Media Framing of Jordanian Legislative Performance in Television Talk Shows

Abstract

Talk shows have a vital role in framing legislative issues to influence public attitudes, in a way that serves and achieves the interests of those in charge of these talk shows. The coverage of the talk show Voice of the Kingdom during the second regular session of the National Assembly reveals the spotlight on the performance of the legislative authority, which is the basis for approving, rejecting, or amending laws in Jordan. It also highlights the way talk shows address the performance of the legislative authority in exercising its legislative and oversight role and analyzes the elements on which these talk shows rely in framing legislative issues, as these treatments reflect the public’s interpretations and priorities towards the performance of the legislative authority. To achieve these objectives, the media content analysis approach was used to analyze the media frames of 37 episodes of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show during the second regular session of the 19th National Assembly, which extended from 13 November 2022 to 7 May 2023. This article reveals that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show framed the performance of the legislative authority within the framework of economic results, responsibility, and human interests. The methods of treatment were characterized by the analytical approach, while it relied on rational persuasion methods in treating the performance of the legislative authority. The results concluded that the process of framing the Voice of the Kingdom talk show for the performance of the legislative authority acquires its characteristics from the nature of the television channel’s orientations, the vision of the talk show makers, and the goals they seek to achieve, which gives the communicator an influential role in framing legislative performance.

1. Introduction

Television channels have a pivotal role in societal development by raising awareness on various aspects of life. These channels serve as a primary source of information for audiences across different intellectual levels and interests, helping them understand and interpret events and issues spanning social, political, and economic domains. Among the diverse programming formats, television talk shows stand out as a vital platform for the exchange of opinions and ideas. They facilitate dialogue by hosting prominent societal figures who present diverse viewpoints while analyzing and discussing critical issues (Naz et al., 2014). As such, these talks show contribute significantly to public awareness and knowledge (Abuhasirah & Al-Gharaibeh, 2023; Oreqat et al., 2023; Loeb, 2015).

Talk shows deliver significant media content through their approach to framing discussions, which includes constructing narratives and providing specific meanings aligned with media discourse objectives. This process, referred to as media framing in communication studies, focuses on dominant meanings within media content (Sullivan, 2023; De Vreese, 2014; Borah, 2011). Framing helps shape public understanding by directing attention to particular aspects of events or issues and presenting them in a deliberate manner. Media frames go beyond mere information dissemination; they guide audiences in evaluating the importance of issues based on the framing approach employed (Petruck, 2022; Brugman et al., 2017; Entman, 2004; Jakobsen, 2000; Scheufele, 2000).

In the context of television talk shows, the framing of legislative performance derives its distinctiveness from editorial policies (Eisele et al., 2023), which are reflected in the choice of words, expressions, and guest speakers. These editorial strategies align with the channel’s policies and its relationships with various stakeholders. Such talk shows often adopt specific media frameworks to present topics and issues related to legislative performance in ways that advance the interests of their producers (Figenschou et al., 2023). This framing shapes audience perceptions and attitudes by establishing specific interpretations and priorities (Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2024a; Van den Heijkant et al., 2023).

The importance of television talk shows in addressing legislative issues becomes particularly evident in light of Jordan’s political developments and ongoing debates surrounding the reform process. These talk shows play a crucial role in analyzing and simplifying legislative issues, allowing the public to understand their implications and form informed opinions. By hosting specialists and experts, talk shows offer in-depth explanations of legislative matters, fostering public awareness and shaping public opinion on these topics. This study focuses on analyzing the media frameworks employed by Jordanian television talk shows in covering the performance of the legislative authority. Specifically, it examines the extent and methods of coverage, as well as the professionalism exhibited by talk show hosts when addressing legislative matters. The study’s significance lies in its exploration of the legislative authority’s performance, a fundamental aspect of lawmaking that directly impacts citizens’ lives. Furthermore, it investigates how talk shows frame legislative issues and the elements they rely on to shape public attitudes.

To achieve these objectives, the study analyzed episodes of the television talk show The Voice of the Kingdom talk show, which dedicated substantial focus to legislative matters during the second regular session of the National Assembly (13 November 2022–7 May 2023). This session featured 15 legislative sessions and 4 oversight sessions, resulting in the approval of 12 draft laws. The talk show hosted specialists, political analysts, and legal experts to discuss these topics, providing viewers with comprehensive information and diverse perspectives to help them form informed opinions, attitudes, and priorities.

Accordingly, this article highlights the significance of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show, which has emerged as one of the leading platforms for discussing legislative performance in Jordan. With an average viewership that positions it among the top-rated talk shows on Jordanian television, the program attracts diverse audiences seeking insights into critical political issues affecting their lives. According to a recent survey, over 60% of viewers reported relying on this talk show as their primary source of information regarding legislative matters, underlining its role in shaping public discourse (Amazon, 2024). The editorial line of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show is characterized by a commitment to promoting transparency and accountability in governance. This aligns with Al Mamlaka TV’s broader mission to provide balanced, fact-based journalism that resonates with the channel’s ethics as a public service broadcaster focused on national development. The concept of public media service is embodied in media that is independent from the interference of authorities and private economic interests, reflecting the public interest. It guarantees pluralism and participation, reflects the interests of all citizens, and addresses them without exception, exclusion, or marginalization of any group or party. The Voice of the Kingdom talk show seeks to present a new Jordanian model in public media, based on the principles of independence in broadcasting information and news, freedom of public debate according to the standards of pluralism and participation, and oversight and representation of public opinion by monitoring the performance of public institutions and the application of the law to serve the public interest.

2. Literature Review

This study applies the theory of media framing, which offers a framework for analyzing the implicit content within media messages delivered by television talk shows (Chong & Druckman, 2007). These talk shows strategically emphasize certain aspects of the legislative authority’s performance while omitting others. By deliberately selecting and highlighting specific elements, talk shows aim to explain legislative issues and validate opposing viewpoints, aligning with their editorial policies (Kaplan, 2006) and the orientations of the communicators. This approach facilitates the presentation, discussion, and analysis of opinions, ultimately influencing public perceptions and attitudes toward the legislative authority’s performance (Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2023; Oreqat et al., 2023).

The theory posits that the meaning of events, issues, and facts is shaped through media frameworks that classify and contextualize information by emphasizing selected elements while downplaying others. This process influences how audiences think about and interpret issues, as well as how they link them to broader contexts (Sullivan, 2023).

