Framing the Paralympic Games: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Spanish Media Coverage of the Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympic Games

Abstract

In recent years, there has been an increased emergence of studies focusing on the media coverage of the Paralympic Games. Until recently, studies have predominately used quantitative content analyses that, although providing useful interrogation of observational patterns, limit the understanding of and appreciation for the contexts that may have shaped the production of information. By focusing exclusively on the “what” and on the “how much,” it is difficult to reveal the “why” and to identify the underlying motives of any changes. This article recognizes the nuances of the editorial decision-making process by using a mixed-methods approach, employing quantitative and qualitative data drawn from a case study focusing on the Spanish media coverage of the 2008 and 2012 Paralympic Games. An initial content analysis of all news published in Spain’s 12 highest circulation newspapers during Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympic Games was undertaken. Subsequently, 15 semistructured interviews were conducted with journalists that were also sent to these two iterations of the Paralympic Games by Spanish media. Drawing on conceptualisations of media framing, the results highlight that the numerical data alone shed insufficient light on the complexity of the news-making process. The semistructured interviews brought to light issues such as editorial management buoyed by commercial imperatives, and organisational interjection in journalists’ narratives and authorship, that also contoured coverage and content. In addition to further debate about the complexities of media coverage of Paralympic sport, the study underscores the utility of incorporating and combining qualitative methodologies within sport media and communication research.

Keywords

Paralympic Games media studies journalism framing disability

The roles of mass media in constructing social realities have already been well-defined, conceptualised, and critiqued (see, e.g., Boykoff & Yasuoka, 2015; Klapper, 1960; McCombs, 2014; Meyen, Theiroff, & Strenger, 2014; Shoemaker & Reese, 2011). Such work has drawn attention to ways processes of media production contribute to the establishment and perpetuation of hegemonic discourses, and the contouring or mitigation of narratives that exist in parallel or are incongruent with the “mainstream” consensus. Media critique has been of value in highlighting how particular discourses emerge through production processes and ideological assumptions (e.g., demographic stereotypes) and stigmatizations crystalize in and through press practices (Cherney, Lindemann, & Hardin, 2015; Guarneiro, Bellinghini, & Gattaz, 2017; Renwick, 2016; Schug, Alt, Lu, Gosin, & Fay, 2017). In relation to stereotyping and stigmatization, of concern has been the roles of mass media in the positioning of people living with disabilities and, relatedly, the ways in which media discourses further add to, or exacerbate, the extent of social exclusion (Barnes, 1999; DePauw, 1997; Haller, 2000; Nelson, 1994; Saxton, 2018; Wilson, Jaques, Johnson, & Brotherton, 2017). While concerns about stigmatization, exclusion, and positioning of disability have been explored across a range of society sectors, these issues have also manifested themselves within the realm of sport and sport media. Although critiques have targeted a range of global and local contexts, a frequent focus has been media (re)presentations afforded to elite participants (exemplified by those participating at Paralympic Games).

As the world’s premier mega-sporting event for athletes living with a disability, the Paralympic Games have afforded scholars opportunities to explore intersections of disability, physical praxis, sociocultural and ideological meaning making, and individual embodiment. Of interest in this article has been critiques of mainstream media’s varied interrogations of social attitudes toward disability vis-à-vis the Paralympics, organisational agendas, processes of inclusion and exclusion, the construction and challenging of stereotypes, and the crafting of ideologies via media production and dissemination (Duncan, 2006; Fong & Katz, 2012; Hardin & Hardin, 2003). There has also been sustained interest in undertaking country-specific examinations of Paralympic media coverage (see, e.g., Boykoff & Yasuoka, 2015; Buysse & Borcherding, 2010; Fong & Katz, 2012; Kian & Hardin, 2009; Misener, 2013; Pappous, Marcellini, & Léséleuc, 2011a, 2011b; Schantz & Gilbert, 2001, 2008; Smith, Bundon, & Best, 2016). Collectively this work has highlighted the continued global precariousness of disability sport coverage, the interdependencies of coverage in relation to the temporality of catalytic sport mega-events, and incongruities between media representations, institutional and structural shifts, and changes in sociocultural assumptions and behaviours. Moreover, although there are some synergies across contexts with respect to the marginalised framing of Paralympic athletes, incremental structural improvements to sport organisations, biomedically entrenched renderings of disability experiences, and an overemphasis on discourses of empowerment, equality of opportunity, human achievement, and (over)performativity, there remains scope for further critique. To counter work that has focused on media representation aspects (essentially, what and how stories are told), there is also a need to articulate how representations are borne out of specific political and production dynamics (Price & Tewksbury, 1997; Renwick, 2016; Xue, Mason, Humphreys, Johnson, & Whitehead, 2019).

Subsequently, this article draws upon, and furthers, these debates through an examination of mainstream Spanish media coverage of the Beijing 2008 and 2012 London Paralympic Games. Although Paralympic and disability discourses are dynamic and ever changing (Gilbert & Schantz, 2012), there remains value in investigating this particular temporal juncture to understand some of the contextual complexities that inform mainstream media processes within and beyond the Paralympics and disability sport realms. To note, not unlike countries such as Canada, the United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, and Taiwan that have been at the vanguard of the disability rights movement (Bagenstos, 2014; Baynton, 2001; Chang, 2014; Marks, 2014; Shakespeare, 2013; Vanhala, 2010), Spain has a progressive recent history in disability advocacy and social policy. At the forefront of the disability movement has been the National Organisation of the Blind (Organización Nacional de Ciegos Españoles (ONCE); https://www.once.es/otras-webs/english); established in 1938, but rising to prominence in the mid-1980s in an era shaped by the broad sweeping socialist reforms of Prime Minister Felipe González. Concomitantly, national disability agendas within sport were enhanced further by the country’s political representation in international sport governance. Spain was most significantly represented, in the first instance, by International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Juan Antonio Samaranch.¹ In addition, and further to bringing the Olympic and Paralympic Games to Barcelona 1992, Samaranch developed closer (if albeit still fractured) relations between the IOC and International Paralympic Committee (IPC; Legg & Steadward, 2011; Purdue, 2013). Spain has also had continued participation on the governing board of the IPC since the mid-1990s.²

In addition to organisational and individual relations, the contemporary context of disability-related media coverage has been framed by Spain’s commitment to international competition. Since the 1992 Paralympic Games, Spain has fronted one of the largest delegations.³ In addition to global governance work, Paralympic and disability sport awareness has been helped by the success of the country’s high-profile Paralympic athletes.⁴ Reflecting continued participation and performances of the nation’s athletes, temporal interest in Paralympic coverage within Spanish media remains high and, over time, there has been an evident effort by media outlets to continue to produce and develop the breadth and depth of Paralympic content. Such a context, and in particular the need to remain steadfast in our critique of media practices that influence public discourse and corporeal hegemonies, provides a strong rationale to investigate Spain’s Paralympic coverage. In an effort to go beyond issues of qualitative and quantitative representation in the press, we take specific interest in this article with the machinations behind the coverage. Our aim is to explore the perceptions of the journalists, editors, and press officers involved in the Paralympic Games and its place in the media arena. Such an exploration may both inform understandings about the political idiosyncrasies of media coverage and aid an overarching appreciation for mixed-methodological approaches within the field.

