Interest group representation and framing in the media: A policy area perspective

• Published date: 01 February 2020
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2009
• Date: 01 February 2020
• Author: Anne Skorkjær Binderkrantz

ACADEMIC PAPER

Interest group representation and framing in the media: A

policy area perspective

Anne Skorkjær Binderkrantz

Department of Political Science, Aarhus

University, Aarhus C, Denmark

Correspondence

Anne Skorkjær Binderkrantz, Department of

Political Science, Aarhus University, Bartholins

Allé 7, 8000. Aarhus C, Denmark.

Email: asb@ps.au.dk

This article analyzes interest group representation and framing in the news media. In

contrast to previous work, it focuses on the role of the policy area in shaping the

types of groups appearing in the media and the frames used by groups. Empirically,

the analysis maps group representation and framing across six different policy areas

in the Danish news media. It distinguishes between whether groups frame their view-

points as furthering (a) the interests of group members, (b) the interests of other spe-

cific societal groups, (c) broad economic concerns, or (d) public interests in general.

Interest group representation and framing is found to vary between these policy

areas. Some areas mainly contrast economic groups and the interests of their mem-

bers, whereas debates in other areas are more likely to be shaped by references to

beneficiaries of welfare state services or broad, public interests.

1|INTRODUCTION

A key characteristic of democracy is that different viewpoints are

heard in public debates. This facilitates the representation of citizens

and allows decision makers to be informed of a variety of perspectives

(Dahl, 1998). Organized interests serve as transmission belts for citi-

zen views into public debates and the political system. In effect, much

attention has focused on the diversity in the range of voices represen-

ted by interest groups (Binderkrantz, Chaqués-Bonafont, & Halpin,

2017; Schattschneider, 1975; Schlozman, Verba, & Brady, 2012;

Thrall, 2006). More recently, scholars have pointed to the importance

of the way groups frame their arguments in public debates—do they

emphasize the interests of their own membership or try to legitimate

their views by highlighting broader societal concerns (Binderkrantz,

2019; Boräng & Naurin, 2015; Klüver, Mahoney, & Opper, 2015)?

Western democracies have become increasingly mediatized, and

today, the news media is a crucial arena to access for organized inter-

ests (Strömbäck & Esser, 2014). Appearing in the news media comes

with the added benefit of signaling to members that a group is actively

lobbying on their behalf (Berkhout, 2013). Political communication is,

however, not only about being present but also about expressing

viewpoints in a manner that help groups achieve their goals. The

importance of arguments was acknowledged already by

Schattschneider (1975 [1969], p. 27) with his emphasis that “A public

discussion must be carried on in public terms.”Later scholars have also

argued that framing group concerns as furthering the public good may

be a desired strategy for many interest groups (Ihlen et al., 2018;

Rommetvedt, 2005).

This paper analyzes interest group representation and framing in

the news media. In contrast to previous research, the analysis centers

on the importance of the policy context for group appearances and

frame use. The insight that group mobilization depends largely on the

policy area in question is classic (Lowi, 1964; Wilson, 1980). Yet, as

argued by Grossman, “many theories of the policy process largely side-

step the question of differences across issue areas and are meant to

apply to many domains”(Grossmann, 2013, p. 66). In the interest

group field, this is reflected in the number of studies focusing on

aggregate patterns of interest group representation and communica-

tion (Binderkrantz, Christiansen, & Pedersen, 2015; Binderkrantz &

Pedersen, 2019; Boräng & Naurin, 2015; Thrall, 2006).

The premise of this paper is that policy areas differ not only in the

types of interests likely to be mobilized and gain media representation

(Lowi, 1964; Wilson, 1980) but also in the prevalence of different

frames. Some policy areas contrast the interests of organized groups

such as labor and business, and debates are likely to center on these

contrasts. Other policies —such as welfare state production—are

mainly about helping specific societal groups, and the concerns of

these groups may therefore dominate debates. Yet other areas invoke

Received: 1 April 2019 Revised: 1 July 2019 Accepted: 19 August 2019

DOI: 10.1002/pa.2009

J Public Affairs. 2020;20:e2009. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa © 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 1of10

https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2009