the hostile media phenomenon biased perception and

7/28/2019 The Hostile Media Phenomenon Biased Perception And

1/9

The Hostile Media Phenomenon: Biased Perception andPerceptions of Media Bias in Coverage of the Beirut MassacreR o b e r t P. V a l lo n e, L e e R o s s, a n d M a r k R . L e p p e rStanford University

After viewing identical samp les of majo r network television coverage of the B eirutmassacre, both pro-Israeli and pro-A rab partisans rated these program s, and thoseresponsible for them, as being biased against their side. This hostile media phenom-enon appea rs to involve the operation of two separate m echanisms. First, partisansevaluated the fairness o f the me dia's sam ple of facts and argu men ts differently: inlight o f their ow n divergent views abou t the objective merits o f each sid e's case andtheir corresponding views abou t the nature of unbiased coverage. Second, partisansreported different perceptions and recollections about the program content itself;that is, each group reported more negative references to their side than positiveones, and each predicted that the coverage would sway nonpartisans in a hostiledirection. Within bo th part isan groups, furth erm ore, greate r knowledge o f the crisiswas associated with stronger perceptions of media bias. Charges of media bias, weconcluded, ma y reflect mo re than self-serving attem pts to secure preferential treat-ment. T hey m ay result from the op eration of basic cognitive an d perceptual mech -anisms, m echan isms that should prov e relevant to perceptions of fairness or objec-tivity in a wide range of mediation and negotiation contexts.

Socia l perceivers , i t has long been recog-nized, are far f rom pass ive , impar t ia l recorderso f t h e e ve n t s t h a t u n f o l d a r o u n d t h e m . E v e r y -d a y we h a v e o c c a si o n t o m a r v e l a t t h e c a p a c i t yo f pol i t ica l , socia l , or even sc ient i f ic par t isan sto f ind s t rong suppor t f o r the i r v iews in da tat h a t m o r e n e u t r a l a n d d i s p a s s io n a t e o b s e r v e rsf ind confus ing , con t r ad ic tory , and u t te r ly in -decisive.

A n i m p re s s iv e b o d y o f e v i d en c e d o c u m e n t sthe ex ten t to which eva lua t ions o f soc ia l ev i -d e n c e c a n b e d i s t o r t e d b y p r e c o n c e i v e d t h e o -r ies and bel iefs (Allpo r t , 1954; Brun er , 1957;C h a p m a n & C h a p m a n , 1 96 7; Ha m i l t o n , 1 97 9;Nisbet t & Ross , 1980; Ross & Lepper , 1980;Snyder , 1981) . I n one pa r t i cu la r ly d r amat icexp er ime nt , f o r ins tance , Lord , Ross , andL e p p e r ( 1 97 9 ) a sk e d a d v o c a t e s a n d o p p o n e n t so f ca p i t al p u n i s h m e n t t o r e v i e w a n i d e n ti c a lp a i r o f st u d ie s t h a t p r o v i d e d m i x e d r e su l t s o n

This research was supported in part by Research GrantMH-36093 to the second and third author s from the Na-tional Institute of Mental Health.Requests for reprints may be sent to any of the authorsat the Dep art men t of Psychology, J orda n Hall-- Bldg. 420,Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305.