Going Beyond Content Analysis: Some Methodological Considerations

In recent decades, there has been a plethora of studies using content analysis as a methodological tool of analysing Paralympic Games coverage (e.g., Gilbert & Schantz, 2008; Golden, 2003; Lebel, Marcellini, & Pappous, 2010; Pappous & Hayday, 2016; Schantz & Gilbert, 2012; Thomas & Smith, 2003). Using content analysis, most of these studies applied comparative methods to assess the coverage allotted to the Paralympic Games in terms of frequency and amount of published news about the event and/or to assess variances with respect to gender, ethnicity, nationality, or geographic locale (Braye, 2016; Braye, Dixon, & Gibbons, 2013; Pappous, Marcellini, & Léséleuc, 2010; Pappous et al., 2011a, 2011b). In general, the strategy adopted by these studies is to provide quantitative data (e.g., column inches, page coverage, publication lines, and word counts), make inferences about the differences between variables, and draw conclusions about the potential distinctions against one or another variable. However, comparative research among studies that use coding schemes can be problematic. As Léséleuc (2012) notes, different research groups may actually be using different “units of analysis” in their quantitative comparative studies, which could lead to inadequate international comparisons. In response, Léséleuc (2012) proposes new methodological directions, namely improved contextual articulations that inform both media processes and subsequent analytical renderings.

Reiterating Léséleuc (2012), Neuendorf (2002) and Gilbert and Schantz (2012) have also stressed the importance of developing methodologies that speak to the underlying logic of journalists’ and the media’s decisions and provide space to understand the voices of the key actors (“gatekeepers”) of the news-making process (Druckman & Parkin, 2005; Shoemaker & Reese, 2011; White, 1950). With specific reference to both Olympic and Paralympic Games media coverage, Gilbert and Schantz (2012) argue there is still limited understanding of media producers’ perspectives, thoughts, and ideas regarding what, how, and why particular types and forms of content are delivered. In addition to issues connected with the organization of the Paralympic Games, Howe (2008) notes that Paralympic journalists’ work is shaped by particular, and often limiting, discourses of disability and sport participation. Other scholars have also highlighted the “discriminatory” characteristics of Paralympic media content (e.g., Braye, 2016; Brittain, 2010; de Haan, 2012; Fong & Katz, 2012; Kian & Hardin, 2009; Rother, Oelrichs, & Geske, 2012; Smith et al., 2016; Smith & Sparkes, 2008). This article takes up Gilbert and Schantz’s (2012), Howe’s (2008), Léséleuc’s (2012), and Neuendorf’s (2002) encouragement to augment the conventional media content analysis approach, specifically by articulating some aspects of the Spanish context and particular voices within the media structure minutiae and editorial decision-making process (Druckman & Parkman, 2005; Olson et al., 2002). To aid this effort, we take cues from the work of D’Angelo and Kuypers (2010); Price and Tewksbury (1997); Scheufele (1999); Scheufele and Tewksbury (2007); Wachs and Dworkin (1997); and Xue, Mason, Humphreys, Johnson, and Whitehead (2019) who utilise theoretical conceptualisations of media framing to shed light on how the organisational, institutional, or editorial mechanisms influence the media coverage of the Paralympic Games.

Narrative Making and the Theoretical Process of Framing

With disciplinary roots in psychology and sociology, “framing” has been adopted as a practical and heuristic device within communication studies to examine the ways key stakeholders (e.g., producers, owners, editors, politicians, and corporations) use media outlets and/or journalists to disseminate preferred narratives, issues, events, or meanings (while also simultaneously suppressing or annihilating countervailing constructions; D’Angelo & Kuypers, 2010; Pan & Kosicki, 1993; Price & Tewksbury, 1997). Research has continued to utilise the framing process to interrogate the complexities of a wide array of media and communications domains (Entman, 1991, 1993; Scheufele & Tewsbury, 2007; Shoemaker & Reese, 2011). Conceptually, Scheufele (1999) suggested framing typologies segmented across two dimensions: the type of frame being explored (individual or media frames) and the way the frame is operationalised (either independently or dependently). Individual frames are focused more on the concept of cognitive processes that guide a person’s understanding and processing of information, whereas media frames account for qualities and attributes of the news itself and link to the journalist routines which allow then to segment and classify information efficiently for their audiences (Entman, 1991, 1993).

Alongside the typologies highlighted above, Scheufele (1999) and Scheufele and Tewkesbury (2006) developed a process model that identified four key interconnected elements that are critical to this process: frame building, frame setting, individual-level process of framing, and a feedback loop between the audiences and journalists themselves. Frame building links to the individual journalist’s characteristics, professional values, and/or the structural and organisational factors within the media system and considers what impact and influence this has on news content framing and creation process (Kian & Hardin, 2009; Scheufele, 1999; Scheufele & Tewkesbury, 2006). Reese’s (2007) and Xue et al.’s (2019) work highlights three potential types of influence, first, links to the attitudes, ideologies, and professional practices of the journalists themselves and this links to the way they actively construct frames. The second influencing factor links to the organisational routines. This accounts for the political positioning or type of the medium. Finally, there are external sources (e.g., politicians, managers, authorities, and elites) that influence frame building, for example, journalists incorporate frames suggested by editors of organisations into their coverage (Scheufele, 1999; Scheufele & Tewkesbury, 2006). In essence, the theory of framing postulates that the news, during the process of its preparation and presentation, acquires a distinct orientation that corresponds to wider structural and organisational forces and matters of individual agency and action. Within framing, there is a recognition that journalists can tell the same story in very different ways, and these variances can be better understood by examining some the of the nuances of the contexts in which they are formed and presented.

Our interest, accordingly, was to determine some of the conditions and elements of Spanish Paralympic news-making processes and appreciate and detail elements that comprised the final approaches adopted by each respective journalist. These include, for example, the journalist’s routine, social norms, organisational pressures, and external forces. Within the sporting context, framing has been utilised to investigate the influence factors such as journalist’s gender, identity framing especially relating to gender and ethnicity, representation of HIV-positive athletes, and racial stereotypes (Billings & Eastman, 2003; Kian& Hardin, 2009; Mercurio & Filak, 2010; Wachs & Dworkin, 1997). From a sports mega-event and Paralympic/disability perspective, framing has be adopted by those undertaking quantitative content analysis, investigating issues such as legacy, gender, and international media representation comparisons (Buysse & Borcherding, 2010; Misener, 2013; Pappous et al., 2011a). Notwithstanding Golden’s (2003) earlier work on reporters at the 2002 Winter Paralympic Games and Xue et al.’s (2019) investigations of media interpretations of elite disability sport funding, there remains a scarcity of studies that look at Paralympic media framing. Accordingly, this article explores two primary questions. Firstly, did the Spanish mainstream and sport media provide increased coverage of the Paralympic Games in London 2012 compared to Beijing in 2008? Secondly, what are the views and explanations given by the people who participate in the news-making process (journalists, photographers, and directors of communication) about any possible differences between the coverage of these two editions of the Paralympic Games?

