UPPSALA UNIVERSITY

Department of Business Studies

Master Thesis

Spring Semester 2012

Media framing – As time goes?

A qualitative longitudinal study

Authors: Julia Kahlström

Erik Norin

Supervisor: Stefan Jonsson

Date of Submission: 2012-08-08

ABSTRACT

This thesis concentrates on how media framing, regarding organisations, in Sweden have

developed, starting in the 1950s. Recent studies have concluded that media framing differs

between different national contexts. Still, there is a need of empirical studies comparing the

medias´ influence within countries over time. The thesis intends to fill the gap doing a

longitudinal single case study on a critical case, examining a Swedish organisation called SNS;

Centre for Business and Policy Studies. Three snapshots with 30 years apart have been selected

as events, all when SNS underwent a controversial situation. The findings suggest a shifted focal

point from more thematic to episodic frames, in the case of SNS. In the 50s the focus was mainly

on economic aspects and the media of later decades tend to focus more towards conflicts. The

conclusion is that the media framing, in a historical perspective, has developed within one

nation’s context.

A special thanks to…

• Stefan Jonsson, our supervisor, for his time, commitment and constructive ideas.

• Jonas Larsson Taghizadeh, PhD Student at Uppsala University, for feedback and

inspiration.

• Nina Giliusson for extraordinary language skills.

• Lars Engwall, Senior Professor Uppsala university; Bengt Rydén, Senior Advicer

Hallvarsson & Halvarsson and former CEO of SNS; Kersti Ullenhag, Professor Emeriti

Uppsala university and Jan Wallander, former CEO of SNS, for answering all our questions

considering SNS.

• SNSs office of administration, for provided help and access to their computers and

databases.

Keywords: media framing; media system; frame building; frame setting; longitudinal study;

Sweden

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Aim & Research Questions .................................................................................................... 3

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................ 4

2.1 Media Systems ........................................................................................................................ 4

2.2 Agenda Setting Theory & Framing Theory ............................................................................ 5

2.3 Framing Theory ...................................................................................................................... 6

2.3.1 Frame-Building ................................................................................................................ 6

2.3.2 Frame-Setting ................................................................................................................... 7

2.4 Media Framings & Conflicts .................................................................................................. 7

2.4.1 Frames Related To Controversial Situations ................................................................... 8

2.6 Propositions ............................................................................................................................ 9

2.6.1 Propositions And Frames ............................................................................................... 10

3 METODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 12

3.1 Research Approach ............................................................................................................... 12

3.2 Research Design – A Longitudinal Single Case ................................................................... 12

3.3 Case And Informant Selection .............................................................................................. 13

3.4 Data Collection – Documents & Interviews ......................................................................... 15

3.4.1 The Newspaper Articles ................................................................................................. 17

3.4.2 Operationalization Of Newspaper Articles .................................................................... 17

3.5 Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 21

4 EMPIRICS .................................................................................................................................. 22

4.1 Event 1951 Cartels And Wallander ...................................................................................... 22

4.2 Event 1981 Wage-Earners Funds And Rydén ...................................................................... 24

4.3 Event 2011 Privatization And Hartman ................................................................................ 27

5.2 SNS & Media In 1981 .......................................................................................................... 32

5.3 SNS & Media In 2011 .......................................................................................................... 34

5.4 One Case, Three Events & Five Propositions ..................................................................... 37

5.5 Media Framing – Reflection Of Society? ............................................................................. 39

6 CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................................................... 41

6.1 Implications For Researchers And Practitioners .................................................................. 41

6.2 Limitations ............................................................................................................................ 41

6.3 Further Research ................................................................................................................... 42

7 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 43

7.1 Articles & Books .................................................................................................................. 43

7.2 Personal Communication ...................................................................................................... 46

7.3 The Internet ........................................................................................................................... 46

7.4 Newspaper Articles ............................................................................................................... 48

8 APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................. 49

8.1 Interview 120229 With Bengt Rydén ................................................................................... 49

8.1.1 Interview Questions ....................................................................................................... 49

8.2 Interview 120413 With Kersti Ullenhag .............................................................................. 51

8.2.1 Interview Questions ....................................................................................................... 51

8.3 Jan Wallanders Letter To SNS In 2011 (In Swedish) .......................................................... 53

8.4 Letter To Jan Wallander ....................................................................................................... 55

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1- Media & Stakeholders In The 50s .................................................................................. 23

Figure 2- Media & Stakeholders In The 80s .................................................................................. 26

Figure 3- Media & Stakeholder In The 21th ................................................................................... 28

Figure 4 – Results From 1951 ........................................................................................................ 29

Figure 5 – Results From 1981 ........................................................................................................ 32

Figure 6 – Results From 2011 ........................................................................................................ 34

Figure 7- Development Of The Five frames .................................................................................. 37

Figure 8 – Summary Of Propositions & Outcomes ....................................................................... 39

1

1 INTRODUCTION

In Sweden we are constantly surrounded by a variety of different information flows. Information

is something most people take for granted, although in later years the information available has

changed in appearance while also increasing in volume. The information revolution began in the

nineties; digital texts were spread with a higher intensity, speed and simplicity than ever before

(Jansson, 2004). In the 21th century, the information society is a certainty (Hand, 2007). In

accordance, media organizations have a more central role in the development of society today

than in previous decades (Jansson, 2004). Even if most people would agree that media has a great

influence on society and individuals, the definitive role of media has been debated. Some argue

that media acts as a gatekeeper in the massive information flow (Strömbäck, 2009) while others

argue that media is an important base for our democracy (Petersson et al. 2005; De Vreese,

2005). Some will argue that the role of media is important; even though it sometimes tends to be

exaggerated (Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997). There is always a negotiation between media and

different organizations, about what kind of information should be turned into news, as opposed to

the media having total control (Engwall et al. forthcoming 2010).

Medias’ role goes beyond producing information; it can affect the interpretation of our daily lives

(Strömbäck, 2004) and influence how situations are conceived (Cho & Gower, 2006). What is

presented in media will often be used as sources of public opinions. That makes media a very

powerful tool in influencing our social conceptions, opinions and beliefs (Strömbäck, 2004). The

power of selecting what information should be presented creates opportunities to benefit some

parties of society before others. This could be referred to as framing.

Today framing is a commonly used concept, it could be explained as the biases that media ads to

its’ published news and articles (Entman, 2007). Framing originated in the seventies when

different scholars debated how media could be a key factor in creating different perceptions of

the information provided. This resulted in several well-known theories and The Framing theory

by Goffman is one of them (Strömbäck, 2009). Framing theory advocates that media has an

important role in framing the reality for individuals; consequently it influences individuals’

opinions (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000).

2

Decision making in organizations is now starting to integrate with medias’ framing and media

can both construct and destruct a reputation of an organization (Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997).

This has led to a strong dependence on the media since their framings have a great influence

towards how the public perceives the organization (Cho & Gower, 2006). This is particularly true

when a crisis occur in an organization (Pearson & Clair, 1998), because this is when they are at

their most vulnerable state.

The use of framing has been studied in different contexts, such as different countries (Semetko &

Valkenburg, 2000; An & Gower, 2009; Valentini & Romenti, 2011). These studies established

that framing could differ depending on cultural values and social differences between countries.

This thesis on the other hand will argue that framing could also differ within a single country

over time. This is supported by the idea that the history of a country provides different contexts,

due to the changing nature of societies. Should this prove correct future studies would have to

consider the history of a country as an additional dimension since studying different points in

time could produce different results.

Other studies have made different conclusions on whether or not framing is a dependent or

independent variable of societal development (Scheufele, 1999). For this thesis it does not matter

what came first – the chicken or the egg. What does matter is how and if there have been any

changes in media framing over time and if it is at all connected to societal development.

According to Hallin & Mancini (2004) a comparison between media systems and particularly

framing could be done by studying a time when political parties had a strong influence on media,

as opposed to a more contemporary period where commercial forces have a greater influence.

Swedish media as well as society has gone through major changes during the last 60 years

(Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997) and therefore a historical comparison between media and other

social actors would indicate whether or not media framing could also differ within a single

country over time.

3

1.1 Aim & Research Questions

The information flow has increased and news is provided faster than ever before. Historical

changes in media and society would indicate that how news is presented has changed too. The

aim of the study is to explore how media framing, in a national context, has changed between the

years 1951 and 2011. Through this thesis, the intention is to make an empirical contribution on

how media framing has changed over time and if this change is connected to the societal

development.

- How has the media changed their way of framing organisations from a national

perspective?

- Is the development of media framing within a country connected to the countries societal

development?

4

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter aims to build a framework on media framing and explain medias´ role in society and

their interaction with other social actors. The media can be seen as an institutional Infomediary,

“which emphasizes the roles of selectivity and social influence in perception and inference”

(Pollock & Rindova, 2003, p. 631). The medias´ societal role could differ depending on the

context that is examined; one of the aspects to consider is different media system.

2.1 Media Systems

A media system is an attempt to capture the main features in how media interplay in relation to

other actors in society. One of the reasons to make such studies is to compare different countries

(Petersson et al. 2005). Hallin & Mancini (2004) studied medias´ societal role in Western Europe

and North America. The authors developed three models called the Polarized Pluralist Model, the

Liberal model and the Democratic Corporatist Model. The first of the models has characteristics

of a low newspaper circulation, weak professionalization and strong intervention from the state.

Countries with this system are France, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The Liberal model is

dominant in United Kingdom, United States, Canada and Ireland. Market forces are governing

and the professionalization is high with self-regulation. The Democratic Corporatist Model has

high newspaper circulation and strong professionalization. In a historical perspective, the ties to

the political parties have been strong, but are moving toward a neutral commercial press.

Countries included are the Nordic countries, Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, Germany and

Switzerland (Hallin & Mancini, 2004). According to Petersson et al. (2005) Sweden is a

stereotype for the Democratic Corporatist Model. Important to consider is that the definitions are

fluid and Sweden has some similarities with the Liberal model for example (Hallin & Mancini,

2004). Further factors influencing is the national context (Dimitrova & Strömbäck, 2005) and

culture (Entman, 1993). There is still a need to further investigate the interplay between media

systems and news practices, and how it is managed and communicated in different contexts

(Valentini & Romenti, 2011).

In Sweden the media field changed drastically when Swedish media liberated from the

government in the 1980s. Ever since, media organisations have been influenced by

5

commercialization and the ties to the government have decreased (Hjarvard, 2008; Petersson et

al. 2005). This combined with the massive information flow has made media more influential

(Strömbäck, 2009). To completely understand the development of the Swedish media, one has to

understand the power of media (Strömbäck, 2009). Several theories have been developed and

next chapter will introduce two of the most well-known theories concerning media influence.

2.2 Agenda Sett ing Theory & Framing Theory

In the 1970s, several scholars developed theories about medias´ influences (Strömbäck, 2009).

Two of the most well-known theories are The Agenda Setting Function of Mass Media by

McCombs & Shaw (1972) and Framing theory by Goffman (Strömbäck, 2009).