t h e d e t e r r e n t e f fi c ac y o f s u c h p u n i s h m e n t . Asp r e d i c t e d , t h i s e x p o s u r e t o a c o m m o n s a m p l eo f i n c o n c lu s i v e e v i d en c e p r o d u c e d n o m o d -e r a t io n o r c o n v e r g en c e o f v ie ws o n t h e p a r t o fthe pa r t i s ans . On the cont r a ry , i t r e su l ted ini n c re a s ed p o l a r i z a t io n t h r o u g h t h e m e c h a n i s mo f b i as e d a s s i m i l a ti o n ; t h a t i s , e a c h g r o u pread i ly a s s imi la ted or accep ted a t f ace va luet h e e v i d e n c e t h a t s e e m e d t o s u p p o r t i t s p o s i -t ion , bu t sub jec ted to c r i t i ca l s c ru t iny the ev-i d e n c e t h a t t h r e a t e n e d o r u n d e r m i n e d i t s p o -s it ion . Obv ious metho dolog ica l l imi ta t ions anda l t e r n a t i v e e x p l a n a t i o n s we r e n o t e d b y t h esubjec t s and used as a bas i s f o r d i scount ingresu l t s on ly when such r esu l t s conf l i c ted wi thpreconce ived be l ie f s . Outs ide the l abora tory ,o f c o u rs e , t he s a m e p h e n o m e n o n s e e m s u b iq -u i tous whenever pa r t i s ans d i spu te the s ta tusof their p et socia l o r sc ient if ic theor ies .

In th i s a r t i c le we seek to document and ex=plore wha t s eems a t f i r s t cons ide ra t ion to bea n e x c e p t i o n t o t h e t e n d e n c y f o r p a r t i s a n s t of i n d s u p p o r t i n i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t o t h e r s f i n di n c o n c lu s i v e o r p r o b l e m a t i c . T h i s s e e m i n g e x -cep t ion l i e s in r e sponses to media ted presen-t a t i o n s o f i n f o r m a t i o n . R a t h e r t h a n p e r c e iv i n gconf i rmat ion and suppor t , pa r t i s ans f r equent ly

Journal of Psrsonality and Social Psychology, 1985, Vol. 49, No. 3, 577-585Copyright 1985 by the American PsychologicalAssociation, Inc. 0022-3514/85/$00.75577


2/9

57 8 R. VALLONE, L. ROSS, AND M. LEPPERc l a i m t o p e r c e i v e h o s t i l e b i a s , e v e n i n n e w sc o v e r a g e t h a t m o s t n o n p a r t i s a n s f i n d e v e n -h a n d e d a n d o b j e c ti v e . I s t h e h o s ti le m e d i ap h e n o m e n o n r e al ly a n e x ce p t i o n to t h e ru l e o fc o n f i r m a t o r y b ia s in c o g n i t i o n a n d p e r c e p t i o n ?U l t i m a t e l y , w e a r g u e , i t i s n o t ; i n d e e d , i t i s o u rc o n t e n t i o n t h a t p e r c e p t i o n s a n d a t t r i b u t i o n so f m e d i a h o s t i l i ty a r e , a t l e a s t i n p a r t , a c o n -s e q u e n c e o f t h e s a m e c o n f i r m a t o r y b i a s t h a tt h e y s u p e r f ic i a ll y a p p e a r t o c o n t r a d i c t . T h ee v i d e n c e f o r b i a s e d p e r c e p t i o n s o f m e d i a b i a si s , a t p r e s e n t , a n e c d o t a l : b i t t e r m e m o r i e s o fd e f e a t e d c a n d i d a t e s a n d r e t i r e d p o l i t i c i a n sa b o u t t h e " u n f a i r t r e a t m e n t " t h e y s u f f e r e df r o m t h e p r e s s, o r d e n u n c i a t i o n s o f t h e m e d i ab y s p o k e s m e n f o r v a r io u s i n t e re s t g r o u p s w h oc o m p l a i n a b o u t " c o n s p i r a c i e s " t o i g n o r e o rd i s t o r t t h e i r c o n c e r n s .

P r e l i m i n a r y S t u d y : M e d i a T r e a t m e n to f C a r t e r V e rs u s R e a g a nO c c a s i o n a l p r o t e s t s o f b ia s o b v i o u s l y c a n n o tb e t r e a t e d a s p r i m a f a ci e e v id e n c e o f b i a s edp e r c e p t i o n o n t h e p a r t o f t h e p r o t e s te r s , h o w -

