Framing the Blogosphere: Perspectives on the Left-Right Divide

Over the past half-decade, blogging has exploded as a modern communication medium. The act of publishing work on the internet has become incredibly popular, and more blogs on vastly varied subjects spring up each day. Political blogging became especially prevalent after the terrorist attacks of September 11^th, 2001. One of the phenomena that resulted from this astronomical increase in political blogging was the formation of a left-right divide in the blogosphere; as the blogosphere grew, political blogs on each side of the debate began to create circles of like-minded contributors. “The blogosphere is a highly fragmented place where people naturally and often aggressively divide into ideological camps,” (Kerbel, Bloom, 22). The result was a blogosphere sharply divided by ideology, wherein, due to a number of factors, blogs tended to interact almost exclusively with other politically sympathetic blogs, rarely linking to or citing blogs of opposing viewpoints.

The purpose of this paper is not so much to explore each of the multiple reasons for this divide as to focus on the perceptions bloggers hold of their own work and others’ through the language of frame. A study of postings on blogs on each side of the political debate reveals that each blogger is active in framing; that is, “to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described,” (Entman, 52). In a great number of instances, political blogs specialize and cover one or several specific topics; as they report and analyze information about each topic, a frame becomes apparent. Naturally, blogs that tend to have a general political perspective, while not wholly subscribing to all of their compatriots’ opinions, share similar frames that perpetuate themselves through linking and idea-sharing among the bloggers. In other words, for many of these blogs a certain political ideology invariably becomes its primary framework, “[a frame] that is seen as rendering what would otherwise be a meaningless aspect of the scene into something that is meaningful,” (Goffman, 21). Thus, as each side of the blogosphere continues to communicate information and ideas amongst their fellow frame-sharers, the divide between left and right becomes more apparent. For the purposes of studying this and other phenomena, this paper will cite two popular political blogs as examples: Daily Kos on the left side of the blogosphere, and Little Green Footballs on the right.

Blogs are revolutionary in their treatment of news communication. Individuals, who have in common perhaps only an internet connection, cite, produce, comment on, and share information in a decentralized and unstructured fashion. This is in stark contrast to traditional media forms, as described by Tuchman in a 1978 work: “news is located, gathered, and distributed by professionals working in organizations. Thus it is inevitably a product of newsworkers drawing upon institutional processes and conforming to institutional practices,” (Tuchman, 4). Nothing could be further from the reality of blogging, which eschews “conforming to institutional practices.” This revolutionary form of communication “increases civic participation, mobilization, and engagement,” (Kerbel, Bloom, 5). It is the very freedom from typical media structures that allows for this novel dynamism. An important aspect of these traditional media structures was a supposed adherence to objectivity and balance, which ensured, if in a flawed manner, that the left and right were engaged in some form of dialogue. The freedom of blogs means that they are not in any way obligated to engage in such balance; their respective frames are shared by other like-minded individuals, and for reasons explained below, a divide between left and right exists that was not as apparent in the old media styles.

In a phone interview with the author, blogger Bill Whittle illustrated effects of the left-right blogosphere divide. Whittle is a television editor and author, whose popular blog Eject! Eject! Eject! consists of lengthy essays on contemporary issues and ideals concerning Americans, and happens to be on Little Green Football’s blog roll (a list of links to other blogs the blogger maintains on his or her website). When asked to provide an overarching theme, which could be reasonably understood as frame, Whittle described Eject! Eject! Eject! as a blog that “provides ammunition to those who believe that America is a good and decent place.” As such, Whittle’s blog postings are original pieces of thought that defend traditionally-held views and ideals about the goodness, generosity, and decency of the average American citizen. Responses to his blog handily illustrate the separation of the left and right blogospheres. Whittle’s work is regularly praised by other bloggers and commentators, including Little Green Footballs founder Charles Johnson. When asked what sort of response his work garnered from liberal bloggers, Whittle responded that there was very little; what several examples do exist are insubstantial and offensively crude. Whittle’s work is simply not widely read on the left blogosphere, but it is enthusiastically consumed on the right, by those who share Whittle’s ideological frame of America.