In 1972 McCombs & Shaw released a theory of mass media named “The Agenda-Setting

Function of Mass Media” arguing that media were the major source for political information and

able to frame the information in a certain way and influence the result (McCombs & Shaw,

1972). The theory has been further developed and now consists of two levels where the second

level describes the attributes of themes and subjects presented in the media. Thereby influence

the cognitive aspects of the audience (Carroll & McCombs, 2003; Weaver, 2007). Some argue

that the Framing Theory is a part of the second level Agenda Setting (McCombs, 2006). The

disagreements to McCombs statement is that Framing theory includes what the content represent

e.g. how cultural values influences media and how the lack of information could create specific

framings (Strömbäck, 2004). Another fundamental difference is while Agenda setting theory

takes media’s power for granted Framing theory sees the whole perspective and the social

constructions (Strömbäck, 2004). Several of the above mentioned factors Framing theory

includes and Agenda setting theory excludes have to be taken into consideration when studying

how media interacts with other actors. Framing theory will be further described in next part.

6

2.3 Framing Theory

The purpose of framing is to highlight and select. This is used to construct arguments around

problems, judgment and/or solution (Entman, 1993). Framing could have a wide range of

appearances and the result could influence the society (Scheufele, 1999). If done successfully

media framing could affect and change peoples and even society’s values and beliefs (Entman,

1993). If the framings instead are of low relevance, there is a risk that the audience rejects the

frames (Yioutas & Segvic, 2003), which could damage media’s credibility.

Media framing can be seen as a dependent or independent variable (Scheufele, 1999). Framing is

in most cases referred to as the dependent variable in the process of creation. Here, media are

affected and influenced by external actors (Strömbäck, 2004). This would indicate that current

trends, attitudes and norms would impact on how situations are framed. Media would be affected

by how people perceive the world; referred to as frame building (Scheufele, 1999).

The frames could also be seen as an independent variable explaining why the readers perceive the

reality in a certain way, i.e. frame setting (Scheufele, 1999). This perspective emphasizes media’s

role and provide them with great power and responsibility.

The two perspectives could be regarded as either on an individual- or societal level. One example

of consequences on the individual level could be a changed attitude to a phenomenon while an

example of the societal level is political socialization or collective actions (De Vreese, 2005). In

order to understand how the Frame-Building and Frame-Setting emerge, the processes will be

described below.

2.3.1 Frame-Building

How a frame emerges depends on internal and external factors, influencing the structural

qualities of the news frames (De Vreese, 2005). Examples of internal factors are how the

journalists perceive the information, the political orientation of the medium or the way of

working for the media-organisation (Scheufele, 1999). Those factors affect how issues and news

will be framed (De Vreese, 2005). External factor includes the interactions between journalists,

managers, politicians and social movements (De Vreese, 2005). Here, the frame-building process

takes a mirror-perspective where the journalists reflect their images (Scheufele, 1999). All of this

create and build frames manifested in the texts (De Vreese, 2005).

7

In Frame Building journalists has a strong position. When handling news journalists has to

choose between attributes, perspective, sources etcetera. Framings are therefore inevitable

(Strömbäck, 2004). As other humans, journalists have a limited cognition and could therefore be

influenced by their own frames (Scheufele, 1999). Also norms from the profession could have an

impact and there is a certain risk that once a frame is introduced it will be reproduced. It is

important to consider to what extent journalists are influenced by their external surroundings i.e.

elites, other interest groups and frames from other news sources (Scheufele, 1999). Frame-

building in turn interrelates with Frame-Setting (De Vreese, 2005).

2.3.2 Frame-Sett ing

Frame-setting concerns the salience of how issues are characterized, which is very similar to

second level agenda setting since it influences the cognitive aspects of an attribute. By stressing

specific facts and giving them relevance, the frames make them appear more important than other

information. Giving an event higher relevance will in turn influence and create ideas of how

people should interpret the event (Scheufele, 1999). The media tends to focus in conflicts and

negative news (Strömbäck, 2008), which will be further investigated in next section.

2.4 Media Framings & Confl icts

Media has a great power to affect people’s perception (McCombs & Shaw, 1972) but for the

single organisation there is always a struggle between commercial aspects and quality of news

(Strömbäck, 2009). Media organisations have higher pressures than most other industries making

them focus in exclusive and unexpected stories including drama to attract readers (Rindova et al.

2006). One way to gain interest from the readers is to promote conflicts between different actors

(Jonsson & Buhr, 2010). It has become more common that journalists frames news in sport-terms

with winners and losers instead of focusing on the issues (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005). One

reason why conflicts get attention in the media is that people remember negative news rather than

positive news. Here media exaggerate the news (Strömbäck, 2008). By working in this way

media organisations creates excitement, decrease their production costs, make it easier for the

reader to understand and gives journalists the possibility to make own interpretations (Strömbäck

& Jönsson, 2005). In accordance, next section will considerate how media frames are used when

a controversial incident occurs.

8

2.4.1 Frames Related To Controversial Situations

The influences from the media when organizations have controversial situations, has never been

stronger or more common (Pearson & Clair, 1998; Massey, 2001; Howell & Miller, 2006;

Alpaslan et al. 2009). The news tends to be framed within two ways; episodic or thematic. When

handling an issue or event, one way is often dominant. Still, it is uncommon with news

exclusively becoming episodic or thematic. Episodic news is when media focuses in certain cases

or events and frames the individuals as responsible. Contrary, thematic news frames an issue in

general or abstract terms where the society is seen as responsible (Iyengar, 1991).

The press tend to take a thematic approach if the controversial situation was accidental or caused

by an employee. Contrary, if an executive were responsible, the episodic point of view will be

framed (An & Gower, 2009). Important to considerate when discussing episodic and thematic

ways of framing responsibilities is the influence from the social contexts in which the news is

produced (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000).

To analyze a controversial situation in politics or organizations five frames have been identified

(Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000; An & Gower, 2009; Valentini & Romenti, 2011). The five

identified frames and their correlation to episodic and thematic news will be further described

below:

1. Human Interest Frame (HIF): focuses on drama and giving an emotional angle by

generating empathy or sympathy. This makes the news becoming a product (Semetko &

Valkenburg, 2000). Consequently, the journalists’ interpretations get more space making

the angle personal. The frame correlates with episodic news and is rarely used in

emergent situations but more common when the situation was preventable and the

manager was responsible (An & Gower, 2009).

2. Conflict Frame (ConF): tries to reflect disagreements between parties, individuals or

groups. ConF often pictures several sides of an issue and talks about winners and losers

(Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000) and is common when internal conflicts occur (An &

Gower, 2009). ConF has no clear ties either to an episodic or thematic way of framing an

event (An & Gower, 2009).

9

3. Morality frame (MorF): when referring to morality, religion or social prescriptions.

Journalists often use the MorF indirectly because they have to follow the norms of

objectivity (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). When organisations having a controversial

situation, the frame is rarely used. Still, the frame was more common when the incident

was preventable. MorF tend to correlate with an episodic approach (An & Gower, 2009).

4. Economic Frame (EconF): mentions financial outcomes in present or future situations.

The media uses economic frame when referring to the economic consequences of taking

or not taking action. The financial costs or degree of expenses is often involved (Semetko

& Valkenburg, 2000). EconF is the only frame correlating with media taking a thematic

approach (An & Gower, 2009).

5. Attribution of Responsibility Frame (AttrF): when media talks about responsibilities,

either in a governmental or individual level. Focus areas are solutions, matters requiring

urgent actions or discussing the governments’ possibilities to ease the problem (Semetko

& Valkenburg, 2000). AttrF is common when the controllability and intentionality from

an actor is strong. Episodic news and AttrF often goes hand in hand (An & Gower, 2009).

Next section will handle the authors’ suggestion of how these circumstances including medias´

societal role and the five frames have developed historically.

2.6 Proposit ions

As Scheufele (1999) suggest there is a difference in the literature about if media framing is a

dependent or an independent variable. Framing as a dependent variable indicates that external

actors and current social trends affect which frames are used. In this study it would mean that the

five frames has been affected by the societal developments and have the same trends as society in

general.

Contrary, if framing is an independent variable, framing has a more powerful role and can

actually change societal values, beliefs and norms. This indicates a societal development created

by the way the media use different frames (Scheufele, 1999). Even if these two different

10

perspectives have different explanations they still acknowledge a connection between changes in

society or societal development and media framing. This could be derived into a proposition

saying that changes in society and changes in framing are connected, without considering in what

order.

The development of media framings will reflect the societal development

If framings are not correlated to societal development, framings might not have been developed

at all or simply not following the societal trend. This indicates that media framings isn´t

connected to the societal development. The lack of connection also signifies that media framing

cannot be seen as the dependent or independent variable of societal development. Therefore,

other factors have to be considered in the future studies of media framing. To contribute to the

answer if this is true; five propositions concerning the usage of the five frames in different

periods of time will be created.

2.6.1 Proposit ions And Frames

Human Interest Frame

The proposition is an increased usage from the 1950s and forward. The motivation is an

increased influence from commercial forces origin in the 80s (Hjarvard, 2008). As a result the

importance of framing human interests has increased (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005).

Conflict Frame

The assumption is a positive development from the 50s. A high competition within the field has

increased the importance for media organisations making dramatized stories (Rindova et al.,

2006). One way of dramatizing is to promote fight and conflicts (Jonsson & Buhr, 2010;

Strömbäck, 2008) and frame news in terms of winners and losers (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005).

Morality Frame

Morality is considered to be unchanged in all the decades because of the norms of objectivity

(Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Factors supporting an increased amount of morality is a more

heterogeneous profession since the 80s (Petersson et al. 2005) and more favour for journalists to

make own interpretations (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005). Still, the proposition is that the norms of

objectivity will be highly valued making the frame constant.

11

Economic Frame

This frame is supposed to be most common in the 50s and have a negative development. The

economic news was in a macro-level to a higher extent in earlier decades but has become more

focused in the micro-level (Grafström, 2006). Since EconF and a macro-level approach often

goes hand in hand (An & Gower, 2009) the proposition is a lower amount of EconF in later

decades.

Attribution of Responsibility Frame

The proposition is a rare use of AttrF in the 50s but increase later on. The motivation is a more

questioning attitude from media with its origin in the 80s (Grafström, 2006) and an increased

attention to sensational news (Rindova et al. 2006) where blaming some actor is used as a tool.

12

3 METODOLOGY

Method is like a map, (Myers, 2009 p. 19) or more accurately, a treasure map, it will present

crossroads, clues, temptations and some possible danger zones, and there is always a drawn line to

show which path to choose, so by your next visit you will know which way to go.

3.1 Research Approach

The thesis is about presentation and meaning, but also how these two has changed over time.

Doing this in a narrow setting and with a high degree of interpretation, the natural selection of

research approach would be qualitative (Repstad, 2007). This will primarily be a qualitative

approach, seeking deeper settings, with an interpretive analysis that aims towards understanding

the meaning of the data. Often qualitative approach includes only non-numerical data (Saunders

et al. 2009). This on the other hand will solely not be an only non-numerical thesis. Instead

descriptive numerical data will be the results from a match between the five identified frames and

data in form of newspaper articles, collected from three different events in 1951, 1981 and 2011.