Method

Quantitative Content Analysis

Quantitative data were obtained from Spain’s six highest circulation generalist newspapers (El País, El Mundo, La Vanguardia, ABC, El Periódico, and La Razón) and the country’s six main sports newspapers (Marca, As, Mundo Deportivo, Sport, Estadio Deportivo, and Superdeporte). The sports newspaper Marca is the biggest selling newspaper in Spain. According to the recent reports (February–November 2015) of the Estudio General de Medios (EGM), an audience survey conducted by the company Asociación para la Investigación de Medios de Comunicación (AIMC);which is taken as a benchmark in the Spanish communication sphere, Marca currently has 2,337,000 readers, followed by El Pais, the most influential generalist newspaper of the country. Superdeporte and Estadio Deportivo, in comparison, are two regional sports newspapers (from Valencia and Sevilla, respectively) and have their interests and audience concentrated in these cities. The pages of these two publications are mainly devoted to news related to Valencia CF and Sevilla FC teams. Finally, ABC is a pro-Monarchist and conservative newspaper published in Madrid since 1903 and, at present, is ranked 10th in sales monitored by EGM, with nearly 500,000 daily readers.

Within these sources, all news items published during the 2008 Beijing and London 2012 Paralympic Games, plus 1 day before the opening and 1 day after the closing ceremony (from September 5 to 18, 2008, for Beijing and from August 28 to September 10, 2012, for London) were collected. News clippings (N = 815 individual items) were collated into an Excel 2013 database by the lead author. The database content was then disseminated with collaborating authors who completed additional data verification. In congruence with similar media analysis approaches, key measures of analysis were identified. These included total column lines, percentage of the total media coverage, and coverage difference between 2008 and 2012 (see Table 1). To note, in Spain, the majority of the mainstream publications (including those used within the context of this research) have very similar production qualities in terms of overall size; dimensions; and width, height, and column layouts. The papers used in this research all have five columns of comparable dimensions. Such similarities make it possible to assess the publications’ approaches to Paralympic coverage with a degree of validity.

Table 1.
Spanish Newsprint Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympic News Coverage.

Newspaper Lines News Items Images

2008, N (%) 2012, N (%) Dif., N (%) 2008, N (%) 2012, N (%) Dif., N (%) 2008, N (%) 2012, N (%) Difference., N (%)

El País 316 (2.1) 253 (1.4) −63 (−19.9) 10 (2.7) 5 (1.1) −5 (−50) 6 (1.6) 4 (0.8) −2 (−33.3)

El Mundo 726 (4.9) 430 (24) −296 (−40.8) 16 (4.3) 17 (3.8) 1 (6.25) 10 (2.7) 7 (1.4) −3 (−30)

La Vanguardia 301 (2) 346 (1.9) 45 (15) 11 (2.9) 11 (2.4) 0 (0) 7 (1.8) 9 (1.8) 2 (28.6)

ABC 922 (6.1) 1,826 (10.2) 904 (98) 20 (5.4) 40 (8.9) 20 (100) 12 (3.2) 47 (9.5) 35 (291.7)

El Periódico 305 (2) 351 (2) 46 (15.1) 8 (2.1) 12 (26) 4 (50) 10 (2.7) 14 (2.8) 4 (40)

La Razón 507 (3.4) 967 (5.4) 460 (90.7) 14 (3.8) 24 (5.3) 10 (71.4) 10 (2.7) 23 (4.6) 13 (130)

Total generalist 3,077 (20.5) 4,173 (23.2) 10,960 (158.1) 79 (21.2) 109 (24,1) 30 (177.7) 55 (14.7) 104 (20.9) 49 (426.9)

Marca 951 (6.4) 5,351 (29.8) 4,400 (462.7) 13 (3.5) 84 (18.8) 71 (546.2) 14 (3.8) 83 (16.8) 69 (492.9)

As 1,644 (11) 960 (5.3) −684 (−41.6) 48 (13) 32 (7.1) −16 (−33.3) 31 (8.5) 32 (6.5) 1 (3.2)

Mundo Deportivo 1,179 (7.9) 1,178 (6.6) −1 (−0.1) 18 (4.9) 24 (5.3) 6 (33.3) 26 (7.1) 32 (6.5) 6 (23.1)

Sport 1,954 (13.1) 904 (5) −1,050 (−53.7) 38 (10.3) 32 (7.1) −6 (−15.8) 31 (8.5) 25 (5) −6 (−19.4)

Estadio Deportivo 3,591 (24.1) 3,863 (21.5) 272 (7.6) 89 (24.2) 105 (23.5) 21 (23.6) 110 (30.3) 123 (25) 13 (11.8)

Superdeporte 2,494 (16.7) 1,531 (8.5) −963 (−38.6) 83 (22.6) 61 (13.7) −22 (−26.5) 96 (26.4) 93 (18.9) −3 (−3.1)

Total sports 11,813 (79.3) 13,787 (76.8) 1,974 (336.2) 289 (78.5) 338 (75.5) 54 (527.5) 308 (84.8) 388 (78.8) 80 (26)

Total combined 14,890 (100) 17,960 (100) 3,070 (494) 368 (100) 447 (100) 79 (465.8) 363 (100) 492 (100) 129 (452.9)

Note. The shading is provided to differentiate between the years and publication types.

Interviewing the News Makers

For the qualitative dimension, interviews with 15 key actors of the news-making process were undertaken. The initial sample of participants included all the journalists sent to the Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympics by the aforementioned Spanish print media outlets. In addition to the informed consent procedures, and in order to ensure the authenticity of participants’ suitability for recruitment, the Spanish Paralympic Committee (SPC) provided additional verification of the credibility of participants’ associations with mainstream publication outlets. Once legitimate journalists were identified, potential participants were contacted via e-mail and invited to take part. Our final sample was made up of newspaper reporters of ABC, Marca, Superdeporte, and Estadio Deportivo (n = 4); the reporters of news agencies EFE, Europa Press, Servimedia, and Colipsa (n = 5); and the photographers sent by the SPC (n = 4) and by the newspaper Marca (n = 1).

Due to logistics (namely participants’ geographic spread and hectic work schedules), interviews were conducted by telephone. Interviews lasted between 25 and 55 min, and the same researcher performed all interviews. All interviews were undertaken in the participants’ native language of Spanish. Once transcribed by the Spanish lead author, the transcripts were translated into English by the bilingual second author of the research team. Subsequent to this, the translations were verified and validated by a professional translator. Any points of clarification were addressed either via correspondence with participants or discussions among the research team. Regarding the background of journalists in this study, all of them were experienced reporters who specialised in sports and only two occupy a position of leadership within their newsrooms. Most participants are actively involved in covering a wide array of daily sporting events of all kinds and many of them have reported on the Paralympic and Olympic Games. An additional interview was undertaken with a representative from the SPC’s communications department. The 15 semistructured phone interviews were conducted between May and June 2013. The interview comprised some initial opening demographic and background questions about the overall experience of reporting on the Paralympic Games. Subsequent questions then focused on aspects of the journalist decision-making processes (e.g., what the overarching foci or narrative threads are; who covered what, when, where, and how; what editorial and political decisions were made and why; what production procedures were; and how particular textual or photographic outcomes were achieved). Further questions were asked in relation to participant’s impressions of sport journalists at the Paralympic Games.

All interviews were recorded, transcribed, and codified independently by two researchers and thematic analysis was then undertaken (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006; Guest, 2012). Key themes, also considered as frames of meaning, were discussed in light of commonalities and differences, and, where appropriate, ideas were then aggregated into distinct domains of meaning. The selection of themes derived from our qualitative data but also from our initial quantitative examinations. Subsequent to the quantitative analysis, for example, the research team discussed how coverage variances and points of interest might be explained and theorised within the context of framing. These considerations were then taken forward in analysis of the interview transcripts. While a number of initial themes emerged, here we present the most salient themes related to the underlying theoretical arguments regarding framing (e.g., organisational and structural controls, editorial and journalist attitudes, economic crises, temporal issues, and publication pressures).