As referenced above, Charles Johnson is the proprietor and main contributor of the weblog Little Green Footballs. Founding the site in early 2001, the jazz musician and web designer began to write about his hobbies, such as bicycling, and described his political tendencies as “center-left,” (Ronen, 1). However, the events of September 11^th of that year turned Johnson into something of a hawk, and his blog began to take on a more political and conservative tone. If the blogosphere can be divided, as it has been suggested, into groups of “thinkers” and “linkers,” (Whittle) then Johnson is most certainly a member of the latter. A thinker is a blogger whose content is, for the most part, original thoughts and opinions published for public consumption; Bill Whittle is an excellent example. A linker tends to blog less substantial, original work, preferring to link and cite from other sources, be they bloggers or members of the traditional news media. For the purposes of this discussion, Johnson’s tendency to blog as a linker is extremely helpful, for while it may be difficult to analyze the frame of a prolific writer whose work is entirely original (and therefore, whose influences may be less than obvious), Little Green Footballs’ content is almost entirely links to other blog posts and news stories. By observing what stories Little Green Footballs posts, and which stories are ignored, one can come more easily to a conclusion about the blog’s frame.

A visit to the Little Green Footballs weblog will quickly reveal a website dedicated to covering events concerning several current global issues: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, America’s involvement in Iraq, especially as a part of the global war on terror, and the encroachment of Islam, Islamic terrorism, and Islamic values on traditional western civilization (it is difficult to list these issues without engaging in framing oneself). For instance, a sample of one day’s blog titles might read “Five Sentenced in Islamic Bombing Plot,” “Gadafi’s Raving Takes a Darker Turn,” “Another British Muslim Secretly Jailed in Airline Plot,” and “Five UK Muslims Convicted in Bomb Plot,” (all from Little Green Footballs entries on 4/30/07). It is common, as can be seen above, that a single day’s entries might focus heavily on a particular issue or series of related issues; no one day is usually typical or inclusive of all topics. While the focus of the blog may be immediately apparent, its respective frame or frames may take more time to explore, though they are by no means subtle or difficult to find. Unlike traditional media sources, bloggers such as Johnson make no pretensions about balance or objectivity; the nature of the political blog is openly partisan and its operator rarely suggests that he or she is striving for objectivity. That being said, bloggers often reject labeling, which is in its own way an immediate framing of a blog’s identity and, at times, a judgment of its content.

Johnson himself rejects labels such as “right-wing” for his blog. He cites the Little Green Footballs commenter (as opposed to contributor, a distinction which will be addressed below) “Bleeding heart conservative” as accurately assessing the purpose or ethos of the blog: “Little Green Footballs is not a right wing weblog. Taxes, social programs, moral behavior, tradition, these topics generate widely disparate views among its readership. Instead it proposes a clear and practical idea to which many with a practical mindset ascribe,” (Comments, Little Green Footballs 1) the said “clear and practical idea” being a tough approach to Islamic extremism. A thorough and regular reading of the Little Green Footballs blog will reveal a number of frames; namely, that Israel is almost invariably justified in its behavior toward the Palestinian territories, whose residents as sympathetic to terrorist methods of engagement do not deserve statehood, that the United States is justified in entering the current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as in staying in those nations, and that Islam, in almost all of its forms, is hostile to the western tradition of democracy and freedom.