According to Mohr & Neely (2009) there are no contradictions between having an interpretative

analysis combined from both non-numerical and numerical data. Numerical data could actually

provide assistance and simplifications to the texts. The numerical data could also be used to trace

meanings in the interpretative analysis. The combination would only be beneficial to explanatory

research (Mohr & Neely, 2009).

3.2 Research Design – A Longitudinal Single Case

The plan was to conduct a case study, this kind of studied are often associated with questions on

how and why (Pratt, 2099; Yin, 2008). They are also useful when boundaries between context

and phenomenon are unclear (Baxter & Jack, 2008). In this case it is not known if a possible

development is actually the phenomenon or the context. These blurred boundaries made it

impossible to use an experimental strategy (Saunders et al. 2009). The complexity and the limited

access to individuals with knowledge about events that happened up to 60 years ago, also made a

survey difficult to conduct.

13

A case study is also applicable when there are established theoretical frameworks to be derived

into clear propositions (Yin, 2008). There are several different types of case studies, but to be

able to examine how framing has evolved over time there is one called longitudinal single case

study (Yin, 2008). A longitudinal study concerns the question of time and could represent

snapshots of a phenomenon over a particular period (Saunders et al. 2009). Here, it will include

three snapshots in the history of media framing and with the focus of certain conditions (Yin,

2008). The aim is solely to evaluate if there has been any changes or developments. Since

changes in media framing between different nations has been established (Hallin & Mancini,

2004), the choice of a longitudinal study aim to investigate if the same is true over time in the

same context on a national scale i.e. if media framing have changed historically in Sweden. One

possible drawback with a longitudinal study is the ever changing nature of possibly everything

that is studied, and eventually there is a risk of comparing apples to oranges. On the other hand

since the events have already occurred, there is a possible to evaluate and have control over the

different variables being studied (Saunders et al. 2009).

Case studies should include different sources of empirical evidence. Included will be both

primary data in form of interviews and secondary data in form of documents such as books,

letters and newspapers. Some data will be archival in form of already published newspaper

articles; which is very common in case studies (Pratt, 2009; Gephart, 2004). Something to

consider is that the case may change and turn out to be something completely different from the

outset (Yin, 2008). Therefore it is important to make a thorough investigation and evaluation of

the case in an early stage.

3.3 Case And Informant Selection

According to Baxter & Jack (2008) it is important with boundaries to a case study. Boundaries

included are time or more precisely the years 1951, 1982 and 2011 and activity. The activities are

when the selected organisation has joined the societal debate and been criticized in the media.

The organisation has also experienced some type of threat towards their existence. Informants

will be selected, because of their knowledge about both time and activity and with possibility to

contribute with this knowledge.

14

The selected organisation to examine is SNS – Centre for business and policy studies. SNS has

been an active part of the Swedish society since the 5th of June 1948 (Ullenhag, 1998). It will do

them more justice to let them introduce themselves “SNS is an independent network of leading

decision makers from the private and public sectors that share a commitment to social and

economic development in Sweden. Its aim is to improve the basis for rational decisions on major

social and economic issues, by promoting social science research and stimulating public debate”

(SNS.se, 2012). Even if there are many drawbacks with using one organisation in form of the

limited ability to generalize, there is a belief that the organisation actually provides a unique

opportunity.

There are several reasons for this, as Ullenhag (2012) described it, SNS could be seen as a mirror

of the Swedish society. SNS has during their existence followed and influenced the public debate

with their reports and seminars; they are always dealing with subject that is contemporary for the

actual period. Another argument for SNS being a reflection is the organisational change from a

broad beginning to a more focused and narrow organisation, something seen in the overall

Swedish society (Ullenhag, 2012). Additionally, one of the authors conducted an internship there

during the autumn 2011; something Pratt (2009) writes is important to inform about. This type of

insider positioning provides helpful, when concerning access and knowledge. The study is not

issued on the behalf of the organisation, the theme and the research questions are issued solely by

the authors. Possible drawbacks are mainly in form of biases and a pre-set mind. The authors are

aware of this according to Saunders et al. (2009) is the only prevention that could be made. In

addition, SNS experienced three similar incidents in the years 1951, 1981 and 2011. A

controversial subject, concerning a debate about cartels, wage-earner funds and privatization, has

characterized these incidents. SNS has been a part of the discussion and the result was exposure

in newspapers. In these events SNS has experienced internal or external crises. The ideal setting

would have been three identical incidents, and that media framing could be isolated as the only

changing variable. This is in most longitudinal studies an unrealistic setting and one has to be

aware of the differences in these incidents. In 1981 SNS never released a report and in 2011

unlike 1951 and 1981 there were severe internal conflicts that divided SNS as an organisation. It

will be assumed that SNS has always had the same objective and means to reach this objective.

15

This makes it possible to compare how the media has changed the information provided when

they frame the organisations exposure.

The method used for the first set of sampling are going to be non-probability, the case and the

newspaper articles collection will not be selected using statistics, instead everything found

written in broadsheets about SNS in the different periods will be collected. This is appropriate in

explanatory studies, since the aim is not to generalize (Saunders et al. 2009). In this type of

sampling there are no critical rules to sample sizes. As a consequence the authors take great

responsibility deciding upon that. The case is selected using a critical case sampling, because

these three incidents has been of great importance to SNS (Saunders et al. 2009).

There will be interviews to find data about these cases, in the form of newspaper articles and

other sources of information. The snowball sampling is used for finding persons relevant for the

interviews. In a longitudinal study, access could be difficult especially in the oldest event that

took place approximately 60 years ago. Using this strategy could indicate low representatives

(Saunders et al. 2009), but because this study is primarily archival it will make the search for

relevant articles so much easier.

3.4 Data Collection – Documents & Interviews

A deeper understanding for SNS was needed to define the case. Tools used to get the information

were biographies from former employees, mainly CEOs, and books considering the history of

SNS. Reports published by SNS in periods of the events were studied and SNS own homepage.

Finally, documents from earlier conferences held by SNS and recent newspaper articles were

revived. Using this material, people relevant interviewing started to appear. These informants

were all connected to SNS in some way and could range from professors to authors and former

employees. An interaction phase started, and unstructured interviews led to ideas how the study

could proceed, when and where newspaper articles were published and recommendations for

other persons to interview.

The interviewers acted more like guides, but still pursued a consistency, something very common

in case studies (Yin, 2008). There is always a need to decide a theme before the interviews,

16

making the answers in some sense stay in the context appropriate for the study (Bryman, 2001).

The theme in the interviews was SNS as an organisation, with a special focus on the selected

events and changes in society and SNS, from the 50s until today. The informants would always

have a chance to approve and recall the information provided. The interviews would primarily be

face to face, but due to distance one was conducted by letter. In the face-to-face interviews both

of the authors were present for interviewing, where one will guide the interview, while the other

person took notes. No recording was used due to the inhibitory effect on the answers (Bryman,

2001).

Specific collections for each event

Regarding 1951: Due to circumstances, a letter was posted to Jan Wallander, CEO of SNS 1950-

1953. In the letter Wallander could write about his memories from 1951. A letter from Wallander

was also posted to SNS in 2011 where he compared 1951 to 2011, which were also read.

Biographies written by Wallander was used, both to get information about the particular event,

but also about SNS as organisation. Even reports released from SNS during this period were read.

The old age of some newspaper articles made the search difficult. Therefore, the Sigtuna

foundation was hired to search for articles concerning the year 1951. The articles are primarily

from Swedish broadsheets such as SvD and DN, but also from local broadsheets as Morgon

Tidningen.

Regarding 1981: An interview in Stockholm was conducted with Bengt Rydén, CEO of SNS

1974-1984. The newspaper articles were searched for using libraries with access to microfilm

storages over Swedish newspapers. Due to lack of time and resources newspapers from different

organisations were used as a complements to the broadsheets. The main used complements were

the newspaper from the organisation Svenska Arbetsgivareföreningen (SAF) nowadays called the

Confederation of Swedish Enterprise. SAF was one of the major players in the debate about

wage-earners funds and were not happy about the idea that SNS would make an intrusion in the

subject.

Regarding 2011: One of the main tasks from one of the author’s internship was to screen the

daily press, using the monitoring system Meltwater. Therefore the majority of what was written

17

considering SNS during the event in 2011 was gathered and available to use. Furthermore

documents from conferences and internal documents were used, as well as SNS homepage. In

addition, the report which started the debate was read for more information and understanding.

Two knowledgeable persons about SNS were consulted for overall thoughts and ideas.

Kersti Ullenhag – author of the book In Beat with Time, SNS during the years 1948-1998 a

historical review of SNS, which were also read.

Lars Engwall Professor and active member of SNS

3.4.1 The Newspaper Articles

The first criteria were that the articles should concern SNS and the particularly controversial

events selected. The articles was often written the year of the event, but in 1951 and 1981 the

period overlapped to next year, with a maximum period of twelve months. Pure tabloids such as

Expressen and Aftonbladet were excluded. After collecting the articles a random sampling was

made by giving every article a number ranging from one up to the total number of articles for that

given period. Then a randomizer was used to establish a random sample (Random, 2012). The

goal was to base the study on at least 30 articles from each period. The number 30 is often

referred to in statistics as the lowest valid number for a sample. Even if this is not a statistical

report, this was used as a guideline. This goal was kept in the event in 1981 and 2011, but in

1951 the newspaper collection did only result in a total of 24 articles; therefore the sample size

was only 15 articles.

3.4.2 Operationalization Of Newspaper Articles

One of the bases of this study is the newspaper articles collected through different sources. The

idea was to use the five selected frames in the theoretical framework and interpret how often they

were visible in the newspaper articles. To analyse the material it had to be processed in some

way, with influence from Saunders et al. (2009) following steps of process and selections were

used:

1. Themes

Different themes were set up for the newspaper articles. The themes were selected with

the five frames in mind and getting a deeper understanding of the perception of SNS. It

18

was necessary in an early stage to cut out information that did not have any connection to

the five frames. The themes being:

SNS as an organisation – how the organisation was portrayed and if focus were put on

the organizational facts or individual failures.

Involved persons and their characteristics – how employees were portrayed and what

questions they had to answer during interviews.

Subjective information – i.e. the thoughts and opinions of the journalists and what level

of interpretation was added in the articles.

Descriptions of the incidents – both informative and subjective, how was it described,

what facts were used, what opinions were expressed about the incident and SNS way of

creating and handling the incident.

Everything that did not handle the incident of SNS, basic facts about SNS or a more

overall debate of a societal problem were cut out. This was necessary to limit the scope of

the study.

2. Filtering

These themes were filtered a second time searching for irrelevant information.

3. Categories

The five frames from the theoretical framework chapter were used as five categories that

the filtered text later should be pooled into.

4. Codes

From the five categories, codes were created by a number of questions that includes the

major messages from the categories. The newspaper articles were processed one by one.

Sentences and paragraphs up to four sentences from the themes were coded. If a sentence

or paragraph included required information from the questions, it was coded into the

category. To be able to code each category, following questions for each of the frame will

19

be presented below. The strategy will be based on the framework of Semetko &

Valkenburg (2000).

Human Interest

• Does the sentence include personal or private information about SNS actors?

• Does the journalist try to generate empathy or sympathy for SNS or their opponents?

• Is the focus on drama rather than information?

HIF could be demonstrated as: “First Hartman got careened and now she leaves SNS.

