News Frames: How Selective Reporting Can Help Improve Your Content’s Viral Potential
News framing is the process of filtering and transmitting news through an angle or ‘frame’ in order to support specific ideologies, stimulate widespread attention or persuade an audience. They are narratives which contextualize information. As a form of selective reporting, news framing is a remarkably useful tactic for bloggers, journalists and marketers.
Politico recently published an article about media hype in political journalism which talks about how trivial or sensationalist news stories capture the attention of the political-media community much more than important stories or serious reporting.
An example used in Politico’s article was Hillary Clinton’s invocation of Robert Kennedy’s assassination as the reason for continuing her presidential campaign. This created some controversy as the media interpreted this statement to suggest that Barack Obama might be assassinated before the democratic nomination concludes, hence allowing Clinton to win.
This particular Clinton comment was made in an 20-minute interview with the editorial board of the Argus Leader newspaper in South Dakota. According to Politico, the original dispatch from the Associated Press didn’t mention Clinton’s remarks about Robert Kennedy at all.
In fact, the New York Post was the first news source outside of South Dakota to highlight Clinton’s comments by publishing an article titled ‘Hillary Raises Assassination Issue’, which included a shortened video clip showing only the specific comment.
What the New York Post did was typical of most journalists: They examined the original documents and framed the news story by focusing only one or a few statements. Instead of reporting all the points made in the interview, they focused on fleshing out a controversial sound-bite and by doing so gave the story a more interesting or stimulating angle.
The New York Post story got to the Digg frontpage and chalked up over 4,000 diggs in a little more than a day. Subsequently, the same ‘assassination frame’ was picked up and published on numerous popular political blogs and several other news sites, most notably the New York Times, Washington Post and evening news outlets like ABC, CBS and NBC.
Pressed by an onslaught of media coverage, Clinton made effort to clarify the issue, explaining that her remarks about Robert Kennedy had absolutely nothing to do with Barack Obama.
Why did I mention this story? Because it’s an excellent example of how news framing or the selective reporting of news can be used to improve your content’s viral potential.
Interpreting News to Generate Maximum Relevance or Attention
Image Credit: reno, nv
News or issue framing is most evident in political journalism and I think it is a useful technique that can be applied in all forms of media and topical niches. Framing is the process of filtering and re-transmitting news or messages through specific angles in order to support your core ideas or agendas. It also works to attract attention or persuade a targeted audience.
When you want to blog about a specific news story, think about what frame you want to use in order to get maximum attention. This is not just about being sensational but about putting certain issues relevant to your audience’s interest in the forefront.
As long as you practice factual accuracy with an open or all-inclusive perspective (which means including divergent point-of-views), it’s not wrong or unethical to frame or ’spin’ a news story.
Framing a specific news article means that you’re doing several things at once. You’re not just publishing news, but interpreting it within a specific angle in order to accentuate a certain point of view, sometimes one will appeal a lot more to a particular audience.
The Triviality of News Frames and Smart Journalism
As a web publisher, your spin on the topic of the day can position you as a discussion-leader and the recipient of numerous citation link references from other websites. Being a news outlet that has published its fair share of juicy news-bites, Politico’s John F Harris understands this and is quite candid about their website’s strategy:
The signature defect of modern political journalism is that it has shredded the ideal of proportionality.
As leaders of a new publication, Politico’s senior editors and I are relentlessly focused on audience traffic. The way to build traffic on the Web is to get links from other websites. The way to get links is to be first with news — sometimes big news, sometimes small — that drives that day’s conversation.
We are unapologetic in our premium on high velocity. In this focus on links and traffic we are not different from nearly all news sites these days, not just new publications but established ones like The New York Times.
Velocity is a virtue in the Web world, and we are not going to stop trying to be fast off the mark — for relevant and fairly reported stories.
Harris’s article concludes by suggesting that news media should always endeavor to distinguish big stories from small ones, in order to produce work that deserves an audience. Salon’s Glenn Greenward agrees and offers a similar opinion, by asserting that critical thought and well researched journalism is important for the entire socio-political sphere:
The belief that petty items will attract links is only one of the motives driving political journalists to fixate on trivialities, and it’s probably not even the most significant reason. “Reporting” gossip is incredibly easy to do, and requires little effort and, more importantly, no critical thought.
The real harm inflicted by the behavior Harris describes isn’t that we’re all subjected to an endless stream of worthless gossip from our political journalists. That’s more of an avoidable annoyance than anything else.
It’s that the trashy gossip completely crowds out any discussion of anything that actually matters, allowing our government and political class generally to get away with the most extreme acts of corruption, lawbreaking and destruction while those assigned to “report” on what they’re doing prattle on about haircuts, horse races, and an endless stream of soap opera storylines. Those who know best how to feed journalists their easy, gossipy items are those who best manipulate their “reporting.”
While Greenward may be right to say triviality can drown out the visibility of important news, it is important to note that some audiences welcome gossip. They love it because its a distraction from the mundanity of their lives. Not many want to read long articles or think critically about issues: they don’t have time or the interest to get involved.
