Public Interest in the Pandemic : a comparative framing analysis of COVID-19 public health interventions by the Victorian State Government and Australian digital news outlets

Abstract: This thesis investigates the framing of COVID-19 public health interventions by the Victorian State Government, in daily press conferences, and Australian digital news outlets, in their reporting on the press conferences. A mixed-methods approach to framing analysis is used to comparatively analyse the framing by the two sources. The analysis revealed significant differences between the frames operationalised by the Victorian State Government and Australian digital news outlets. These differences were highly indicative of the practices, norms, and ethics of journalism and public health, and their competing definitions over what constitutes ‘public interest’. The findings indicated that while the majority of news articles in the sample replicated the ‘public health’ framing promoted by the State Government, a significant number of articles adopted a negative judgement on public health interventions, emphasising political blame and moral and economic risks. This latter framing predominated among News Corporation-owned tabloid news outlets, in which reporting was found to be more dramatized, sensationalised, and critical of state intervention. These findings prompted recommendations for increased funding and regulation to promote quality journalism and media diversity in Australia, arguing that it is the interests of both democracy and public health.