Sticking to the status quo with a twist: Western media representations of fiscal negotiations during the Greek economic crisis

Abstract

In a volatile global economic system, the need for comprehensive media portrayal of economic crises intensifies. Crises expose the deficiencies of existing financial systems and present opportunities for structural change, but media coverage consistently promotes hegemonic structures. During the Great Recession of 2008, media narratives of Greek and foreign newspapers represented Greece's debt crisis as a national problem rather than a systemic problem. This study examines newspaper coverage of the Greek economic crisis in the summer of 2015 to explore whether the lack of comprehensive coverage persisted in the aftermath of the Great Recession. A qualitative content analysis of legacy newspapers suggests the press has become more rigorous in interpreting the underlying mechanisms of a crisis instead of solely covering episodic events, but with a caveat: most analysis comes from editorials. The findings indicate that financial systems are portrayed as unmalleable institutions.

Keywords

Media framing crisis coverage neoliberal framing media comparison QDA Miner

The media inform people about crucial events whose representation can shape public perceptions of political reality (McCombs and Shaw, 1972: 176). Media influence intensifies in times of crisis (Vliegenthart and Damstra, 2019). Even though economic crises expose the collapsibility of existing systems and the need for either recuperation or replacement of the existing order (Gupta, 2015: 293), possibilities for the latter are systematically excluded from media coverage in lieu of hegemonic narratives (Mylonas, 2015). Coverage of the Greek economic crisis underplayed the perspective of ordinary citizens and mostly depended on the views of elite financial institutions (Doudaki et al., 2016), a pattern that applies to the representation of poor nations under economic crises (Durham, 2007). This investigation of media frames in the aftermath of the 2008 Great Recession explores whether Western media patterns of eschewing alternative narratives have persisted.

This exploratory qualitative content analysis of 114 articles by The New York Times and the Guardian examines how legacy newspapers framed the summer 2015 fiscal negotiations between Greece and its creditors. This period offers a distinct opportunity to reflect on whether news coverage patterns of the 2008 crisis persisted because it is a crisis in itself but at the same time an indispensable chapter of the 2008 saga. As this study considers the implications of crisis coverage for the perceptions of global audiences, it uses the Guardian and the New York Times because they are legacy media with international appeal (Riordan, 2014). Additionally, the Guardian has established an innovative social audit process to monitor its news coverage (Hossain and Jaehnig, 2011: 232), which is compelling to compare with the coverage of the NYT that does not use an equivalent social responsibility function. Furthermore, investigating the United Kingdom and the United States, countries with similar media systems and economic regimes but varying stakes in the crisis, allows this examination to focus on differences that are more specific to newspapers based in powerful states that are not members of the European Union or question its importance.

Media portrayal of international news may determine the magnitude of salience cues media consumers receive (Wanta and Hu, 1993). Prior studies suggest Western media portrayed the Great Recession through episodic frames that concentrated on the threat of crisis contagion from Greece to other European countries, represented Greek politicians and citizens as “unruly” and “irredeemable,” and projected austerity measures proposed by the troika—the European Central Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the European Commission—as the main solution to the crisis (Tracy, 2012: 17). Before the Great Recession, major newspapers omitted investigative stories that would have directly confronted “powerful institutions about basic business practices” (Starkman, 2009). Journalists generally avoid questioning the bigger picture of a capitalist system that benefits the wealthy over the needy (Usher, 2017: 367).

Coverage of economic crises may affect perceptions of the economic system and its international actors, but neoliberal policies are consistent with the status quo. This becomes especially problematic considering that people display a motivated tendency to perceive the status quo as reasonable and desirable (Kay et al., 2009). Furthermore, public perceptions are shaped through intuitive biases and economic interests, which generally reflect cultural values (Kasperson et al., 1988: 178). Sometimes risk events, such as economic crises, engender massive public reactions that have significant social and economic impacts. Risk events can boost public perception of risk and precipitate related risk behavior (p. 178–9). Communication studies have shown that “the symbols present in messages are key factors in triggering the attention of potential receivers and in shaping their decoding processes (p. 180).” The information system may amplify risk perception by intensifying or enervating signals about the presented event and by filtering part of the signals that characterize a risk (p. 181).

Most media studies on news representation of the Euro crisis explored European media (Damstra and Vliegenthart, 2018; Doudaki et al., 2016; Lichtenstein and Eilders, 2019; Nienstedt et al. 2015) while some elaborated on the perspectives of American legacy media (Tracy, 2012), the Greek press (Doudaki et al., 2016), or international magazines (Bickes et al., 2014). However, the coverage of the crisis from a perspective of legacy newspapers based outside of the EU has been mostly overlooked. Narratives by these newspapers matter because people tend to perceive risk events in unfamiliar systems, such as foreign nations, as issues of great concern, especially when the risk “is not well understood, not controllable, or not completely managed, thus implying that further (and possibly worse) mishaps are likely” (Kasperson et al., 1988: 186). This study intends to fill this gap by investigating the differences between legacy newspapers with international audiences that are not directly involved in the crisis.

This paper examines news stories right before and after the July 2015 referendum that asked Greeks if they wanted to adhere to stricter austerity policies, a period when media coverage of the Greek affairs flourished. The study explores differences in economic crisis coverage between the Guardian and the NYT. I investigate how these newspapers portrayed responsibility attribution for the parties involved (RQ1) as well as Europe's systemic deficiencies and past treatment to the economic crisis (RQ2). Newspapers need to be cognizant of the underlying mechanisms that shape the events they cover and of the ways proposed solutions facilitate or deteriorate crisis outcomes over time. This study argues that newspapers ignore systemic issues, which has implications for public perceptions of economic crises.

Literature review

Theoretical framework: Framing

Framing information in a certain context affects public perceptions of selected issues (Coombs, 2006; Kahneman and Tversky, 1984; Neuman et al., 1992). Framing enhances the salience of certain aspects of reality in a way that promotes “a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation” (Entman, 1993: 53). The selected media content (frame) becomes an influential factor in the public's judgment and inference making (Kahneman and Tversky, 1984). News frames are conceptual tools in which media and citizens depend on to comprehend, interpret, and evaluate information (Neuman et al., 1992). Through selection of what to include or/and exclude from a story, the media limit or define the story's meaning, therefore shaping the public's interpretations of the story (An and Gower, 2009).

