Abstract
A path analysis tested an agenda-building model in which three real-world indicators—price of crude oil, U.S. production and U.S. consumption of oil—would lead to discussions of oil in Congress and media coverage of oil. The model showed the level of U.S. oil production produced the strongest path coefficients. Congress and the news media formed a reciprocal relationship. The model worked better when oil was framed as an economic issue than as an environmental issue.
Keywords
Oil has been called the “lifeblood” of the U.S. economy. 1 Oil prices have a profound impact on a whole range of facets of U.S. life, from heating bills to transportation costs.
Oil is also an issue that has received a great deal of news media coverage as the price of crude oil and oil production rise and fall. These real-world indicators of the oil market can have a profound impact on the amount of attention oil receives in the news media. Oil is also an issue that draws heated debate among legislators. Increased oil production in the United States will lessen dependence on foreign oil, which would be good news for the U.S. economy. But increased use of oil pipelines is bad news for the U.S. environment.
The issue of oil and energy thus appears to be an ideal case to examine agenda building, in which public officials interact with the news media to increase the salience of issues on the news agenda.
This study investigates the issue of oil in an agenda-building framework. It proposes a model in which real-world cues from the oil industry receive news media coverage and discussions in Congress. Congressional discussions then receive additional news media coverage. Of further concern is whether the discussions or news reports frame oil as an economic or an environmental issue. The path analysis model will test whether Congressional discussions preceded news media coverage, or whether Congress reacted to news media coverage.
The current study also examines how the news media agenda is constructed. Did heated debate in Congress over the economic impact of oil production have a greater impact than discussions in Congress over the potential environmental problems with oil?
Such was the debate early in 2015, when Congress approved construction of the Keystone XL pipeline in February, hailing the construction as a boost to the economy. President Barack Obama immediately vetoed the bill, based on concerns for the environment. With oil becoming such a contentious issue, an analysis of the debate and news coverage surrounding oil is warranted.
Congressional documents recording discussions dealing with oil, and stories dealing with oil from the New York Times and Washington Post were content analyzed from January 2008 until February 2015. During this time period, crude oil prices peaked at $142.38 a barrel in July 2008 and dropped to lower than $50 a barrel in February 2009 and February 2015.
Literature Review
Agenda Building
Many studies have looked at agenda setting at the first and second level. At the first level, agenda setting posits that the salience of an issue in the news media influences how important the public will perceive an issue. At the second level, news media influence attributes of an object in the news—whether the attributes are factual or attitudinal—which ultimately influence how the public views the object.
Agenda building takes the transferal of issue salience one step further. Agenda building is a theoretical area that explores the role of various actors in setting the agenda. Agenda-building research has been conducted on a wide range of issues including terrorism, 2 health care reform, 3 perceptions of other countries 4 and drug abuse. 5
Traditionally, agenda-building literature explored relations between news media, the public and a third actor, such as the president. For example, Johnson et al. 6 found drug abuse incidents influenced the amount of coverage the media devoted to the issue. News media coverage of drug abuse in turn influenced President Richard Nixon’s policies on drug abuse. Although Kiousis, Laskin and Kim 7 examined the role of congressional representatives in influencing the salience and attributes of issues, they noted that little research had been conducted on Congress’ ability to set the media agenda.
Since the premise of agenda building rests on examining the transfer of salience between at least three agendas, an important component of agenda-building research lies in determining the direction of influence. Therefore, studies employing the agenda-building theoretical framework must utilize appropriate methods to determine the agenda(s) from which salience is transferred.
One such technique of understanding the direction of the transfer of salience from three actors is called path analysis. Path analysis has been used to examine a wide array of issues and relationships. For example, Johnson, Wanta and Boudreau 8 employed path analysis to examine the influence of four different presidents, news media and the public. Although they determined that each president influenced news media coverage of the same issue to different extents, their findings determined that the president has at least as much power as the news media in influencing public concern for the issue of drug abuse. Similarly, it was through path analysis that Wanta and Kalyango 9 revealed that terrorism incidents in Africa increased news media coverage of African terrorism, which then led to increased funding for anti-terrorism policies in Africa. Furthermore, Kiousis et al. 10 found public relations counselors influenced the news media coverage by decreasing the negative attributes that the public perceived about foreign nations. Clearly, path analysis is a robust tool for examining the influence of an actor on the news media agenda.