Media framing theory highlights the media’s power to present news stories through specific frames that prioritize certain aspects of facts and issues while downplaying others. This selective focus organizes information in a manner that enhances the clarity of some facts over others (Al-Rubaye & Murad, 2022; Feste, 2011). By providing a structured explanation of the media’s influence on diverse audiences, the theory underscores its impact on public understanding and awareness (Van Gorp, 2009; Norris, 1995).

Entman (2004) emphasizes that framing involves placing issues within a specific context, shaped by the media creator’s perspective—whether a journalist, media institution, or influenced by social, political, or economic environments. Framing highlights specific aspects of issues and their interconnections to foster understanding, evaluation, and problem-solving. De Vreese (2005) identifies various factors influencing the construction of media frames, including the communicator’s characteristics, sources, culture, and susceptibility to pressure groups and political orientations. These interactions among media professionals, managers, political elites, and civil society organizations shape how issues are selected and presented, ultimately guiding public interpretation.

Archetti (2007) agrees, noting that media framing is influenced by national interests, media culture, and editorial policies, which act as filters determining who has a voice in the media. D’Angelo (2002) adds that framing is an ongoing process within media institutions, where communicators craft frames to address specific topics, issues, or events. Dan and Raupp (2018) outline four primary functions of media frames: identifying problems and their causes based on cultural values; diagnosing causes by pinpointing responsible forces; issuing moral evaluations of the causes and effects; and suggesting solutions and predicting their potential impacts. However, not all frames necessarily encompass all four functions (Al Harahsheh, 2025; Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2024b).

Media studies have significantly contributed to identifying various classifications of media frames (Chong & Druckman, 2007; Van Gorp, 2005; Fairhurst, 2005). Over time, new classifications and types have also been introduced (Metry, 2013; Collins, 2016). These classifications, however, often vary across studies due to the diversity of media outlets and their differing goals (Van Dijk, 2023; López-Rabadán, 2022; Sullivan, 2023). Media frames generally fall into two main categories: specific frames and general frames. Specific frames focus on individual cases or events, such as racial discrimination, assassinations, and terrorism. In contrast, general frames address broader issues in abstract contexts, such as government spending cuts or political and economic transformations, often supported by evidence (Alkhatib & Hijab, 2024; Salameh & Abuhasirah, 2022; Kozman, 2017; Iyengar & Simon, 1993).

The classification of media frames frequently reflects the characteristics of political news coverage, highlighting the media’s influential role in the political process (Oxley, 2020; Nelson, 2019; Kim et al., 2010). The actions of interest groups, policymakers, journalists, and other stakeholders shaping media agendas and frames significantly impact the volume and nature of news messages surrounding particular issues. These frames include objective features, such as highlighting politicians’ characteristics and their societal positions, and emotional features, which involve presenting images and addressing issues in positive, negative, or neutral contexts (Salameh, 2019; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).

Semetko and Valkenburg (2000) identified five key media frames that influence public perceptions and understanding of the issues featured in news coverage. These include the following: conflict frame: emphasizes conflicts among individuals, groups, or institutions to capture public attention; human interest frame: personalizes, dramatizes, or emotionalizes news to maintain audience engagement; economic outcome frame: focuses on presenting problems or issues by highlighting their economic impacts on individuals, organizations, or nations; ethics frame: positions issues within the context of religious beliefs or moral perspectives, often indirectly, through quotes or implications, to convey moral messages or propose social solutions; responsibility frame: assigns accountability for problems or issues to individuals or governments, shaping public understanding of the entities responsible for societal challenges.

The analysis of media frames is guided by four foundational principles. First, media frames serve as a tool to help audiences understand and interpret reality, enabling individuals to compare and contextualize information based on prior experiences (McQuail, 2010). Second, framing involves emphasizing certain aspects of issues while omitting or de-emphasizing others (Entman, 1993). Third, media employ words, texts, metaphors, and images to construct frames, shaping the meanings conveyed by media messages and influencing audience opinions and attitudes (Dewulf & Bouwen, 2012). Finally, framing is an interactive skill developed by opinion leaders or officials, as frames function as cognitive models that guide the selection and emphasis of specific elements to achieve communication objectives (Van Hulst et al., 2024; Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2024a).

The content presented in media is crafted according to specific standards that align with the mechanisms of media framing. Consequently, the study of media frames and their mechanisms has garnered significant attention from researchers and communication scholars. For instance, Pérez-Sánchez and Peris-Blanes (2024) examine the evolution of political talk shows, particularly within the context of Spanish television, and emphasize their role in shaping public discourse. They note that, since the late 20th century, political talk shows have combined political information with entertainment, a phenomenon known as “infotainment”. This shift has given rise to “pop politics” and “politainment”, where political messages are crafted to attract broader audiences, often at the expense of substantive discussion. The authors argue that this trend has significantly increased social and political polarization, as these shows frequently prioritize sensationalism over rational debate, fostering an environment where incivility thrives.

In the context of media studies, examining how legislative performance is portrayed in Jordanian media, particularly in political talk shows, requires an understanding of framing theory and the concept of the “domestication of news”. Framing theory posits that the media does not merely report facts but rather interprets and shapes public perception through the selection and emphasis of certain aspects of an issue (Entman, 1993). This selective process is vital for understanding the portrayal of national legislative narratives as it reflects both the values of the media producers and the societal priorities of the audience. The idea of “domestication of news”, articulated by Guo et al. (2012), illustrates how news is recontextualized within local settings, allowing foreign and global events to resonate through a domestic framework. Domestic frames capture the essence of how local contexts influence media narratives and how these narratives, in turn, shape public discourse. When talk shows in Jordan discuss legislative matters, they often emphasize national identity, communal values, and pressing social issues, highlighting how legislation directly affects local communities. This localized framing fosters engagement and encourages active participation in democratic processes, as the audience can better relate to the discussed issues, seeing them as integral to their lived experiences.

Understanding the media model of a country is also essential, particularly in terms of how these domestic frames are shaped. Hallin and Mancini’s (2004) classification of media systems provides a framework to analyze the relationship between media and political entities across different countries. Their typology outlines three models: the Liberal, the Polarized Pluralist, and the Democratic Corporatist models. Each of these models fundamentally influences how media outlets operate, their degree of independence from political influence, and their roles in public communication. For instance, in a Polarized Pluralist model, such as that often attributed to countries in Southern Europe, media tends to have a strong connection to political parties, which can lead to more biased reporting but can also foster greater engagement with political issues.

