Hero, victim, and charity case: How the news media frame U.S. military veterans on Twitter

In the initial post for this blog, I highlighted how Americans - especially younger Americans - are less likely to have immediate family connections to the military than in past generations.  One consequence is that many Americans get most of their information about the military from media as opposed through conversations with those who have served.  Thus, it becomes important to understand how media represent the experiences of military veterans.

A recent study,  led by Dr. Scott Parrott, Associate Professor of Journalism and Creative Media at the University of Alabama, explored this issue in depth.  News organizations increasingly use Twitter to broadcast their stories to audiences, and hence Dr. Parrott and his colleagues analyzed tweets from 50 regional news organizations that used the term "veteran" or "veterans" over a 10 year period.  Specifically, the authors analyzed tweets from the largest regional newspapers in each of the 50 states.  In my home state of Florida, for example, the authors analyzed tweets from the Tampa Bay Times, which has the largest media market in the state.  In cases where the largest paper served a national rather than a regional audience, the second largest news organization was selected (e.g., for the state of New York, the authors analyzed tweets by the New York Post rather than New York Times).  From 2008 to 2017, the authors identified 8,417 tweets about veterans by these 50 news organizations; hence, they randomly identified a subset of 20% of those tweets (n = 1,460) to analyze in terms of how military veterans were framed.

Media framing theory argues that news organizations help shape the public's perceptions of social issues by highlighting certain elements of a story while downplaying other elements.  Just as placing a picture into different frames may draw attention to different elements of a painting, framing a news story in different ways can draw attention to different elements of an issue.  In a classic 1993 article, Professor Robert Entman of George Washington University described framing as a process in which communicators "select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such as way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation" (p. 52).  By consistently highlighting certain aspects of the veteran experience, news organizations inadvertently may create and/or reinforce stereotypes about military veterans.

To identify frames, Dr. Parrott and colleagues coded for the presence or absence of about a dozen different topics or themes that they anticipated (based on prior research) might be discussed in each of the 1,460 tweets.  After this, the authors analyzed which themes tended to occur together in the same tweets.  In this way, they were able to identify 3 main frames present in their sample of regional news organization's tweets about military veterans.

First, the charity/assistance frame represented stories in which veterans received free goods or services from businesses or non-profit organizations.  Common themes in the first frame included charity, content that would elicit feelings of happiness, and discussions of physical health.  Example tweets that illustrate this first frame include "Wounded at war, Army veteran gets new home" (Arkansas Democratic-Gazette) and "7-Eleven offering veterans a fee-free franchise" (Times Dispatch, Richmond, Virginia).  About 35% of the news tweets fell into this first frame.

Second, the hero frame included stories about acts of courage and heroism by veterans.  Common themes in this second frame included reference to honor, content that would elicit pride, and specific mentions of WWII veterans.  Examples illustrating this second frame include "Dallas photo exhibit focuses on bravery, sacrifice of WWII veterans in senior living center" (Dallas Morning News) and "We offer our greatest gratitude to our veterans and those who are active in the U.S. military" (Burlington Free Press).  About 35% of tweets feel into this second frame.

Third, the victim frame was composed of stories about hardships faced by veterans.  Common themes in this third frame included veterans being wronged, veterans struggling with mental health issues, politics, the post-9/11 conflicts, and content that would elicit sadness.  Examples of this third frame include "News at noon: Report shows VA staff left veterans' body in shower nine hours" (Tampa Bay Times) and "Suicides of young veterans top those of active duty troops" (Detroit Free Press).  About 30% of stories fell into this third frame.

One concerning aspect of these findings is how they highlight only certain aspects of the veteran experience.  Some veterans (at some points in time) do need assistance; some have performed incredible acts of courage that merit recognition, and some struggle to reintegrate to civilian life after returning from combat and/or separating from the military.  But the danger comes when repeated frames lead readers to move from inferring "some veterans" to "most" or "all veterans."    

Consider the victim frame. As noted in a previous blog, the best evidence to date suggests that about a quarter (23%) of veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan struggle with post-traumatic stress symptoms.  After being encouraged by family and military peers, many of these veterans seek professional help and go on to live productive lives.  What's left unsaid in this statistic, however is that most veterans (77%) transition back to civilian life remarkably smoothly.   If the public believes that most military veterans suffer from PTSD, then it's easier to understand why employers might be cautious about hiring veterans or younger Americans might be reluctant to consider serving.

A second concerning aspect of these findings is what frames are missing from news tweets about military veterans.  Military veterans bring a range of experiences and skills into the civilian world - whether they are searching for employment, continuing their education, or volunteering for non-profit organizations in their community.  So where is the veterans as valuable resources frame?

Given that more of the public rely on media as their primary source of information about the military, what are ways of moving forward?  The point of this blog isn't to blame the media.  As Dr. Parrott notes, reporters at regional news organizations often are tasked with writing more than one story per day; hence it is understandable that they may write routine stories at particular times (e.g., around Memorial Day and Veterans Day) rather than digging deeper to write about broader aspects of the veteran experience.  One option is for academics and activists to collaborate with news organizations to improve coverage of veterans issues.  The Center for Media Engagement at the University of Texas offers a model for how this might work.  Equally important, we need to create more opportunities for civilians and military-connected individuals to have productive conversations about a range of issues (e.g., the benefits and challenges of military service, the role of the military in our larger society), including on our college campuses.  Regardless of your opinion about the military as an institution, surely we all have something to learn from more opportunities for dialogue.