e ve r, b e c a u s e t h e m e d i a p r e s u m a b l y a r e s o m e -t i m e s g u i l t y a s c h ar g e d . S u c h p r o t e s t s d o n o te v e n c o n s t i t u t e e v i d e n c e o f perce i ved b ia s , f o rp a r t i s a n s s o m e t i m e s a r e s i m p l y e x e r t in g p r e s -s u r e in t h e h o p e o f m o r e f a v o r ab l e m e d i at r e a t m e n t . F u r t h e r m o r e , i n t h e a b s e n c e o fs o m e s y s t e m a t i c s a m p l i n g o f re s p o n se s , w ed i s i n t e r e s te d b y s t a n d e r s m a y g e t a d i s t o r t e dp i c t u r e b e c a u s e t h o s e p a r t i s a n s w h o a r e s a t -i s f i e d a b o u t t h e m e d i a ' s f a i r n e s s ( o r e v e np l e a s e d b y a m e d i a b i a s t h e y p e r c e i v e t o b e i nt h e i r f a v o r ) a r e r e l a ti v e l y u n l ik e l y t o b r i n g t h e i rv i e w s t o o u r a t t e n t i o n .

M o r e c o m p e l l i n g , a l b e i t st il l a n e c d o t a l , e v -i d e n c e is p r o v i d e d w h e n w e c a t c h g l i m p s e s o fd i v e rg e n t r e s p o n se s b y o p p o s i n g p a r t i s a n s t ot h e s a m e m e d i a c o v e r a g e - -s p e c i fi c a ll y , w h e nb o t h s i de s a g re e t h a t c o v e r a g e w a s b ia s e d , b u td i s a g r e e s t r e n u o u s l y a b o u t t h e d i r e c t i o n o fs u c h b i a s . A c a s e i n p o i n t w a s t h e 1 9 8 0 U . S .p r e s i d e n t ia l c a m p a i g n . L e t t e r s t o t h e e d it o r,c i t iz e n s ' u s e o f re s p o n s e o p p o r t u n i t i e s p r o -v i d e d b y t e l ev i s i o n a n d r a d i o s t a t i o n s, a n d c o l -u m n s b y p o l i ti c a l a n a ly s t s f re q u e n t l y r a i s ed t h ei ss u e o f m e d i a b i as , b u t t h e r e s e e m e d t o b es h a r p d i s a g r e e m e n t a b o u t t h e d i r e c t io n o f t h ea l le g e d b i as . S u p p o r t e r s o f b o t h m a j o r c a n d i -d a t e s s e e m e d t o f e el t h a t t h e i r s i de w a s b e i n g

s a v a g e d b u t t h e o t h e r s i d e w a s b e i n g c o d d l e d .S u c h d i v e r g e n t se n t i m e n t s , f o r e x a m p l e , a r ei l l u s t r a t e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g t w o b r i e f l e t t e rs t ot h e e d i t o r o f T i m e m a g a z i n e ; b o t h w e r e p r o -v o k e d b y t h e s a m e a r t ic l e r e v i e w i n g t h e n - c a n -d i da te R o n a l d R e a g a n ' s c a m p a i g n a n d p u b -l is h e d u n d e r t h e h e a d i n g H a t ch e t Jo b ? ( 1980 ) .Laurence Ba rrett's pre-electionpiece on Candidate RonaldReagan [Oct. 20] was a slick hatchet job, and y ou k nowit. You ought to be asham ed of yourselves for printing itdisguised as an objective oo k at the m an.Your story on "Th e real Ronald Reagan"did it. Why didn'tyou just editorially endorse him? Barrett glossesover Rea-gan's fatal flaws so hand ily that the "real" Rona ld Reagancame across as lh e answer to all our problem s.