Mission accomplished” (Bengtsson, 2011).

Conflict

• Does a conflict exist?

• Are different groups with different opinions presented?

• Is one opinion presented as right while another is to be seen as wrong?

An example of conflicts is: “Here, the deep ideological breach within the labor movement is

outplayed” (SAF, 1981).

Morality

• Is there a moral undertone to the arguments?

• Are there moral consequences from certain behavior?

Morality can be illustrated as: “It was like, during the morning service, question god´s existence“

(Bengtsson, 2011).

Economic

• Is there a focus on financial facts?

• Are there opinions about historical, present or future gains or losses from the event?

20

One example of the economic frame is: “The country’s financial crisis is so serious that some national gathering or agreement probably is necessary” (SAF, 1982).

Attribution of responsibility

• Are individuals, groups or societies pointed out as responsible for the event?

• Has some groups behaved irresponsibly?

• Does the article suggest solutions or causes of action?

Example of AttrF is as follows: “That the government’s essential role is to accomplish

such general conditions which facilitates competition and prevents cartels is obvious”

(DN, 1951).

5. Reassessment

Every code was reassessed and compared with other articles for that period of time. The

information selected to match each frame was additionally compared between the

different periods. All with the intention that content and especially the meaning of the

content should be as similar as possible. Then the final codes were placed in the

categories.

6. Summarisation

Each of the five categories were counted and summarised for each article. The total

number of categories during the selected period was then counted and summarized. This

will be presented in percentage; the motivation is an unequal sample size. Other

motivations are the different length of the articles and that the result should indicate

trends and development.

The content of each frame was always discussed between the two authors to reach an agreement

that this particular sentence for example matched the ConF. The aim of these six steps was to

raise the validity, to be transparent and in the form how this study could be replicated. Another

way of doing this would have been to count words (Bryman, 2001), but due to the differences in

language from the different periods this could have led to a very deceptive result.

21

3.5 Data Analysis

The data was collected and analysed simultaneously. It infers that the identified five frames lay

the foundation of the analysis, but were not boundaries. The propositions were created as

guidelines to the content of the analysis. According to Saunders et al. (2009) a qualitative

analysis is like a jigsaw puzzle and all the different sources of data were meant to create a bigger

picture. All the read documents were categorized into the three different events, with the aim to

create a narrative of what happened from different points of view.

22

4 EMPIRICS

In this section, the challenge is to create a balance between presenting data and restrict the

number of pages (Pratt, 2009). Suggested ways of reporting a case study is to tell a story

(Walsham, 2006); therefore the different events will be presented as three different narratives.

4.1 Event 1951 Cartels And Wallander

During this decade SNS is a broad organisation (Ullenhag, 2012) that had put a lot of effort in

social science and produced many reports. The reports were rather used by universities than

business. Hot issues in the Swedish society were cartels, school systems, market economy and

entrepreneurship (Ullenhag, 1998). The discussion about cartels was heated; “During the last few

years there has been a vivid public debate on the restrictions of competition in the Swedish

business sector…” (DN, 1951).

Jan Wallander was newly appointed CEO of SNS, and had worked together with a group of SNS-

scientists to release a report that got the name Competition Or Corporation. The book is

controversial; it suggests that the Swedish companies are collaborating in different cartels,

something that Sweden had big issues within the beginning of the 1950s. Often the government

allowed this behaviour, because it made it easier for them to control the different organisations

(Wallander, 1997). There was also a strong critique against competition, a widespread belief that

competition only wasted resources and that consumer would feel confused when there were

different prices on the same product (Wallander, 1997). DN (1951) interpreted the arguments in

Wallanders report as the following: “The government’s role to establish such public conditions,

which will simplify the competition and combating cartels, is obvious...”

SNS in this period of time was completely financed by a fund called Confederation fund, and

there was a fear inside SNS that it would be revealed in the media and that the objectivity would

be questioned (Wallander, 1997). “We had prepared for a revelation” (Wallander, 2012). When

the book was published in the autumn of 1951, the discussion that followed became loud. It was

pointed out to SNS and Wallander that they “were on the way to put a knife in the back on the

Swedish business sector and bite the hand that fed us” (Wallander, 2011). Despite of this

Wallander (2011) wrote that the fact that they “should make any compromises and change

23

anything in the report was out of the question”. Wallander and his group believed that a free

market is critical in order to have a well-functioning market economy. Media was handled with

the belief that in research, what you find is more important than who you upset. Wallander and

some of the other researchers presented their views and beliefs about the book as an Op-Ed in

different broadsheets.

In the end the book was not changed despite the criticism; SNS kept their funding, something that

Wallander thinks is remarkable (Wallander, 2011). Articles were published in the newspapers.

This quote demonstrates how some were criticizing the book “This motive for suspension makes

a strange impression. If the reasoning would be true, what can one say about the industrial

unions intensive work, that self-regulation brings an end to the cartels?“ (Bonow 12/12-51).

Worth mentioning is that, as a result of the discussion that followed the report, researchers in

SNS should always take personal responsibility for their works, i.e. SNS as an organisation

should never have an opinion (Wallander, 2011).

Swedish media around this period was a listening and respectful entity, with more focus on the

opinion of the newspaper then the journalist (Ullenhag, 2012). There were also many closures of

individual newspapers, even if the daily press keeps its strength on the market (Björnsson &

Luthersson, 1997). The Government had a monopoly on radio, the ties between newspapers and

political parties were strong (Petersson et al. 2005) and the editors were often politically active

(Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997). The different ties between media and some of its stakeholders

during this decade are demonstrated in the figure below. Media has in this period a weak role in

comparison with their stakeholders.

Media

Readers

Polititians

Organizations

Figure 1- Media & Stakeholders In The 50s

24

Business news was on a macro level and the organisations had a strong influence on what

material and information was provided to the media (Grafström, 2006). The readers had a small

influence over the media and if they felt mistreated by the government, they used the tabloids,

since the broadsheets had such strong ties to politics (Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997). It was in

the tabloids that objective and examining journalism was born, but during this period not

actualized (Nowak, 1963).

4.2 Event 1981 Wage-Earners Funds And Rydén

There was soon to be an election to the Swedish parliament and currently Thorbjörn Fälldin is

prime minister, leader of the Centre party (Nationalencyklopedin, 2012). Sweden was struggling,

and politics in general was a high focus topic during this decade. Consequently SNS was

influenced by the debates of the time (Ullenhag 1998). CEO of SNS was Bengt Rydén and during

his time SNS gets financed completely by member fees (Rydén, 2012). Overall the public interest

in the organisation grows in the media (Ullenhag, 1998). At the same time, the social democrats

wanted to introduce wage-earners funds (Ullenhag, 1998). This was preceded by an intense

political discussion between the business sector and the labour movement. The business sector

was opposing the funds and was going to arrange a campaign to avert the funds (Rydén, 2012).

The discussion between the two sides was harsh.

SNS, with the initiative from Rydén, started a small discussion group to handle the current socio-

economic issues that characterized this period of time (Ullenhag, 1998). Tore Browaldh, one of

the founders of SNS had talked to Tage Erlander, former leader and Prime Minister of the social

democrats, about having the conversations in Bommersvik, Erlander’s residence. Erlander posed

the question if the new leader and later Prime Minister Olof Palme could participate since he had

no natural ties to the industrial life (Rydén, 2012). The purpose was to publish a book (Ullenhag,

1998). As the question about the wage-earners funds was a big part of the current debate it was

brought up in the groups first meeting (Ullenhag, 1998). This was however not the central aim of

the group, according to Rydén (2012) the aim was to discuss the financial crisis.

It was agreed to keep the group a secret, but in connection to the election, information about the

group was leaked after one of the members made a clumsy statement to the media (Rydén, 2012).

This resulted in a media hunt (Ullenhag, 1998) during which SNS temporarily couldn´t stay in

their headquarters (Rydén, 2012). SNS is accused of arranging negotiations with an ulterior

25

motive, which is not the case (Rydén, 2012). Both sides of the discussion about wage-earners

funds, i.e. the business sector and the social movements, started to question SNS and their role in

the discussion (Rydén, 2012). This was how the newspapers interpreted the meetings; SAF is

representing the business sector: “Simultaneously, SAFs campaign against the wage-earners

funds has advanced to a complete policy of confrontation... [SNS], has quietly been having

conversations with representatives from the labour movement and the social democrats...”

(Ronge, 1982). It was not clear to the different sides of the debate what the discussions

concerned. Therefore, both sides reacted to the meetings since they were afraid that the meetings

would be to their disadvantage. The existence of SNS was threatened since the financiers

threatened to leave; it has to be considered, most of them belonged to the business sector

(Ullenhag, 1998).

The result of this attention was a negative attitude towards SNS. Written in Handels &

Sjöfartstidning 12/2 – 82: “the chief of SNS has created great irritation...”. Rydén felt the need

to visit the Chief of SAF, who was representing the business sector, to discuss the problem. This

made the climate less tense (Rydén, 2012). (SAF, 1982) “It is a question of being careful with

ones choice of selecting conversation-partner with judgement – and partners with judgement “.

This quote demonstrates that SAF has turned to question the choice of SNSs conversations

partners rather than SNS. SNS did not discuss their action in the media according to Rydén

(2012) would have been meaningless since the editor-in-chief always gets the last word. This was

the only time in Rydéns career that he did not respond to the accusations made (Rydén, 2012).

This also resulted in the planned book never being published (Ullenhag, 1998).

Media in Sweden had a powerful expansion period. Many governmental studies were made on

communication both in the 70s and 80s, the politicians started to realize the impact media could

have on voters (Flodin, 1993). The newspapers on the other hand tried to distance themselves

from the politicians due to heavy critique from readers (Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997). This led

to clearer boundaries between news and opinions, and a more professional journalism

(Grafström, 2006).

The media climate became more competitive with a focus on commercial forces and customers

satisfaction (Hjarvard, 2008) and more resources where invested in design and marketing

(Gustafsson & Weibull, 1990). Journalists became more heterogeneous (Petersson et al. 2005),

26

and started to develop special competences in areas such as environment, economics and science

(Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997; Flodin 1993). They started to make more stories and interviews

(Grafström, 2006). At the same time, university educations in information technique (IT)

expanded (Flodin, 1993). Consequently, the information flow increased where the journalists got

a more important role (Petrelius Karlberg, 2007). This changed the relationship and interaction

between organisations and mass media in Sweden (Grafström, 2006). The figure below

demonstrates the beginning of a more even balance of power between media and different

stakeholders.

Figure 2- Media & Stakeholders In The 80s

Jan Wallander, CEO of SNS in the 1951 case, had become CEO of Handelsbanken. He argued

something happened to mass media during this period (Wallander, 1998). The journalists got a

more intrusive role in their coverage of the business sector. Prior, the reporting had been discrete

and in small scale based on what information companies were willing to expose. Wallander, as

well as Ullenhag (2012), experienced that journalists working in the large morning newspapers

took a more active, investigating and critical stand. The aim was more to uncover and expose

what was going on inside the organisation and especially how it was governed. Wallander

describes his feelings in his memoirs as; “In the business sector we feel audited in a completely

different way than before” (Wallander, 1998, p. 314). This implies that the managers became

aware of bad publicity to a higher extent, but also an increased demand from the media that

managers needed to take more responsibility. This could be seen as a shift in the media’s

approach, from a more considerate entity to a more propagandizing (Ullenhag, 2012).

