Framing the Public Sphere in the Ethiopian Media: An Analysis of Newspaper OP-ED Sections

Abstract

This study examines the framing of Ethiopia’s 2018 governmental reform in the op-ed sections of four selected newspapers—state-owned Addis Zemen and Ethiopian Herald and privately owned Addis Admas and The Reporter—by applying the theoretical framework of media framing. Drawing on methodological insights from textual analysis, 24 op-eds were read to understand how the reform was presented through the selection of contributors and the presentation of competing frames in the media. The study reveals that the reform is framed differently in the selected media via topics, dominant themes, sources cited, or a combination of these devices. Contrary to the original purpose of the op-ed column, the analysis reveals a significant gap. Not varied perspectives are found in the process of discussion, as the op-eds in each media outlet are framed using a limited set of interpretations derived from two dominant frames: responsibility and binary frames. Textual analysis further reveals that these frames manifest through distinct
subframes. Specifically, the state-owned Addis Zemen and The Ethiopian Herald employ a societal-level responsibility frame, whereas the privately published Addis Admas and The Reporter shifted the focus to individual accountability. Regarding binary framing, Addis Admas, Addis Zemen, and The Ethiopian Herald consistently portray the reform positively, while The Reporter adopts an anti-reform stance in the binary frame. These findings suggest a media landscape characterized by deficient discursive diversity and a tendency towards interpretive homogenization and polarization in the media. This gap between the ideal of diverse public discourse and the reality of limited framing practices suggests the critical role media outlets play in shaping public understanding of complex political events such as Ethiopia’s 2018 reform.