Prior studies have demonstrated the impact of framing for public perceptions and policy preferences (i.e., Bos et al., 2016; Page and Shapiro, 1992). For example, the frame of news stories affects attitudes toward immigrants while the valence of news articles affects willingness to support collective action (Bos et al., 2016). Exposure to news frames triggers emotional response while the influence of news frames varies depending on the tone of their valence (p. 821). Page and Shapiro (1992) also detected media effects on Americans’ policy preferences (p. 355). In coverage of policy reforms to prolong employment of older workers, the frame against activating such policies was more pronounced in conservative rather than progressive European newspapers, especially during the aftermath of the Eurozone crisis (Kroon et al., 2017). The importance of framing heightens in times of crisis when the media tend to use the responsibility frame to attribute culpability to the actors involved in a crisis (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000), which is “an event for which people seek causes and make attributions” (Coombs and Holladay, 2004: 97).

News coverage of crises and economic regimes

In economic crises, media representations tend to focus on elite sources and legitimize fiscal austerity measures promoting certain economic policies (Ojala and Harjuniemi, 2016: 414). In its representation of the 1997 Thai currency crisis, The Financial Times relied on elite sources to serve an equally elite readership (Durham, 2007). The Times relied on IMF, advocating “dominant fiscal policies based on the free market liberalization of smaller state economies” (p. 57). When it comes to economic regime coverage, Starr (2004) posited that the English news magazine The Economist perpetuated utopian views of the economic future by alluding to continuous economic growth and prosperous prospects for the poor. Variation in media portrayals can be attributed to sources and newspaper types (Kroon et al., 2016). These trends are consistent with media coverage of the Greek economic crisis and patterns of business and economic news coverage.

While this paper does not exclusively focus on the business sections of legacy newspapers, it is important to examine the perspectives of business journalism to acquire an insight on how the business articles under study are informed by the professional attitudes of business journalists. Business journalism uses elite sources, inadvertently adopting their views on the normalcy of status quo. When economic crises arise, business journalists are scrutinized for lacking the insight to predict looming economic dysfunctions, so they become more critical of the financial sector (Fahy et al., 2010). Business journalists are often accused of eschewing the “watchdog” function of the press (Tambini, 2010). Financial journalists can shape public opinion (Doyle, 2006) but they mostly rely on financial professionals, government officials, and less frequently on academics (Fahy, et al., 2010). Preference to news sources varies among different outlets (Lasorsa and Reese, 1990). Financial news typically addresses specific parts of the public like investors and businesspeople (Schiffrin, 2011). Journalists report on day-to-day advancements, which could compromise their ability to act as watchdogs. The interests of the business press may not be perfectly aligned with the public's interests as the former is immersed in the corporate subculture it covers. It is “far easier for news bureaucracies to accept ever-narrowing frames of discourse, frames forcefully pushed by industry” (Schiffrin, 2011: 53). This relationship between media and corporations prompts journalists to report from an investor's rather than a citizen's perspective. What could benefit investors does not necessarily benefit citizens and vice versa. Economic coverage is particularly important in times of economic turbulence, especially regarding how the world perceives countries in economic distress.

The Greek crisis

In October 2009, Greece revealed its cavernous deficit, discrediting bogus statistics (Angelos, 2015) it had been using to keep borrowing in order to fund its unsustainable welfare state (Bandow, 2017). Prime Minister George Papandreou sought help from IMF and the EU, which were given complete access to the Greek affairs. They found a chaotic public administration and an economy debilitated by languid productivity and an “artificially strong currency” (Politico). The creditors closely enforced and monitored the progress of fiscal austerity measures to overhaul the tax code and public administration in order to revitalize economic competitiveness. Despite years of oversight and austerity measures, Greece's debt still exceeds 180 percent of its GDP over a decade after the beginning of the crisis (The Greek Economy, 2020), placing it among the most indebted states in history. The growing debt required reforms in public finances, but Greece entered a circle of borrowing to cover the substantial budget gap (Little, 2012) while Greek banks entered a circle of excessive lending. The markets did not foresee the risk of default (Little, 2012) while Greece could borrow at very low interest rates under the authority of the monetary union.

The crisis plagued an already devastated economy, but austerity measures were counterproductive. Between 2008 and 2011, youth unemployment skyrocketed from 18.6 to 40.1%. Between 2007 and 2010, the national debt rose from €239.4 billion to €328.6 billion, or from 105.4% to 142.8% of the country's GDP. In 2010, industrial production in Greece fell by 8% (Kentikelenis et al., 2011 p. 1457). In the summer of 2015, after years of counterproductive fiscal austerity, the Greek government of the leftist party Syriza and Greece's creditors entered negotiations to secure that Greece would continue being funded as long as it agreed to enforce fresh austerity measures that would further rupture the devastated social web. On the other side, Greece requested a haircut on its colossal debt, a proposal the International Monetary Fund eventually insisted was necessary. When the negotiations reached to an impasse, Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras called for a referendum in which the Greek people rejected the imposition of new austerity measures.

Coverage of systemic issues and attribution of responsibility

Greek and foreign mainstream media adopted hegemonic explanations by portraying the crisis as a national and character problem rather than a global and systemic problem (Mylonas, 2014, 2015). The European press linked the structure of the Eurozone currency to the origins of the crisis only in 21% of the articles that discussed the root of the crisis (Nienstedt et al., 2015). Among the only countries that presented the structure of the euro system as the main cause were the UK, which is not a member of the Eurozone, and France (p. 27). Furthermore, news outlets from eight Eurozone states deployed neoliberal framing in “problem definitions” and “treatment recommendations” (Ojala and Harjuniemi, 2016) while American media “legitimized [neoliberal] proposals of economic austerity as reparation” (Tracy, 2012: 513). The UK press offered a large amount of coverage in comparison to the bigger members of the Eurozone, which Nienstedt and colleagues (2015) attributed to the role of the country as a consequential financial center and its internal debate about its EU membership (p. 39). In Greece, mainstream media also deployed frames that promoted neoliberal policies as the solution to the country's defects (Doudaki et al. 2016: 440). Frames across Greek newspapers differed, but the debate around the memoranda—the financial agreements between Greece and its creditors—was uniform (Kostopoulos, 2020).