These frames are apparent in the news stories that Johnson chooses to put up for discussion on Little Green Footballs. The very recent stories from April 30^th present readers with a world where Islamic terrorism is a real, grave, and constant threat. Besides textual news stories, Johnson often posts brief video clips accompanied by translated captions provided by the Middle Eastern interest group MEMRI. As far as Johnson’s frame on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict goes, his video post with the title “Palestinian Sheikh Calls on Allah to Kill Every Single Israeli and American” gives the viewer an appropriate idea. The conflict in Iraq, Johnson feels, is justified by its supposed detrimental effects on terrorist networks. The recent announcement of the capture of a terror leader in Iraq leads Little Green Footballs recent posts on Iraq: “Big Fish Was 7/7 Mastermind,” in reference to the attacks on the British mass transit system. Accompanying each post’s link and short preview of contents, Johnson usually provides a brief reference or tidbit about the linked article. His frames cannot be discerned from these small writings alone, but rather it is the stories he chooses to highlight that determine them. It is also those stories he does not post that help to identify his frames. For instance, there is conspicuously little reporting on the negative events unfolding in Iraq, which would suggest that Johnson wishes his readers to focus on other stories that seem to support the United States’ invasion and occupation of that country.

By consistently reporting news stories of the same tenor, Little Green Footballs presents a frame for its readers. “The text [in this case, the choice of stories] contains frames, which are manifested by the presence or absence of certain key-words, stock phrases, stereotyped images, sources of information, and sentences that provide thematically reinforcing clusters of fact or judgments,” (Entman, 52). As the readers, who often consist of other bloggers and blog commentators, continue to read these same presented stories, they begin to accept the stories’ frames, and recreate them in their own environments. Such is the self-perpetuating nature of blog frames.

Such failures to highlight negative stories that may lessen the validity of Johnson’s frames are often pointed to by his critics. Indeed, if one does not wish to send valuable traffic to an opposing website, it is much better to attack them for the lack of an addressed subject than to link to an offensive one. The bloggers of Daily Kos are among the web’s most common and intense detractors of Little Green Footballs, and it is not at all uncommon to see daily negative references on one blog about the other. Daily Kos was founded by Markos Moulitsas in May of 2002, or when, as he states, “in those dark days when an oppressive and war-crazed administration suppressed all dissent as unpatriotic and treasonous,” (Moulitsas, Daily Kos). Daily Kos also is a forum not only for Moulitsas and his commentators, but also a number of other bloggers who are hosted on the website. This results in a different dynamic with more varied frames than a blog like Little Green Footballs. Even so, it too has shared general content focus and frames easy to identify upon inspection.

Daily Kos blog posts tend to focus on domestic and international policy issues, often supporting those measures suggested by others on the left, and attacking the policies of conservatives, especially members of the Bush administration. A sampling of post titles from April 30^th, 2007, would read “Broder: Iraq War is Lost,” “Kurtz lets one slip,” and “Day 1460: Bush says troops stay in Iraq indefinitely.” The posting format on Daily Kos is relatively similar to that of Little Green Footballs, relying heavily on links to other stories or opinion. There is, generally, slightly more original commentary on Daily Kos than appears at Little Green Footballs. No matter the slightly differing formats, the frame-perpetuation of Little Green Footballs acts in the same manner at Daily Kos. Left-leaning bloggers regularly read Daily Kos postings and travel to other lefty blogs to which Kos links. As a result, the liberal political frame that selects which news stories are posted on Daily Kos become ingrained further upon the left blogosphere, and the similar effect on the right blogosphere combine to dig ever deeper the online political rift, ensuring that little substantial dialogue will occur between either side.

While it is not clear that the internet is an appropriate forum for substantial political dialogue between opposing camps, it is clear that the left-right dialogue that does occur is usually aggressively negative and pejorative. The terms “moonbat” and “idiotarian” in reference to far left individuals were popularized on Little Green Footballs, while common criticisms of Johnson and his site refer to racism and hate. It is important here to make a distinction between bloggers and their commentators. As stated earlier, many blogs (including Daily Kos and Little Green Footballs) offer opportunities for regular web denizens to comment upon posted subject matter, though it is sometimes restricted to registered members. At any rate, much of the derogatory dialogue found in blogs finds its source in the commentators, and not the bloggers themselves. When Little Green Footballs is categorized as a hate site, quotes frequently used to support this theory almost invariably come from the comments section of the blog, which are often taken out of context. Little Green Footballs, it must be said, often cites the more extreme statements of Daily Kos commentators, as well as members of the internet forum Democratic Underground.

