Deliberative qualities of generic news frames: Assessing the democratic value of strategic game and contestation framing in election

Transcription

1 Deliberative qualities of generic news frames: Assessing the democratic value of strategic game and contestation framing in election campaign coverage - ONLINE APPENDIX: CODING PROTOCOL - Eike Mark Rinke Hartmut Wessler Charlotte Löb Carina Weinmann Forthcoming in Political Communication

2 Deliberative qualities of generic news frames: Assessing the democratic value of strategic game and contestation framing in election campaign coverage ONLINE APPENDIX: CODING PROTOCOL Levels of Analysis This study spans three levels of analysis. 1 st Level of Analysis: Newscast: 2 nd Level of Analysis: News item: Coded for date; television channel Coded for topic (policy vs. strategic game); responsiveness (contestation) Pick-up criterion: Code a news item only if it contains an explicit reference to the upcoming Bundestag election. References may be visual or auditory. 3 rd Level of Analysis Utterance: Coded for type of speaker (political center vs. periphery); incivility; reason-giving Variables 1 st Level of Analysis: Newscast Date This variable captures the date the newscast aired. Code as follows: YYMMDD. may range from August 3, 2009 to September 27, TV Station This variable captures the TV channel on which the newscast aired. This study includes material from four channels: ARD, ZDF, RTL and Sat ARD

3 02 ZDF 03 RTL 04 Sat.1 Coding Instruction Capture both date and television channel in the name of the ANVIL file for the show you are coding. (Note: The software tool ANVIL is used for coding of the audiovisual material; see 2 nd Level of Analysis: News Item Topic (Policy vs. Strategic Game) Policy 01 Nuclear power / energy 02 Europe 03 German armed forces / war in Afghanistan / terrorism 04 Privacy protection / Internet 05 Immigration 06 Unemployment 07 Economy 08 Financial crisis 09 Disenchantment with politics/politicians 10 Education 11 Living costs / prices / income development 12 Family / children / youth 13 Taxes 14 Health care 15 Pensions 16 Social inequality 17 Environment / climate Strategic game 18 Election campaign / campaigning 19 Election outcomes / coalition speculations 20 Election metacoverage 21 Opinion polls 99 Other First, consult inserts displayed before or during the news item to determine its thematic focus. If there is no insert or you cannot determine a single thematic focus from it, consult the verbal and visual information in the news item. Examples Jan Hofer: The debate over the future of nuclear power plants continues. To discuss the issue, the Chancellor and the Minister of Environment met in Berlin today Nuclear power / energy Peter Limbourg: Youth unemployment continues to increase at rapid pace. Teachers regard this as a problem that is closely related to youth crimes

4 06 Unemployment Speaker (Off): the EU guideline that recently became effective 02 Europe Responsiveness 01 Contestation 02 No contestation Code a news item as containing contestation if it presents opposing viewpoints that are explicitly related to one another (by the speakers themselves or a journalist). Disregard viewpoints of reporting journalists themselves but code for viewpoints of others when quoted by any speaker (including reporting journalists) in the news item. If a news item presents no or only one viewpoint (either directly or in a quote), code it as containing no contestation. Examples Angela Merkel: this country does not need a minimum wage. Speaker (off screen): The Finance Minister has a different opinion. Peer Steinbrück: Without minimum wages, we will continue to have employees working for dumping wages in Germany [No further viewpoint appears in this news item.] 01 Contestation Angela Merkel: this country does not need a minimum wage. Peer Steinbrück: Without minimum wages, we will continue to have employees working for dumping wages in Germany [No further viewpoint appears in this news item; no explicit connection made by a speaker.] 02 One-sided

5 3rd Level of Analysis: Utterance Type of speaker 01 Political center 11 Legislature / parties 111 CDU/CSU 112 FDP 113 SPD 114 Die Grünen 115 Die Linke 119 Other: (open coding) 12 Administration / government 121 CDU/CSU 122 SPD 129 Other / no explicated party affiliation 13 Judiciary 02 Political periphery 21 Interest groups/associations 22 Social movements 23 Experts / intellectuals 24 Advocates 25 Affected persons / ordinary citizens 26 Artists / celebrities 27 Journalists and other media workers (non-affiliated with news program) 03 Journalists (affiliated with news program) 99 Other Code this variable for all utterances in the newscasts (sound bites, utterances by anchors, and utterances by speakers of the news program). Assign a code according to the relevant function of the speaker in the specific news item and/or utterance. For example, Angela Merkel may be quoted as Chairwoman of the Christian Democratic Union, Member of Parliament or Chancellor of Germany. If more than one function is relevant in the item/utterance, you can assign more than one code. Information about the type of speaker can be visual (e.g., an