Convergence of crisis coverage implies silencing of alternative voices that could challenge existing crisis frames. Glykos and Voutyras (2016) argued that the rhetoric of media and political elites has contributed to “framing responses to the Greek economic crisis in patriotic terms, a frame subsequently adopted by groups from across the entire political spectrum.” Mainstream media reproduce hegemonic frames of the crisis and austerity without considering the possibility of alternative narratives (Mylonas, 2015). As the media assume neoliberal frames, they tend to ignore Keynesian policy frames as a viable alternative solution to crises (Sklias, Roukanas and Maris, 2014). Keynesian economics suggests that in times of economic turbulence, the government should increase public spending and reduce taxes to stimulate the economy (Keynesian economics, 2018). Neoliberal framing permeated magazines too (Mylonas, 2015). Bickes et al. (2014) found differences in the Greek crisis coverage between the British The Economist and the American TIME (p. 440). The former's coverage expressed a persistent skeptical attitude toward the basic systemic principles of the EU instead of the structure of individual countries’ systems. Conversely, TIME accentuated the frame of conflict and the lack of solidarity among European countries (pp. 440–441). In terms of volume of crisis coverage, Dutsch broadsheet newspapers dedicated more articles to the crisis than tabloids while financial newspapers devoted more articles than broadsheet newspapers (Damstra and Vliegenthart, 2018: 999).

When it comes to attribution of responsibility, the media emphasized negative character traits of the Greeks (RQ1). The Greek media portrayed the country as unable to solve its own problems and in need of external help by the troika (Doudaki et al., 2016) while American media focused on “alleged character flaws and ineptitudes of [the] nation and its people” (Tracy, 2012: 513). In parallel, the German press facilitated the development of an anti-Greek sentiment along with the perception that Greeks are lazy and corrupt (Bickes et al. 2014). When the crisis spread to richer countries like Italy and Spain, crisis framing subsided. Negative representation of Greece and its citizens prompted outsiders to be more judgmental about the country's role in the economic plight (pp. 438–439). Aggressive coverage was accompanied by public demands for Greece to leave the monetary union. Even though negative coverage subsided after 2012, when more European countries became affected by the crisis, Greece retained a special position in media representation as the country that triggered the crisis and burdened the Eurozone with its financial predicament.

The literature on the Eurozone crisis has focused on European outlets (Doudaki et al., 2016; Lichtenstein and Eilders, 2019; Nienstedt et al. 2015). Specifically, most studies focused on the Greek legacy press (Doudaki et al. 2016), American legacy media outlets (Tracy, 2012), or international news magazines (Bickes et al., 2014). Scarce research focused on the differences between legacy newspapers outside of the Eurozone. Coverage by legacy newspapers and the differences in their news narratives are crucial in how non-Europeans perceived the crisis and its actors. This study attempts to cover this gap by offering a comparison between two legacy newspapers (Guardian and New York Times) with global audiences and varying stakes in the crisis as the United Kingdom at the time was questioning its role in the EU while the United States was not directly affected in comparison to European countries. Understanding framing by legacy newspapers is crucial because regional economic crises can have a global impact.

Selection of legacy newspapers

Usher (2017) partially agreed to critiques that “journalists have internalized a neoliberal economic approach to creating news” as The NYT’ journalists delved into reporting about aspects of major corporations like basic earnings reports and big market shifts (p. 369). This type of coverage implies acceptance of the financial status quo while it avoids “questioning the markets themselves (p. 369).” Other than that, I explore The NYT because it is a global agenda setter (Achbar, 1994) and one of the top three highest-circulated daily papers in the US (Pew Research Center, 2018). On the other side, The Guardian in London established an innovative social audit process to monitor and evaluate all aspects of its organizational activities (Hossain and Jaehnig, 2011: 232), including news coverage, environmental impact, and the response of stakeholders such as employees, readers, and advertisers (p. 234). The newspaper has been publishing the report titled “Living our values” since 2003. During the summer of 2015, The Guardian wrote 560 stories on the Greek economic crisis. Considering the social audit process, I expected The Guardian to attribute more blame to the institutions’ structural inefficiencies and failed treatments and The NYT to ascribe less responsibility to systemic issues and counterintuitive treatments (RQs 1-2). The Guardian's social audit function is considered a credible response to criticism against the ambiguity of social responsibility of media companies (Jaehnig and Onyebadi, 2011). However, there is a dearth of studies explicitly exploring differences between media with rigorous social audit with news outlets that do not have a clearly laid-out function like this. The only comparative study found was one that compared the Guardian with a Bengali news outlet that also undertook a social responsibility (Hossain and Jaehnig, 2011).

I assumed the frames in covering the Greek economic crisis will be similar between the London-based The Guardian and The NYT given similarities in journalism practices between the UK and the US (Besova and Cooley, 2009), but would differ in matters affected by The Guardian's social audit function. I analyzed newspapers because “the printed word is better suited to providing context and analysis” (Hamilton, p. 302). Finally, I examine legacy newspapers because of their prestige in covering financial and business news, as well as their strong tradition of foreign news coverage (Hamilton, 2009). I argue that in the case of covering the Greek economic crisis, the press intensified signals of responsibility to Greek actors and partially filtered signals that would address underlying systemic ineffectiveness. Therefore, I expect my analysis to show The NYT and The Guardian ascribed more responsibility for the crisis to Greek actors and downplayed the Eurozone's systemic inefficiencies (RQs 1&2).

RQ1: How did The Guardian and The New York Times portray attribution of responsibility for lack of cooperation during the 2015 fiscal negotiations between Greece and the other Eurozone states?

RQ2: How did The Guardian and The NYT portray Europe's systemic deficiencies and past treatment to the economic crisis?

Methodology

I performed a computer-assisted content analysis using QDA Miner and WordStat, a computerized textual analysis software that can process a large amount of data that would be much harder to code by human coders. QDA Miner and WordStat have been used to analyze network TV news coverage of the 2004 presidential campaigns in the context of framing theory and attribute agenda-setting (Lowry and Xie, 2007: 5).