P r o m p t e d b y s u c h d i s a gr e e m e n t s a n d b y o u rt h e o re t ic a l c o n c e rn s , w e u n d e r t o o k a m o d e s tt e l e p h o n e s u r v e y t h r e e d a y s b e f o r e th e 1 9 80p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n ( V a l lo n e , L e p p e r , & R o s s ,1 9 81 ). T w o m a i n f i nd i n g s e m e r g e d f r o m t h i sp r e l i m i n a r y s t u d y . O n t h e o n e h a n d , a c l e a rm a j o r i t y ( 6 6% ) o f t h e 1 60 r e g i s te r e d v o t e r s r e -s p o n d i n g c l a i m e d t h a t t h e m e d i a g e n e r a ll y h a db e e n f a ir a n d i m p a r t i a l. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d ,w h e n p a r t i a l i t y w a s p e r c e i v e d , i t w a s a l m o s ta l w a y s p e r c e iv e d t o b e a g a i n s t t h e r e s p o n d e n t ' sf a v o r ed c a n d i d a t e ( 89 % ). A m o n g J i m m yC a r t e r 's s u p p o r te r s w h o t h o u g h t t h a t t h e m e d i ah a d f a v o r e d o n e c a n d i d a t e o v e r t h e o t h er , 8 3 %c l a i m e d t h a t R e a g a n h a d b e e n t h e f a v o r e dc a n d i d a t e ; c o n v e r se l y , a m o n g R e a g a n s u p -p o r t e r s w h o c h a r g e d m e d i a p a r t is a n s h i p , t h ec o n s e n s u s w a s e v e n g r e a t e r ( 9 6 % ) t h a t i t w a sC a r t e r w h o m t h e m e d i a h a d f a v o re d . T h e m a -j o r i ty o f J o h n A n d e r s o n ' s s u p p o r t e r s r e p o r ti n ga b i a s i n t h e m e d i a p e r c e i v e d t h e b i a s t o b ea g a i n s t A n d e r s o n ( 8 8 % ) a n d i n f a v o r o f e i t h e rC a r t e r o r R e a g a n .

E n c o u r a g e d b y t h es e r es u lt s, b u t m i n d f u l o ft h e f a c t t h a t o n l y a m i n o r i t y o f re s p o n d e n t sh a d p e r c e i v e d a n y b i a s , 2 w e c o n d u c t e d a s e r ie s

We are g rateful to Bob A belson for drawing our atten-tion to th is apparen t exception o the g eneral rule presentedby confirmation or assimilation biases and fo r encouragingus to undertake he pre sent line of research. Ou r intellectualdebt to him , we are pleased to acknowledge, continues togrow.2 It is temp ting to speculate about the possibly con-founding ro le played by selective exposu re and selectiveavoidance biases in determining our survey results. Spe-cifically, it is possible that the people who exposed them-selves disproportionately to coverage favorable to their


3/9

THE HOSTILE MEDIA PHENOMENON 579o f p o s t e l e c t i o n p i l o t s t u d i e s i n w h i c h s p e c i f icn e w s p a p e r a n d m a g a z i n e a r t i c l e s w e r e e x a m -i n e d a n d r a t e d b y C a r t e r a n d R e a g a n s u p -p o r t e r s . O u r i n t e n t w a s t o f o c u s o n r e s p o n s e st o s p e c i f i c s t i m u l i r a t h e r t h a n e v a l u a t i o n s o fg e n e r a l m e d i a c o v e r a g e, b u t o u r e f f o r ts w e r ec o n s i s t e n t l y f r u s t r a t e d . W e f o u n d n o g e n e r a lt e n d e n c y f o r p a r t i s a n s t o p e r c e i v e h o s t i le r a t h e rt h a n f r i e n d l y b i a s. W e a ls o f o u n d , h o w e v e r , t h a tf e w o f t h e p a r t i s a n s i n t h e s e s t u d i e s e v i d e n c e ds t r o n g f e e li n g s f o r o r a g a i n s t e i t h e r c a n d i d a t e ,a n d t h a t t h e c a m p a i g n a n d e l e c t io n w e r e d e a di ss u e s f o r m o s t o f o u r s u b j e c ts . T h e s e r e s u lt sw e r e d is a p p o i n t in g , b u t t h e y w e r e n o t w i t h o u tv a l ue . T h e y c a u t i o n e d t h a t p e r c e p t i o n s o f ho s -t il e m e d i a b i a s w o u l d n o t a l w a y s o c c u r , a n dt h e y p r o m p t e d u s t o t h i n k a b o u t t h e t y p e s o fi ss u e s, i n t e re s t g r o u p s , a n d c o n t e x t s t h a t w o u l db e s t s e r v e a n y f u t u r e a t t e m p t s t o d o c u m e n tt h e p h e n o m e n a u n d e r c o n s i d e ra t io n . A t th es a m e t i m e , t h e s e r e s u l t s a l s o r e a s s u r e d u s ( a n d ,w e h o p e , s o m e f u t u r e c r i t i c s ) t h a t f i n d i n g s o fp e r c e i v e d h o s t il e b i a s a r e n o t s o m e s i m p l e a n di n e v it a b le a r t if a c t a ri s in g f r o m o u r m e t h o d o fi n q u i r y o r o u r c h o i c e o f r e s p o n s e i te m s . I na n y c a s e , o u r p r e l i m i n a r y f i n d i n g s l e d u s t os e a rc h f o r p e r c e p t i o n s o f m e d i a b i a s a n d t op r o b e t h e m e c h a n i s m s u n d e r ly i n g s u ch p e r-c e p ti o n s, u s i n g m o r e e v o c a t iv e s t i m u l u s m a -t e r ia l s a n d a n i s s u e t h a t p r o m p t e d f i er c e r a n dm o r e e n d u r i n g p a r t i s a n s h i p .