In the case of Jordan, the media framework has been described as a mixture of the Polarized Pluralist and Democratic Corporatist models (Casero Ripollés, 2008). This hybrid structure often results in a media environment where state control and political influence are significant, yet there is also a push toward greater pluralism and professional journalism. The relationship between media and politicians in Jordan reflects this duality; while there are opportunities for dialogue and critique through talk shows like Voice of the Kingdom, political actors often retain substantial influence over media narratives. These dynamics shape how legislative issues are framed and discussed, impacting public understanding and engagement with political processes.

Anshori et al. (2022) found that media significantly influences the framing of news shaped by events. This process involves employing various frames to address sensitive and intricate issues, influenced by factors such as media characteristics, historical and ideological contexts, and organizational structures. Similarly, Al-Zghoul (2022) analyzed a three-month programming cycle of the After the News talk show on Al-Mamlaka Channel and observed diverse usage of media frames, including issue-specific frames, responsibility frames, and conflict frames, to discuss local affairs. This study also highlighted that the talks show’s media treatment was primarily oppositional, and while balance was sought, the presentation often emphasized a single viewpoint.

Al-Anati’s (2022) article on Al-Mamlaka Channel’s documentary programming revealed that the coverage of national issues exhibited a negative trend. However, the program presenters maintained objectivity and balance in media treatment, employing emotional appeals, followed by rational approaches. Prominent media frameworks included social responsibility, strategy, human interests, and economic outcomes. Abdullah (2022) explored how talk shows on the American Al-Hurra channel framed issues in Arab countries. Through analyzing episodes of the The Four Sides talk show, Abdullah found that political issues were prioritized, with visual aids like silent video backgrounds and opinion dialogues involving multiple participants. These talk shows primarily utilized political frameworks and engaged researchers who aligned with American perspectives while maintaining a balanced approach in addressing Arab country issues.

Habbat (2021) highlighted emotional appeals as the most prominent mechanism in framing the royal vision for moral values and reform in Jordan, followed by rational appeals. The royal vision’s frameworks emphasized human interests, moral principles, economic outcomes, and responsibility. Similarly, Nassar (2021) examined talk shows on Egyptian channels (DMC and Channel One) during the 2020 Senate elections, revealing that private channels outperformed government channels in their electoral coverage. The study identified key elements in framing, including images, infographics, and accompanying video clips, with written titles summarizing content. Guests featured experts, analysts, officials, and politicians, often through telephone interviews.

In the context of the 2019 European elections, Pérez-Sánchez and Peris-Blanes (2020) confirmed that the political talk show La Sexta Noche exemplifies the trend towards infotainment in media, where sensationalism often eclipses substantive political discourse. A study of the show revealed that it predominantly focused on national and regional issues, devoting only two minutes to European topics during nearly 1000 min of total broadcast time. This prioritization fosters a sensationalized atmosphere that trivializes critical debates and reduces public engagement with significant European challenges. As such, La Sexta Noche demonstrates how political talk shows can perpetuate ideological polarization and conflict, ultimately undermining informed discussion within the public sphere and highlighting a troubling dynamic in contemporary political communication. Serafimovska and Markovikj (2020) analyzed framing by opinion leaders during political events in Macedonia, identifying two dominant frameworks: the FOR framework (supporting a gradual name change) and the BOYCOTT framework (opposing name changes). These frameworks utilized short, impactful titles with emotional words or phrases that criticized, warned, or ridiculed. Khalifa and Ahmed (2020) studied talk shows on Bahraini television addressing legislative authority performance and observed a strong commitment to social, ethical, and professional responsibility. The talk shows promoted public intellectual and cultural development, set legislative agendas, and informed the audience about legislative matters. The analysis approach was characterized by persuasive methods, prioritizing emotional appeals followed by rational and biased approaches. Yahya’s (2019) compared media framing processes with politicians’ framing during political election campaigns. By analyzing five media frames (conflict, ethics, economic consequences, responsibility, and human interests), the study concluded that mutual influence between media and politicians was minimal. Media utilized the conflict frame, while politicians favored the economic consequences frame. These differences in framing reflected contrasting trends between media outlets and political actors.

Montagut and Carrillo (2017) examine the strategies of fascination used in political talk shows on television, focusing on the coverage of the 2015 Barcelona municipal elections. The research aimed to reveal the presence of fascination elements and how they are organized in these programs. The article shows that political talk shows are an opinion-based dialogue genre, but they have a wide presence and high viewing levels in the Spanish media. Public television channels use fascination strategies such as personalization, the dramatization of political figures, the glorification of stories, and the search for emotional impact. The study considers entertainment as an integral part of information and politics, leading to the emergence of what is called “politainment”. Additionally, the study examines in detail the shifts in the form and language used in talk shows, where emotional arousal is prioritized over precise description, and propagandistic and emotional language is used. Lastly, Mazzoleni and Sfardini (2009) examine the intersection of politics and entertainment in contemporary media. They delineate various forms of pop politics, such as soft news and politainment, arguing that while such content may distract citizens, it also has the potential to bolster new forms of activism and political engagement, ultimately contributing to a more nuanced understanding of citizenship. The authors advocate for recognizing “subtle citizenship”, which promotes political participation through accessible and engaging content. This study highlights the dual nature of politainment, where it can both trivialize political discourse and simultaneously foster a more engaged and informed citizenry. By framing political information within an entertaining context, media significantly influence public perception and engagement. This framing can either enhance understanding and participation or lead to superficial engagement, depending on how the content is presented.

Through the analysis of prior studies, it is evident that the topic of media framing has garnered significant scholarly attention. Many researchers have adopted analytical approaches in their studies (Al-Zghoul, 2022; Abdullah, 2022; Habbat, 2021; Nassar, 2021; Khalifa & Ahmed, 2020; Serafimovska & Markovikj, 2020). For instance, Yahya’s (2019) study employed a combination of quantitative and qualitative content analysis to examine media frames, while Anshori et al. (2022) utilized an inductive method to analyze media strategies. The study populations also varied widely, encompassing television talk shows (Al-Zghoul, 2022; Abdullah, 2022; Nassar, 2021; Khalifa & Ahmed, 2020), documentaries (Al-Anati, 2022), royal speeches and correspondence (Habbat, 2021), and newspapers (Serafimovska & Markovikj, 2020).

