Elisabeth A Donaldson1, Joanna E Cohen1, Patricia L Truant1, Lainie Rutkow1, Norma F Kanarek1, Colleen L Barry1. 1. Elisabeth A. Donaldson is a PhD candidate with the Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD. Joanna E. Cohen is with the Department of Health, Behavior and Society, and the Institute for Global Tobacco Control, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University. Patricia L. Truant, Lainie Rutkow, and Colleen L. Barry are with the Department of Health Policy and Management, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University. Norma F. Kanarek is with the Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: We assessed news media framing of New York City's proposed regulation to prohibit the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages greater than 16 ounces. METHODS: We conducted a quantitative content analysis of print and television news from within and outside New York City media markets. We examined support for and opposition to the portion-size cap in the news coverage from its May 31, 2012, proposal through the appellate court ruling on July 31, 2013. RESULTS: News coverage corresponded to key events in the policy's evolution. Although most stories mentioned obesity as a problem, a larger proportion used opposing frames (84%) than pro-policy frames (36%). Mention of pro-policy frames shifted toward the policy's effect on special populations. The debate's most prominent frame was the opposing frame that the policy was beyond the government's role (69%). CONCLUSIONS: News coverage within and outside the New York City media market was more likely to mention arguments in opposition to than in support of the portion-size cap. Understanding how the news media framed this issue provides important insights for advocates interested in advancing similar measures in other jurisdictions.
OBJECTIVES: We assessed news media framing of New York City's proposed regulation to prohibit the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages greater than 16 ounces. METHODS: We conducted a quantitative content analysis of print and television news from within and outside New York City media markets. We examined support for and opposition to the portion-size cap in the news coverage from its May 31, 2012, proposal through the appellate court ruling on July 31, 2013. RESULTS: News coverage corresponded to key events in the policy's evolution. Although most stories mentioned obesity as a problem, a larger proportion used opposing frames (84%) than pro-policy frames (36%). Mention of pro-policy frames shifted toward the policy's effect on special populations. The debate's most prominent frame was the opposing frame that the policy was beyond the government's role (69%). CONCLUSIONS: News coverage within and outside the New York City media market was more likely to mention arguments in opposition to than in support of the portion-size cap. Understanding how the news media framed this issue provides important insights for advocates interested in advancing similar measures in other jurisdictions.
Authors: S Kremers; A Reubsaet; M Martens; S Gerards; R Jonkers; M Candel; I de Weerdt; N de Vries Journal: Obes Rev Date: 2009-06-16 Impact factor: 9.213
Authors: Nicole Larson; Cynthia S Davey; Caitlin E Caspi; Martha Y Kubik; Marilyn S Nanney Journal: J Acad Nutr Diet Date: 2016-11-23 Impact factor: 4.910
Authors: Rachel C Shelton; James Colgrove; Grace Lee; Michelle Truong; Gina M Wingood Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Michael Essman; Fernanda Mediano Stoltze; Francesca Dillman Carpentier; Elizabeth C Swart; Lindsey Smith Taillie Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-03-06 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Heide Weishaar; Lori Dorfman; Nicholas Freudenberg; Benjamin Hawkins; Katherine Smith; Oliver Razum; Shona Hilton Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Alex Elliott-Green; Lirije Hyseni; Ffion Lloyd-Williams; Helen Bromley; Simon Capewell Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 2.692