Results

Measuring Coverage

On first examination, the numerical data (see Table 1) give the impression that the coverage of the London 2012 Paralympic Games increased in comparison to Beijing’s 2008 coverage, with some additional 3,070 lines, 79 news items, and 129 photos. However, a more in-depth analysis offers evidence that this improvement was due solely to a spectacular increase in coverage by one of the newspapers: the sports newspaper Marca. Yet a thorough overview on the newspaper-by-newspaper data offers a unique perspective. The generalist press’s interest in the Games was either the same or lower, apart from the conservative Madrid-based newspapers ABC and La Razón, which devoted 1,364 lines, 30 news items, and 46 photos more to the coverage of London than of Beijing.

In the case of the sports press, in terms of the number of lines published, in London 2012, this was slightly lower than in Beijing 2008: The newspaper As published 41.6% less, Sport 53.7% less, and both Superdeporte less and Mundo Deportivo 38.6% less. Only two newspapers increased their coverage of London 2012: Estadio Deportivo published 7.5% more content and in Marca (who published 462.7% more lines) a 5-fold increase was noted. In the mainstream press sphere, the data show overall decreases were counterbalanced by the interest shown by just two newspapers (ABC and La Razón). In the case of the sports press, the only considerable increase in coverage came from the newspaper Marca. The remaining newspapers’ interest in the Games was either lower or marginally higher. In conclusion, the coverage was only better when considering the overall data and worse when analysing the newspaper-by-newspaper data. This overarching data interpretation is dependent upon and skewed significantly by, one sports newspaper, Marca.

The quantitative findings are reinforced when we specifically look at the percentages. In percentage terms, El País’s interest was approximately 20% lower and El Mundo’s was more than 40% lower; the Catalan generalist newspapers increased their coverage by about 15%, while ABC published 98.4% more and La Razón 90.7% more on London than in Beijing. In the case of the sports press, As, Sport, and Superdeporte reduced their interest between 40% and 50%, and the only newspaper to increase its coverage was Marca, which increased their coverage by approximately 500%.

Making Meanings of Coverage

The interview data presented below offer evidence to help understand “why” such coverage measurements were observed and to identify some of the underlying motives of coverage decreases. In the first instance, all participants referred to elements of the news-making and editing process. The news-making process can be associated with three phases of development: newsgathering, selection of items that will make the news, and the final news product (McCombs, 2014; Meyen et al., 2014; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007). We present here two particular logistical elements related to news-making in addition to two further contextual forces.

The organisational and structural controls

Many participants noted that the organisers in Beijing gave journalists considerable freedom and that they could move around the Olympic Village and surrounding areas with great ease. In contrast, control over the media in London was much stricter and journalists could only move around a preplanned internal circuit that organisers fully controlled. “We could work better in Beijing,” one journalist noted, “there were (sic) less control in entering and getting out of the Olympic Village. In Beijing we would engage and meet easier with the athletes while in London that was more complicated since we had more limitations.” This greater control over the press in London meant that most journalists had limited interactions with the athletes, interviewing or taking photos, in the so-called mixed zone; the area athletes had to transit on leaving the competition facilities. As such, it was hard to develop detailed stories as journalist lacked visual or audio sound bites. As Howe (2008) notes, the mixed zone was an invitation to produce stories of celebration. Mixed zones matter in the sense that they break down some of the formality of the professional sport setting and enable reporters, athletes, fans, and entourages to interact in a more convivial, lively and (primarily) positive ways. In the context of reporters generating interest about the Paralympic games, such opportunities for access and engagement can be considered integral to the positive narrative-making process. From the interviews, it emerged that the outcome of this limitation on journalists’ movements was a reduction in the production of life stories and more short news items.

While most of the competitions in Beijing were held in nearby venues, journalists in London spent considerable time travelling between venues. In some cases, this meant that journalists in Beijing could cover up to three competitions per day, whereas in London they could only attend two. As another participant stressed:
In Beijing the media hub was also a hotel, we were just at the centre of the Olympic Park, you had easy access to everywhere; In London, on the other hand, traveling between venues was much more complicated.
Such difficulties, invariably, manifest in journalists’ abilities to add nuance to their Paralympic narratives and the quality of the overall media framing of the event (at least in terms of what was presented within the Spanish mainstream and sport media outlets).

Editorial attitudes towards framing Paralympic sport

In addition to organisational and practical constraints, all the journalists interviewed said they had suggested topics and angles to their senior managers at the central editorial offices. However, what eventually transpired was that the senior managers ultimately decided on the space that would be devoted to the event each day and whether or not the article would include a photo as well as the specific image and image size. While this may be accepted practice within mainstream media production, organisational hierarchies and decision-making processes are central in determining how frames of meaning are developed, which frames are prioritised and what values and ideals are to be represented (Scheufele & Tewsbury, 2007; Shoemaker & Reese, 2011; Xue et al., 2019). As well as variable values placed on the events by senior management, additional financial constraints also limited resources journalists were given to cover the Paralympic Games. As one journalist offered:
To tell you the truth, the journalists that have never been to the Paralympic Games, they think that these Games are less important.…When I would say to the rest of my colleagues that I would go to cover the Paralympic Games they would go like: Oh, this is too relaxing! They think that this is like going for holidays. And of course covering the Paralympic Games has nothing of relaxedness. It is exactly the opposite, because they (media companies) want to save money they tend to send less people to cover the Games so in the end, you end up working more hours.
Here, it is possible to see some of the contextual complexities that affect journalists’ work and also how certain events or issues are subsequently framed (in this case, in light of particular social norms and values, individual ideological orientations, and the peer decisions of the journalist’s team; Kian & Hardin, 2009; Scheufele, 1999). With regard to the specific media coverage of Paralympic athletes, such issues matter as the way the media coverage is framed by journalists became restricted by a set of professional norms and “organisational routines.” “The guidelines that I had from the editorial office,” one ABC newspaper journalist noted, “was to focus mainly on ‘storying’ background tales of athletes, not matter if they were Spanish or foreigners…”
I was told not to focus on medals but to privilege the coverage of the Spanish athletes. The guidelines were to focus in themes related to normalization and comparisons between Olympic and Paralympic athletes…to create stories not so much related to their medals or sport achievement but to mainly focus on how their nonathletic life is, which were they obstacles they had to face in their road to success. The whole idea of our coverage was to focus more on the personal aspect, which I believe is what interest the audience the most.
In this case, Spanish media outlets' apparent concern with the assumed lack of popularity of the Paralympic Games and organisational buy-in to journalists’ practices that were buoyed by their professional work ethic and sporting enthusiasm (Entman, 1993; Scheufele & Tewsbury, 2007; Shoemaker and Reese, 2011). As one further journalist noted, “it is not a matter of only reporting about the medal, but lots about what happens behind the scenes.” As these quotes illustrate, there was some clear guidance on coverage foci provided to journalists in some newspapers. Although journalists may have had particular persuasions and motives to cover certain stories, these had to be mediated and negotiated within the context of the overarching newspapers' strategies. In the cases above, this remit entailed a primary focus on the personal aspects and non-sport-related narratives. The only exception to this pattern or routine was the Seville-based newspaper Estadio Deportivo, whose London correspondent was also the newspaper’s deputy director, which meant that he could make all the decisions on site. This special circumstance may explain why there was a slight increase in this newspaper’s coverage during London 2012 (see Table 1).

