february 16, 2010. review quality of coverage evaluations

27
February 16, 2010

Upload: opal-anderson

Post on 02-Jan-2016

217 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

February 16, 2010

Page 2: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Review

Quality of coverage Evaluations

Page 3: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Newspaper coverage in Britain

Page 4: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Public Reaction to News Coverage in the US

Page 5: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Public Evaluations of TV news in Britain

Page 6: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Evaluations of Campaign Coverage

Page 7: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Public vs. Private broadcasting

The most respected news sources in many countries are the public radio and television news services (ie. BBC)

News is a profit making enterprise Public broadcasting allows a broader range of news to be

covered more in depth But should the government regulate media coverage? Criticisms of the BBC; ie. should it have invited Nick Griffin

of the BNP on Question Time?

Page 8: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Unmediated Coverage

One of the most visible examples of parliament at work is the 30 minutes devoted each week to Prime Minister’s Questions

It is one of the few points where - between elections - the legislature can act as a check upon the executive in a visible forum.

Does PMQs enhance or weaken democracy? Stealth Democracy

Would it be better if people did not see politics in action?

Page 9: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Media Effects

Categories of effects: Cognitive processes; making sense of politics Opinion on issues Make choices between candidates

Processes: Agenda Setting Priming Framing Persuasion

Page 10: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Definitions

Agenda Setting – influence on what people think is most important problem

Priming – make respondents recall particular issues when evaluating leaders/issues

Framing – emphasis on particular aspects of a story (remember example about question wording)

Persuasion – convert respondent’s position on a particular issue/leader

Page 11: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Agenda Setting

Media can drive not “what to think” but “what to think about”

Transmission of salience Citizens develop ideas about what is and is not important,

which problems are and which are not proper subjects for government action, and these ideas shape and constrain what government attempts to do

Concerned with salience and not tone/direction

Page 12: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Priority given to an issue by media

Perceived importance

Agenda Setting

Page 13: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Priority given to an issue by media

Perceived importance

Source

Personal experience

Agenda Setting

Page 14: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Most Important Problem (US)

Page 15: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Health Care (US)

Page 16: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations
Page 17: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Priming

The more attention the news media pay to a particular aspect of political life – the more frequently that aspect is primed – the more people will incorporate what they know about it into their political evaluations

Page 18: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Priming

Attention given to an issue by media

Prominence in evaluations

Page 19: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Priming

Attention given to an issue by media

Prominence in evaluations

Trust in source

Change in importance

Prior knowledge

Page 20: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Priming: 2005 UK General Election

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Day before election

Num

ber o

f sto

ries

NHS Tax Crime Asylum/Immigration Iraq

Page 21: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Framing

“A frame operates to select and highlight some features of reality and obscure others in a way that tells a consistent story about problems, their causes, moral implications, and remedies” (Entman 1996)

Page 22: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Framing

Frames organize (or reorganize) information that citizens already have in mind

Frames suggest how policies should be thought about Frames imply what if anything should be done In campaigns, frames are used to interpret actions of candidates

Page 23: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Example of Framing on the Environment

Global warming Climate change Climate crisis

Page 24: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Framing: The Horton Menace

• Journalists ignored the facts about furlough programs in adopting strategy frame

• Adopted the language of the Bush campaign• Failed to check facts that seemed compatible with their

narrative

Page 25: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Framing: Coverage of the 2000 Election and its Aftermath

• Possible frames– Gore won the popular vote– Bush ahead in FL, meaning that he had won the electoral

college

Page 26: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Coverage of the 2000 Election and its Aftermath

• Frames that weakened the Democratic position– Chaos frame– Recount frame– Bush challenge in other states– Military ballots frame

• Later reinforced notion that Bush the winner

Page 27: February 16, 2010. Review  Quality of coverage  Evaluations

Framing: The Recession

Is the dominant media frame a global recession

or or

A recession for which Gordon Brown/Labourbear a large responsibility?