Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,767

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power

Entman, Robert M.·2007·Journal of Communication
DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article proposes integrating the insights generated by framing, priming, and agenda-setting research through a systematic effort to conceptualize and understand their larger implications for political power and democracy. The organizing concept is bias, that curiously undertheorized staple of public discourse about the media. After showing how agenda setting, framing and priming fit together as tools of power, the article connects them to explicit definitions of news slant and the related but distinct phenomenon of bias. The article suggests improved measures of slant and bias. Properly defined and measured, slant and bias provide insight into how the media influence the distribution of power: who gets what, when, and how. Content analysis should be informed by explicit theory linking patterns of framing in the media text to predictable priming and agenda-setting effects on audiences. When unmoored by such underlying theory, measures and conclusions of media bias are suspect.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 40 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Baker, 1994, Advertising and a democratic press
  2. Budd, 1999, Consuming environments: Television and commercial culture
  3. Entman, 2005, Constraining the politics of self-interest: How the media helped to sell the Bush tax cuts
  4. Kang, 2005, Trojan horses of race, Harvard Law Review, 118, 1489
  5. Lasswell, 1966, Politics: Who gets what, when and how
  6. Manheim, 2004, Biz-war and the out-of-power elite: The progressive-left attack on the corporation, 10.4324/9781410610379 · doi:10.4324/9781410610379
  7. Martin, 2004, Framed!: Labor and the corporate media
  8. McCombs, 2001, Framing public life, 67
  9. Pew Research Center for People and the Press. (2004). Bottom line pressures now hurting coverage, say journalists. Retrieved September 15, 2006, from http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=829.
  10. Riker, 1986, The art of political manipulation
  11. Rojecki, 1999, Silencing the opposition: Anti-nuclear movements and the media in the Cold War

Cited by

See all 1,767

Metadata

Authors
Entman, R. M.
Venue
Journal of Communication
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2007-03
Volume
57
Issue
1
Pages
163-173
ISSN
  • 0021-9916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2466
DOI
10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x
OpenAlex
W2103843299
Cited by
1,767
References
40
FWCI
112.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3106 d)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x
The paper
Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power. Journal of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00336.x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.