This article’s purpose is employing path analysis to examine agenda building as it pertains to congressional communication and the oil industry. It examines the influence of economic indicators on news media coverage and congressional communications. While few mass communications studies have examined the impact of economic indicators in the energy industry on media coverage, other disciplines have shown that news media coverage affects the public’s perception of risk as well as policy makers’ perceptions of public opinion. 11
Congressional Agenda
Political scientists have examined the ability of Congress to set the national agenda in relation to the president. Rutledge and Larsen Price 12 analyzed six issues over the course of 50 years, and their results indicate that Congress’ attention to certain issues, including the environment, does not impact the presidential agenda. In fact, for all issues except international relations, the president had a clear impact on the congressional agenda. For the issue of international relations, however, a reciprocal relationship was discerned. Yet statistical analyses conducted by Rutledge and Larsen Price 13 show that the president’s influence over the congressional agenda by far exceeds the congressional influence of the president’s agenda. Therefore, Congress’ ability to influence the national agenda may be more potent with regard to some issues than others.
Moreover, political scientists have examined governmental public records to examine where the public agenda was most accurately represented. 14 Jones, Larsen Price and Wilkerson 15 found that the government most effectively responded to the public’s priorities where costs and transactions occur at a higher cost. Even so, some public concerns increase policy attention to certain issues—including the economy and the environment.
Combining these two issues, Delshad 16 examined the influence of various actors on one another in the agenda setting of the biofuels issue. Once a bill is introduced, congressional communications about biofuels increase and the salience of the issue in the presidential and news media agenda decrease. Furthermore, Delshad 17 found that food prices, and the price of corn in particular, affect news media coverage of biofuels. In her study, Delshad 18 noted that “economic indicators had the most sizeable agenda-setting impact on the media.” 19 This is a precedent for the inclusion of economic indicators in research determining the direction of influence in the agenda-setting process.
When McCombs and Shaw 20 first established the agenda-setting effect, they showed a transfer of salience of issues from the news media agenda to the public agenda. In subsequent decades, Golan and Wanta 21 determined that factual and attitudinal attributes linked to objects on the news media agenda were being transferred to the public agenda. While framing research is concerned with dominant attributes of objects in the news media, framing research is not the only theoretical area concerned with attributes of objects. 22
For example, the salience of objects and their attributes has become a part of the study of agenda building. 23 Kiousis and Wu 24 argued that public relations professionals frame issues, and their findings showed support for second-level agenda building. In other words, public relations professionals can influence news media coverage of an object and, consequently, public opinion of it. Thus, framing of issues is an important component of agenda-building research.
In an analysis of data from 59 years, Tan and Weaver 25 compared the news media agenda, the public agenda and the congressional policy agenda. Their findings reveal that Congress’ relationship with the news media is stronger than either’s relationship with the public. Furthermore, Tan and Weaver 26 found a causal relationship in the flow of information from Congress to the news media on defense, but they also found that news media and Congress have a reciprocal relationship on international issues.
This study extends research in this area by exploring the role of Congress in setting the news media attention with regard to the oil industry. Furthermore, this study examines the way in which the oil issue is framed as an economic or environmental issue.
Framing Issues
The nature of some issues weakens their agenda-setting effects. Yagade and Dozier 27 found that concrete issues are easier to imagine and therefore have stronger agenda-setting effects. However, abstract issues are harder to imagine and thus have weaker agenda-setting effects.
Agenda-building research has examined the transfer of salience of frame across three actors’ agendas. For example, an analysis of the issues used by President George W. Bush as a rationale for the Iraqi War revealed that not all issues were equally influential. 28 Regardless, Fahmy et al.’s 29 findings demonstrated that the agenda-building effect can occur in a linear fashion, acting as “a pumping mechanism—of influence extending down from the White House” 30 through the news media and then reaching the public.
However, it is important to note that news media are not monolithic. For example, Meraz 31 found that moderate and liberal blogs shared the same subframes as the traditional news media while conservative blogs did not. Furthermore, Tan and Weaver’s 32 examination of the congressional agenda between 1946 and 2004 showed a decrease in the ability of news media to impact the public agenda. Since the “media universe has radically changed,” 33 the greater number of media outlets “may reduce any overall uniform media impact.” 34
Regardless, research shows that elite news media set the agenda for the blogosphere. 35 In addition, Wanta and Hu 36 have shown that newspapers have the strongest agenda-setting effects. Therefore, this study examines two elite newspapers in examining the influence on framing oil as an economic or environmental issue by Congress, news media and economic indicators. These two particular frames were chosen because of Watson’s 37 findings that journalists’ attitudes toward the oil industry are predicted best by their environmental and political ideologies. Furthermore, journalists who saw the profession as “populist mobilizers” 38 are more likely to support regulation of the oil industry.