I collected the data from LexisNexis, using the terms “Greece AND economic crisis OR financial crisis OR debt crisis.” I analyzed a period of 25 days before and after a July 5 of 2015 referendum on whether Greeks would accept a new memorandum that would entail fresh austerity measures and the Greek government's capitulation to those measures. I chose that period because the referendum prompted the media to cover Greece more. A LexisNexis search yielded 421 articles from The Guardian and 246 from The NYT for the period I examined. Since the population of articles was different in each newspaper, I selected every seventh story from the Guardian and every fourth story from the NYT to ensure I reach a threshold sample of about 60 stories per newspaper. The numbers four and seven were randomly selected using a random number generator. I started from the beginning of each data set as the stories were downloaded by LexisNexis in random order. This practice is consistent with data reduction used in content analyses (Tracy, p. 517). I manually excluded stories that only mentioned the Greek crisis in passing instead of including the subject in their lead. Then, I inserted my sample into QDA Miner and created a dictionary based on words used by previous researchers who examined coverage of the Greek crisis (Doudaki et al., 2016). QDA Miner found all the dictionary words in the articles that constituted my sample and presented them in order from the most frequent to the least frequent terms. These terms represented actors involved in the Greek crisis, such as citizens, economists, government officials and international institutions. QDA Miner presented all the terms, so I had to manually go through a sample of over 5000 references to find and exclude the terms that referred to actors but did not attribute responsibility to them. Essentially, I read all the paragraphs that included my dictionary terms and weeded out references irrelevant to my task. For example, the sentence “Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras may have won a victory at home on Sunday as the Greek people dealt a resounding ‘no’ to European austerity policies” mentions the Greek Prime Minister, but it neither attributes any kind of responsibility to him nor portrays him as attributing responsibility to someone else. On the contrary, the sentence “Mr Tsipras, who was elected this year on a platform of challenging the austerity policies that have defined the European response to seven years of economic trouble, has resisted some of the demands for additional cuts and accused the creditors -- the Eurozone countries, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund -- of humiliating the Greek people and imposing excessive hardship” represents the Greek prime minister as attributing blame to his country's creditors. In the end of this procedure, I had less than 2000 relevant references.

After this phase, I electronically extracted the relevant terms from QDA Miner to a Word document. The Guardian sample filled 40 pages of references and The New York Times sample filled 32. I manually went through the document to determine framing categories and develop themes within where applicable. I concluded with four framing categories and 14 themes (see Results and Appendix B). After constructing these categories and themes, I analyzed the data and compared between the two newspapers to find out how they covered the events individually and comparatively. In the analysis, I synthesized the references in each newspaper to create framing narratives. The frames were operationalized as themes based on generic frames (i.e., attribution of responsibility) (An and Gower, 2009) and an a priori codebook (Doudaki et al. 2016), which is a traditional approach in framing studies (Nicholls and Culpepper, 2021). Frame identification depends on interpretation of the issue at hand and its causes (Entman, 1993), the internal coherence of each frame (Gerring, 2001), and the level of differentiation between an identified frame and other prospective frames (Roberts et al., 2014), a combination of factors that was also used by Nicholls and Culpepper (2021: 166). In this study, frames were identified through the detection of topics. While the use of topics as frames is a matter of debate among framing scholars, there are consequential studies that have interpreted topics as frames (p. 168).

When it comes to framing studies of crisis coverage, some have been informed by grounded theory by extracting frames during their content analysis instead of basing these analyses on preconstructed frames (Damstra and Vliegenthart, 2018). This paper assumed the grounded approach of inductive framing. Still, the questions asked during the analysis were informed by observations of existing studies (i.e., responsibility frame) (Doudaki et al., 2016). Previous studies explored frames by asking questions about how the media framed the roots of crisis as well as the treatments that were applied (Doudaki et al., 2016; Nienstedt et al., 2015; Tracy, 2012). This study contributes to the theoretical framework of media framing of crises by extending existing observations to legacy media located in countries with different stakes in the crisis but similar media systems and economic backgrounds.

Results

The results suggested four general frames by The Guardian and The NYT: the Greek government's dissatisfaction with creditors, disappointment of creditors with the Greek government, European systemic deficiencies, and the solutions the creditors offered that exacerbated the country's economic condition instead of alleviating it—wrong treatment to the crisis. Overall, the British newspaper published 10 news stories in its business section, 11 stories in its world news section, six pieces in the comment is free section, one story in its politics section, and one piece in its letters to the editor section (see Table 1). On the other side, the American newspaper included 12 news stories in its foreign desk section, four stories in its business/financial desk section, three stories in its dealbook section, one story in its book review desk section, as well as two op-eds, one editorial, one letter, and one opinion piece (see Table 1). This section starts with brief overview of frames and references and moves on comparing the coverage between the two outlets.

Table 1.

Number of articles per section.

Number of articles per news section
Section	Guardian	NYT
Business	10	7
World news	11	12
Comment is free	6
Politics	1
Letters to editor	1	1
Book review		1
Op-ed		2
Editorial		1
Opinion		1

As expected, both newspapers attributed blame to both sides by representing each side's grievances toward the other (RQ1). Finding that newspapers attribute blame to crisis actors was not surprising since blame attribution is among the most common frames media deploy to portray crises (Semetko and Valkenburg, 2000). Furthermore, I expected both newspapers would adhere to elitist points of view by mainly portraying the viewpoints of major financial institutions like the IMF and the ECB. Therefore, I expected the newspapers to rely less on perspectives by Greek officials, who represented the will of impoverished Greek people, blaming the country's creditors. Surprisingly, this study showed that both newspapers used more references to portray the Greek officials’ discontent against their creditors than the creditors’ dissatisfaction with the Greeks (RQ1). The main difference in coverage of attribution of responsibility between the Greeks and the creditors is that The Guardian included a wider variety of sources from the Greek government. This has clear implications for the coverage of the Greek crisis because the British newspaper allowed the outsider in the negotiator to voice its concerns.

However, in tandem with prior research and my expectations, both The NYT and The Guardian did not dedicate much space in their news stories to explain the underlying mechanisms of the crisis and the European system's deficiencies (RQ2). As expected, The Guardian was more rigorous in presenting the Eurozone and EU's systemic errors, but mostly deployed editorials and letters to the editor to provide depth. In tandem with the literature, I also expected that coverage of the Greek crisis would be mostly event-driven rather than comprehensive in terms of explaining the underlying mechanisms that contribute to an economic crisis, which was found to be mostly accurate. The news stories tended to provide an account of the events without much explanation of how things evolved the way they did and without demonstration of systemic deficiencies that could have exacerbated the crisis. This lack of comprehensive coverage does not allow news consumers to fully understand how previous developments led to the 2015 negotiations between Greece and its European counterparts potentially leading to criticism against the outsider without a full account of the causes and implications of the Greek crisis.