Temporal and production issues

There was a time difference of 6 hr between Beijing and Madrid, meaning that in 2008, when the competitions ended in China, journalists had a lot of time to prepare their news items before their newspapers closed. The opposite was the case for London: With London being an hour behind Madrid, the journalists could not deal with the final page proofs effectively. Ultimately, this led to a reduction in the space devoted to the Games. For example, one journalist stated that:
The work system was quite similar, although the problem was the time difference, which benefited us in Beijing. In London, the information about medals, the competition set carried significantly later and that may have influenced the lower media coverage in some cases.
Some participants also highlighted that, during the economic crisis in recent years, their newspapers had cut back on the total number of daily pages published (e.g., from 48 to 40 pages in one case). One reporter stated:
The problem is that in 2008, Superdeporte had more pages, around 48 regular pages, but for 1 or 2 years now the number has not exceeded 40. You had regular pages for Valencia CF, for Levante UD, and then the “Polideportivo” section, which covered all sports other than football or basketball.
The shortening of the overall size of the newspaper identified here ultimately effects the counting of the variables measured and is a further example of the factors that are affecting media framing as organisational pressures and constraints are influencing the selection and the production of news (Scheufele, 1999; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007). Additionally, regarding the final version of the news item, participants reported that this decision was shared between the central editorial offices in Spain and the reporters in London. Editors would decide on the space allocation, and journalists would adapt their narratives to the space and editorial angle.

Economic crisis effects on media coverage

In the same way as for the Beijing Games, the SPC’s communication strategy for London 2012 included paying for the travel and accommodation expenses of those reporters who wanted to cover the events onsite. However, the media coverage of London 2012 was influenced by austerity measures that several newspapers put in place to deal with the prevailing financial crisis that hit the country. In the London edition of the Games, many print media turned down this invitation because they could not even pay for the reporter’s daily subsistence expenses. “I put that down mostly to the economic crisis,” the SPC representative noted, “…some media that attended the Beijing Games didn’t accept our invitation because sending someone would have meant paying for subsistence expenses and being one person down on the editorial team.”

Yet, occasionally, austerity measures could be countered. In one case, at the level of individual journalists, the use of social media provided a cost-effective, efficient, and powerful means to augment the content provided in their print journalism. The comments here echo scholars elsewhere who have, variously, noted the increased utility of social media in engaging (new) audiences, broadening coverage and market share, enhancing public engagement, generating “meaningful accounts of human experience,” and circumventing production and/or editorial constraints (Bastos, 2015; Moritz, 2015; Reed & Hansen, 2013; Schoenstedt & Reau, 2010). “The use of social media has created a huge impact,” one journalist noted, “Almost all of the coverage I wrote about Paralympic sport were retweeted and I enjoyed interacting with our readership. Sometimes, the comments were harsh but I like to read what the comments from our readers are.” They continued:
The constructive feedback is always welcomed. For example, the Paralympic Games coincided with some sensationalist stories about the flamboyancy of (the football star) Ronaldo and there were some readers commenting positively about our newspaper, congratulating us for offering media space to Paralympic sport and making ironic comments about Ronaldo. For instance, saying that Paralympic athletes are “the REAL athletes.” What is so interesting for social media for us as Paralympic journalists is the fact that there are less strict rules in terms of the size you can dedicate when writing new reports and this is helpful.
In another instance, there were larger political efforts made to shift approaches to media coverage. According to the SPC representative, the principal factor behind the substantive increase in the space devoted by Marca to the London 2012 Paralympic Games was due to a financial agreement had been reached with this newspaper and the SPC. The SPC made a payment to the media outlet to entice journalists’ engagement and ensure that a substantial amount of daily coverage was produced during the period of the Paralympic Games. Justifying the rationale for this commercial agreement, the representative noted that:
We (the SPC) believe that Marca is the biggest sports medium and we are with them. Because of limited resources, we can’t reach agreements with all the media. It’s clear to us that the money must be allocated to television and to Marca, and we don’t have the budget to do anything else.
Notwithstanding concerns over media impartiality and narrative bias, it is evident that such strategic financial agreements may go a considerable way to improving and increasing the coverage. Yet, while such economical manoeuvrings may make considerable sense given the precarity that both sport organisations and press outlets can face with regard to engagement and competitiveness in neoliberal markets, there are ethical questions and methodological implications that also accrue.

Discussion

The initial quantitative analysis of Paralympic media coverage provided a data set that revealed discernible changes in some aspects of media coverage between the 2008 and 2012 Paralympic Games iterations. The results were, invariably, sufficient to draw tentative conclusions about the state of Spanish media coverage toward the Paralympic Games at this temporal juncture and the particular publications in which further improvement and intervention work may or may not have been required. Quantitative content analyses are of course essential in an early phase of understanding the differences in the media treatment of the Paralympic Games and, consequently, the underlying unfairness in the media coverage of this type of elite sport. However, such differences can often lead to an understanding of reality that is possibly superficial or even mistaken. Recently, for example, Pappous, Marcellini, and Léséleuc (2011a; 2011b) observed that there is no quantitative discrimination in terms of the space devoted to female Paralympic athletes compared to that devoted to male Paralympic athletes. However, those authors mentioned that there is some sort of qualitative discrimination because these female athletes are represented in ways that highlight sex appeal and, at the same time, belittle them in comparison to male Paralympic athletes by accentuating family-related and sentimental aspects. On that note, Neuendorf (2002) stresses that care should be taken when it comes to drawing conclusions based solely on quantitative content analysis.

Following Scheufele (1999), Scheufele and Tewksbury (2007), and Xue et al.’s (2019) theoretical conceptualisations, our study investigated media framing with the aim to investigate the multiple factors that may influence the production of Paralympic Games narratives within Spanish print media. Our findings highlighted that journalists’ routines and values, logistical issues, production processes, and organisational pressures influenced the news content and creation processes within Spanish mass media portrayals of the Beijing 2008 and London 2012 Paralympic Games. Our interrogations also revealed that coverage was framed by the attitudes of some key stakeholders (editors and managers) who did not believe that the Paralympic Games were a genuine athletic or competitive event, nor that it merited comparable treatment to the Olympic Games. These negative assumptions of keymedia stakeholders affect the media framing but also may inform important organisational decisions, for example, how many journalists may be sent to cover the Games, how news content is positioned, events are perceived and/or valued, and whether editorial decision made in situ during the event or at the point of final production.

Within our analysis, it was evident that increased success of Paralympic athletes at and across Paralympic Games was, in some instances, a notable factor in influencing editorial decision-making and the focus specific journalists took with the breadth and depth of their coverage over the Games’ duration. Essentially, real-time medal tallies and athlete progress in situ mattered greatly. To reiterate, prior to the commencement of the Games, editors decided which journalists cover which events and athletes and (at times) dictated the precise nature of the writing and allocated column space (a practice no different in Spain than it is in many other countries). However, as with other areas of journalism, there are considerable degrees of flexibility within editors’ and journalists’ approaches. Improved performances and medals in one sport, for example, may motivate the expansion of coverage and the editor’s authorisation of further column space (even if that space is, albeit, still minimal compared to able-bodied sport coverage). Therefore, and further reiterating our main thesis regarding the complexities of framing in this context, assertions about generalised increases in coverage and clear/fixed strategies to frame national coverage in particular ways warrant caution.