Although the majority of these studies focused on the media frames employed, Khalifa and Ahmed (2020) extended their scope to include an analysis of media discourse in talk shows. Additionally, the role of television, particularly talk shows, in political discourse has been a subject of extensive study, revealing a tendency towards the spectacularization and trivialization of politics (Pérez-Sánchez & Peris-Blanes, 2024; Montagut & Carrillo, 2017; Mazzoleni & Sfardini, 2009). Moreover, Guo et al. (2012) confirmed that the “domestication of news” allows for an examination of how media narratives mold public discourse and political engagement in Jordan. By focusing on the interplay between international and domestic narratives, the Voice of the Kingdom talk show and similar talk shows illustrate the crucial role of media in shaping legislative discussions and public perceptions, thereby arguably influencing the legislative agenda itself. In contrast, the present study goes further by not only examining media frames but also evaluating how talk shows address the performance of the legislative authority. This evaluation includes analyzing the extent of media coverage, methods of treatment, elements of emphasis, persuasive techniques, and adherence to professional standards of balance and objectivity. Additionally, the study investigates how talk shows frame the legislative authority’s performance by focusing on certain aspects while disregarding others. This selective framing provides coherence to the narrative and aids the audience in understanding and evaluating the legislative authority’s performance within the frameworks constructed by these talk shows. Moreover, the objectives emphasized by talk shows in their portrayal of the legislative authority’s performance inherently shape the nature of this treatment. These objectives align with the talk show’s policies and the orientations of the communicators involved, ultimately influencing how the legislative authority’s performance is framed and interpreted by the audience.

3. Materials and Methods

This study is classified as a descriptive study, which aims to provide an in-depth exploration of a scientific issue, phenomenon, or problem. The goal is to gather sufficient data to understand its characteristics scientifically and to offer logical and evidence-based explanations to address it. Within the scope of descriptive studies, the media content analysis method was employed (Oreqat et al., 2023). This method was used to analyze the content of television talk shows, focusing on their treatment of the legislative authority’s performance in Jordan. The study community consists of talk show broadcasts on Jordanian television channels. The study sample specifically includes the Voice of the Kingdom talk show, aired on Al-Mamlaka Channel from Sunday to Thursday. This talk show was selected due to its high viewership, making it one of the most popular talk shows in Jordan (Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2024b). The talk show’s popularity can be attributed to its ability to engage viewers with relevant and timely topics, as well as its efforts to present diverse perspectives on legislative performance (Abuhasirah, 2021). While specific viewership numbers are not readily available, the show’s impact and reach are evident from its widespread recognition and the attention it receives from both the public and academic circles. The talk show is known for its in-depth discussions on various political, social, and economic issues. The show has garnered a significant viewership due to its bold approach in addressing contemporary Jordanian issues and its commitment to promoting freedom of opinion and expression. According to an opinion poll conducted by Amazon (2024), over 60% of Jordanians identified Al-Mamlaka Channel as their preferred television channel. Consequently, all episodes of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show addressing legislative issues and the National Assembly—comprising the Senate and the House of Representatives—during the second regular session (from 13 November 2022 to 7 May 2023) were included in the study. The total number of episodes aired during this period was 126, of which 37 episodes specifically addressed the performance of the legislative authority.

Table 1. Characteristics of Voice of the Kingdom talk show.

Talk Show	Frequency	Total Episodes	Number of Episodes Dealing with Legislative Authority	Total Duration of Segments
Voice of the Kingdom	Five days a week	126	37	27 h:19 m

provides a detailed description of the study sample:

The content analysis form was used as a methodological tool to analyze the content of the talk show episodes in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show. The paragraph was adopted as the basic unit of analysis to examine the media frames used by the talk show in addressing the performance of the legislative authority during the second regular session of the National Assembly. The content analysis form included the following categories to answer the study questions:

• Category of the talk show guest’s specialization: refers to the specialization of the guest discussing the performance of the legislative authority;
• Category of processing methods: analytical, presenting opinions and ideas, discussion, promotional, critical;
• Category of the most prominent issues related to the performance of the legislative authority: legislative issues, oversight issues;
• Category of highlighting elements: explanatory text at the bottom of the screen, talk show presenter’s commentary on selected materials, documents, pictures, without elements, mixed;
• Category of persuasion methods: rational, emotional, enticement and intimidation, mixed;
• Category of balance in presenting viewpoints: giving the guest enough time, fair distribution among guests, bias towards a particular guest, not applicable;
• Category of presenter objectivity: intervenes in the dialogue, does not intervene in the dialogue, neutral, not applicable;
• Category of media frames: achievements, conflict, responsibility, economic results, humanitarian concerns, strategy, mixed.

To ensure the validity and reliability of the content analysis questionnaire tool, the Holsti method was employed for the content analysis conducted on the Voice of the Kingdom talk show. This method is particularly effective for assessing inter-coder reliability, which is crucial when multiple coders analyze qualitative data. In this study, the coding process was carried out by two coders, a necessary condition for applying the Holsti method. This method calculates the percentage of agreement between coders, providing a quantitative measure of reliability (Nili et al., 2020; Mao, 2017; Gwet, 2014). To implement the Holsti method, the analysis index was applied to a portion of the sample twice, with a two-week interval. Specifically, 7 out of the 37 episodes addressing legislative authority performance were analyzed independently by both coders. After the initial coding, the results were compared to determine the level of agreement. The Holsti equation was then applied to calculate the percentage of agreement, yielding an impressive rate of 95.08%. This high level of agreement indicates that the coding process was consistent and reliable, affirming the stability of the content analysis tool used in the study. Consequently, this meticulous application of the Holsti method enhances the credibility of the findings, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of how legislative performance is framed in the talk show. It also contributes significantly to the field of media studies by providing insights into the shaping of public perceptions regarding legislative authority in Jordan. The following equation illustrates Holsti’s equation for the stability ratio of the instrument:

$$\begin{gathered} 100\times {\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{number} \mathrm{of} \mathrm{agreement} \mathrm{categories}}{\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{agreement} \mathrm{count} \mathrm{categories}+\mathrm{disagreement} \mathrm{count} \mathrm{categories}\\ (\mathrm{total} \mathrm{sample} \mathrm{categories})\end{array}}} \\ \mathrm{\%}93.08=100\times {\displaystyle \frac{46}{46+3}} \end{gathered}$$

4. Results

4.1. Nature of the Guests’ Roles in the Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show When Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The Voice of the Kingdom talk show primarily hosted guests closely associated with legislative affairs. This reflects the talk show’s commitment to featuring influential figures linked to the legislative authority’s performance, ensuring a comprehensive presentation of diverse perspectives on legislative effectiveness (see

Table 2. The nature of the work of the guests in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show.