Media

Readers

Polititians

Organizations

27

4.3 Event 2011 Privatizat ion And Hartman

Today SNS is an international and slimmer organization. This development has happened very

fast (Ullenhag, 2012). Earlier focus was on a national scale where Sweden as a country was of

importance and the members of SNS naturally worked for Sweden’s best interest. Today the

world is more globalized, and the members of SNS need not have any loyalties to Sweden, so the

focus on Sweden is not as present (Ullenhag 2012; Rydén, 2012). This will of course have a

major impact on SNS (Ullenhag, 2012), whose role indirectly is made more difficult.

On the 7th of September 2011, SNS released a report called Consequences of Competition

discussing the privatizations of the Swedish welfare sector. The report got massive critique in the

media during the entire autumn, especially from interest organisations and private firms working

in the welfare sector. Nordensköld & Rex, (2011) “...established that it is unclear if privatization

of the health care really has improved the quality, she got powerful enemies”. The journalist’s

referred to the remarkable in the great attention given to the report, considering that it did not

make any conclusions about privatization. This was also considered in SvD, (2011) “To write a

whole anthology and not come to any conclusions, is almost admirable” (Ankarberg Johansson et

al, 2011). For SNS, the external pressures caused internal problems in how to handle the

opposition. The chief of research Laura Hartman and the CEO couldn’t reach an agreement. The

CEO of SNS wanted SNS to keep a low profile and not discuss the report in the media. Hartman

on the other hand wanted to discuss the report right away. Because of this inability to reach an

agreement SNS did nothing, and as a result the report was not discussed in the media (Hartman,

2011).

As a consequence, Laura resigned, which caused a research director to leave in protest as well

(Petersson, 2011). Additionally, seven members of SNS council of trust wrote a debate article in

Dagens Nyheter (DN) accusing SNS of not being able to handle the pressure from the business

sector“The internal critique was harsh...This trust is now severely damaged, both in society as a

whole- where many already has calculated what has happened – and in the research society

where the actions of SNS of course is completely unacceptable” (Sörlin et al, 2011). Although the

CEO regretted his actions he was later forced to resign in September 26 due to his legitimacy

being questioned (SR, 2011).

28

The 21th century is characterized by information and access to information (Jansson, 2004). The

journalist and their opinions have a more important role than ever before. One big difference is

that media people gets more coverage both in their capacity as journalists and in their personal

life (Ullenhag, 2012). There is also more focus on individuals and on conflicts than on events and

causes (Ullenhag, 2012). The figure of this decade demonstrates that the media has established a

powerful and independent role.

Figure 3- Media & Stakeholder In The 21th  

Media companies today have a central role in the societal development. They have expanded to a

variety of areas (Jansson, 2004) and gotten less connected to politics but more influenced by

external factors such as organisations, commercial interests and the public opinion. The

development has been towards profitability having a greater importance that affects the content

and focus of the news (Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997).

Media

Readers

Polititians

Organizations

29

5 RESULTS & ANALYSIS This chapter includes an interpretative analysis, using the theoretical framework in a historical

perspective studying the development of media framing. The events will be presented in

chronological order. A comparison will be made to conclude how the five frames have evolved in

relation to the propositions.

5.1 SNS & Media In 1951 The study conducted on media coverage and framing of SNS and their controversial event in

1951 resulted in the distribution of used frames as demonstrated below. As mentioned in the

methodological section or more specific in the operationalization part 6, the frames were counted

and the divided into percentage, mainly because of the uneven number of articles from the

different years. This was an attempt to search for differences and similarities in the results from

the different years. In this year the EconF is the far most common frame. The diagrams are an

attempt to summarize and provide a picture of the distribution of frames, so that the argument

following will be easier to follow.

Figure 4 – Results From 1951

In 1951 the question about cartels was a topic of current interest; the discussion was mainly on a

macro level with the usage of many economic terms. SNS released their contribution to the

6%  

14%  

4%  

54%  

22%  

Human  Interest  Frame  

Conflict  Frame  

Morality  Frame  

Economic  Frame  

A=ribu?on  of  Responsibility  Frame  

30

debate resulting in opposition from different actors “…the main result of the intervention will be

an increased inflation. This motive for suspension gives a strange impression” (Bonow, 1951).

This journalist questions the validity in the arguments and points to the propositions made by

Wallander and his group, which the journalist sees as devastating for the Swedish economy. In

another quote, the expertise of the group is questioned; “What I oppose, on the other hand is that

the writers so totally ignore the distribution aspect” (Bonow, 51). Those quotations are

representative for all the articles in the sense that the critique never occurs on a personal level.

Even though the tone is respectful the debate is characterized by contradictions between different

groups in society making the ConF common. The following sentence describes a situation where

different groups value utility differently “…the most efficient [choice] can lead to dangerous

paths, for here we encounter the question how different groups value both physical and

psychological utilities” (Åkerman, 1952). Utility is a common subject in this event, often

discussed when the ConF occurs. Since utility could have a different content depending on which

group it concerns contradictions will occur making the ConF common (Semetko & Valkenburg,

2000). The discussion mainly handles what social aspects should be prioritized and why. The

social benefits and disadvantages with cartels are often discussed on a political level. This strong

connection to politics was predicted to have a great impact on what was written during this period

(Björnsson & Luthersson, 1997; Hallin & Mancini, 2004).

Who owns the responsibility, as pertains to the cartels, is often pointed out in the debate when the

social utility is discussed. This is exemplified in the event of the government being framed as

responsible for the regulation of the market: “That the government’s essential role is to

accomplish such general conditions which facilitates competition and prevents cartels is obvious

/.../ That the government creates conditions for a livelier competition /.../ between organisations

that makes them more profitable than collaborations and self-regulations, is a basic

requirement” (DN, 1951). The quote describes the importance of someone taking responsibility

and that the best possible economic outcome should be kept in mind. The high amount of AttrF

could indicate that urgent actions and solutions are required to solve the issue (Semetko &

Valkenburg, 2000). In this event different solutions were presented, which concerned the

discussion whether or not a law to prevent cartels was necessary. Another reason of the high

31

amount of this frame could be a high ability of control from the concerned parties (An & Gower,

2009); SNS by their report and the government by their ability to regulate the law.

The by far most common frame, the EconF, is categorized in this event by many details about

financial aspects in problems and in-depth economic analysis. An example of EconF is as

follows: “The point regarding the high profits [is that they] can be a symptom that the efficiency

in that particular industry is being neglected” (Bonow, 1952). The news were focusing on whole

industries, rather than on a personal level, coherent with Grafströms’ (2006) argumentation that

business news was on a macro level. This indicates that the news is thematic rather than episodic

(An & Gower, 2009). Thematic news is often connected to the EconF (An & Gower, 2009) that

makes it logical that EconFs frequently appear.

The least common frames were the subjective frames morality- and human interest. If the

reasoning above considering episodic news were correct, the outcome would be a low amount of

these frames since they correlate with episodic news (An & Gower, 2009).

If it had been widely recognized that SNS only were financed by the Confederation fund, it could

have resulted in more focus on episodic frames and conflict, especially if the media had framed

Wallander and the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise as accountable (An & Gower, 2009).

The question about objectivity and dependency did not come to be a part of the discussion.

Wallander (1997) speculates that the outcome may have been different if their financiers had

been generally known. The financiers did not explain their disagreement with this report in the

media, instead this criticism was only sent to SNS (Wallander, 2012). This might explain why the

critique focused on the subject rather than blaming SNS as an organization.

In the 80s the commercialization in the media field had its breakthrough. Customer satisfaction

became a more common term because of the importance of gaining market shares (Hjarvard,

2008) and the journalists were more specialized in different areas (Flodin, 1993). How these and

other changes in the field influenced the five frames will be presented in the next chapter.

32

5.2 SNS & Media In 1981

How the media framed SNS and their controversial event in 1981 is demonstrated below. The

most striking difference from 1951 is that conflict frame more common than economic frame and

morality has become a much more important aspect. Even if the diagrams cannot be used as solid

evidence, they can still show a tendency that the media framing has changed.

Figure 5 – Results From 1981

This event mostly concerns a conflict between different birds. These birds are of course

metaphors and SNS is one of the doves. The conflict could be described like this: “... these

“doves” has silently had conversations with representatives from the union and social democrats

about how the crisis in Sweden should be solved” (SAF, 1982). “Against them are the “hawks”

which means that the fund question overshadows everything else... (SAF, 1982). The conflict

around SNS was connected directly with the business sector. The actions of SNS “...has created

much irritation and the result could be that the organisation SNS is put down. It is financed by

the business sector” (Göteborg Handel och Sjöfartstidning, 1982). The ConF is the most present

frame in this event, this is not surprisingly since much of the 70s and 80s were characterized by

conflicts, and the media started to distance itself from politics and politicians (Petersson et al.

2005; Grafström, 2006). In this era the relationship between organizations and media was

changing. Media adopted a more questioning role, instead of just listening and intermediating

(Ullenhag, 2012; Grafström, 2006). Consequently media didn´t only act as a provider of

7%  

36%  

17%  

26%  

14%  Human  Interest  Frame  

Conflict  Frame  

Morality  Frame  

Economic  Frame  

A=ribu?on  of  Responsibility  Frame  

33

information any longer. This could explain why the episodic frames and ConF became more

common and the EconF decreased compared to 1951.

One of the episodic frames that increased was MorF, coherent with journalists as individuals got

more prevalence to make their own interpretations (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Ronge (1982)

writes “I know that many reason that with the funds we have no future”. In the article he provides

no sources for this; it is only his own interpretation. This is also seen in an interview with Rydén

where he states that journalists instead of listening to the truth only made their own

interpretations “It would have been very easy for our critics to find out – if they only would have

contacted us” (Hjertqvist, 1982).

Something surprising was the relatively low outcome of AttrF. Since it was common to frame

conflicts, it would have been natural that the different parties blamed each other, which

characterizes this frame (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). This was not the case and one

explanation could be that SNSs ability to control had decreased and their intention to contribute

to the public debate was low, making this frame less common (An & Gower, 2009).

The least common frame was HIF. Characteristics for HIF are when individuals or groups are

affected by a decision. The frame tends to be more common when it is possible to prevent a crisis

(Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). In this event, this could have led to a higher degree of this

specific frame that was the result, especially compared to 1951. The basis of this event was a

clumsy statement that could have been prevented, but instead started the media hunt. Another

reason for the low outcome could be the use of newspapers in this thesis, as opposed to TV where

the frame is often apparent (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Still, the outcome is in line with An

& Gower (2009) who predicts a low outcome of this frame.

The outcome in 1981 differs from the other years since SNS did not release a report. This could

of course have influenced the decrease of EconF. Moreover, SNS chose not to comment the

incidents in the press (Rydén, 2012). Consequently it might be unclear what responsibilities

Rydén and SNS took.

