Public interest v.s. special interest: The strategic framing tactics of technologies in the political arena

Although current scholarship has shown that firms strategically frame their new technologies to persuade market stakeholders, such as investors and customers, we know less about how they use strategic framing tactics to influence politicians when the new technology challenges the regulatory framework. This is a significant omission, given that market and political stakeholders have very different interests and legitimacy judgments. Therefore, this paper aims to systematically examine the variations and antecedents of framing tactics of technologies in the political arena. It distinguishes between two types of political framing tactics of technologies: public interest framing tactics, which align the technology with the interests of the public, and special interest framing tactics, which condemn the incumbents as representatives of a special interest that stifles innovation. It also suggests that technology firms' political framing tactics are influenced by the instrumental interests and ideologies of targeted politicians. Based on a keyword-based content analysis of Uber's political statements in the most populous US cities between 2012 and 2018, it finds that the use of public interest framing tactics is specifically related to politicians' electoral pressure, whereas the use of special interest framing tactics is associated with politicians' liberal tendencies.