Nature of the Work of the Guests	N	%
Member of Parliament	90	41.1%
Senator	41	18.7%
Representative of a government sector	18	8.2%
Unionist	13	5.9%
Legal expert	12	5.4%
Economic expert	11	5.1%
Minister	8	3.6%
University professor	8	3.6%
Journalist	6	2.8%
Parliamentary expert	6	2.8%
Government official	6	2.8%
Total	219	100%

).

4.2. The Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show’s Methods of Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The Voice of the Kingdom talk show’s methods of addressing the performance of the legislative authority were predominantly analytical. The talk show’s reliance on analytical methods can be explained by its focus on analyzing the laws passed by the National Assembly and their impact on Jordanian society. The talk show seeks to break down and simplify these laws for the audience to help them understand their various dimensions. Additionally, the talk show frequently presents opinions related to the legislative authority’s performance through a direct-talk format, which is used at the beginning of each segment to review the latest developments in Jordan’s legislative affairs (see

Table 3. The Voice of the Kingdom talk show: methods of addressing the performance of the legislative authority.

Methods of Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority	N	%
Analytical	78	57.8%
Presenting ideas and opinions	34	25.2%
Discussion-based	16	11.8%
Promotional	4	3%
Critical	3	2.2%
Total	135	100%

).

4.3. The Most Prominent Issues Related to the Performance of the Legislative Authority, as Addressed by The Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show

The Voice of the Kingdom talk show focused on the legislative issue related to discussing, approving, or rejecting draft laws and the issue related to the oversight of the executive authority in implementing plans and strategies. This focus on legislative issues more than oversight issues in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show can be explained by the fact that the second ordinary session of the National Assembly saw 15 legislative sessions and 4 oversight sessions, during which 12 draft laws were passed. This confirms the talk show’s orientation toward presenting, discussing, and analyzing topics related to legislative performance according to legislative sessions and the discussions arising from them, keeping the public informed of the latest developments (see

Table 4. Prominent issues related to the performance of the legislative authority.

Most Prominent Issues Related to the Performance of the Legislative Authority		N	%
Legislative	Discussing, approving, or rejecting draft laws	40	35.40%
	The political reform in Jordan	29	25.70%
	Discussing and studying the laws and amendments referred by the government	22	19.50%
	Proposing new laws or bills to regulate the operations of various state institutions	14	12.40%
	Debating the approval or rejection of laws related to international agreements	8	7%
Total		113	100%
Oversight	Oversight of the executive authority in implementing plans and strategies	21	33.90%
	Submitting recommendations from legislative committees regarding issues of the public	15	24.20%
	General discussions and exchanging views and advice	12	19.30%
	Raising questions to the government and discussing inquiries	8	12.90%
	Inquiring about specific facts and verifying them	6	9.70%
Total		62	100%

).

4.4. The Highlighting Elements Used in the Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show in Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The most episodes of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show lacked highlighting elements or supporting materials, with the category “no elements” ranking first at 56.3%. The absence of highlighting elements in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show can be explained by the talk show’s reliance on analysis and discussion. It primarily focuses on legislative experts in its discussions, emphasizing their opinions and expertise without the use of visual, audio, or textual materials for clarification. This characteristic distinguishes the talk show from others. However, the talk show’s presenter occasionally commented on selected materials, particularly at the beginning of the episodes, where the presenter introduces key topics that will be discussed with guests, providing the audience with an overview of the issues being addressed (see

Table 5. The highlighting elements used in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show.

Highlighting Elements	N	%
No elements	76	56.30%
Mixed	29	21.50%
The host’s commentary on selected materials	12	8.90%
Caption at the bottom of the screen	11	8.10%
Documents	5	3.70%
Images	2	1.50%
Total	135	100%

).

4.5. The Persuasion Methods Used in the Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show in Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The Voice of the Kingdom talk show relied on rational persuasion methods of addressing the performance of the legislative authority, followed by persuasion through enticement and intimidation, then mixed methods, and finally emotional persuasion methods. This result is logical, given that talk shows aim to discuss and analyze political issues using rational methods, providing evidence and arguments to validate information during discussions, and using facts, evidence, and proof to support opinions and positions and deconstruct and evaluate ideas objectively. Additionally, the host of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show used legislative and legal texts in a rational manner as a reference to persuade the audience of the viewpoints presented in the talk show, avoiding emotional methods that could lead to bias. This approach ensures a constructive and objective discussion that ultimately contributes to evaluating the arguments presented by guests and presenting and comparing different viewpoints to reach conclusions. To enhances political awareness among viewers (see

Table 6. Persuasion methods used in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show.

Persuasion Methods	N	%
Rational	95	70.40%
Enticement and intimidation	18	13.30%
Mixed	15	11.10%
Emotional	7	5.20%
Total	135	100%

).

4.6. The Aspects of the Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show Host’s Commitment to Balance in Presenting Viewpoints When Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The Voice of the Kingdom talk show adhered to balance in presenting viewpoints when addressing the performance of the legislative authority. The findings show the following: guests were given sufficient speaking time in 52.6% of cases, the balance category was “not applicable” in 25.2% of cases, there was fair distribution among guests in 11.9% of cases, and the talk show host showed bias towards a particular guest in 10% of cases. The talk show’s commitment to providing guests with enough time can be interpreted in light of the fact that balance in presenting viewpoints is fundamental to the success of talk shows. Ensuring such balance is a key principle that the host must follow to facilitate fair and comprehensive discussions, represent all perspectives, and avoid favoritism. Additionally, the host’s accumulated experience and ability to moderate discussions play a crucial role in maintaining balance. The host achieves this by directing a specific question to one guest and then posing the same question or a follow-up to another guest, ensuring equal opportunities for all participants to express their views. (see

Table 7. The Voice of the Kingdom talk show host’s commitment to balance in presenting viewpoints.

