| The goal of this study was to assess how a selection of newspapers framed coverage of the Bush Administration's first-term proposal to institute drilling for oil and natural gas in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Content analysis was used to systematically examine 214 ANWR-related articles and editorials published between February 2001 and March 2003 in 5 strategically chosen Unites States newspapers. Reliability testing was conducted, resulting in a 61-item recording instrument that covered background information, thematic and episodic frames, consequence frames, sources, drilling perspective and tone.;The results corroborate findings from existing communication literature that criticize the quality of environmental news coverage. Although this study uncovered some promising qualities---the ANWR issue frequently appeared in the first section of newspapers and was presented, overall, without being significantly skewed to a specific pro- or anti-drilling perspective---the framing patterns illustrated overly parsimonious coverage: episodic content dominated thematic coverage; government sources were privileged over all other sources; and a scant number of potential ANWR consequences were discussed. As such, as posited by extant research, it is probable that the media content identified in this study was likely to foster among its users a nebulous, decontextualized understanding of the ANWR issue and, perhaps more importantly, an ethereal representation of how this issue can most effectively be resolved. |
