Literature Review

A better understanding of news coverage of Trump’s falling voter approval ratings can be reached by understanding Entman (1993)’s concept of framing. Entman argued that communicators – in this case, journalists – embed certain frames in their texts, either consciously or subconsciously (p. 52). These frames come in the form of key words, images, sources, etc. and reinforce certain judgements. These judgements, which the journalist has encoded into their text, are then subcoded – or absorbed – by the reader. This concept of framing illuminates the power of communicating concepts over text. 

​

News coverage of public opinion polling, like Trump’s voter approval ratings, is relatively common. So, there is a sizable body of research on how news articles frame public opinion polling, as well as public opinion in general. 

 

To start with news coverage of public opinion polling, Appelman and Schmierbach (2024) found that journalists often commit frequent errors when writing about polling (p. 770). Not only that, but Appelman and Schmierbach also found that readers are often unable to identify errors in reporting on public opinion polling, often only being able to identify them when they’re very frequent. Interestingly, Appelman and Schmierbach found that readers who identified themselves as more sensitive to these types of errors were actually less likely to notice them (p. 771). Journalists involved in Appelman and Schmierbach’s study were aware of the fact that opinion poll coverage contained frequent errors, and identified various structural and individual causes (p. 774). Ultimately, Appelman and Schmierbach’s findings show that news coverage of public opinion polling is often trusted by readers, even when it's undeserving of that trust.

 

In regards to political public opinion polling in particular, Oleskog Tryggvason (2021) examined whether news coverage of political parties and polling affects more general (non-polling) coverage of those parties. Oleskog Tryggvason found that news stories about political parties and polling with positive framing seem to influence future coverage about political parties in general (p. 684). Negatively framed stories, however, didn’t seem to have much of an effect. These findings highlight the potential impact of news coverage of Trump’s falling voter approval ratings. Since coverage of Trump’s falling approval ratings is predominantly negative, it may be less influential on coverage of his political party than positive coverage would be – judging by Oleskog Tryggvason’s findings. 

 

As recent voter approval ratings have shown, public opinion of Trump can indeed change. Nai and Maier (2021) examined how public perception of Trump changed over time, with special attention to partisanship. Nai and Maier found that Trump’s public perception among both Democrats and Republicans is, on average, very stable (p. 309). Democrats demonstrated a more critical perception of Trump to begin with, but Republicans grew increasingly negative in their view of him over time (p. 304). Nai and Maier argue that this negative shift in public perception towards Trump may have been more pronounced in a country with a political leader that never had a personality as extreme as Trump’s in the first place (p. 310). Nai and Maier also argue that this shift in public opinion may have been more dramatic in a country where voters aren’t so swayed and confused by hyperpartisanship. Overall, Nai and Maier’s findings show that while public opinion on Trump can change, it’s often slow-moving and perhaps subtle. 

Much like how public opinion of Trump behaves in unique ways due to his being a unique figure, news coverage of Trump may be unique as well. The findings of a study by Teresa (2020) demonstrate that pre-existing ideologies about a politician can influence news framing of said politician. Teresa found that during the 2016 Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clinton’s ability to present herself in a palatable manner as a female presidential candidate motivated journalists to provide her with flattering coverage (p. 32). Teresa argues that pre-existing gender-ideologies influenced news framing of Clinton (p. 39). These findings reinforce Entman’s claim that framing is guided by schema (p. 52). Teresa’s findings show that pre-existing ideologies about a politician’s identity or identities can influence news coverage of that politician. 

 

New coverage can often shape public opinion, including coverage of public opinion. De Vreese et al. (2011) found that positive news coverage of Turkey joining the European Union (EU) made people more likely to support it. Importantly, De Vreese et al. argue that news framing doesn’t necessarily change audience’s opinions, instead influencing them by exposing them to already existing ideas (p. 182). Similarly to Oleskog Tryggvason, De Vreese et al. found that negatively framed coverage of Turkey joining the EU was less impactful than positive coverage. This will come in handy when examining news coverage of Trump’s falling approval, which is often negative. 

News framing influencing public opinion of a president isn’t unheard of in the U.S. In fact, Shah et al. (2002) used news framing to help explain why former president Bill Clinton received some of his highest voter approval ratings ever while in the midst of his infamous sex scandal. Although Clinton was receiving a mountain of highly unflattering news coverage surrounding the scandal, he was also receiving some positive coverage about his handling of the economy. Shah et al. found that positive coverage of Clinton’s economy was one of the reasons he received high voter approval ratings even during such a turbulent period of his presidency (p 368). These findings again tie back to De Vreese et al. and Oleskog Tryggvason’s findings that positive news coverage can prove more impactful than negative news coverage. Shah et al.’s findings also demonstrate that public opinion of U.S. presidents can indeed be influenced by the press.