Balance	N	%
Sufficient speaking time	71	52.60%
Not applicable	34	25.20%
Fair distribution among guests	16	11.90%
Biased towards a particular guest	14	10.30%
Total	135	100%

)

4.7. The Aspects of the Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show Host’s Commitment to Objectivity in Presenting Viewpoints When Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The host of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show was not objective when addressing the performance of the legislative authority: they intervened in the dialogue in 53.3% of cases, objectivity category was not applicable in 25.2% of cases, and they refrained from intervening in 21% of cases. The host was neutral in 5.9% of cases. The host’s interventions can be interpreted in light of the fact that talk shows often require the host to guide and organize the conversation to ensure balance, fairness, and the representation of diverse viewpoints between guests. Additionally, the host may need to calm tensions and facilitate dialogue if disagreements arise among the guests, as well as keep the guests within the context of the discussion and ensure the main idea of the issue being discussed remains central. However, through analysis of the talk show segments, it became clear that there were unjustified interventions from the host, to the point that some guests requested the host not to interrupt until they finished speaking, requests which the host respected (see

Table 8. The Voice of the Kingdom talk show host’s commitment to objectivity in presenting viewpoints.

Objectivity	N	%
Not objective	72	53.30%
Not applicable	34	25.20%
Refrained from intervening	21	15.60%
Neutral	8	5.90%
Total	135	100%

).

4.8. Media Frames Used in the Voice of the Kingdom Talk Show in Addressing the Performance of the Legislative Authority

The Voice of the Kingdom talk show adopted the “economic outcomes” frame to framing the performance of the legislative authority, followed by the “responsibility” frame and the “humanitarian concerns” frame. The findings indicate that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show framed the performance of the legislative authority primarily within the context of economic outcomes to highlight its significance, assign meaning to it, and influence viewers’ perceptions. The talk show addressed issues and topics related to the impact of laws discussed and passed in the National Assembly on Jordanian society and their repercussions on citizens’ lives. Among the key topics were social security laws, the consequences of suspending the Defense Law, and amendments to labor laws in 2023 (see

Table 9. Media frames used in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show.

Frame Type	N	%
Economic outcomes	38	28.10%
Responsibility	25	18.50%
Humanitarian concerns	23	17%
Strategy	22	16.30%
Achievements	12	8.90%
Conflict	11	8.20%
Mixed	4	3%
Total	135	100%

).

The discourse surrounding legislative performance in Jordan as presented in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show offers a valuable opportunity to examine the media framing of political issues in relation to parliamentary debates. Understanding the intersection of media narratives and political discourse can illuminate the dynamics affecting public perception and engagement in political matters. Research suggests that media framing plays a significant role in shaping audience perceptions and attitudes toward legislative performance (Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2024b; Oreqat et al., 2023). In the context of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show, the dominant frames identified were economic outcomes, responsibility, and humanitarian concerns. These frames not only reflect the talk show’s editorial stance but also provide insight into broader societal priorities concerning legislative authority. Contrasting these findings with those observed in parliamentary discussions, we may notice similarities in the framing strategies employed by legislators. Previous studies have indicated that parliamentarians frequently adopt similar frames, particularly concerning economic impacts of legislative proposals and the accountability of government officials (Abdullah, 2022; Serafimovska & Markovikj, 2020; Yahya, 2019). For instance, discussions surrounding economic legislation often highlight the direct implications on citizens’ livelihoods, mirroring the framing found in Voice of the Kingdom. This suggests a convergence in the narrative strategies utilized by both media and parliamentarians when addressing economic legislation.

To further explore the interaction between media and political agendas, it is essential to consider the potential influence that talk shows may exert on parliamentary debates. The idea of agenda-setting posits that the media can shape the public agenda by prioritizing certain issues, which, in turn, may prompt political actors to address these concerns in their legislative discussions (Oxley, 2020; Nelson, 2019; Kim et al., 2010; Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007; Iyengar & Simon, 1993).

In the case of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show, the emphasis placed on economic outcomes may encourage legislators to prioritize similar themes during parliamentary debates. This can create a feedback loop wherein media framing not only reflects existing political discourse but also actively shapes it (Abuhasirah & Salameh, 2023). A recent study by Sullivan (2023) supported this notion, indicating that increased media coverage of specific legislative topics tends to correlate with heightened parliamentary activity around those same issues.

5. Discussion

This study aimed to examine the media frames employed by television talk shows in covering the performance of the legislative authority in Jordan. The findings indicate that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show dedicated significant attention to legislative performance throughout its episodes, aligning its coverage with the sessions of the National Assembly and the decisions emerging from the second regular session. The talk show adopted a multi-perspective approach by hosting multiple guests per episode—whether in-studio, through digital applications, or via phone—to ensure a comprehensive representation of diverse viewpoints, including supportive, critical, and neutral perspectives. Additionally, the Voice of the Kingdom talk show invited key figures directly involved in legislative and oversight matters, facilitating an in-depth discussion of legislative performance from multiple angles. The findings of this study, which highlight the talk show’s emphasis on hosting legislative figures such as members of Parliament and the Senate, align with Nassar’s (2021), which found that the majority of talk show guests were government officials and ministers. However, the emphasis on legislative guests in this study contrasts with Al-Zghoul’s (2022) findings, which indicated that citizens were the most prominent figures in talk shows, whereas parliamentarians were among the least featured guests on Al-Mamlaka TV. Additionally, this study’s findings regarding the limited presence of journalists in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show contrast with Abdullah’s (2022), which found that journalists and media professionals were among the most frequently hosted guests in talk shows.

