Konsonant oder interessengeleitet? Eine Frame-Analyse zur Berichterstattung über die Vermögensteuer im Wahljahr 2013

“Poison to the Economy”: (Un-)Taxing the Wealthy in the German Federal Parliament from 1996 to 2016

“…While the CDU framed its opposition against the taxation of wealth from an efficiency perspective, the SPD variously attempted to mobilize a social justice frame in order to generate support. Similar to the findings on media debates presented by Lichtenstein et al ( 2016 ), we find that these two frames exist amidst a set of more technical considerations around the existence of such a tax and that the antagonism between them really seems to constitute a substratum of this debate over time. However, our findings do not merely reflect straightforward partisan divides between the political representatives of capital and labour.…”

“…We find that two competing frames (DiMaggio et al, 2013 )—an economic efficiency frame and a social justice frame—variously imbue the wealth tax with meaning. While prior research finds that in public discourse on the taxation of wealth, purported negative economic implications are often invoked to underline opposition to this measure (Leipold, 2019 ; Lichtenstein et al, 2016 ; Rieder & Theine, 2019 ), we need more systematic evidence for how arguments that are crafted in the political sphere might resonate with a broader public. Our findings suggest that evocative language and political symbolism may play a crucial role in this regard: in the parliamentary debates we analyse, Conservatives’ use of the efficiency frame often rests on biological metaphors.…”

“…One key finding here is that arguments that emphasize potentially negative economic consequences of taxing wealth—for growth, employment, etc.—are a prominent trope. For instance, Lichtenstein et al ( 2016 ) study media representations in 2013, an election year, and find that worries about negative economic consequences of the wealth tax are a dominant theme across different types of media outlets, over and above favourable arguments around its redistributive effects, considerations about how the revenue could be used, and legal issues concerning its feasibility as well as its implementation. Rieder and Theine ( 2019 ) investigate how the policy proposals put forward by French economist Piketty are portrayed in the media in Germany and four additional European countries in 2014 and 2015.…”

“…Our investigation contributes to an emerging literature that analyses how issues of wealth taxation are publicly debated. While prior studies have mostly focused on public discourse in the media (Leipold, 2019 ; Lichtenstein et al, 2016 ; Rieder & Theine, 2019 ), our study is the first to analyse the parliamentary debate over time. In modern democratic polities, the parliament is an important site of communication, deliberation, and coordination, both between different political actors as well as vis-a-vis the larger public (van Dijk, 1997 ).…”

Die Medienberichterstattung zur Vermögens- und Erbschaftsbesteuerung in Deutschland: eine korpuslinguistische Analyse

“…Jene wissenschaftlichen Studien, welche die Medienberichterstattung zu Umverteilungsmaßnahmen (von Vermögen und Einkommen) untersuchen, konstatieren, dass diese in der Berichterstattung eher ablehnend behandelt werden, die positiven Implikationen der Umverteilungspolitik, d. h. die Reduktion von Ungleichheit, vielerorts unterrepräsentiert bleiben (siehe u. a. Lichtenstein et al 2016). Wird die Piketty-Debatte 2014/15 4 herangezogen, so ergibt eine Analyse der Berichterstattung in jeweils drei Tages-und Wochenzeitungen in Irland, Großbritannien, Deutschland und Österreich, dass Umverteilungspolitiken in geringerem Maße angesprochen werden als das Thema der ökonomischen Ungleichheit an sich, und diese Politiken außerdem als wesentlich umstrittenerer definiert werden (Grisold und Preston 2020).…”