6 insert) or verbal (e.g., an utterance by the reporter). For speakers of parties not represented in the Federal Parliament (Bundestag), code their party affiliation manually (see value 119). Examples Gregor Gysi: what was, after all, the Chancellor s task 115 Die Linke Frank Bsirske: to realize minimum wages. This will surely not be possible with the Grand Coalition. 21 Interest groups / associations Richard David Precht: Philosophically speaking, this issue has been a concern to mankind throughout the ages and thus as well to citizens with regard to the federal elections. 23 Experts / intellectuals Franz Beckenbauer: As a Bavarian, I have voted for the same party for decades. I will not change this now. 26 Artists / celebrities Steffen Seibert: As a journalist, you should be shy about indicating party preferences. [Broadcasting TV station: ARD] 27 Journalists and other media workers (non-affiliated with news program) Psychologist: Youth unemployment puts pressure on our society. You also notice this in our work. The new government needs to find solutions here. 24 Advocates Incivility This variable measures if and how speakers in the news and news producers violate deliberative demands of a civil discourse. Incivility is defined as being [...] unusually impolite (Mutz, 2007, p. 624), as well as utilizing

7 nonverbal cues (such as rolling of the eyes) and phrases devoid of explicit political content (such as You have completely missed the point here! ). The candidates in the uncivil condition also raised their voices and interrupted one another. In the civil version, the politicians spoke calmly throughout and were patient and respectful while the other person spoke (Mutz, 2007, p. 625). Incivility is measured on the auditory and the visual level. Auditory level 01 Hot button language 02 Derogative style 03 Interruption by a speaker 04 Interruption by producers 05 Personal attack Visual level 06 Non-verbal offense 07 Uncivil camera perspective 99 Other On the auditory level, code interruptions by other speakers are as uncivil. Also, code any editing of utterances so as to cut into a sentence as uncivil. Code an utterance as interrupted only if it is rendered semantically incomplete or meaningless. Using hot button language (i.e., words that are likely to outrange opponents, see Ferree et al., 2002, p. 239) also constitutes a violation of the civility norm. Another, lesser form of uncivil offense is derogative style (see Rohlinger, 2007, p. 130). Derogative style includes speech reproachful speech that works through cynicism, irony, or sarcasm. On the visual level, code any filming/editing that focuses on the face of speakers, like closeups or extreme close-ups (i.e., in-your-face perspectives, see Mutz, 2007, p. 623), as uncivil. Conversely, code shots showing at least the speaker s upper body as civil. If the utterance contains more than one violation of the civility norm, code all violations. The order of codes does not matter. Examples Citizen: women like Chancellor Merkel do not know anything about family politics. She does not even have kids.

8 05 Personal attack Politician: These ideas for reforming the social welfare system in Germany are absurd. This can only come from a crackpot in the liberal party. 01 Hot button language 07 Uncivil camera perspective Reason-giving Reasons are linguistic expressions that support an argumentative structure and do not consist of factual information, polemic, threats, and narration only (Schultz, 2006). They offer either explanation or proof (Kuhlmann, 1999): An explanation supports the claim of comprehensibility, a proof fosters the claim of truthfulness by making a traceable connection to reality. Here, we code whether an utterance contains a reason (thus defined) for a previously explicated claim or position or not. 01 Reason-giving 02 No reason-giving Code whether the utterance at hand contains a reason. If the utterance contains more than one reason, code all reasons. The order of codes does not matter.

9 Examples Anchor: Conservatives demand an extension of running times for power plants because they want to invest the profits in family politics. 01 Contains reason-giving Anchorman: As you can see from the results of this Forschungsgruppe Wahlen poll, the majority of Germans would vote for the CDU. 02 Contains reason-giving References Ferree, M. M., Gamson, W. A., Gerhards, J., & Rucht, D. (2002). Shaping abortion discourse: Democracy and the public sphere in Germany and the United States. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Kuhlmann, C. (1999). Die öffentliche Begründung politischen Handelns: Zur Argumentationsrationalität in der politischen Massenkommunikation. Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag. Mutz, D. C. (2007). Effects of in-your-face television discourse on perceptions of a legitimate opposition. American Political Science Review, 101(4), doi: /s x Rohlinger, D. A. (2007). American media and deliberative democratic processes. Sociological Theory, 25(2), doi: /j x Schultz, T. (2006). Geschwätz oder Diskurs? Die Rationalität politischer Talkshows im Fernsehen. Cologne, Germany: Halem.