ABSTRACT
The media is one of the most powerful and influential social institutions in the 21st century. Accordingly, this chapter focuses on the concepts of media framing and agenda-setting. It uses the findings of a large-scale content analysis to demonstrate these aspects of the War on Drugs debate through newspaper content. Researchers who focus on agenda-setting are interested in how media can influence what is deemed as important by the public. In the context of mass media, framing describes how complex real-world events and issues get translated into coherent narratives presented in the media. Research combining qualitative and quantitative approaches, however, allows us to see patterns and variations in the actual content of framed media messages and their meanings. By analyzing a large dataset of discussions of the War on Drugs in print media, I identified frames and various themes within each frame. I also looked at the strategies people used to present a claim as valid or rational. I look at the variance and aspects of four major frames that appear in the debate: the fiscal frame, the freedom and justice frame, the functionalist frame, and the racial unfairness frame. I discuss how each of these frames provides a unique window into how the American public thinks and talks about drug policy with major implications for racial justice.