34

In the 80s the conditions in the media field were not the same as in the first event (Grafström,

2006), instead the media organization’s political independency was important (Björnsson &

Luthersson, 1997). This affected the content in the news, where the political messages decreased

and the journalists own voice took more prevalence and the news took a micro-perspective to a

high extent (Grafström, 2006). This made for a higher amount of episodic news and ConF since

the diversity within the field increased (Flodin 1993; Petersson et al. 2005). This and other

changes in the proportions of the frames will be analyzed in the next part of the chapter.

5.3 SNS & Media In 2011

The study conducted on the medias´ coverage of the event in 2011 and framing of SNS resulted

in following proportions. The frames starts to even out, this can also depend on that the frames

are created in a more contemporary time. Still it supports that it is a difference in used frames,

later on figure 8 will demonstrate a comparison between the used frames.

Figure 6 – Results From 2011

As shown in the figure, ConF and MorF were the most common frames. An example of how

media framed a conflict could be found in FOKUS where it is written “The Confederation of

Swedish Enterprise [CoSE] and a number of leading right wing debaters got very upset and

accused Hartman for pursuing ideological pseudo research”. (Lönegård, 2011). In the quotation,

the journalist tries to frame the conflict after SNS had released their report and how CoSE

reacted. Overall, the descriptions of the event were often overemphasized. This is in line with

17%  

23%  

23%  

20%  

17%  

Human  Interest  Frame  

Conflict  Frame  

Morality  Frame  

Economic  Frame  

A=ribu?on  of  Responsibility  Frame  

35

Johnsson & Buhr (2010) and Strömbäck (2008) who thought that the media tends to focus on

conflicts.

MorF was mainly used on a content that is indirect (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). One sentence

describing the moral aspects of the conflict within SNS is from September 21th when the Chief

of Research resigned; “To do research independently is okay. Theoretically. As long as SNS

researchers don’t bite the hand that feeds them” (Bengtsson, 2011). This sentence questions how

SNS management handled the situation. It criticizes SNS as an organization that should be

enabled to conduct independent research, but truth is the management does not condone research

presenting them in an unfavorable light, and risk to lose their financiers. In the academia, this is

against the moral norms.

In this debate many different views from different camps of journalists were presented. This is

coherent with what the journalist profession has become more heterogeneous, i.e. t the same

news is framed from different perspectives (Petersson et al. 2005). One other explanation to the

increased MorF is the higher pressure to deliver sensational news fast (Rindova et al. 2006).

Those two factors could have contributed to the changed media norms where certain behaviors

are more acceptable. According to Scheufele (1999) norms influence the frames and reproduce

them, indicate a different result in the event. This would be in line with Strömbäck & Jönsson

(2005) arguing that journalists’ way of working has given them more room for interpretations.

Since the journalists strive towards gaining market shares, the usage of sensational news is now

more widely spread. The reason could be a need to engage readers by making the story exciting

and easy to read (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005).

EconF is mainly used on a macro-level when discussing privatizations. To illustrate the EconF, a

quote from Hellquist (2011) is selected: “The report showed that there is no evidence that

privatizations in the welfare have created any improvements as regards to cost efficiency and

quality”. The EconF is often used in a thematic way (An & Gower, 2009). Since the episodic

frames (AttrF, MorF and HIF) increased throughout this year, there was a trend of more focus on

specific individuals or events (An & Gower, 2009) causing the EconF to decrease. A reason for

this could be changed norms for the journalists as discussed in the part above. This would concur

36

with a more individualistic journalism (Petersson et al. 2005; Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005;

Ullenhag, 2012).

HIF is used to explain how individuals or groups are affected by a decision and how this decision

could create emotions (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Ludvigsson (2011) uses the frame in an

editorial where she was negative to SNSs report and defends privatizations. “It was the citizens

wish for an increased influence and the freedom for any Tom, Dick or Harry to choose school

and type of healthcare”. In this sentence Ludvigsson frames the positive aspects of privatizations

writing about the provided freedom. The government should not take such decisions for

individuals or groups, Ludvigsson argues. The frame has a very high percentage compared to

earlier events and recent studies (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000; An & Gower, 2009; Valentini &

Romenti, 2011). The subject of SNSs report greatly dealt with how individuals and groups were

affected. This combined with hard pressures for the media to deliver attractive news (Rindova et

al. 2006) with an emotional angle (Cho & Gower, 2006) could explain why HIF was as

commonly used as it was in 2011.

To illustrate AttrF a sentence about Laura Hartman after her resignation from SNS follows. “The

report about competition within Swedish welfare as she presented created a massive debate

which led to Laura Hartman getting a “gag” and then resigned” (Tuvhag, 2011). In this

instance, the CEO, as responsible for Laura Hartman being silenced, is therefore also responsible

for Hartmans’ resignation and this outcome could have been prevented. Attribution of

responsibility tends to be common when the control and intention from a party is strong (An &

Gower, 2009). Concerning the CEOs actions the intentions and control was high making for a

high amount of the frame and so even the number of episodic frames (An & Gower, 2009).

The greatest difference between the prior events and 2011 was the internal contradictions that

increased the MorF. In the earlier events SNS stood united against external critique, although the

press had portrayed them as having an internal crisis. Important to have in mind when studying

the event in 2011 is the drastic increase in information flow (Hand, 2007). Consequently, more

actors became involved resulting in a high exposure of SNS. The increased information flow

(Hand, 2007) contributed to bringing more angles to the internal conflicts within SNS to public

37

attention. This, combined with the high responsibility of the CEO in turn might motivate why the

episodic news increased (An & Gower, 2009).

A further comparison of the three events will be presented in the next part, where it is discussed

if there is a correlation between media framings and societal development.

5.4 One Case, Three Events & Five Proposit ions

It has always been the role of the media to attract readers (Strömbäck, 2004). In later decades

major changes within the media field have occurred, resulting in changed conditions, which in

turn led to use of other methods to attract readers (Petersson et al. 2005; Hjarvard, 2008), such as

the internet. This is supported by the changed proportions of the five frames in 1951, 1981 and

2011. The propositions made were correct considering HIF, EconF and ConF but incorrect in

terms of MorF and AttrF.

Figure 7- Development Of The Five frames

6%  

14%  

4%  

54%  

22%  

7%  

36%  

17%  

26%  

14%  18%  

23%   23%  20%  

17%  

0%  

10%  

20%  

30%  

40%  

50%  

60%  

Human  Interest  Frame  

Conflict  Frame   Morality  Frame   Economic  Frame   A=ribu?on  of  Responsibility  

Frame  

1951  

1981  

2011  

38

Human-interest proposition: The HIF was one of the least common used frames in all the cases

that correspond with An & Gower (2009) that other values are of greater importance in

controversial situations. However, the proportion of HIF was higher in 2011 compared to earlier

years and recently made studies (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000; An & Gower, 2009; Valentini &

Romenti, 2011). Two of the reasons could be firstly the subject of the report of this year, and

secondly the vast focus on Hartman as a person.

Economic proposition: The personal focus on Hartman might be one of the reasons why EconF

went down in 2011 compared to the earlier events. If the internal conflict had not arisen the focus

instead might have been on the consequences of the report and the EconF would then have been

more visible. The suggestion is that the more sensational stories have been an established norm

within media, including drama (Rindova et al. 2006). Drama could include factors making it

important to blame those responsible (attribution of responsibility), show how individuals or

groups are affected (human interest) and make personal reflections on what is appropriate

behaviour (MorF). This indicates that media prioritizes more episodic news (An & Gower, 2009).

Since thematic news and EconF is connected to each other (An & Gower, 2009) the economic

aspects will decrease.

Conflict proposition: ConF was commonly used in 1981 and 2011. This is consistent with a

more questioning attitude from journalists ever since the 80s and onwards (Grafström, 2006).

Since the frame either are related to episodic or thematic news (An & Gower, 2009) and news

rarely are only bounded to only one of the approaches (Iyengar, 1991) the frame might become

less influenced by media trends.

Morality proposition: Morality increased in 1981 and 2011. The suggested explanation is the

gradually more heterogeneous profession ever since the 80s (Petersson et al. 2005) resulting in

more room for the journalists to make their own interpretations (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005). In

2011 the frame is used very frequently compared to recent studies (Semetko & Valkenburg,

2000; An & Gower, 2009; Valentini & Romenti, 2011). The reason might be two conflicts that

occurred simultaneously; the resignations within SNS and the privatization of welfare. There was

prevalence for interpretations making the journalists’ personal opinions or biases more visible.

39

Attribution of Responsibility proposition: AttrF was most common in 2011 and 1951. The

event in 1981 was characterized by the belief that quick actions were necessary and the

government’s ability to prevent the problem (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000) talking for a high

amount of AttrF in all the events. A possible explanation to the difference in 1981 is that SNS

was not in the center of the debate. In addition, the fact that SNS did not release a report, made

their controllability weaker. As a result the frame would be less common in 1981 (An & Gower,

2009).

Frame: Proposition: Outcome:

Human Interest

Conflict

Morality

Economic

Attribution of

Responsibility

Figure 8 – Summary Of Propositions & Outcomes

5.5 Media Framing – Reflection Of Society?

How frames emerge is influenced by the countries media system (Hallin & Mancini, 2004), their

culture (Entman, 1993) and the national context (Dimitrova & Strömbäck, 2005). By keeping this

in mind, it might be deduced that the cultural and national contexts have changed in a way that

40

accepts sensational and emotional framings to a higher extent. One of the reasons could be

commercialization in the field with a focus on attracting the readers (Hjarvard, 2008). This has

influenced the media norms (Hjarvard, 2008) affecting what actions are considered legitimate for

journalists (Scheufele, 1999). This is in accordance with Sweden moving towards the liberal

model where market forces are given more precedence (Hallin & Mancini, 2004).

Media frames emerge through internal and external factors (De Vreese, 2005). For journalists,

external factors, for instance the interaction between journalists and its environment, has changed

(Grafström, 2006). Even internal factors have changed through increased importance of customer

satisfaction (Strömbäck & Jönsson, 2005) and an increased information flow (Jansson, 2004).

This indicates a development in society and media, from news of thematic character towards

episodic news. This might explain why the frames emerged to different extents in the studied

events. Still, the selected frames were visible in all three events. This combined with several

similarities in the framing of controversial situations implies that the five frames are useful when

analysing such events over time.

41

6 CONCLUSIONS

The research questions were how media framings had changed over time and if those changes

were connected to the societal development. Media in Sweden has changed their role where the

profession has become more heterogeneous (Petersson et al, 2005) while the field has been more

influenced by commercial forces (Strömbäck, 2009). This combined with an increased

information flow (Hand, 2007) has changed the medias relation to organizations, politics and the

readers. Consequently, medias way of framing controversial situations has changed and the

framing has gone from thematic news in the 1950s to episodic news in the 2010s. This indicates

that media framings could be seen as a reflection of the societal development.

6.1 Implications For Researchers And Practi t ioners

This longitudinal thesis has compared a time where media was influenced by commercial

interests to a period where politics was more influential. According to Hallin & Mancini (2004)

there is a need for these types of studies. This thesis contributes to the history of media framing

and how media framing has evolved in three different events.

