights into the strategic choices that political actors face while constructing frames for media input. Chapter 5 explores how political actors promote their frames across various communication channels and adapt their strategies over time. Chapter 6 investigates the role of journalists in selecting, modifying, and presenting frames introduced by political actors. Chapter 7 discusses the flow of frames between the political actors and the media. In Chapter 8, the analysis turns to the public, focusing on the impact of frames in communication on the frames in thought and the public opinion formation process. The final part, the conclusion in Chapter 9, summarises the findings and discusses implications for research and beyond. The book's main contribution is its innovative and comprehensive framework for analysing frame building in political communication, which distinguishes between the processes of frame construction, frame promotion, and frame edition. The rigorous empirical test of this theoretical model in the context of Swiss direct democratic campaigns reveals the conditions and patterns in frame dialogue that might be applicable in other cases of issue competition, such as election campaigns. According to Hänggli, in the frame construction process, political actors make three strategic framing choices. The "Substantive Emphasis Choice" involves selecting strong frames to attract media and public attention to their cause while diverting it from opponents. The analysis reveals that political actors emphasise one or two strong frames consistently across various channels, with the highest focus in unmediated channels like political advertisements and direct mail but their focus varies in internal communications. Notably, the core frames remain stable over time, though the strategies sometimes change if a frame is ineffective. These findings provide important empirical support for the concept of frame ownership (Arbour, 2014), i.e., a set of frames associated with a particular political actor or party. The "Oppositional Emphasis Choice" requires political actors to balance attention between their own frames and those of their opponents. Hänggli finds that political actors engage more with opponents' frames in mediated channels, using counter-framing as a key strategy to reduce their impact and win votes. In unmediated channels, the focus is on mobilising supporters, while internal channels aim to inform members. Though campaign dialogue persists, issue complexity and financial inequality can reduce it. These findings have important implications for the democratic process and highlight the balancing role that regulation of campaign funding might play. Lastly, the "Contest Emphasis Choice" determines whether to emphasize personal attacks and conflicts or the substantive content of the debate. The analysis shows that political actors primarily rely on substantive framing, while those with extreme partisan positions use more contest frames. Though substantive frames dominate the campaigns, showing that the issue at stake remains central for the political actors, toward the end of campaigns the number of contest frames increases. Journalists, however, emphasize contest frames slightly more than political actors, underscoring the newsworthiness of conflict, in line with the literature on news values (Harcup however, the study of framing effects through survey data presents certain challenges. The use of surveys, as opposed to an experimental setting (e.g., Druckman, 2001), allows for the identification of strong frames but makes it difficult to control for all factors that (might) influence the emergence of the audience frames. Hänggli acknowledges this issue, noting that if core frames are not the strongest frames in communication, other influences, such as the direct impact of emotions on vote decisions, must be considered (p. 217). Future research could enhance the analysis of frames in thoughts by including visuals, which can impact audience frames (Powell et al., 2015), the context, considering frames from opinion leaders, friends, family, or other relevant channels, or by testing the strength and causal links between the media and public frames in an experimental setting. Additionally, as direct democratic campaigns focus on one issue and require the opponents to address it, further analysis is needed to ascertain the applicability and generalisability of the findings in the context of competition on diverse issues simultaneously, for example, in election campaigns. Testing the theoretical model and the findings of the book in a different setting offers a promising direction for future research. The digitalisation of media and social life make further testing and potential extension of Hänggli's model necessary. While political actors' strategies likely remain the same, there might be some impact on audience frames and, to a lesser extent, on frame edition by news media. Social media often reinforce existing divides, creating filter bubbles and echo chambers driven by algorithms (Flaxman et al., 2016), and introduce a heavy visual element that can contribute to the formation of frames in minds. However, they also enable rapid dissemination of frames, allowing political actors to reach wider audiences bypassing the traditional media and adapt frames based on direct audience feedback. The rise of influencers and micro-targeting strategies further facilitate tailoring frames to specific audiences, potentially enhancing their impact. At the same time news media production has become faster, more visual, and often reliant on quick audience feedback (e.g., Pavlik, 2001), with social media as an important news source. These qualities of the digital environment potentially increase the pace of the dialogue between political actors, news media, and the audience. Overall, this book is an important contribution to the study of political communication and provides a solid basis for future research in the field, offering a detailed examination of frame building and valuable insights into the strategic choices political actors make in framing their messages and the role of media in shaping public opinion frames. The results demonstrate that political actors lead in introducing frames into public discourse, with journalists playing a crucial role in balancing and contextualising these frames. This comprehensive analysis not only enhances the understanding of the framing process but also demonstrates its critical role in the dynamics of political communication.
Olga Litvyak (Mon,) studied this question.