Hypotheses and Research Question
This study tests the model seen in Figure 1. The model predicts that real-world indicators of the oil industry—namely, the cost of crude oil, level of oil production in the United States and the level of oil consumption in the United States—will give salience cues to Congress and the news media. Both Congress and news media will increase their attention to the oil issue. News media also will devote coverage to Congress’ discussion of the issue. Based on the model, the following hypotheses and research question are posed:
Proposed Model of Agenda Building for the Issue of Oil
Oil prices are a highly salient issue for U.S. consumers. Therefore, when oil prices increase, both Congress and news media should react by devoting more attention to the issue of oil. Thus, Congress will discuss oil more, and news media will increase coverage.
Consumption is an indication of importance. Thus, when consumption increases, Congress and news media should react with increased attention.
Production is also an indication of importance. A decrease in production would indicate a problem in the oil industry, causing Congress and news media to react.
Congress is an important source of information for news media. Thus, the more Congress discusses an issue—in this case oil—the more news media will cover this discussion.
In the case here, economics is a more concrete issue. Americans can picture in their heads problems with oil because they understand high oil prices can lead to higher prices at the gas pump. Americans would have more difficulty picturing environmental problems with the oil because environmental issues are more long term. Americans may have a more difficult time picturing environmental problems with an oil pipeline because most people have never seen a pipeline. Thus, the economic impact of oil is more concrete than the environment. However, while the differing impact of concrete versus abstract issues has been demonstrated on the public agenda, this has not been examined in agenda building between news media and public officials.
Method
Measures of the German oil supply were used as economic indicators by Kepplinger and Roth 39 to test the economic and mediated realities of oil politics in the 1970s. Since this study examines the U.S. oil industry, only measures of the U.S. oil supply and oil consumption, in thousand barrels per day, were obtained from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (2015a, 2015b). 40 Furthermore, the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil price, which “serves as reference or ‘marker’ for pricing number of other crude streams and which is traded in the domestic spot market at Cushing, Oklahoma,” 41 was included in the study due to its significance in determining the price of other kinds of crude products around the world.
Measures of congressional communication were generated from the U.S. Government’s Publishing Office. 42 A total of 7,880 documents were located that mention oil and the economy separately from oil and environment. A total of 2,450 articles were located that mention oil and both the economy and the environment. A separate variable was later computed to eliminate duplicates by subtracting the 2,450 items from the total of 7,880 items. The resulting net number of congressional communications was 5,430.
Finally, measures of news media coverage were determined by LexisNexis Academic. In mass communication, the New York Times and the Washington Post are often examined for their agenda-setting effects due to their elite status. 43 Therefore, 16,741 stories dealing with oil were generated from the New York Times. Of these, 12,031 dealt with oil and the economy while 4,710 dealt with oil and environmental issues. Similarly, 10,942 stories were generated from the Washington Post. Of these stories, 7,690 dealt with the economy and 3,252 dealt with the environment. To ensure high quality of data, random articles were assessed to ensure the data’s face validity. In some cases, the central focus of the economic stories dealt with oil prices; however, in other instances, oil’s economic impact on Japanese fishing was mentioned tangentially.
Data were gathered between January 2008 and February 2015. This time frame was chosen due to the drastic fluctuations of oil prices at this time, with crude oil prices peaking at $142.38 a barrel in July 2008 and dropping to lower than $50 a barrel in February 2009 and February 2015.
To test for relationships between real-world indicators, congressional discussions and news media coverage, a series of path analyses were computed. Path analysis has been used successfully by other researchers in mass communication. 44 Based on regression analyses, path coefficients determine whether the knowledge of one variable allows researchers to predict a second variable. To test for time order, or whether Congress was reacting to news media coverage, or whether Congress was leading news media coverage, the congressional and news media data were staggered by one month. Here, observations for each month of news media coverage were compared with congressional discussions a month later. A significant path coefficient would suggest news media coverage impacting congressional discussions. Similarly, an additional analysis compared each month of congressional discussions with news media coverage of a month later. A significant path coefficient would suggest congressional discussions were influencing news media coverage since the measure of congressional discussions preceded media coverage in the analysis.
Results
Table 1 shows the B path coefficients for the model in this study. Regarding the hypotheses,
Path Coefficients of Variables
p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Model of Agenda Building for the Issue of Oil Based on Results
Research question 1 asked whether the results would differ based on whether oil was framed as an economic or environmental issue. All significant path coefficients found here were larger for economic frames than for environmental frames. This is not surprising since the three real-world indicators used here (crude oil prices, oil production and oil consumptions) were all related to economic factors.