Since the empirical findings shows an increasing amount of episodic news, this study indicates an

increased focus in certain individuals or events compared to earlier decades. This makes the

organizations more vulnerable against media framing resulting in higher costs when handling the

press. Additionally there is a risk that organizations and CEO: s will avoid taking certain actions

striking against the media norms. The risk is a decreased focus in the core activities because of

the fear of getting a negative media-reputation.

6.2 Limitat ions

In this case study three different events were selected. They each had different characteristics,

which made it more difficult to compare them. Another limitation was that framing theory had its

breakthrough in the 70s (Strömbäck, 2009) and research of Swedish media had its breakthrough

in the 80s. This made it difficult to analyse the frames correctly in the event from 1951. It also

caused difficulties in finding facts about the media in the 50s since the documentation was

written several decades later. This might result in the material from this period being based more

on interpretation than actual fact. One further aspect to consider is that the result from this thesis

42

is contradictory to other recent studies such as different results of visible frames, especially in the

event in 2011. This is not uncommon in critical cases, but still important to mention. Another

limitation is that no consideration has been taken towards the political orientation of the

newspapers. This could affect the result, due to the political nature of the subjects in the three

events. Still, the aim was not to compare how the different parties handled SNSs actions, but

rather how newspapers handled the news in different decades.

6.3 Further Research

Human-interest frame and morality frame had outstandingly high proportions in 2011 compared

to earlier events and recent studies. It would therefore be of interest to study if this was specific

for the 2011 event or if a shift in the journalists’ way of framing conflicts has occurred. Is this

specific for Sweden? Otherwise, questions to be answered could be if morality for media

organisations has changed over the last decades and what the consequences would be for

organisations and individuals if it had.

43

7 REFERENCES

7.1 Articles & Books

Alpaslan, C., Green, S. & Mitroff, I. 2009. “Corporate Governance In The Context Of Crises:

Towards A Stakeholder Theory Of Crisis Management”. Journal Of Contingencies &

Crisis Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, PP. 38-49.

An, S-K. & Gower, K. 2009. “How Do The News Media Frame Crises? A Content Analysis of

Crisis News Coverage”. Public Relations Review, Vol. 35, No. 2, PP. 107–112.

Baxter, P. & Jack, S. 2008. “Qualitative Case Study Methodology Study Design And

Implementation For Novice Researchers”. The Qualitative Report, Vol. 13, No. 4, PP. 544-

559.

Björnsson, A. & Luthersson, P. 1997. Medialiseringen Av Sverige. Stockholm: Carlssons

Bokförlag.

Bryman, A. 2001. Samhällsvetenskapliga Metoder. Malmö: Liber AB.

Carroll, C. & McCombs, M. 2003. “Agenda-Setting Effects Of Business News On The Public’s

Images And Opinions About Major Corporations”. Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 6,

No. 1, PP. 36–46.

Cho, S. & Gower, K. 2006. “Framing Effect On The Publics’ Response To Crisis: Human

Interest Frame And Crisis Type Influencing Responsibility And Blame”. Public Relations

Review, Vol. 32, No. 4, PP. 420–422.

De Vreese, C. 2005. “News Framing: Theory And Typology”. Information Design Journal +

Document Design, Vol. 1, No. 13, PP. 51-62.

Dimitrova, D. & Strömbäck, J. 2005. “Mission Accomplished? Framing Of The Iraq War In The

Elite Newspapers In Sweden And The United States”. The International Journal For

Communication Studies, Vol. 5, No 67, PP. 399 – 417.

Engwall, L., Grûnberg, J., Pallas, J., Sahlin, K., Strannegård, L., Wedlin, L., H, I., Buhr, H.,

Jonsson, S., Frostensson, M., Romani, L., Windell, K. & Buhr, K. 2010. Corporate

Governance In Action: A Field Approach. Book Manuscript.

Entman, R. 1993. “Framing: Toward Clarification Of A Fractured Paradigm”. Journal Of

Communication, No. 43, PP. 51–58.

44

Entman, R. 2007. “Framing Bias: Media In The Distribution Of Power”. Journal Of

Communication, No. 57, PP. 163-173.

Flodin, B. 1993. Samhällskommunikation Under 80-talet - En Kunskapsöversikt. Kungälv:

Grafikerna I Kungälv AB.

Gephart,R. 2004. “Qualitative Research And The Academy of Management Journal”. Academy

Of Management Journal, Vol. 47, No. 4, PP. 454-462.

Grafström, M. 2006. The Development Of Swedish Business Journalism: Historical Roots Of An

Organizational Field. Uppsala: Uppsala University.

Gustafsson, K. & Weibull, L. 1990. Mått På Medier. Kungälv: Grafikerna I Kungälv AB.

Hallin, D C. & Mancini, P. 2004. Comparing Media Systems. Cambridge: The Press Syndicate

Of The University Of Cambridge.

Hand, D J. 2007. Information Generation: How Data Rule The World. Oxford: Oneworld

Publications.

Hjarvard,S. 2008. “The Medicalization Of Society A Theory Of The Media As Agents Of Social

And Cultural Change”. Nordicom Review, Vol. 29, No, 2 PP. 105-134.

Howell, G. & Miller, R. 2006. “How The Relationship Between The Crisis Life Cycle And Mass

Media Content Can Better Inform Crisis Communication”. Prism, Vol. 4, No. 1, PP. 1-14.

Iyengar, S. 1991. Is Anyone Responsible? How Television Frames Political Issues. Chicago:

University Of Chicago Press.

Jansson, A. 2004. Globalisering - Kommunikation Och Modernitet. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Jonsson, S. & Buhr, H. 2010. “The Limits Of Media Effects: Field Positions And Cultural

Change In A Mutual Fund Market”. Organization Science, Vol. 22, No.2, PP. 464-481.

Massey, J. 2001. “Managing Organizational Legitimacy: Communication Strategies For

Organizations In Crisis”. Journal Of Business Communication, Vol. 38, no. 2, PP. 153-183.

McCombs, M. 2006. Makten Över Dagordningen: Om Medierna, Politiken Och

Opinionsbildningen. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.

McCombs, M. & Shaw, D. 1972. “The Agenda Setting Function Of Mass Media”. Public

Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 36, No.2, PP. 176-187.

45

Mohr, J. & Neely, B. 2009. “Modeling Faucault: Dualities Of Power In Institutional Fields”.

Research In The Sociology Of Organizations, Vol. 27, PP. 203-255.

Myers, M. 2009. Qualitative Research In Business & Management. London: Sage Publications.

Nowak, K. 1963. Masskommunikations Forskning I Sverige. En Översikt Samt En Annoterad

Bibliografi. Stockholm: P.A. Norstedt & Söner Förlag.

Pearson, C. & Clair, J. 1998. “Reframing Crisis Management”. Academy Of Management

Review, Vol. 23, No. 1, PP. 59-76.

Petersson, O., Djerf-Pierre, M., Strömbäck, J & Weibull, L. 2005. Demokratirådets Rapport

2005: Mediernas Integritet. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.

Petrelius Karlberg, P. 2007. Den Medialiserade Direktören. Stockholm. Stockholm School Of

Economics.

Pollock, T. & Rindova, V. 2003. “Media Legitimation Effects In The Market For Initial Public

Offerings”. Academy Of Management Journal, Vol. 46, No. 5, PP. 631–642.

Pratt, M. 2009. “For The Lack Of A Boilerplate: Tips On Writing Up (And Reviewing)

Qualitative Research”. Academy Of Management Journal, Vol. 52, No. 5, PP. 856-862.

Repstad, P. 2007. Närhet Och Distans. Kvalitativa Metoder I Samhällsvetenskap. Oslo:

Universitetsförlaget.

Rindova, V, Pollock, T. & Hayward, M. 2006. “Celebrity Firms: The Social Construction Of

Market Popularity”. Academy Of Management Review, Vol. 31, No.1, PP. 50–71.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. 2009. Research Methods For Business Students.

Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Scheufele, D. 1999. “Framing As A Theory Of Media Effects”. Journal Of Communication, Vol.

49, No. 1 PP. 103-122.

Semetko, H. & Valkenburg, P. 2000. “Framing European Politics: A Content Analysis Of Press

And Television News”. Journal Of Communication, Vol. 50, No. 2, PP. 93–109.

Strömbäck, J. 2004. Den Medialiserade Demokratin. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.

Strömbäck, J. 2008. På Nyhetsmediernas Agendor. En Studie Av Hot Och Risker I Det Svenska

Nyhetsurvalet I Morgonpress, Kvällspress Och TV. Sundsvall: Demokratiinstitutet

Strömbäck, J. 2009. Makt, Medier Och Samhälle. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.

Ullenhag, K. 1998. I Takt Med Tiden. SNS Åren 1948 -1998. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.

46

Valentini, C. & Romenti, S. 2011. ”The Press And Alitalia's 2008 Crisis: Issues, Tones And

Frames”. Public Relations Review, Vol. 37, No. 4, PP. 360–365.

Wallander, J. 1997. Livet Som Det Blev: En Bankdirektör Blir Till. Stockholm: Albert Bonniers

Förlag.

Wallander, J. 1998. Forskaren Som Bankdirektör - Att Utveckla Och Förändra. Stockholm: SNS

Förlag.

Walsham, G. 2006. “Doing Interpretive Research”. European Journal Of Information Systems,

Vol. 15, PP. 320-330.

Weaver, D. 2007. “Thoughts On Agenda Setting, Framing and Priming”. Journal Of

Communication, Vol. 57, No.1, PP. 142-147.

Yin, R. 2008. Case Study Research – Design And Methods. California: Sage Publications Inc.

Yioutas, J. & Segvic, I. 2003 “Revisiting The Clinton/Lewinsky Scandal: The Convergence Of

Agenda Setting And Framing”. J&MC Quarterly, Vol. 80, No. 3, PP. 567-582.

7.2 Personal Communication

Hartman, L., 2011. SNS And Science – A Story Of Success? Unpublished Presentation From

Seminars Of SNS. Fall Of 2011, Uppsala: Centre For Business And Policy Studies In

Uppsala.

Rydén, Bengt.,Senior Advisor At Hallvarsson & Halvarsson, 2012-02-29, Stockholm Culture

House, Stockholm, Personal Interview.

Ullenhag, Kersti.,Professor Emerita At The Institution Of Economical History, Uppsala

University, 2012-04-13, Ekonomikum, Uppsala, Personal Interview.

Wallander, Jan; Retired. 2011. Personal Letter To SNS, October 10, 2011.

Wallander, Jan; Retired. 2012. Personal Letter, April 28, 2012.

7.3 The Internet

Ankarberg Johansson, A., Samuelsson, E., Lega, D., Appelgren, M. & Södertun, B. 2011.

