Search

Housing is an issue that affects all individuals in society. People have first-hand experiences with housing, or the lack thereof, daily. Housing is also a macro-issue that is affected by and has implications for the nation's economy and public policy. Despite the centrality of housing for individuals and society, few scholars have examined media coverage of the issue. We examine media framing of housing in the New York Times between 2005 and 2010, a period that encompasses the 2008 Great Recession. We investigate whether the New York Times framed housing episodically by focusing on individuals or thematically by focusing on societal factors. We compare framing of housing topics related to inequality – such as homelessness, affordable housing, foreclosure and public housing – to more general housing topics – such as mortgages, homeownership and economic policy. We also examine if frames differ depending on whether the coverage mentions racial minorities. We find that the New York Times framed housing primarily as a thematic issue during this period; however, for stories focused specifically on inequality and racial minorities, there was substantially more episodic coverage. This research provides the much-needed insight into news coverage of inequality and race in the context of housing and housing policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Field research, defined as "leaving one's home institution in order to acquire data, information, or insights that significantly inform one's research" (Kapiszewski, MacLean, and Read 2015, 1), is a beneficial research practice. It also is a practice with significant safety risks, including sexual harassment, that can undermine the research process and harm researchers. Thus, combatting sexual harassment in the field is fundamental to maintaining the integrity of the research enterprise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The missions of both the mainstream and specialized press affect their coverage of the Supreme Court, which in turn might well affect how their audiences perceive the institution. The U.S. [...]

A comprehensive, systematic examination of media coverage of Congress in the 1990s is provided by analyzing over 2,600 congressional news stories. Findings reveal that news media to covered substantive policy concerns and the legislative process quite regularly and that the stories focusing on individual personalities and political scandals were comparatively infrequent.

Unlike other policy-making institutions that actively attempt to shape public opinion, the Supreme Court is largely dependent upon others to disseminate its policy pronouncements to the public. One consequence: How the media frame the Court's actions can affect public support for Court policies. This article presents the results of an experiment designed to take soundings on the effect of different media frames on White and Black support for a controversial affirmative action ruling. Using stimuli we created based on coverage of the Adarand v. Pena (1995) decision in the Black press and the mainstream press, we find that media framing has a significant effect on agreement with the Court's policy among White subjects. For Blacks, the impact of the media framing is moderated by ideological predispositions. In addition, both White and Black support for the Court's ruling is influenced by the media portrayal of Justice Clarence Thomas. Keywords: public opinion, Supreme Court legitimacy, race, mass media, Black press