IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Print Media Support for Social Welfare Programs: The View from the Opinion Pages of the Elite Press

  • Fay Lomax Cook
  • Gretchen Caspary
Registered author(s):

    This paper examines the framing of social welfare programs in the opinion pages of two major elite newspapers that research shows are widely read by U.S. policymakers. In particular, it focuses on level of attention (salience) and level of support. The data consist of all editorials, op-ed columns, and letters to the editor dealing substantively with social welfare programs or issues that appeared in the New York Times and the Washington Post from January 1, 1990, through December 31, 1995 (N=1,824). Results from reading and coding of each article show that the salience of social welfare programs as a whole remained stable over the period studied but that the salience of individual programs changed markedly from year to year, primarily in response to political events. From 1990 through 1994, support was strongly positive, with the majority of editorial, op-ed columns and letters to the editor calling for increases in spending on benefits. In 1995, fewer articles called for increases in social welfare programs, and more advocated either decreases to or maintenance in program scope and spending. This change was found to be primarily a defensive response to social welfare program cuts proposed by the Republicans' Contract With America. Thus, overall, we conclude that in the six years studied, the opinion pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post were highly supportive of American social welfare programs. The task that awaits future research is an examination of the influence, if any, that this framing of social welfare programs had on the opinions and actions of policymakers, government bureaucrats, and the general public.

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Paper provided by Institute for Policy Resarch at Northwestern University in its series IPR working papers with number 96-35.

    in new window

    Date of creation:
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:wop:nwuipr:96-35
    Contact details of provider: Postal: 2040 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-4100
    Phone: 847-491-8712
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wop:nwuipr:96-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Thomas Krichel)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.