In covering the treatment implemented to Greece by its creditors in the previous years, both newspapers concentrate on the erroneous approach of IMF and the focus on saving banks instead of governments. The outlets provide an account of these underlying factors, but The Guardian appeared more thorough as it used more space and more sources. In addition, it made references to the errors of capitalism and the need for a Keynesian economic approach to treat the crisis. Such references to alternative treatments to the crisis allow readers to understand there are more approaches than fiscal austerity measures, which were almost uniformly presented as the only way by the media during the first years of the crisis. Finally, in line with prior literature, this study found similarities in coverage of the economic crisis by the two newspapers as they used similar frames and themes. Additionally, the frame of responsibility typically used to portray economic crises persists in both newspapers even though the narratives have partially changed (Table 2).

Table 2.

Number of frame references.

	Number of references
Frames	Guardian	NYT
Greece's dissatisfaction with creditors	31	28
Creditors’ disappointment with Greece	18	9
European systemic deficiencies	12	4
Wrong treatment to crisis	17	10
Total number	78	51

RQ1: The main frames by the Guardian and the NYT were Greek government's dissatisfaction with creditors, disappointment of creditors with the Greek government, European systemic deficiencies, and wrong treatment to the crisis. The Guardian represented the Greek government as deeply frustrated with the troika—the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. Greek government officials portrayed the lenders’ demands as outrageous and asphyxiating. There were several themes in The Guardian's representation of the events: blackmail; attempts to corrode the Greek government; not seeking agreement, but the humiliation of Greece; and harsh and ineffective proposals by the creditors. This frame and its themes were constructed with evidence across 10 news pieces and two editorials for a total of 31 references on Greek actors portraying the creditors. On the other side, The NYT reported that the creditors have failed to bring Greece back to the track of economic recovery and that most Greeks blamed them for their plight. The themes shaped were similar to The Guardian. The ones that emerged were: blackmail; not seeking an agreement but the humiliation of Greece and the exasperation of the Greek government with creditors; and harsh and ineffective proposals. This frame was constructed upon 13 news stories for a total of 28 references.

In the frame of Greeks attributing responsibility to the creditors, The Guardian and The NYT deployed generally similar themes. Both newspapers included themes referring to Greeks accusing their creditors of blackmailing and attempting to humiliate the Greek government. They generally portrayed the situation in similar narratives. This could either be the result of common journalistic norms between Western democratic states or the reliance to the same or similar sources that painted the aforementioned narratives. However, it is distinguishable that The Guardian generally shaped its themes using various sources within the Greek government while The NYT predominantly relied on quotes by the Greek prime minister. The prime minister does represent his party, but involving more actors within a party provides a more comprehensive reflection of a governing party's positions. Furthermore, The Guardian provides more editorials that include analysis, which is essential for the average reader who wants to understand the big picture instead of shaping his opinion according to sporadic events without an overarching context. Other than that, The NYT included references to the IMF in this frame while The Guardian did not. This could be explained by geographical proximity as IMF headquarters are located in the United States, therefore making it easier and more newsworthy for The Times to make germane references.

The Guardian represented the creditors’ views on the Greek government as an obstinate and defiant group of actors determined to reject austerity measures once and for all. The British newspaper developed four themes under this frame: Juncker against Tsipras; Tsipras threatens European stability; Greek irresponsibility in negotiations; Greece not serious about reforms. For this frame, evidence was collected from nine news stories for a total of 18 references. On the other hand, The NYT developed two themes: Greece not serious about reforms, and Greek unwillingness to compromise and deceitful negotiating tactics. The Greek government tried to negotiate the mandate of the impoverished Greek people, but consistent with prior research, the creditors blamed the government for unwillingness to follow the prescriptions offered by Europe as they attempted to undermine its credibility. The frame was constructed using evidence across five news stories for a total of nine references.

In this frame, the creditors’ disappointment with the Greek government, The Guardian concentrated on Juncker's attack on Tsipras as the former accused the latter of being a liar. In this sample, NYT did not include Juncker's controversial statement that the Greeks should not commit suicide because they are afraid of death. Instead, it focused more than The Guardian on the Greek government's unwillingness to compromise, its use of deceitful negotiating tactics and the deep distrust between the negotiating entities. Still, the British newspaper included a theme about the Greek government's irresponsibility during the negotiations while both newspapers included statements that portrayed Greece as not serious about proposing and implementing reforms.

Even though the newspapers used the same frame, they deployed different themes. The difference does not lie in the tone of the narrative, but the perspective. Both newspapers refer to Greece's refusal to submit to the creditors’ proposals. The NYT focused on the Greeks’ unwillingness to compromise and the deployment of deceitful negotiation tactics while The Guardian similarly framed the Greeks as portrayed by the creditors as irresponsible and dangerous for the stability of the Eurozone. Even though both newspapers included comments by one of the protagonists of that period, Juncker, the British newspaper seems to have constructed a whole theme based on his remarks. The insistence on Juncker's comments along with the inclusion of the theme by The Guardian that Tsipras threatens European stability could be attributed to geographic and political proximity. As The Guardian is located in Europe, it makes sense that it would consider European stability and comments by a top European official as more salient and newsworthy for its European audience. This way, the British newspaper provides a more comprehensive account of the situation by incorporating more themes/perspectives to its representation.

RQ2: Overall, The NYT dedicated fewer references to Europe's systemic deficiencies, focusing on the lack of provisions to withdraw from the Eurozone. However, The Guardian addressed the Eurozone's main systemic flaws and the ECB's role in the monetary union. It also provided some background on the history of how Greece entered the Eurozone, which exposed systemic deficiencies. Eurozone membership allowed weaker countries like Greece to tie their economy to economic powerhouses like Germany. This relationship compromised the stability of the union. This difference can be attributed to the Guardian's country of origin since Great Britain had been skeptical about the EU and its own role in it. Both newspapers referred to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's conviction that the monetary union was doomed because of its problematic structure. The greatest difference between the newspapers is that The Guardian included editorials and letters to the editor that provided further context and explanation than the news stories. Thus, the British newspaper contributed more to the overarching understanding of the crisis by providing contextual information by non-journalist commentators.

