It is often noted that media outlets are more likely to report on negative campaign messages than positive campaign messages. Going negative may therefore be a very effective way of reaching voters through the media, and this media amplification of negative messages may be particularly important in non-US campaigns, where politicians often have limited opportunities to use direct communication channels, in particular TV advertisements. However, media outlets do more than choosing what they want to cover, they also chose how they want to cover it, i.e. how they want to frame their stories. The literature on media framing, have shown that media outlets often cover politics and political campaigns through a “game frame,” which focuses on the motives and strategy behind policy positions, and on the popularity and power of political actors. This paper investigates whether there is an association between a media focus on negative campaigning and the use of a game frame. The possible association between negative campaigning and media framing is relevant not only for the politicians using such campaign messages, but also relevant from a more general democratic perspective since both negative campaigning and media game framing have been charged with similar, detrimental, effects on the electorate such as voter apathy, cynicism and a lowering of political efficacy. Any association between media coverage of negative campaigning and choice of frame means that we will have to investigate both in conjunction in order to disentangle the possible effects on the electorate. Therefore, this paper takes a first step by investigating whether a media focus on negative campaigning is indeed associated with a use of the game frame. Such an association have previously been suggested, but it remains to be investigated empirically. This investigation is based on a content analysis of a selection of major media outlets.