It’s easier to enjoy a soap opera storyline because its entertaining. The culture industry has become deeply entrenched in our daily lives and we are all conditioned by it. People and the media organs have long been locked in a vicious cycle of demand and supply for triviality.
On the web, traffic and links rule for businesses and online publishers who not only want monetary profits but the ability to spread ideas effectively. If triviality once in a while gets you new readers for future content, why not? Sometimes you need to play the demand-n-supply game in order to build an audience that’ll listen to what you really want to say.
A good overall content strategy focuses on producing both attention-grabbing news frames and critical, unique content. The best print magazines have done the same for a while by publishing bite-sized entertainment alongside longer, feature length premium articles.
What you publish (or don’t publish) defines your site in the eyes of others. So when using news frames, don’t lose track of your overall goals. If you’re trying to develop a reputation as an authority on a topic or position yourself within a community, it pays to put effort in publishing well researched, high quality content with some degree of critical thought.
For more tips on successful online marketing, subscribe to dosh dosh today.
It’s important to understand the issues of the matter at hand so that you can put your own spin on it. Far too many people are happy to “borrow” content rather than put the effort in theirselves.
That is what has astounded me since I cam to DoshDosh, every post is very detailed. You need a clear head to take them in properly!
That’s what they call using a crow bar to insert yourself into the conversation.
Woah. This is the first time I’ve read a post on a blog and thought to myself, my gosh, the writing here is just plain brilliant. I never considered the above ideas before…I’ll have to think on how I can incorporate them in my blog for the future. Great stuff!
Barbara
“What you publish (or don’t publish) defines your site in the eyes of others. So when using news frames, don’t lose track of your overall goals. If you’re trying to develop a reputation as an authority on a topic or position yourself within a community, it pays to put effort in publishing well researched, high quality content with some degree of critical thought.”
I really like your closing paragraph. Very good advice.
Isnt this the same idea of what Hurst did like a hundred years ago? Yellow journalism? Rosebud? Citizen Kane?
Very well said Maki. Your solid research is appreciated and I would have to agree with monawea, very nice closing statement.
IMHO, framing and angeling of information is why many in the main stream media are viewed with disdain and mistrust by some of us in the new media.
While it is very true that it can be helpful in viral aspects and possibly in long term readership, it is the all mighty dollar that seems to be the motivator in many cases. Follow the money. I have seen news stories about some new drug that is out, only to find that it is tied to a parent company of the messenger.
That’s why I always consider the source of the information, and never rely on any single source. When you get more angles, you get a wider view.
Good post. Newspapers suck. “A wise man talks because he has something to say. A fool talks because he has to say something.”
News always spread like fire specially when it is concerned regarding any celebrity .
Active blogging with the news updates can bring lots of potential visitors to any blog thus giving a new way of popularity to your site as people are always looking for the latest updates on the web in there busy day schedules.
Any good pictorial description of Clinton killing Obama available..too funny to think abt it..
In addition to producing attention grabbing news frames and unique critical content, another element that one should consider regarding their content strategy is relevancy. Although this seems to be a no brainer, it should not be overlooked. Staying focused on what your audience expects or hopes to read about is key.
The ability to do this effectively can make a huge impact on an individual blog. There is so much UGC available on youtube or flickr like sites that any blogger regardless of niche can exploit. Maki, this is such common sense information but extremely helpful to any aspiring blogger.
I love the viral mode. It’s sometimes the least expensive as well.
What?! R U serious? What the Post did (and always does) was quote someone out of context and create a story where there was none.
“Instead of reporting all the points made in the interview, they focused on fleshing out a controversial sound-bite and by doing so gave the story a more interesting or stimulating angle,” is what you said.
But they did NOT give the story “a more interesting angle” they invented the story. It was false, fake, untrue and you think that is ethical and appropriate? You mention that the inclusion of divergent points-of-view can justify such a story, but did they? Do they ever?
Seeking to deliver “juicy news-bites” and “positioning yourself as a discussion-leader ” is wholly at odds with the goal of being a responsible reporter, and blogger. Yeah, you’ll get attention all right, and a reputation for being slanted and trivial.
Did you understand Glenn Greenward’s comment? “The trashy gossip completely crowds out any discussion of anything that actually matters, allowing our government and political class generally to get away with the most extreme acts of corruption, lawbreaking and destruction…”
Let’s keep this in mind and understand that what we publish MATTERS and AFFECTS people, so it needs to be accurate, substantial and useful. If you do this consistently you will attract the right kind of attention, and create the right kind of reputation.
@ George epsilanty
I think you need to read my article more carefully before commenting. But let me clarify.
The Post didn’t invent the story. They extracted a clip n statement from an interview that Clinton gave to an editorial board for a newspaper. They didn’t put words in her mouth. It was factually accurate. She said what she said.
Read the story carefully. The Post only chose to ignore everything else she said in the interview and focused on that one statement. Look carefully and you’ll see that they didn’t claim that Clinton said Obama would be assassinated. That would be wrong, inaccurate and libelous. Instead they wrote about Obama separately and left the reader to infer themselves. This is a frame.