In tandem with my expectations, it seems The Guardian devoted more time to explain the underlying causes of the Greek crisis and further delved into the systemic inadequacies of the Eurozone and the shortcomings of the IMF. Possibly, an American audience would not be as interested in how the Eurozone system works and why Greece was disproportionately hit by the crisis, which could explain why The NYT dedicated less space. Both newspapers attempted to give the background of the crisis instead of providing superficial coverage, but most explanation came from editorials and op-eds instead of news stories. It would be preferable if the newspapers had added this context to their news stories to facilitate comprehension of the whole situation. However, both The Guardian and The NYT presented Europe's systemic deficiencies through a few op-eds and editorials instead of explaining the situation in context with the evolving news.

A similar frame was constructed by The NYT with evidence across four news stories for a total of four references. The NYT reported that since a Eurozone member had never been as close to economic collapse as Greece, there is no precedent that could predict the outcome. The Treaty of Lisbon in 2009 included a clause for a country's withdrawal from the EU, but there are not provisions for withdrawal from the currency union. Margaret Thatcher had denounced the monetary union project around three decades before as she considered it doomed. It is hard to be flexible in a currency union which is not also a political union (Cohen, 2015, July 7). This raises concerns about democratic practices in the Eurozone.

The wrong treatment frame by The Guardian emerged from eight news stories, four op-eds and one editorial for a total of 17 references. The British newspaper focused on the themes of bailing banks, not the governments; insistence on austerity and the need for a Keynesian approach; and the erroneous approach of IMF. On the other side, The Times concentrated on the themes of bailing out the banks, not the governments; treatment made things worse; and the erroneous approach of IMF. The frame was constructed with evidence across three news stories, an editorial, an opinion piece, and a letter to the editor for a total of 10 references.

In the final frame, wrong treatment to the crisis by the creditors, both newspapers developed the themes of IMF's erroneous approach and the bailout of the banks instead of the governments. Both newspapers suggested that most of the bailout package that was supposed to address the Greek crisis was offered to French and German banks that were exposed to the Greek public debt. Therefore, contrary to initial crisis coverage (Starkman, 2009), the newspapers attributed responsibilities to financial institutions, but mainly through editorials and op-eds. If one takes only the news stories into account, both newspapers downplayed the structural inefficiencies of the Eurozone and the EU. The Guardian had a more comprehensive coverage of the issue and includes more sources. The British newspaper made references to capitalism while The NYT did not. The American newspaper concentrated more on how the creditors’ treatment to the crisis exacerbated Greece's plight while The Guardian focused more on the creditors’ insistence on austerity, as well as the need for a Keynesian approach that would stimulate the economy by raising government spending. Potentially, the Guardian's approach of including alternatives to fiscal austerity reveals the positive influence of its social audit function to the framing of economic crises, a key observation that has not been revealed before. Finally, both outlets mention the erroneous approach of IMF. The Times mentioned that the fund initially resisted Greek default, basing its assertion on an analysis of the Greek economy that was out of touch with reality.

Discussion

Consistent with prior studies, the coverage mainly concentrated on the developing events of the summer of 2015 instead of focusing on explaining Greece's trajectory in the crisis and the reasons behind the crisis, indicating that newspapers used episodic frames. The coverage was also reminiscent of coverage prior to 2014, when prominent media represented Greece as irredeemable and portrayed troika's measures as a reasonable solution to the crisis. The responsibility frame persisted as the newspapers dedicated far more space to portray attribution of blame between the actors and less space to address the underlying mechanisms of the crisis. Surprisingly, there were more references of Greek actors attributing blame to the creditors and foreign organizations than creditors blaming Greeks. Therefore, coverage of blame attribution seems to have become more balanced in comparison to crisis coverage before 2014 and generally similar in both outlets. These results indicate that the 2008 crisis may have served as a call to journalists to present a more balanced approach when it comes to their representation of crisis actors, thus offering a glimmer of hope for blame attribution in future coverage. On a similar note, both newspapers covered the erroneous approach of IMF, a finding that contradicts most previous studies on coverage of the Greek crisis and thus offers a modicum of optimism on how journalists can learn from their past mistakes (contrary to Usher, 2017).

Among the reasons why the perspectives presented by the newspapers are so similar is the fact that they depended upon similar or the same sources. Both outlets included non-political sources like scholars and economists to present the crisis, but most of those sources were editorials instead of news stories. In the news stories in which Greek officials attributed responsibility to the creditors, The NYT mostly relied on the Greek prime minister rather than party officials while The Guardian included a wider variety of Greek government sources than The NYT, such as Syriza party members. The Guardian's approach of wider inclusion hints to the newspaper's social responsibility function, possible suggesting that more newspapers, such as the NYT could benefit from adopting similar social responsibility elements. Downplaying or excluding other party members could present a skewed or incomplete account of events. By providing similar accounts that do not rigorously address the context of the crisis, the press helps to perpetuate positions that are congruent to the status quo, inadvertently inhibiting structural systemic changes.

Essentially, The Guardian and The NYT used similar frames and themes to portray the developments in the Greek economic crisis during the summer of 2015. That could mean the newspapers either share a similar perspective in news coverage because of similar journalistic norms or simply that they both covered the most important developments collecting information by the same actors or actors with similar attitudes toward the crisis. It is typical for business and economy journalists to be close to elite sources that are part of the status quo, compromising the press's watchdog function (Tambini, 2010). Media dependence on elite organizations for quotes and background information likely enhances those organizations’ prominence in public discourse. In combination with lack of sufficient reporting of perspectives by the members of the public, the discourse becomes limited to elite points of view. When two elite newspapers like The Guardian and The NYT deploy so similar narratives to a complicated matter like an economic crisis, they give news consumers less perspectives to reflect on. This is crucial to public opinion as people need to absorb and corroborate a variety of information to shape their opinion in complicated topics.

On the other side, the differences in coverage between The Guardian and The NYT could be attributed to the geographical base of the newspapers. In the frame of creditors against Greeks, The Guardian included more themes than the NYT. These themes revolved around Juncker's comments against Tsipras and comments by other foreign officials that the Greek prime minister threatens European stability. The comments about the Greek prime minister threatening European stability represent heated rhetoric by the creditors, which could indicate that they were harsh to set an example for those who do not give in to their demands. Since The Guardian is located in Great Britain, which in 2015 was a prominent member of the European Union, it would make sense to assume that the newspaper's main audience, British people, would be more interested in the stability and affairs of Europe than their American counterparts.