The findings reveal that the talk show primarily addressed legislative issues, particularly through discussions on proposed laws, their approval or rejection, and the broader political reform agenda in Jordan. Additionally, the talk show covered oversight matters by evaluating the executive authority’s adherence to strategic plans and policies, as well as presenting legislative committee recommendations on pressing societal issues. This focus underscores the Voice of the Kingdom talk show’s commitment to analyzing legislative performance in accordance with parliamentary sessions and their deliberations. Notably, during the second regular session of the National Assembly, 15 legislative sessions and 4 oversight sessions were held, culminating in the approval of 12 draft laws. The talk show’s approach to framing legislative performance was predominantly analytical, characterized by in-depth examinations of enacted laws and their socio-economic implications. Discussions extended to broader legislative oversight, public debates, and direct critiques of the executive branch. The talk show employed a structured format, beginning each segment with an overview of recent legislative developments before transitioning into expert discussions, ensuring a comprehensive exploration of relevant legal and regulatory issues. This study’s findings, which indicate that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show primarily adopts an analytical approach, differ from Abdullah’s (2022) study, which found that presenting opinions and ideas was the most commonly used method in handling political discussions on Al-Hurra, the American news channel. Also, the findings, which show that the most prominent legislative issues addressed by the Voice of the Kingdom talk show were “discussing, approving, or rejecting draft laws”, differ from the findings of Khalifa and Ahmed (2020), which revealed that the main legislative issues addressed in talk shows were “the evolution of the comprehensive reform project”. Similarly, the findings, which show that the main oversight issue addressed by the Voice of the Kingdom talk show was “general discussions and exchanging views and advice between the legislative authority and the government”, differ from Nassar’s (2021) study, which showed that talk shows heavily focused on clarifying information about the Senate and the significance of elections. The distinct approach of Voice of the Kingdom may stem from its alignment with the socio-political landscape of Jordan, where public discourse necessitates a more responsible treatment of legislative performance, unlike the sensationalized narratives often observed in Western media (Pérez-Sánchez & Peris-Blanes, 2024, 2020; Montagut & Carrillo, 2017; Mazzoleni & Sfardini, 2009).

Furthermore, the findings highlight that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show largely refrained from utilizing visual or textual supporting materials in its coverage of legislative performance. Instead, the talk show placed a strong emphasis on expert discussions, relying primarily on guest analyses without incorporating supplementary audio–visual elements. However, some supportive materials were presented at the beginning of the talk show, particularly in the opening segment where the host outlined key discussion points to provide viewers with a contextual overview of the topics to be addressed. Additionally, the characterization of discussions in the Voice of the Kingdom as “expert discussions” warrants scrutiny. As indicated, these discussions often feature political actors rather than independent commentators, which can skew the perception of impartiality and depth. This aligns with findings from Abdullah (2022), who emphasized that many talk shows present political perspectives aligned with specific agendas, rather than offering a truly balanced discourse. In parliamentary settings, debates are similarly influenced by party lines and political affiliations, limiting the scope of dialogue to often competing perspectives rather than a broad spectrum of expert analyses. Additionally, the findings of the study indicate that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show does not use highlighting elements (“no elements”), which aligns with Abdullah’s (2022) study that revealed that talk shows on the American Al-Hurra channel also lacked highlighting elements and supporting materials in 24.1% of cases. However, this study’s finding regarding the use of the highlighting element “explanatory text at the bottom of the screen” differs from Nassar’s (2021) study, which found that “using written captions on screen” was the most commonly used highlighting element in talk shows.

The findings indicate that rational approaches were prominently employed in the Voice of the Kingdom talk show coverage of legislative performance, aligning with the nature of legislative issues that necessitate the presentation of precise information, supporting evidence, and factual validation during discussions. The talk show systematically utilized legal and legislative texts as reference points to substantiate arguments and persuade the audience, steering clear of emotional appeals that could introduce bias. This rational discourse facilitated constructive and meaningful discussions, ultimately enhancing viewers’ political awareness. The findings of this study, which indicate that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show relied on “rational methods” in addressing the performance of the legislative authority, align with Al-Zghoul’s (2022), which confirmed that talk shows on Al-Mamlaka Channel relied on rational persuasion methods in addressing local issues. However, this study’s findings differ from Al-Anati’s (2022), which indicated that Al-Mamlaka Channel relied primarily on emotional and sentimental appeals, followed by rational appeals, in presenting documentary and investigative programs. Furthermore, the findings also contrast with Habbat’s (2021), which revealed that the most prominent persuasion techniques used in royal speeches were emotional appeals.

Regarding the professional standards of talk shows, particularly in terms of balance and objectivity, the results reveal that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show maintained a degree of balance in presenting diverse perspectives on legislative performance. Achieving equilibrium among guests was recognized as a fundamental principle for the talk show’s host, ensuring fair and impartial discussions. While the talk show demonstrated an overall commitment to balance, some instances of host bias toward certain guests were observed. However, this inclination was not a consistent trend but rather dependent on the guest’s ability to articulate information effectively. By maintaining a professional and objective stance in its coverage, the talk show encourages journalists to adopt similar standards in their reporting and interviewing practices. This could lead to a positive shift towards more responsible journalism, where the emphasis on facts and thorough analysis becomes the norm rather than the exception. Furthermore, the talk show’s commitment to providing comprehensive information and diverse viewpoints suggests that it plays a vital role in fostering a more informed society. By engaging audiences with substantive discussions of legislative matters, the program empowers viewers to develop informed opinions on critical issues affecting their lives. The findings of this study—which indicate that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show host maintained balance by “giving guests sufficient time”—aligns with Abdullah’s (2022) study, which found that talk show hosts on Al-Hurra channel ensured that guests had ample time to speak. However, this study’s results regarding the talk show’s fairness in “equal distribution of time among guests” differs from Nassar’s (2021) study, which indicated that talk show hosts generally exhibited flexibility and fairness in distributing speaking time among guests.

Moreover, the findings indicate that the host did not maintain strict objectivity throughout the discussions on legislative performance. The host frequently intervened in conversations—either to guide and structure the discussion, ensure equitable representation of viewpoints, or de-escalate tensions arising from guest disagreements. These interventions also aimed to keep the discussion aligned with the talk show’s central theme. Nevertheless, an evident pattern of unjustified interruptions emerged, to the extent that some guests requested the host to refrain from interjecting until they had concluded their statements—requests that the host ultimately respected. This study’s findings, showing that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show was not objective during their handling of the legislative authority’s performance due to “intervention in the dialogue”, contrast with the findings of Khalifa and Ahmed (2020), which confirmed that talk show hosts were able to manage discussions objectively. The findings of Pérez-Sánchez and Peris-Blanes (2024, 2020) and Montagut and Carrillo (2017), which concluded that talk shows contribute decisively to the spectacularization of politics, its trivialization, simplification, and banalization, as well as to an emotional and aggressive view of political discourse, stand in contrast to the results regarding the professional standards of talk shows.