To note, while national success variations across Games iteration may have altered the nature and extent of some coverage, one key continuity was the perpetuation of narratives related to the personal lives of athletes with a disability (specifically, the construction of discourses of triumph, adversity, overcoming barriers, perseverance, etc.). Although a detailed examination of this type of content was not a focus of our analysis, it is possible to see how there were entrenched discourses of ableism (or at least varying degrees of unconscious bias within the journalistic process) operating within and across the Paralympic Games framing. By extension, it may subsequently be possible to claim legitimately that views that endorse the superiority of ableism are at work within the Spanish media’s sport coverage. However, we acknowledge, there is a need for more research to fully comprehend the underlying processes behind this and the possibilities for news-making going forward. One suggestion here may be to recognise and address the need for training that might be offered to newspaper editors and/or sport media professionals in order to improve their knowledge and understanding about Paralympic Sport and its highly competitive and athletic nature.

In this research, a superficial quantitative observation might have led to positive conclusions about Paralympic coverage. However, quantitative content analyses alone do not provide elements that are capable of shedding light on the underlying logic of decisions made by professionals, which, in consequence, could go some way to explaining why discrimination or stigmatisation is happening. Our recommendation here is that if we want to develop our understandings further and somehow change media outlets’ and journalists’ treatment of disability and specifically of the Paralympic Games, the key is to interrogate the underlying logics of their behaviour (Lowe, 1999; Rother, Oelrichs & Geske, 2012). The utility of such mixed-methods approach has already been noted by some, for example, Marcellini (2012), with respect to French Paralympic media analysis, and by Howe (2008) and Golden (2003) who have proffered the advantages of ethnographically based media research. In particular, we continue calls for work to supplement media content analysis with in-depth interviews to allow analysis of reporter, line managers, section heads, deputy directors, and directors’ perceptions towards the Paralympic Games. As evidenced by the qualitative data, these individuals are fundamental stakeholders of the news-making process and may contribute directly to narrative framing. Such an approach would also be of value in complementing ongoing work to better articulate athletes’ perceptions towards the media representation of Paralympic athletes (Braye, 2016; Braye et al., 2013; Peers, 2012a, 2012b; Smith et al., 2016).

Conclusion

In conclusion, we argue that if the aim is to understand the mechanisms and processes involved in the news-making process, an understanding of key actors’ ideologies, perceptions, and attitudes towards the Paralympic Games is required. In light of our findings, it is also paramount to understand the economic logic underlying the relationship between Paralympic Committees, the media and corporate sponsors, and the roles this plays within media coverage. Ultimately, if the objective is to influence and improve how the media report disability, and specifically Paralympic sport and athletes, we need to continue to expand research agendas; for example, by undertaking qualitative studies that include data from not only journalists but staff in other roles within the organisational hierarchy (e.g., managing editors, editors in chief, and publishers). Additionally, we consider that media scholars should continue to take interest in critically examining the underlining political and financial agreements and contextual forces that may be at work in media production processes. In our case, this means drawing attention to those forces that may be directly influencing the representation of disability groups at the international, national, and local media levels. Although not yet extensively explored with relation to Paralympic media coverage, such examinations may also take interest in questions of ethics and journalistic/organisational credibility, and/or stakeholders’ relations, that emerge when agendas to increase coverage are explored. While on the one hand, financial agreements between sport federations and mass media evidenced in our research may be considered advantageous for raising the public profile of Paralympic sport, such relations also have the capacity to affect seriously the validity, interpretability, and integrity of quantitative content analysis.

Newspaper	Lines	News Items	Images
El País	316 (2.1)	253 (1.4)	−63 (−19.9)	10 (2.7)	5 (1.1)	−5 (−50)	6 (1.6)	4 (0.8)	−2 (−33.3)
El Mundo	726 (4.9)	430 (24)	−296 (−40.8)	16 (4.3)	17 (3.8)	1 (6.25)	10 (2.7)	7 (1.4)	−3 (−30)
La Vanguardia	301 (2)	346 (1.9)	45 (15)	11 (2.9)	11 (2.4)	0 (0)	7 (1.8)	9 (1.8)	2 (28.6)
ABC	922 (6.1)	1,826 (10.2)	904 (98)	20 (5.4)	40 (8.9)	20 (100)	12 (3.2)	47 (9.5)	35 (291.7)
El Periódico	305 (2)	351 (2)	46 (15.1)	8 (2.1)	12 (26)	4 (50)	10 (2.7)	14 (2.8)	4 (40)
La Razón	507 (3.4)	967 (5.4)	460 (90.7)	14 (3.8)	24 (5.3)	10 (71.4)	10 (2.7)	23 (4.6)	13 (130)
Total generalist	3,077 (20.5)	4,173 (23.2)	10,960 (158.1)	79 (21.2)	109 (24,1)	30 (177.7)	55 (14.7)	104 (20.9)	49 (426.9)
Marca	951 (6.4)	5,351 (29.8)	4,400 (462.7)	13 (3.5)	84 (18.8)	71 (546.2)	14 (3.8)	83 (16.8)	69 (492.9)
As	1,644 (11)	960 (5.3)	−684 (−41.6)	48 (13)	32 (7.1)	−16 (−33.3)	31 (8.5)	32 (6.5)	1 (3.2)
Mundo Deportivo	1,179 (7.9)	1,178 (6.6)	−1 (−0.1)	18 (4.9)	24 (5.3)	6 (33.3)	26 (7.1)	32 (6.5)	6 (23.1)
Sport	1,954 (13.1)	904 (5)	−1,050 (−53.7)	38 (10.3)	32 (7.1)	−6 (−15.8)	31 (8.5)	25 (5)	−6 (−19.4)
Estadio Deportivo	3,591 (24.1)	3,863 (21.5)	272 (7.6)	89 (24.2)	105 (23.5)	21 (23.6)	110 (30.3)	123 (25)	13 (11.8)
Superdeporte	2,494 (16.7)	1,531 (8.5)	−963 (−38.6)	83 (22.6)	61 (13.7)	−22 (−26.5)	96 (26.4)	93 (18.9)	−3 (−3.1)
Total sports	11,813 (79.3)	13,787 (76.8)	1,974 (336.2)	289 (78.5)	338 (75.5)	54 (527.5)	308 (84.8)	388 (78.8)	80 (26)
Total combined	14,890 (100)	17,960 (100)	3,070 (494)	368 (100)	447 (100)	79 (465.8)	363 (100)	492 (100)	129 (452.9)

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

Geoffery Zain Kohe

Notes

References

Bagenstos

S. R.

(2014). Law and the contradictions of the disability rights movement. London, England: Yale University Press.

Barnes

(1999). Theories of disability and the origins of the oppression of disabled people in Western society. In Barton

(Ed.), Disability and society: Emerging issues and insights (pp. 43–60). New York, NY: Pearson.

Bastos

M. T.

(2015). Shares, pins, and tweets: News readership from daily papers to social media. Journalism Studies, 16, 305–325.

Baynton

D. C.

(2001). Disability and the justification of inequality in American history. In Longmore

P. K.

Umansky

(Eds.), The new disability history: American perspectives (pp. 33–56). New York: New York University Press.