Based on these results, the agenda-building model seen in Figure 1 needs to be slightly modified. The new model appears in Figure 2.
In the first stage of the model, real-world indicators of oil will be associated with discussion levels in Congress. As Table 1 shows, this was clearly the case with the level of oil production. As oil production in the United States decreased, discussions of oil both in terms of economics and the environment increased. The relationship was stronger for economic news frames. In addition, as the cost of crude oil rose, discussions in Congress also increased, but only discussions of oil as it related to the economy. U.S. oil consumption was not associated with discussions in Congress for either frame.
A slightly different trend emerged for real-world indicators and news media coverage. Here, oil production again showed the strongest relationship with news media coverage. As oil production decreased, news media coverage of oil increased both as an economic issue and as an environmental issue. As with congressional discussions, the relationship between oil production and news media coverage was strongest for economic framed news reports. Unlike the congressional results, however, oil consumption and news media coverage showed a significant association. The higher the level of oil consumption in the United States, the more the news media covered oil as an economic issue. The cost of crude oil was not related to news media coverage.
Overall, then, four of six path analyses examining real-world indicators and economic frames in Congress and news media were statistically significant. Three paths for real-world indicators and environmental frames in Congress and news media were statistically significant. All six path coefficients for economic frames were stronger than the coefficients for the environmental frames. Thus, the model worked better for economic frames.
Discussion
Results indicate stronger path coefficients for news coverage of oil as it relates to economy than environment. This is consistent with previous research that explains that newspapers in areas affected by oil spills tend to cover the economic impact of oil spills after a brief period in which a description of the environmental incident is covered. 45 While news media cover oil as an environmental issue, news media cover the economic aspect of the oil industry in many instances.
Oil costs caused Congress to talk about the economy but not the environment. Maugeri 46 suggests that when the WTI price of crude oil is at $50 it is a bargain because “if other commonly used products were also priced at the barrel, they would outstrip—sometimes dramatically—the price of crude oil.” 47 For example, other commonly used items would cost $4,542/barrel for Tabasco sauce, $426/barrel for Perrier’s sparkling water, $410 for Budweiser products and $119 for a Coca-Cola products. 48 In other words, low oil prices enable businesses to operate effectively and may allow government to budget governmental affairs and regulate businesses differently than they would otherwise. However, how much oil was consumed did not affect the congressional agenda.
While oil consumption did not affect the congressional agenda, it affected the news media agenda—an important finding considering the consumption of oil is related to pollution. One such explanation for this phenomenon is that journalists’ ideologies do not support the oil industry. Watson 49 found that journalists’ personal ideologies were reflected in their work in covering the 2010 BP oil spill. The findings are also consistent with Anderson’s finding 50 that news media are more likely to report the “prospective pursuit of alternative energy sources” in an effort to create distance from “struggle among news actors” when covering of oil spills. 51
News media did not cover the cost of crude oil, but oil consumption and production appeared in news coverage. This is consistent with Grunig, 52 who argued that “media and business are interested in different issues” (p. 44). Grunig 53 observed that journalists are more likely to discuss how oil prices affect public affairs rather than to discuss “prices and quality of products” (p. 44).
Limitations and Future Research
While a clear trend emerged for economic frames in the data, several limitations should be noted. The content analysis here included only the frequency of congressional discussions and news media coverage. The context was outside the focus of this exploratory study. Future research should conduct an analysis that examines the content more in-depth. In addition, the agenda-building framework previously examined the U.S. president, news media coverage and public opinion. Because this study is a longitudinal analysis across more than seven years, it was impossible to include a measure of public opinion.
Overall, oil prices affect businesses internationally and in every sector of the economy. Increased understanding of how oil prices affect political, social and economic issues can yield interesting public affairs news that do not receive coverage at the moment because journalists do not pay attention to the price of oil. The fact that the congressional agenda deals with oil prices but the news media’s agenda does not speaks to the importance of oil prices being disconnected from journalistic values.
Future research should further examine what factors are at the root of this trend.
Additional research is also needed to examine the role of news sources. The measurements of oil industry were only in terms of economic factors. Sources within the oil industry may also impact news media coverage and congressional discussion. For example, Chang 54 studied auto elites’ influence on the news media agenda on trade in the automotive industry. Similar research can examine the influence of oil industry corporations on the news media agenda.
Thus, additional research is needed to get a clearer understanding of the complex relationships between the news media, public and important news sources.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank the economist, Dr. Hamid Reza Baradaran Shoraka, for his helpful comments on this paper.
Editor’s Note
This article was accepted for publication under the editorship of Sandra H. Utt and Elinor Kelley Grusin.