Abstract The recent events of Ferguson have created a situation where two opposing viewpoints exist regarding the events that transpired in the shooting death of Michael Brown, and the ensuing controversies that emerged from the case. Central to the divided rhetoric appears to be the differing methods of framing the incident and its corresponding elements. At the center of this controversy, lies the cable television news network, who continually offer partisan reporting, and utilize previously established biases in shaping how stories are framed and discussed. In particular, Fox News and CNN have distinguished their reporting by playing up claims of unbiased reporting, in Fox’s case presenting themselves as, “Fair and Balanced, and CNN claiming to be, “America’s News,” and their place as the main sources for television news in America. Given previous research regarding the framing and messages of Fox and CNN, and the current controversy and noticeable difference in opinion regarding the events in Ferguson, the application of framing theory to interpret the messages broadcast becomes necessary in this divided culture. Through examination of the framing of messages, this research aims to provide clarity regarding the messages offered by the news networks. Understanding the narratives and effects of framing enables critical assessment of information and critical understanding of media information, enabling informed viewers and active social participants. Understanding how media networks utilize framing, agenda setting, priming, and expert/perceived authority to shape and modify stories that they report to fit a predetermined narrative, enables the audience to interpret media narratives consciously, enabling enhanced understanding and increased resistance to biased or slanted perspectives in televised news media. Key Terms: Media Framing Theory, Agenda setting, Expert Power, Priming. Source Bias. CNN, Fox, Ferguson, Protesters, Media, Law Enforcement. Moral Panic. Introduction The endlessly expanding mass media offers a plethora of mediums from which one can acquire their intellectual information. The selections range from news websites, blogs, social media, radio, newspapers, to other varying options. However, many Americans predominantly turn to television news, the kind primarily found on the twenty-four hours a day cable news networks. The two highest rated networks, CNN and Fox News, have been the forerunners of their respective medium for a number of years, and each has received pointed critiques for their perceived bias in how they frame their messages and reporting. While many understand the importance of understanding the network’s existing biases, the partisan messages offered have nevertheless engendered an audience for both networks that research has found to be under informed and less cognizant of current events than viewers or readers of other mediums. Given the academic research that exists exploring the perceived and confirmed biases of the audiences that watch the two respective channels, I considered the importance of understanding how the audiences became so misinformed or engaged in misinterpretation critical to facilitating a change in how we as an audience view the offered narratives. Many in America decry the death of intellectual thinking and the lack of critical assessment throughout the American public, but few seem willing to consider, outside of academic circles, the importance of understanding the effects of the media narratives upon the audience. Inoculation to outside messages comes from exposure to previous messages crafted to shape interpretation of new messages. The effects of source bias and media framing that both networks engage in, to differing degrees of severity and focus, plays in important role in understanding the existing and ongoing biases and viewpoints of the viewing public that finds itself manipulated by the narratives employed by the two most watched news networks. I will attempt to use framing theory to interpret the narratives offered by Fox News and CNN regarding their reliance on sources based in authority structures, such as law enforcement and judicial officials and the source bias that results, which in turn influences viewer’s interpretations of crime. Specifically; "Who commits it?" "Why?" and, "Why it is important to understand how a diversity of sources plays an important role in allowing stories to remain as objective as possible?" The importance of understanding the role of framing in shaping viewer’s perceptions and attitudes is important, given current assertions of pristine media ethics and unbiased reporting that both networks regularly engage in making claims of, regarding the ideological purity of their news broadcasts and information supplication. Another important reason for focusing on media framing and critical media analysis pertains to the effects of the media narratives on racial and societal relations in America,