During the months leading up to the 2008 Russian presidential election, American news coverage of Russia increased and began to present alarming depictions of the Russian government. However, coverage of this event was not the same across all media outlets and sources. The various differences in the presentation of issues surrounding the Russian election can be largely attributed to the process of framing. Through framing, stories and issues are shaped, thus ensuring that the audience is left with a desired interpretation and an intended message. In order to better understand how different news sources have framed the subject of this highly controversial election, this study examines both a liberal American newspaper, The New York Times, and a conservative American newspaper, The Wall Street Journal. To further the scope of the study, The Moscow Times, a Russian newspaper written primarily for expatriates living in Russia, is also examined. The study compares ten news articles published between January 10, 2008 and March 4, 2008 from each of these three newspapers. Its findings provide insight into the real issues of the election and shows how people’s opinions of the presidential race might be shaped depending on which newspaper is read. Although the overarching frame of President Putin controlling the election is used in all three newspapers, each source also utilizes additional frames: current events-focused in The New York Times, economic in The Wall Street Journal, and local in The Moscow Times.