Definitions: from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)#Definitions

Framing refers to the social construction of a social phenomenon often by mass media sources, political or social movements, political leaders, or other actors and organizations. It is an inevitable process of selective influence over the individual's perception of the meanings attributed to words or phrases. It is generally considered in one of two ways: as frames in thought, consisting of the mental representations, interpretations, and simplifications of reality, and frames in communication, consisting of the communication of frames between different actors.[1]] Framing might also be understood as being either equivalence frames, which represent logically equivalent alternatives portrayed in different ways (see  framing effect (psychology)) or as  emphasis frames, which simplify reality by focusing on a subset of relevant aspects of a situation or issue.[1]  In the context of politics or mass media communication, a frame defines the packaging of an element of  rhetoric  in such a way as to encourage certain interpretations and to discourage others.

In social theory, framing refers to a schema of interpretation, a collection of anecdotes and stereotypes, that individuals rely on to understand and respond to events.[2] In other words, people build a series of mental filters through biological and cultural influences. They use these filters to make sense of the world. The choices they then make are influenced by their creation of a frame. Framing is also a key component of sociology, the study of social interaction among humans.

Q: What happens to our thinking when we frame “THE MEDIA” as one, monolithic powerhouse?

Q: What about the “public interest” function of media (given their initial mission and role in society?)

Q: Who benefits by constructing (and vilifying) all media as inherently against the public interest?

chantrill