I don't need to read all that. I can simply observe how it (the structure, in this case, the BBC) reacts, chooses to frame a given story or event. It is not important who is doing it, but that it is being done. And the way that say the BBC go about framing the relationship between Wikileaks and the US will always come down on the side of the most powerful, in this case the US. It is not in the BBC's interest to take the side of Wikileaks and so it doesn't. My beef is that the BBC is situated in most minds as an objective observer of events and is a-political, which is false, and creates false conciousness.Mybe you should read some Levi-Strauss, the structural theorist.
When you've done that then I suggest some Anthony Giddens' Structuration Theory.
Until you've done your homework you are basically blowing it out of your arse.
We need to think about how structural elements within the BBC's piece,(and all electronic visual media) including sound, editing, the choice of presenter/reporter, with particular reference to his voice/accent/intonation/timing, etc. The people interviewed (mostly US personnel), how all this, the whole package, how it works upon the mind of the viewer. Once digested/seen/consumed, the piece starts to do its work within the viewer, much later. Like a virus. It is important to know this. As it forms opinions within the viewer (without the viewer knowing) and then comes out as an opinion of that particular viewer. A good example of this is the programme LOST with its torture scenes.
So then, using electronic visual media aligned with political ideology to obtain consensus/onboard thinking throughout a populace. Mass Entertainment as a form of political consensus building.