To accuse a blog or, more specifically, their bloggers of “hate” is irresponsible if one’s evidence comes only from blog commentators. While a blogger ought to have some level of appropriate control over what other publish on his or her blog, and regular blog commentators are inseparable from the overall identity of the blog, it is logistically ludicrous to suggest that bloggers must monitor and censor each and every commentator for offensive material. Johnson and other bloggers use software that attempts to identify certain slurs in postings, and forbid the posting to occur. Johnson himself will often read through comment threads and personally edit offensive messages, although as one person his abilities are limited.

Even were blogs such as Little Green Footballs to remove comment abilities, they would probably still be criticized and attacked. This is not because the actual content of blogs would change, but because the frames of a right or left wing blogger are seen as offensive intellectually and otherwise to those who disagree with them. This is the core conflict that occurs when, as in more mainstream political debates, ad hominem attacks trump content debates. Although Johnson only links to other news stories and offers limited commentary, he is derided as a racist by many (including the specialized blog LGF Watch, which exists solely to criticize Little Green Footballs). It is the blog’s frame, that Islam poses a threat to western society, that is found so offensive as to be categorically described as hateful. In response, one might suggest that the frame of little Islamic terrorist threat existing in the world so wrong as to be described as “idiotic,” which, by bloggers on the right wing, it often is. As it stands, there is little original content on Little Green Footballs, written by Johnson that could reasonably be accused of espousing racist themes. Such accusations, say sympathetic bloggers like Whittle, are slanderous.

Opposing frames naturally divide any political debate; it is the nature of internet communication as non-physical and remote that allows for a deliberate “snubbing” and lack of discourse between argumentative parties. If one has the opportunity to avoid inevitably nasty exchanges, why bother engaging them? The blogosphere’s place in the internet ensures that, until some collective action is taken, the relative independence and tribalism of left and right blogging will remain intact. Blogs’ frames, which act as filters for what content is posted, will continue to perpetuate themselves as right to their fans and offensive to their detractors. It is not this author’s opinion that this divide proves that blogs have a negative effect on this country’s political process. On the contrary, blogs by their nature encourage active participation in political life and activity; Little Green Footballs readers often post about engagements with the left in the “real world” that were inspired by content found on the internet. Daily Kos has inspired its readers to support and promote the campaigns of a number of Democratic politicians in different elections, with admittedly mixed results.

It must be remembered that, in the scheme of communication, blogs are an incredibly young innovation. It is difficult to accurately propose just what the blogosphere will look in ten years, or further. Even so, it seems a remote possibility that the left-right blogosphere rift will be bridged any time soon. Blog frames, as self-perpetuating, are simply unlikely to spontaneously bridge that gap; perhaps, it would even be unnatural to the medium. However, the internet has a habit of creating the most unlikely of phenomena; in an age of such technology, what is unexpected is often the next big thing.

Bibliograohy

Ronen, Gil. “At Israel’s Right.” Aritz Sheva. May 11, 2004.

<http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/62000>

Goffman, Erving. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. 1974. Harvard University Press: Cambridge.

Tuchman, Gaye. Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. 1978. The Free Press: New York.

Kerbel and Bloom. “Blog for American and Civic Involvement.” 2005. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics.

Entman, Robert. “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” 1993, Journal of Communication, Autumn.

Johnson, Charles. Content of Little Green Footballs weblog. April 30, 2007. <http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com>

Various authors. Content of Daily Kos weblog, April 30, 2007.

<http://www.dailykos.com>

Moulitsas, Markos. “About Daily Kos.”

<http://www.dailykos.com/special/about2>

“Bleeing heart conservative.” Little Green Footballs blog comment, May 8, 2003.

< http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=6552#c0026>

Whittle, Bill. Eject! Eject! Eject!

<http://www.ejectejecteject.com>

Whittle, Bill. Telephone interview. April 26, 2007.