”Valfriheten För Enskilda Är Vinsten”. Retrieved April 12, 2012, From

http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/valfriheten-for-enskilda-ar-vinsten_6457910.svd

Bengtsson, H. 2011. ”Krisen För SNS Ett Faktum”. Retrieved April 6, 2012, From

http://www.dagensarena.se/ledare/krisen-for-sns-ar-ett-faktum/

47

Hellquist, A. 2011. ”Högerns Kompakta Ointresse För Fakta”. Retrieved April 6, 2012, From

http://arbetaren.se/artiklar/hogerns-kompakta-ointresse-for-fakta/

Ludvigsson, M. 2011. ”Rätten Att Välja Effektivt Genomförd”. Retrieved April 6, 2012, From

http://www.svd.se/opinion/ledarsidan/ratten-att-valja-sjalv-effektivt-

genomford_6451392.svd

Lönegård, C. 2011. ”Studieförbund Ur Balans”. Retrieved April 7, 2012, From

http://www.fokus.se/2011/09/studieforbund-ur-balans/

Nationalencyklopedin, 2012. ”Statsminister”. Retrieved May 24, 2012 From

http://www.ne.se/enkel/statsminister?i_h_word=sveriges%20statsministrar

Petersson, O. 2011. “Why I Left SNS”. Retrieved April 6, 2012, From

http://www.olofpetersson.se/aktuellt_sns_eng.html

Random.org. 2012. ”RANDOM.ORG True Random Number Service”. Retrieved April 3, 2012

From http://www.random.org/integers/

SNS, 2012. “SNS - Centre For Business And Policy Studies”. Retrieved February 8, 2012, From

http://www.sns.se/english

Strömbäck, J. & Jönsson, A. 2005: "Nyheter I Konkurrens – Journalistikens

Kommersialisering?". Retrieved May 6 From http://jesperstromback.com/

Sveriges Radio, 2011. “Studio 1 Fördjupad Nyhetsrapportering I P1 – Vinnare Av Stora

Radiopriset 2011. Retrieved March 4, 2012, From

http://sverigesradio.se/sida/gruppsida.aspx?programid=1637&grupp=8981

Sörlin, S., Calmfors, L., Krusell, P., Persson, T., Strömberg, P., Vlachos, J. & Waldenström, D.

2011. ”SNS Har Fallit Undan För Näringslivets Påtryckningar”. Retrieved April 9, 2012,

From http://www.dn.se/debatt/sns-har-fallit-undan-for-naringslivets-patryckningar

Tuvhag, E. 2011. ”Hon Startade Debattstorm- Tystades Av Arbetsgivaren”. Retrieved April 7,

2012, From http://www.svd.se/naringsliv/vagar-dra-slutsatser_6627330.svd

48

7.4 Newspaper Articles

Bonow, M. 1951. ”Ett Nytt Inlägg I Monopoldebatten”, Morgon-Tidningen, 12 December.

Bonow, M. 1952. ”Monopolvinsterna Och Lagstiftningen”, Morgon- Tidningen, 30 January.

Dagens Nyheter, 1951. ”Inlägg I Kartellfrågan”, 12 December.

Göteborgs Handel- Och – Sjöfartstidning, 1982. ”SNS I Kris”, 12 February.

Hjerqvist, J. 1982. ”Näringslivets ”Duvor”: - Diskutera Sakfrågor Och Inte Etiketter”,

Norrköpings Tidningar, 12 February.

Nordenskiöld, T & Rex, M. 2011. ”Kritik Inte Välkommen”, Dagens Industri. 5 October, p.7.

Ronge, P. 1982. ”Det Finns Ett Liv Efter Fonderna”, Stockholms Tidningen, 28 January, p.7.

SAFtidningen, 1981. ”Debattutmaning!”, 30 April, p. 2.

SAFtidningen, 1982. ”SNS Förhandlar Inte”, 11 February, p. 3.

SAFtidningen, 1982. ”Väg”, 30 September, p.2.

Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå, 2011. ”SNS VD Avgår”, 26 September.

Åkerman, J. 1952. ”Fri Konkurrens Och Monopol”, Sydsvenska Dagbladet/Snällposten, 31

March.

49

8 APPENDIX

8.1 Interview 120229 With Bengt Rydén

Bengt Rydén was CEO of SNS from 1974-1985. During those years, the political climate was

bitterly. Sweden had a tough Economic situation and The Social democrats wanted to introduce

Employee funds. SAF, today the Swedish Confederation of Enterprises, was very critical to the

funds and was going to arrange a campaign. At the same time, Tore Browaldh, one of the

founders of SNS, had talked with Prime Minister Tage Erlander having conversations about

Swedens’ economic situation in Bommersvik, the residence of the Prime minister. The group

discussed the financial crises and not the Employee funds.

The reason why the group ceased was that one of the members made a clumsy statement about

the group having discussions alongside the public debate. Within the group it had been consensus

to keep the meetings secret. The consequences became a media hunt where SNS could not be in

their locals. The two newspapers commenting the group most actively were SAFs newspaper and

Svenska Dagbladet (SvD). SNS did not comment it since the editor in chief will always get the

last word. Instead, SNS visited the Chief of SAF that made the climate less though. In addition,

SNS made some revisions in their by-laws. To the question of unseating him as CEO of SNS

Rydén answers that the board always had a trust in him. Judgment and trust always will be

fundamental for a CEO in an organisation.

8.1.1 Interview Questions

1. How did you experience medias' role during 1981-1982?

2. How did you experience the controversial situation?

- What was the response from society, business sector and media?

- Was there any interplay between the actors? If so, what kind of interplay?

- In what way do you think a similar situation had been received today?

3. How did you respond to the external reactions of the event?

4. Was your position ever threatened?

50

5. SNS in the past?

6. SNS in the future?

7. Overall thoughts and ideas how this study could proceed

51

8.2 Interview 120413 With Kersti Ullenhag

The development of SNS mirrors the societal development. When Tsson took over, SNS went

from a broad background to a narrower organisation. Over the years, the orientation of SNS has

changed. Media on the other hand has developed from being more listening and respectful to a

more propagandistic entity. This shift is most visible in the seventies. In this decade, the ones in

power are questioned in a completely different way. Additionally, the Swedish journalists started

to sign the editorial articles and the journalists in general took a greater place. The result was a

shift in focus from the opinion of the newspaper to the opinion of the journalists. This increased

the attention in media events and the person in focus lives (like blogs). Even the number of

chroniclers and photos of the journalists increased.

When asking Ullenhag about the recent crisis in SNS and the actions from the press she thinks it

depends on a more conflict-oriented type of journalism. In this crisis it was much more focus on

the person then the two priors. SNS was maybe harder to target before the eighties because it

consisted of heavier members, especially from the industry. Today, when the world has gotten

more globalized, managers don’t work for Sweden and Swedish firms in the same way. This

could pose some type of threat towards the original organisation SNS. SNS goes from this wider

perspective with top managers from the industry to a more slimmed organisation with shorter

reports from well-known Americans. This can also be seen in world of the enterprise.

8.2.1 Interview Questions

1. Can you describe medias' role in 1951, 1981 and 2011?

2. How would you describe the role of SNS in the public discourse?

3. What was the common attitude regarding companies and CEOs' in 1951, 1981 and 2011? Is

there any similarities or differences?

4. Why do you think that the CEO had to resign in 2011 but not in 1951 and 1981?

5. Thought around the Swedish media?

6. Thoughts around the development and differences concerning Swedish media from the 50s

until today?

52

7. SNS role in the past?

8. SNS role in the future?

53

8.3 Jan Wallanders Letter To SNS In 2011 (In Swedish)

Kände en impuls att skriva till Er. Tvekade – gamlingar skall vara återhållsamma med att lägga

sig i. Så ringde Sten W för att prata litet om vad som hänt. Han trodde Ni kunde ha glädje av att

höra litet om vad jag långt tidigare har varit med om. Det problem Ni har att lösa är nämligen

anmärkningsvärt likt vad jag ställdes inför som nytillträdd VD för SNS för 60 år sedan. Året var

1951 och själv var jag 31 år. Sedan något år hade jag lett en grupp forskare som studerat och

beskrivit de gynnsamma effekterna av den fria konkurrensen och hur central den var för en

välfungerande marknadsekonomi. Eftersom det svenska näringslivet på den tiden och med

allmänhetens och myndigheternas stöd var genom kartelliserat krävdes det reformer och kanske

även lagstiftning för att åstadkomma ett bättre sakernas tillstånd.

Vi sammanfattade resultaten av vårt arbete i en bok, som kom på hösten 1951 och som fick titeln

Konkurrens eller Samverkan. De unga påläggskalvarna i lokalgrupperna var fyllda av entusiasm

inför tanken att vi med rapporten skulle ge de gamla stofilerna i företagens ledningar en spark i

röven så det blev litet fart på dem. Problemet var bara att det var dessa stofiler som genom sina

beslut såg till att vi fick de medel vi behövde för verksamheten och de var helt emot att ge sig på

egna eller andras karteller. Tonen i diskussionen blev hög. Gösta Bohman förklarade att jag och

vi var på väg att sticka en kniv i ryggen på näringslivet och bita den hand som stödde oss.

Att vi skulle kompromissa och ändra något i rapporten var oss helt främmande. Det var för oss

ett heligt värde att verklig forskning innebar att man utan sidoblickar på vad som kunde vara

lämpligt sökte sanningen och redovisade vad man kommit fram till. Jag minns hur jag vid en av

de första företagsledningskonferenserna talade mig varm för sådana tankar. Jag gjorde Voltaires

ord till mina: Sök sanningen och för den Dig till helvetets portar – knacka på! I efterhand säger

jag mig att en hel del av de närvarande och i mina ögon mycket gamla storföretagsledarna måste

frågat sig om det verkligen var klokt att sätta så mycket pengar i händerna på dessa unga

entusiaster. Men de gjorde faktiskt det.

Vi diskuterade i SNS hur vi skulle hantera problem av detta slag. Lösningen blev att när vi i SNS

ville ta upp en fråga så gav vi ett antal personer forskare och andra i uppdrag att undersöka

problemet och eventuellt komma med till förslag till åtgärder. Rapporten och slutsatserna fick de

själva stå för. SNS som organisation tog inte ställning. Däremot krävde vi att deras rapport skulle

uppfylla de krav som man ställer på en vetenskaplig redogörelse. Den skulle också kunna läsas

54

och förstås av en bildad läsekrets. Det senare kravet kunde leda till behov av en del

omarbetningar.

Det här blev långt. Men som bekant är gamla män svårhejdbara om de får en chans att berätta om

sin ungdoms äventyr.

LYCKA TILL

55

8.4 Letter To Jan Wallander Dear Jan Wallander,

We are two students at Uppsala University named Erik Norin and Julia Kahlström. Regarding our

master thesis, in business administration, we are contacting you. We have chosen to analyse the

change in the relationship between media and SNS over a period of time. The purpose is to

conduce to how the process of medias' framing of organizations has developed in Sweden since

1950. The time when the book Konkurrens eller Samverkan was released is of most interest to us.

We have read the letter written to SNSs' secretariat, which resulted mainly in these questions:

- How did media react to the release of Konkurrens eller Samverkan?

- Do you think media was aware of how SNS was financed (entirely by Näringslivets fund)

during this period?

- If no, had things turned out different if it had been known?

- In your book Forskaren som Bankdirektör, you write that there is a change in journalism in the

end of 1970 to the beginning of 1980. Mainly in the monitoring of business leaders and the

framing of organizations. Do you think there has been another drastic change in media framing

since? if so, when and how?

- What is the major change in media framing between 1950, 1980 and today?

An answer envelope is attached for use if you decide to answer this letter.

Best regards,

Erik Norin and Julia Kahlström