Framing disruption: how a regulatory capture frame legitimized the deregulation of Boston’s ride-for-hire industry

Abstract

Abstract The theory of regulatory capture has long been used to make the case for deregulation by questioning the legitimacy of government’s regulatory function. How do government officials, who are tasked with regulating, embrace deregulation? This article explores that question in the context of Boston’s debate over regulating transportation network companies (TNCs). Analyzing media coverage, I identify two types of frames that emerged as stakeholders attempted to influence TNC regulation: issue frames aimed to shape the interpretation of the ride-for-hire industry, while meta-frames shifted the focus of debate from TNCs to regulation itself. Specifically, a meta-frame invoking the theory of regulatory capture became central. Supplementing media coverage with in-depth interviews, I show that government officials did not refute the capture frame but rather used this frame to draw a distinction between legitimate and illegitimate regulation. I propose that these distinctions are central to legitimizing a deregulatory agenda, as officials condemn specific types of regulation in order to shore up the broader category of regulation. The case sheds light on how the idea of government as an impediment to innovation is embraced by government officials themselves, paving the way for new market configurations.