I fail to see how it is unethical when they even included an update for Clinton’s clarification on the original comment. Trivial, yes.. completely. But not unethical. Are you calling every major mainstream media organ or blog who has ever posted about this article, unethical or inappropriate?
I disagree completely. There are many respectable and responsible bloggers or reporters who indulge in news framing or the occasional triviality. It’s a common practice. Bloggers who are not professional journalists have an opinion, and their blog is an vessel for sharing that opinion. Being slanted is nothing wrong. Disagree all you want with them or don’t read them at all.
Positioning yourself as a discussion leader doesn’t mean you have to be an anal-retentive, factually inaccurate journalist. It’s about extracting certain points from a news source and bringing it to the forefront in order to make it relevant to your audience.
There are bad bloggers/journalists and good bloggers/journalists. News framing is a technique. How and why you use it is up to you.
And course, I understood Greenward’s comment. Did you even read what I wrote under the quote?
We agree on the importance of being accurate and substantial.
@ Eric
Good point. It’s good to read widely and research well to get multiple POVs from different sources. This is something that’ll be very helpful for bloggers and journalists.
@ Koka Sexton
It is kinda common-sense.. I think the trouble with most publishers is that they don’t have a strategy in mind.
@ Christian
Yup, relevancy is extremely important. All niche web publishers must be aware of their audience or target market’s needs or interests.
@ Wii Boy
Thanks! You’re right about being a master on a topic. When you read deeply about something or know it inside out, the spin comes naturally because you know what’s important and what’s not.
@ Barbara Ling
Thanks for the link and kind words!
So, OK, in looking at your post again I see that you’re not advocating trashy triviality, but rather saying that it’s sometimes necessary to play the game in order to build an audience. **sigh** Well, people will be who they are and will be eating chips and chocolates instead of fruit and vegetables. But please urge your readers to play this game carefully and in a balanced way.
Now re: the Clinton story. Sorry, but I think it was wrong. They knew she didn’t mean what they implied. The fact that they crafted the story to let the reader come to the conclusion that she did only gets them off the hook legally. Morally it’s bankrupt — especially for a newspaper!
The clarification from the Clinton camp should have been in the original story. That’s what good reporters do: get comments from all parties involved. Why do new media practitioners always dis old school journalists? Admittedly, some do not uphold the highest standards of journalism (viz. The Post), but the standards themselves are excellent and time-tested. Bloggers who are not professional journalists should still keep them in mind.
Finally, I want to apologize for the tone of my original reply. Looking at it again, I see it was harsher-sounding than what I had intended and that I missed part of your point. (Ordinarily I don’t reply to posts I disagree with – I’d be doing it all day and all night!
But your post was generally so intelligent and well-written that it hooked my attention.)
Is it also known as spin?
Thanks for the comment Maki. I don’t visit too many blogs but very few give you the personal touch from a response to a comment. It really does make a difference
Hey, just want you to know how much I am amazed on how you choose your topics and how you really can turn one boring topic to a a meaty one.
As what you have pointed out here, I agree with you and sometimes, when I run out of ideas what to post, I look at some print magazines related to my niche and surprise to see how they can make a particular article so interesting by combining facts (derived from different sources), photos and ads on it.
I have to agree with George. I haven’t read The Post story, but a responsible reporter would have included a clarification from the Clinton camp in the original story. If the Post did in fact focus on her statement with the intent that some of their readers draw an incorrect conclusion, how is that not unethical? As much as I’ve disliked the way Senator Clinton campaigned against Senator Obama, I didn’t like the inference by many media outlets that she was suggesting he be/would be assassinated.
Oh bite my tongue. Despite contrary comments by extreme right-wingers, most really big media is right-owned and making “liberals” look bad is their whole game. (Prove me wrong and I’ll apologize. most “liberals” got out of big media ownership a long time ago.) You know the ones I mean. The ones who think being liberal, despite the dictionary definition of “open-minded” is a sin. Heaven forbid anyone be open-minded. Where’s the profit in open-minded, level-headed thinking?
Enough babbling. Fact is, newspaper journalism has changed since the late 70s/ early 80s. It’s a whole different style now – very sensationalized – and a lot of it is probably trying to compete with new media. It’s the reason why I pretty much stopped reading most newspapers in the late 80s.
Great article. Lex, I would modify your line to the following: ” A wise man talks because he has something to say. A fool talks because he has nothing to say”. Anyway, spin sells today; but then we live in a world where sensational news is what the audience is demanding and the media is catering to the audience I presume.
I’ve read a lot of commentary on web content from the marketing and content management side and I congratulate you on being the first person I’ve seen who has been able to pinpoint a real formula for creating a viral blog post. In fact, you might try reframing (all pun intended) this post with a headline like “The Easy Way To Viral Blogging” and see how much extra mileage the power words “easy” and “viral” get you on this idea.
Nonetheless, your post here is a service to all of us who seek to find more meaningful context in this chaotic online universe. Your post makes perfect sense when you consider that ultra-successful blogs like perezhilton don’t usually break news stories, but rather they specialize in providing an entertaining frame of reference (snarky, gay, campy) that is exactly what perez’s huge audience can’t find at People.com