Mainstream or Marginalized? How German and Dutch Newspapers Frame LGBTI

Abstract

Although historically ignored or stigmatized by mainstream media, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LGBTI) people have increasingly become visible. However, increased visibility does not necessarily translate to more inclusive reporting. Comparing framing of LGBTI in Germany and the Netherlands, I ask which frames are assimilative and which pose structural challenges to hegemonic heteronormative notions on gender and sexuality. I apply a combination of automated text analysis of over 15,000 Dutch and German newspaper articles from 2009 to 2019 with critical frame analysis to analyze how LGBTI people are included in public debate. Despite increased visibility, coverage of gender identity and sexuality continues to be depoliticized and assimilative. Comparing two European cases shows which frames are mainstream and which are marginalized.

Covering inclusion: Frames, themes, and voice in news about LGBTI topics

“…Alongside discourse and content analysis, scholars have adopted framing analysis to investigate the tone and shape of news coverage of LGBTI topics. Schotel (2022) applied automated text analysis to more than 15,000 Dutch and German newspaper articles between 2009 and 2019 and a critical frame analysis to 600 of those articles. In her analysis, Schotel (2022) discerns human rights frames, homonationalist frames, religious or anti-gender ideology frames, and frames specific to transgender people and people with intersex variations.…”

“…Schotel (2022) applied automated text analysis to more than 15,000 Dutch and German newspaper articles between 2009 and 2019 and a critical frame analysis to 600 of those articles. In her analysis, Schotel (2022) discerns human rights frames, homonationalist frames, religious or anti-gender ideology frames, and frames specific to transgender people and people with intersex variations. She argues that these frames are applied in different ways, depending on the national context.…”

“…The homonationalist frame (17% overall, 11% dominant) was operationalised as a focus on LGBTI-phobia attributed to migrants or situated in foreign countries (see also Schotel, 2022). In doing so, this frame posited the own nation as LGBTI-friendly, thus obfuscating domestic discrimination against LGBTI people.…”

“…The studies by Schotel (2022) and Jacobs and Meeusen (2020) use a deductive approach to address the demand for more quantitative analyses of LGBTI media representations. Deductive framing analyses are less time-consuming and allow for comparison with previous research, but they fall short in identifying more fine-grained patterns and issue-specific dynamics in framing (Matthes and Kohring, 2008).…”

‘No room for hate in our country’: Constructing the LGBTI-friendly nation in news discourses after the murder of a gay man in Belgium

“…When will the EU act against this fundamental violation of human rights? (Het Belang van Limburg, 10 March 2021) This discourse builds on the framing of gay equalities as human rights that has characterized European LGBTI-activism since the 1990s(Holzhacker, 2014) but may easily spill over into homonationalist rhetoric(Schotel, 2022). References to CEE also appeared in other articles, such as the following interview question: 'Were you surprised that this happened in Belgium?…”