The study concludes that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show predominantly framed legislative performance within the “economic outcomes” frame, followed by the “responsibility” frame and then the “humanitarian concerns” frame. This framing strategy underscores how the talk show shaped public perceptions of legislative performance by contextualizing it within specific interpretative frames. The prioritization of the economic outcome frame highlights the talk show’s focus on illustrating the impact of laws and legislations on Jordanian citizens’ lives. The responsibility frame then contextualizes the role of the legislative authority in overseeing and shaping public policies, attributing accountability to key decision makers. Finally, the humanitarian concerns frame was employed as a strategy to engage and sustain audience interest in legislative matters. The study’s findings, which confirm that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show employed the “economic outcomes” frame to shape perceptions of the legislative authority’s performance, align with Yahya’s (2019), which found that the “economic consequences” frame dominated political discussions in the media. However, the findings differ from Abdullah’s (2022), which indicated that political, humanitarian, and security frames were the most prominent ones used in talk shows on the U.S.-based Al-Hurra channel. Additionally, the study’s finding that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show used the “responsibility” frame contrasts with Al-Anati’s (2022), which found that the primary frames in documentary and investigative talk shows were the “responsibility” frame, followed by the “strategy” frame. Additionally, the study’s finding that the Voice of the Kingdom talk show used the “responsibility” frame contrasts with Al-Anati’s (2022) results, which indicated that the primary frames in documentary and investigative talk shows were the “responsibility” frame, followed by the “strategy” frame. When juxtaposed with findings, especially from Western world studies, it becomes apparent that, while the Voice of the Kingdom talk show approaches political discussion through economic and humanitarian frames, these Western cases often reveal a trend towards emotional and aggressive political discourse (Pérez-Sánchez & Peris-Blanes, 2024, 2020; Montagut & Carrillo, 2017).

6. Conclusions

Television, as a dominant medium of communication, plays a crucial role in shaping public perception and discourse surrounding political issues. Among various television formats, talk shows stand out for their unique ability to engage audiences in discussions that not only inform but also entertain. The interactive nature of talk shows allows them to address complex political matters in accessible ways, enabling viewers to grasp the implications of legislative actions and government policies. This capacity for engagement positions talk shows as key agents in the public sphere, where they can foster political awareness and interest among viewers who may otherwise be disengaged.

The framing of talk shows in their coverage of legislative performance is inherently shaped by the television channel’s editorial orientation, the vision of talk show producers, and the objectives they seek to achieve. This dynamic grants communicators a significant role in framing legislative performance by selecting guests who represent various perspectives aligned with the channel’s overarching policies. Additionally, specific persuasive techniques, framing mechanisms, and supporting materials are strategically employed to reinforce the topics under discussion, ultimately influencing audience perceptions and opinions on legislative matters (Chong & Druckman, 2007; Kaplan, 2006).

Media framing serves as a communicative and interactive skill that broadcasters refine by carefully selecting and employing frames to fulfill their communicative objectives Entman (2004). These frames also function as essential tools for viewers, enabling them to comprehend legislative issues, assess how the legislative authority addresses these concerns, and understand how talk shows construct narratives around legislative performance. Framing assists audiences in developing specific understandings of legislative issues, allowing them to compare, interpret, and contextualize them within their own experiences (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007; De Vreese, 2005; D’Angelo, 2002).

However, the role of television talk shows is not without controversy. Research from Western contexts, such as the studies conducted by Mazzoleni and Sfardini (2009) and Pérez-Sánchez and Peris-Blanes (2024, 2020), paints a more critical picture of their influence on political discourse. These studies suggest that, rather than merely informing the public, many talk shows contribute to the spectacularization of politics. The sensational nature of such formats often leads to the trivialization and simplification of serious issues, reducing complex political debates to simplistic sound bites that appeal more to emotions than to rational discourse. For instance, Montagut and Carrillo (2017) argue that the aggressive and emotional framing prevalent in these talk shows overshadows substantive political discussion, potentially leading audiences to adopt a more polarized and superficial understanding of political matters.

Although framing may not alter the fundamental realities of legislative issues, it holds the power to shape their meaning. By providing audiences with relevant information and perspectives, framing influences how individuals form their attitudes and opinions toward legislative performance (Van Hulst et al., 2024). Consequently, audiences engage with legislative discourse through their own interpretive frameworks, which guide their understanding of the justifications, causes, and consequences of legislative decisions issued by the political decision maker.

From this perspective, the Voice of the Kingdom talk show’s framing of legislative performance aligns with typical political issues, highlighting the media’s influential role in the political process (Oxley, 2020; Nelson, 2019; Kim et al., 2010). The actions of policymakers, journalists, and other stakeholders shaping media agendas and frames significantly impact the volume and nature of news messages surrounding particular issues. These frames include objective features, such as highlighting politicians’ characteristics and their societal positions, and emotional features, which involve presenting images and addressing issues in positive, negative, or neutral contexts (Scheufele & Tewksbury, 2007).

Finally, the contrasting nature of these findings raises important questions about the role of Voice of the Kingdom talk show in the Jordanian context. Unlike certain Western examples that sensationalize political issues, this analysis reveals that the show adopts a more responsible and analytical approach in framing legislative performance. This divergence suggests that cultural, social, and political contexts significantly influence how talk shows shape political discourse. While the Voice of the Kingdom may prioritize rational persuasion and humanitarian concerns, the Western cases highlight the risks of emotional engagement and aggressive rhetoric. This contrast underscores the necessity for ongoing discourse around the impacts of talk shows in various political landscapes, as they possess the potential to either empower informed citizenry or contribute to the destabilization of political discourse through sensationalism. While the importance of television in political discourse is clear, the manner in which talk shows engage with political issues can vary widely. The responsibility and effects of these programs are shaped significantly by the political and cultural context in which they operate. Understanding these dynamics is essential for evaluating the overall contribution of talk shows to public political discourse.

It is essential to reflect on the broader implications of the findings for various stakeholders involved in the media landscape, notably television channels, journalists, and society at large. The analysis of the Voice of the Kingdom talk show portrays it as a platform that prioritizes informed and rational discourse regarding legislative performance. This approach not only enhances the credibility of the channel but also positions it as a reference point within the journalistic community. While it is acknowledged that additional empirical data would be required to substantiate these claims fully, the findings present a compelling case for the potential impact of well-produced, objective talk shows in shaping media credibility, enhancing journalistic standards, and cultivating an informed citizenry. Thus, the results of this study not only contribute to the understanding of media framing in the Jordanian context but also invite further consideration of how talk shows can serve as instruments for positive change within society.