In comparison to studies before 2014, it seems journalists have shifted to more comprehensive interpretations of such crises, but the newspapers could still have been more comprehensive instead of focusing on certain events. Instead of including more background in the news stories, they provided more comprehensive analysis mainly through op-eds, editorials and letters to the editor with The Guardian dedicating more space to explain the context that surrounded the Greek crisis. Even though editorials included more thorough analysis, the context they provided did not always appear in the news stories in comprehensive terms. While respectable newspapers may use editorials to provide more background and deeper explanations on the issues they cover and the underlying mechanisms that prompt certain events, more of this depth needs to be added within the news stories. The audience needs an overarching account of events and their underlying causes in order to grasp complicated financial issues without being misinformed. Receiving partial information could lead to inaccuracy as the readers may fill the gaps in incomplete presentations of the events. News consumers are not always capable of filling the gaps in convoluted issues through sheer reason, so they may rely on emotion or personal interest to shape their opinion about such issues.

Despite the improvement in coverage, most references that explained Europe's systemic deficiencies and the failed treatment to the crisis were drawn from op-eds and editorials. Even though it is indisputably important for newspapers to include opinion sections to allow scholars and civilians to express their opinion, more explanation needs to occur within news stories. Op-eds and editorials provided comprehensive accounts of how and why the crisis evolved the way it did, but this scrutiny would be more effective and comprehensible if it was included as context in the news stories. Journalists tend to present event-focused stories as they do day-to-day reporting while columnists and op-ed writers take a wider view. Even though news stories should provide adequate context, letters to the editor and op-eds could play an important role in combatting the elite theory and blaming the poor. The Guardian provided sources with a way of presenting their case without journalistic mediation, giving the chance to non-journalists to portray their own perspectives without being affected by business journalism's institutional inclinations. This could be an effective strategy for marginalized groups to voice their concerns and participate more actively to the discourse.

Overall, newspapers seem to follow a pattern of superficial coverage in their news stories when it comes to financial crises. Among the many factors that contribute to such coverage could be insufficient audience interest, repeated inclusion of status quo sources and responsibility attribution. Even though prominent newspapers have the resources to diversify their sources, the organizations that shape the status quo typically have access to crucial information. Also, newspapers have incentives to maintain and grow their audiences, a factor that partly drives media coverage. Even though a solution of providing more comprehensive news stories with adequate background information is not unattainable, it is not the objective of contemporary media as there is no need to overly analyze issues that are targeted to a disinterested audience. This study offered a glimpse on the coverage of economic crises by legacy newspapers outside of the Eurozone. The broad appeal of these newspapers may appeal to a more diverse audience that is not directly affected by the crisis but needs to be aware of its background. Findings suggest that crisis coverage may vary even between newspapers from countries with similar (liberal) media systems, which has potential implications to theories about media systems as well as empirical findings about crisis coverage. This study also extends crisis coverage findings from European countries to countries outside the Eurozone—namely United Kingdom and the United States. Furthermore, this study contributes an insight on how the social audit function of the Guardian could lead to more comprehensive crisis coverage, an area that has been understudied but could encourage media organizations to pay more attention to social responsibility. Future studies may elaborate upon this concept by comparing newspapers with social responsibility attributes to newspapers that lack such tools.

For the purposes of this study, I used the inductive framing approach. It is not easily replicable because the categories are constructed through continuous observation of the data. I attempted to overcome this limitation by premising the study on predefined categories rooted in the literature (Doudaki et al., 2016). Furthermore, the sample of this study is limited both in media selection and in the number of articles reviewed. While the latter is not uncommon in qualitative studies, the results would be more reliable with a larger number of articles. Similarly, the study would be more representative of the press in the United Kingdom and the United States if it had included more media outlets from each of the countries. While the results are supported by the qualitative content analysis, this study would be strengthened with the use of inferential statistics, an analysis that would have only been reliable with a much larger number of articles. While the sample is not large enough to induce generalization of the findings, the study points to intriguing changes in journalistic habits that merit further exploration. Therefore, the study could become a basis for testing claims about journalists’ ability to learn from their mistakes and adapt to fast-paced crisis coverage as crisis events unfold. At the same time, the study offers a comparative perspective among newspapers that operate in liberal media systems. Other than that, the conclusions of this study would be stronger with a mixed methods approach that would combine qualitative and quantitative practices.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-gaz-10.1177_17480485221141609 - Supplemental material for Sticking to the status quo with a twist: Western media representations of fiscal negotiations during the Greek economic crisis

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-gaz-10.1177_17480485221141609 for Sticking to the status quo with a twist: Western media representations of fiscal negotiations during the Greek economic crisis by Tryfon Boukouvidis in International Communication Gazette

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-gaz-10.1177_17480485221141609 - Supplemental material for Sticking to the status quo with a twist: Western media representations of fiscal negotiations during the Greek economic crisis

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-gaz-10.1177_17480485221141609 for Sticking to the status quo with a twist: Western media representations of fiscal negotiations during the Greek economic crisis by Tryfon Boukouvidis in International Communication Gazette

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Tryfon Boukouvidis

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Achbar

(1994) Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media. New York: Black Rose Books.

Angelos

(2015) Why on earth is Greece in the EU? A content analysis of crisis news coverage. Public Relations Review 35(2): 107–112.

Angelos, J. (2015) Why on earth is Greece in the EU?. Politico.com. https://www.politico.eu/article/why-is-greece-in-the-eu-grexit/

Bandow D (2017) As Another Economic Crisis Approaches, Greece and Euro Should Consider a Divorce. Huffington Post. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/as-another-economic-crisi_b_14308198

Besova

Cooley

(2009) Foreign news and public opinion: Attribute agenda setting theory revisited. Ecquid Novi: African Journalism Studies 30(2): 219–242.

Bickes

Otten

Weymann

(2014) The Greek financial crisis: Discourses of difference or solidarity? Journal of Social Science Education 13(3): 113–122.

Bos

Lecheler

Mewafi

Vliegenthart

(2016) It’s the frame that matters: Immigrant integration and media framing effects in the Netherlands. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 55: 97–108.

Coombs

(2006) The protective powers of crisis response strategies: Managing reputational assets during a crisis. Journal of Promotion Management 12(3): 241–260.

Coombs

Holladay

(2004) Reasoned action in crisis communication: An attribution theory-based approach to crisis management. In: Millar

Heath

(eds) Responding to Crisis Communication Approach to Crisis Communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 95–115.

10.

Damstra

Vliegenthart

(2018) (Un) covering the economic crisis? Over-time and inter-media differences in salience and framing. Journalism Studies 19(7): 983–1003.

