Policy Agendas in the Media
99
Conclusions
The analysis of the media coverage presented herein provides evidence for
four conclusions. These included how the intensity of the coverage allowed policy
elites the opportunity to get their definition of reality across to the public. Secondly,
state managers clearly dominated the policy discussion in the media. Thirdly, the
discussions revolved around political legitimation and not economic justifications
for policy. Lastly, policy issues were discussed in the media with state managers
having been the most active policy advocacy group, particularly with respect to
the immigration and death penalty provisions.
The coverage of the Oklahoma City bombing was most intense during the
first week after the bombing. The enormous resources used by the networks, the
air time devoted to this attack, and the constant flow of images from the damaged
Murrah Federal building, demanded that something be done about this attack. In
response, state managers offered their expertise and advice to the nation. Because
of positional qualifications and because they used their organizational expertise,
their perspectives held a distinct advantage over other policy positions televised
during this time. When the audience sought a sense of normalcy, they listened and
trusted those state managers appearing in their living rooms nightly. They provided
an easily digested answer as to why this tragedy happened, as well as solutions to
this crisis in the form of existing policy proposals already before Congress. During
this advocacy, they offered solutions that were beneficial to their agencies and in
the process tried to expand the powers regulated to their agencies.
At a more structural level, the general public and these state managers focused
on the political crisis that terrorism posed and stayed away from the manifest and
latent economic consequences of such an attack. The end result was that capitalism
and economic dynamics were not a dominant frame in the discussions, while
political legitimation was a dominant frame.
The final conclusion to be drawn from this analysis is that during times of
extreme violence and crisis, the media seeks the expertise of state agencies regarding
what has been done to fight terrorism and what should be done. Typically these
answers take the form of policies designed to cure the problems the latest atrocity
pose. These policy solutions will eventually benefit state agencies by granting
them additional resources and power. State managers could be considered the
winners in this process, since it was their definitions of reality and interpretations
of events that framed the media coverage and public opinion.
California State University, Northridge
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Grand Valley State University
James David Ballard
Barbara Brents
Amanda Dean