Billings

A. C.

Eastman

S. T.

(2003). Framing identities: Gender, ethnic, and national parity in network announcing of the 2002 Winter Olympics. Journal of Communication, 53, 569–586.

Boykoff

Yasuoka

(2015). Gender and politics at the 2012 Olympics: Media coverage and its implications. Sport in Society, 18, 219–233.

Braye

(2016). “I’m not an activist”: An exploratory investigation into retired British Paralympic athlete’s views on the relationship between the Paralympic Games and disability equality in the UK. Disability and Society, 31, 1288–1300.

Braye

Dixon

Gibbons

(2013). “A mockery of equality”: An exploratory investigation into disabled activists’ views of the Paralympic Games. Disability and Society, 28, 984–996.

Brittain

(2010). The Paralympic Games explained. London, England: Routledge.

10.

Buysse

J. A. M.

Borcherding

(2010). Framing gender and disability: A cross-cultural analysis of photographs from the 2008 Paralympic Games. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3(3), 308–321.

11.

Chang

H. H.

(2014). Social change and the disability rights movement in Taiwan 1981-2002. Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 3, 1–17.

12.

Cherney

J. L.

Lindemann

Hardin

(2015). Research in communication, disability, and sport. Communication & Sport, 3, 8–26.

13.

D’Angelo

Kuypers

J. A.

(2010). Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives. London, England: Routledge.

14.

De Haan

(2012) Paralympic athletes’ perspectives of media coverage. Whose Story is it? In Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(Eds.), Heroes or zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic sport (pp. 225–236). Champaign, IL: Common Ground.

15.

DePauw

(1997). The (in)visibility of disability: Cultural contexts and “sporting bodies.” Quest, 49, 416–430.

16.

Druckman

J. N.

Parkin

(2005). The impact of media bias: How editorial slant affects voters. Journal of Politics, 67, 1030–1049.

17.

Duncan

M. C.

(2006). Gender warriors in sport: women and the media. In Raney

Bryant

(Eds.), Handbook of sports and media (pp. 231–252). New York, NY: Routledge.

18.

Entman

R. M.

(1991). Symposium framing US coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran air incidents. Journal of Communication, 41, 6–27.

19.

Entman

R. M.

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

20.

Fereday

Muir-Cochrane

(2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5, 80–92.

21.

Fong

Katz

(2012). USA vs. Canada. An analysis of media coverage of Paralympic athletes. In Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(Eds.), Heroes or zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic sport (pp. 113–120). Champaign, IL: Common Ground.

22.

Gilbert

Schantz

O. J.

(2008). (Eds.), The Paralympic Games. Empowerment or side show? Maidenhead, England: Meyer and Meyer.

23.

Gilbert

Schantz

O. J.

(2012). An implosion of discontent. Reconceptualising the rapport between the media and the Paralympic movement. In Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(Eds.), Heroes or zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic sport (pp. 225–236). Champaign, IL: Common Ground.

24.

Golden

(2003). An analysis of the dissimilar coverage of the 2002 Olympics and Paralympics: Frenzied pack journalism versus the empty press room. Disability Studies Quarterly, 23. Retrieved from www.dsqsds.org

25.

Guarneiro

F. B.

Bellinghini

R. H.

Gattaz

W. F.

(2017). The schizophrenia stigma and mass media: A search for new published by wide circulation media in Brazil. International Review of Psychiatry, 29, 241–247.

26.

Guest

(2012). Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

27.

Haller

(2000). If they limp they lead? News representations and the hierarchy of disability images. In Braithwaite

Thompson

(Eds.), Handbook of communication and people with disabilities (pp. 273–288). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

28.

Hardin

M. M.

(2003). Conformity and conflict: Wheelchair athletes discuss sport media. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 20, 246–259.

29.

Howe

(2008). From inside the newsroom: Paralympic media and the “production” of elite disability. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 43, 135–150.

30.

Kian

E. M.

Hardin

(2009). Framing of sport coverage based on the sex of sports writers: Female journalists counter the traditional gendering of media coverage. International Journal of Sport Communication, 2, 185–204.

31.

Klapper

J. T.

(1960). The effects of mass communication. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

32.

Lebel

Marcellini

Pappous

(2010). Regards croisés sur une photographie sportive. Photojournalisme sportif et athlètes handicapés: mise en scène du corps et production de sens. Alter—European Journal of Disability Research, 4, 18–33.

33.

Legg

Steadward

(2011). The Paralympic Games and 60 years of change (1948–2008): Unification and restructuring from a disability and medical model to sport-based competition. Sport in Society, 14, 1099–1115.

34.

Léséleuc

(2012). A way forward. Researching international perspectives on media and the Paralympics. In Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(Eds.), Heroes or zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic sport (pp. 121–134). Champaign, IL: Common Ground.

35.

Lowe

(1999). Inside the sports pages: Work routines, professional ideologies and the manufacture of sports news. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.

36.

Marcellini

(2012). French perspectives on the media and Paralympics. In Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(Eds.), Heroes or Zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic Sport (pp. 95–104). Champagne, IL: Common Ground Publishing LL.

37.

Marks

(2014). Disability: Controversial debates and psychosocial perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge.

38.

McCombs

(2014). Setting the agenda: Mass media and public opinion. London, England: John Wiley.

39.

Mercurio

Filak

V. F.

(2010). Roughing the passer: The framing of Black and White quarterbacks prior to the NFL draft. Howard Journal of Communications, 21(1), 56–71.

40.

Meyen

Thieroff

Strenger

(2014). Mass media logic and the mediatization of politics: A theoretical framework. Journalism Studies, 15, 271–288.

41.

Misener

(2013). A media frames analysis of the legacy discourse for the 2010 Winter Paralympic Games. Communication and Sport, 1, 342–364.

42.

Moritz

(2015). The story versus the stream: Digital media’s influence on newspaper sports reporting. International Journal of Sport Communication, 8, 397–410.

43.

Nelson

J. A.

(1994). Broken images: Portrayals of those with disabilities in American media. In Nelson

J. A.

(Ed.), The disabled, the media and the info age (pp. 1–17). Westport, CN: Greenwood Press.

44.

Neuendorf

(2002). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

45.

Olson

C. M.

Rennie

Cook

Dickersin

Flanagin

Hogan

J. W.

… Pace

(2002). Publication bias in editorial decision making. JAMA, 287, 2825–2828.

46.

Pan

Kosicki

G. M.

(1993). Framing analysis: An approach to news discourse. Political Communication, 10, 55–75.

47.

Pappous

Hayday

E. J.

(2016) A case study investigating the impact of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games on participation in two non-traditional English sports, Judo and Fencing. Leisure Studies, 35, 668–684.

48.

Pappous

Marcellini

Léséleuc

E. D.

(2010). The media coverage of female athletes with disability. Analysis of the daily press of four European countries during the 2000 Sidney Paralympic Games. European Journal for Sport and Society, 7, 283–296.

49.

Pappous

Marcellini

Léséleuc

E. D.

(2011a). From Sydney to Beijing: the evolution of the photographic coverage of Paralympic Games in five European countries. Sport in Society, 14, 345–354.

50.

Pappous

Marcellini

Léséleuc

E. D.

(2011b). Contested issues in research on the media coverage of female Paralympic athletes. Sport in Society, 14, 1182–1191.

51.