11.

Doudaki

Boubouka

Spyridou

Tzalavras

(2016) Dependency, (non)liability and austerity news frames of bailout Greece. European Journal of Communication 31(4): 426–445.

12.

Doyle

(2006) Financial news journalism: A post-Enron analysis of approaches towards economic and financial news production in the UK. Journalism 7(4): 433–452.

13.

Durham

(2007) Framing the state in globalization: The Financial Times’ Coverage of the 1997 Thai Currency Crisis. Critical Studies in Media Communication 24(1): 57–76.

14.

Entman

(1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4): 51–58.

15.

Fahy

O’Brien

Poti

(2010) From boom to bust: A post-Celtic Tiger analysis of the norms, values, and roles of Irish financial journalists. Irish Communication Review 12: 5–20.

16.

Gerring

(2001) Social Science Methodology: A Criterial Framework [electronic resource]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

17.

The Greek Economy (2020, November 6). In Hellenic statistical authority. Available at: https://www.statistics.gr/documents/20181/16865424/greek_economy_06_11_2020.pdf/5a3d0fd2-a8a7-c7cb-1800-6423c39b5769.

18.

Gupta

(2015) Crisis and representation: Notes on media and media studies. Cyprus Review 27(1): 293–310.

19.

Hamilton

(2009) In the foothills of change: Foreign coverage seems doomed, but it’s only just begun. Columbia Journalism Review 47(6): 50–56.

20.

Hossain

Jaehnig

(2011) Social responsibility of the press in developing and Western countries. Media Asia 38(4): 232–240.

21.

Jaehnig

Onyebadi

(2011) Social audits as media watchdogging. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 26(1): 2–20.

22.

Kahneman

Tversky

(1984) Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist 39: 341–350.

23.

Kasperson

Renn

Slovic

, et al. (1988) The social amplification of risk: A conceptual framework. Risk Analysis 8(2): 177–187.

24.

Kay

Gaucher

Peach

, et al. (2009) Inequality, discrimination, and the power of the status quo: Direct evidence for a motivation to see the way things are as the way they should be. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97(3): 421.

25.

Kentikelenis

Karanikolos

Papanicolas

Basu

McKee

Stuckler

(2011) Health effects of financial crisis: Omens of a Greek tragedy. The Lancet 378(9801): 1457–1458.

26.

Keynesian economics. (2018). In Britannica. Available at: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Keynesian-economics.

27.

Kostopoulos

(2020) Framing the Greek memoranda (2010-2015): A polarised yet hollow debate. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique 18(1): 460–477.

28.

Kroon

Kluknavska

Vliegenthart

Boomgaarden

(2016) Victims or perpetrators? Explaining media framing of roma across Europe. European Journal of Communication 31(4): 375–392.

29.

Kroon

Vliegenthart

van Selm

(2017) Between accommodating and activating: Framing policy reforms in response to workforce aging across Europe. International Journal of Press/Politics 22(3): 333–356.

30.

Lasorsa

Reese

(1990) News source use in the crash of 1987: A study of four national media. Journalism Quarterly 67(1): 60–71.

31.

Lichtenstein

Eilders

(2019) Lost in uncertainty. How the euro crisis affected European identity constructions in national media discourses. International Communication Gazette 81(6-8): 602–622.

32.

Little A (2012) How ‘magic' made Greek debt disappear before it joined the euro. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-16834815

33.

Lowry

Xie

. (2007). Agenda-setting and framing by topic proximity: A new technique for the computerized content analysis of network TV news presidential campaign coverage. Conference Papers – International Communication Association, 1.

34.

McCombs

Shaw

(1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36(2): 176–187.

35.

Mylonas

(2014) Crisis, austerity and opposition in mainstream media discourses of Greece. Critical Discourse Studies 11(3): 305–321.

36.

Mylonas

(2015) Austerity discourses in “Der Spiegel” magazine, 2009-2014. TripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique 13(2): 248–269.

37.

Neuman

Just

Crigler

(1992) Common knowledge: News and the construction of political meaning. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

38.

Nicholls

Culpepper

(2021) Computational identification of Media frames: Strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities. Political Communication 38(1/2): 159–181.

39.

Nienstedt

Kepplinger

Quiring

(2015) What went wrong and why? Roots, responsibilities, and solutions of the Euro crisis in European newspapers. In: Picard

(ed) The Euro Crisis in the Media. Journalistic Coverage of Economic Crisis and European Institutions. London: I. B. Taur, 45–62.

40.

Ojala

Harjuniemi

(2016) Mediating the German ideology: Ordoliberal framing in European press coverage of the eurozone crisis. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 24(3): 414–430.

41.

Page

Shapiro

(1992) The Rational Public. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 355.

42.

Riordan

(2014) Accuracy, independence, and impartiality: How legacy media and digital natives approach standards in the digital age. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism 1–70.

43.

Roberts

Stewart

Tingley

, et al. (2014) Structural topic models for open-ended survey responses. American Journal of Political Science 58(4): 1064–1082.

44.

Schiffrin

(2011) Introduction. In: Schiffrin

(ed) Bad News: How America’s Business Press Missed the Story of the Century. New York, NY: New Press, 1–21.

45.

Semetko

Valkenburg

(2000) Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication 50(2): 93–109.

46.

Sklias

Roukanas

Maris

(2014) Keynes and the Eurozone’s crisis: Towards a fiscal union? Procedia Economics and Finance 9: 66–73.

47.

Starkman

(2009, June/July) The power problem. Columbia Journalism Review . Available at: http://www.cjr.org/cover_story/power_problem.php.

48.

Starr P (2004) The creation of the media: Political origins of modern communications. New York: Basic Books, p. 296.

49.

Tambini

(2010) What are financial journalists for? Journalism Studies 11(2): 158–174.

50.

Tracy

(2012) Covering “financial terrorism”. Journalism Practice 6(4): 513–529.

51.

Usher

(2017) Making business news: A production analysis of The NYT. International Journal of Communication 11: 363–382.

52.

Vliegenthart R and Damstra A (2019) Parliamentary questions, newspaper coverage, and consumer confidence in times of crisis: A cross-national comparison. Political Communication 36(1): 17–35.

53.

Wanta

(1993) The agenda-setting effects of international news coverage: An examination of differing news frames. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 5(3): 250–264.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

0.07 MB