Peers

(2012a). Patients, athletes, freaks: Paralympism and the reproduction of disability. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 36, 295–316.

52.

Peers

(2012b). Interrogating disability: The (de)composition of a recovering Paralympian. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 4, 175–188.

53.

Price

Tewksbury

(1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming and framing. In Barett

G. A.

Boster

F. J.

(Eds.), Progress in communication sciences: Advances in persuasion (Vol. 13, pp. 173–212), New York, NY: Ablex.

54.

Purdue

D. E.

(2013). An (in) convenient truce? Paralympic stakeholders’ reflections on the Olympic–Paralympic relationship. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 37, 384–402.

55.

Reed

Hansen

K. A.

(2013) Social media’s influence on American sport journalists’ perceptions of gatekeeping. International Journal of Sport Communication, 6, 373–383.

56.

Reese

S. D.

(2007). The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 148–154.

57.

Renwick

(2016). Rarely seen, seldom heard: People with intellectual disabilities in the mass media. In Schior

Werner

(Eds.), Intellectual disability and stigma: Stepping out from the margins (pp. 61–75). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

58.

Rother

Oelrichs

Geske

(2012). An international comparison of the role of public service broadcasters when reporting on disability sports. In Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(Eds.), Heroes or zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic sport (pp. 37–53). Champaign, IL: Common Ground.

59.

Saxton

(2018). Hard bodies: Exploring historical and cultural factors in disabled people’s participation in exercise; applying critical disability theory. Sport in Society, 21, 22–39.

60.

Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(2001). An ideal misconstrued: Newspaper coverage of the Atlanta Paralympic Games in France and Germany. Sociology of Sport Journal, 18, 69–94.

61.

Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(2008). French and German newspaper coverage of the 1996 Atlanta Paralympic Games. In Gilbert

Schantz

O. J.

(Eds.), The Paralympic Games. Empowerment or side show? (pp. 34–56). Maidenhead, England: Meyer and Meyer.

62.

Schantz

O. J.

Gilbert

(2012). Heroes or zeros? The media’s perceptions of Paralympic sport. Champaign, IL: Common Ground.

63.

Scheufele

D. A.

(1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103–122.

64.

Scheufele

D. A.

Tewkesbury

(2006). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 9–20.

65.

Scheufele

D. A.

Tewksbury

(2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9–20.

66.

Schoenstedt

L. J.

Reau

(2010) Running a social-media newsroom: A case study of the Cincinnati Flying Pig Marathon. International Journal of Sport Communication, 3, 377–386.

67.

Schug

Alt

N. P.

P. S.

Gosin

Fay

J. L.

(2017). Gendered race in mass media: Invisibility of Asian men and Black women in popular magazines. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 6, 222.

68.

Shakespeare

(2013). Disability rights and wrongs revisited. New York, NY: Routledge.

69.

Shoemaker

Reese

S. D.

(2011). Mediating the message. New York, NY: Routledge.

70.

Smith

Bundon

Best

(2016). Disability sport and activist identities: A qualitative study of narratives of activism among elite athletes’ with impairment. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 26, 139–148.

71.

Smith

Sparkes

A. C.

(2008). Narrative and its potential contribution to disability studies. Disability and Society, 23, 17–28.

72.

Thomas

Smith

(2003). Preoccupied with able-bodiedness? An analysis of the British media coverage of the 2000 Paralympic Games. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 20, 166–181.

73.

Vanhala

(2010). Making rights a reality? Disability rights activists and legal mobilization. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

74.

Wachs

F. L.

Dworkin

S. L.

(1997). “There’s no such thing as a gay hero”: Sexual identity and media framing of HIV-positive athletes. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 21, 327–347.

75.

White

D. M.

(1950). The “gatekeeper”: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27, 383–390.

76.

Wilson

N. J.

Jaques

Johnson

Brotherton

M. L.

(2017). From social exclusion to supported inclusion: Adults with intellectual disability discuss their lived experiences of a structured social group. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 30, 847–858.

77.

Xue

Mason

D. M.

Humphreys

B. R.

Johnson

B. K.

Whitehead

J. C.

(2019). Framing the Olympic elite athlete funding issue: A case study of Canadian newspaper coverage. Communication & Sport, 7, 310–336. doi:10.1177/2167479518775427

Newspaper	Lines			News Items			Images
Newspaper	2008, N (%)	2012, N (%)	Dif., N (%)	2008, N (%)	2012, N (%)	Dif., N (%)	2008, N (%)	2012, N (%)	Difference., N (%)
El País	316 (2.1)	253 (1.4)	−63 (−19.9)	10 (2.7)	5 (1.1)	−5 (−50)	6 (1.6)	4 (0.8)	−2 (−33.3)
El Mundo	726 (4.9)	430 (24)	−296 (−40.8)	16 (4.3)	17 (3.8)	1 (6.25)	10 (2.7)	7 (1.4)	−3 (−30)
La Vanguardia	301 (2)	346 (1.9)	45 (15)	11 (2.9)	11 (2.4)	0 (0)	7 (1.8)	9 (1.8)	2 (28.6)
ABC	922 (6.1)	1,826 (10.2)	904 (98)	20 (5.4)	40 (8.9)	20 (100)	12 (3.2)	47 (9.5)	35 (291.7)
El Periódico	305 (2)	351 (2)	46 (15.1)	8 (2.1)	12 (26)	4 (50)	10 (2.7)	14 (2.8)	4 (40)
La Razón	507 (3.4)	967 (5.4)	460 (90.7)	14 (3.8)	24 (5.3)	10 (71.4)	10 (2.7)	23 (4.6)	13 (130)
Total generalist	3,077 (20.5)	4,173 (23.2)	10,960 (158.1)	79 (21.2)	109 (24,1)	30 (177.7)	55 (14.7)	104 (20.9)	49 (426.9)
Marca	951 (6.4)	5,351 (29.8)	4,400 (462.7)	13 (3.5)	84 (18.8)	71 (546.2)	14 (3.8)	83 (16.8)	69 (492.9)
As	1,644 (11)	960 (5.3)	−684 (−41.6)	48 (13)	32 (7.1)	−16 (−33.3)	31 (8.5)	32 (6.5)	1 (3.2)
Mundo Deportivo	1,179 (7.9)	1,178 (6.6)	−1 (−0.1)	18 (4.9)	24 (5.3)	6 (33.3)	26 (7.1)	32 (6.5)	6 (23.1)
Sport	1,954 (13.1)	904 (5)	−1,050 (−53.7)	38 (10.3)	32 (7.1)	−6 (−15.8)	31 (8.5)	25 (5)	−6 (−19.4)
Estadio Deportivo	3,591 (24.1)	3,863 (21.5)	272 (7.6)	89 (24.2)	105 (23.5)	21 (23.6)	110 (30.3)	123 (25)	13 (11.8)
Superdeporte	2,494 (16.7)	1,531 (8.5)	−963 (−38.6)	83 (22.6)	61 (13.7)	−22 (−26.5)	96 (26.4)	93 (18.9)	−3 (−3.1)
Total sports	11,813 (79.3)	13,787 (76.8)	1,974 (336.2)	289 (78.5)	338 (75.5)	54 (527.5)	308 (84.8)	388 (78.8)	80 (26)
Total combined	14,890 (100)	17,960 (100)	3,070 (494)	368 (100)	447 (100)	79 (465.8)	363 (100)	492 (100)	129 (452.9)