M e d i a C o v e r a g e o f t h e B e i r u t M a s s a c r eI n 1 9 8 2 , a t r a g i c s e r i e s o f e v e n t s i n t h e t r o u -

b l e d M i d d l e E a s t , c u l m i n a t i n g i n t h e m a s s a c r eo f c iv i li a n s i n t h e r e f u g e e c a m p s a t S a b r a a n dC h a t i ll a , L e b a n o n , g a v e u s a c h a n c e t o e x p l o r eb i a s e d p e r c e p t i o n s o f m e d i a b i a s w i t h s t i m u l u sm a t e r i a l s a n d p a r t i s a n g r o u p s w e l l s u i t e d t oo u r r e s e a r c h o b j e c ti v e s . O u r g o a l w a s t o s t u d yt h e r e s p o n s e s o f p r o - A r a b a n d p r o - I s ra e l i o b -se rve r s t o a spec i f i c , fa i r l y ex t ens ive , an d h igh lye n g r o s s i n g s a m p l e o f m e d i a c o v e r ag e : t o d e -

candidate tended to be the o nes who rated the media asunbiased (and vice versa),whereas he peoplewho exposedthemselves o m ore evenhandedcoverage ended to be thosewho ra ted the m edia as hostile to their candidate. Theresearch strategy that we followed subsequently, wherebyall subjectsare exposed o the same sample of media prod-ucts, obviou sly reduces the role o f such gross selectivitybiases although it does not precludedifferences n attention,learning, and su bsequ ent recall.

t e r m i n e e x a c tl y h o w t h e ir p e r c e p t i o n s a n de v a l u a t i o n s o f t h e s e m e d i a p r e s e n t a t i o n s d i f -f e r e d , a n d h o w s u c h d i f f e r e n c e s r e l a t e d t o p e r -c e p t i o n s o f m e d i a b i a s . I n a d d i ti o n , w e s o u g h tt o e x a m i n e t w o r e l a t e d b u t r a t h e r d i f f e r e n tm e c h a n i s m s t h a t m i g h t u n d e r l i e p a r t i s a n s 'c o n t r a d i c t o r y c o m p l a i n t s o f m e d i a b i a s.T h e f ir st m e c h a n i s m i s s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d a n d ,i n a s e n s e , a d i r e c t d e r i v a t i o n f r o m t h e b i a s e da s s i m i l a t i o n m e c h a n i s m s d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r b yL o r d e t a l. (1 9 7 9 ). P a r t i s a n s w h o h a v e c o n s is -t e n t l y p r o c e s s e d f a c t s a n d a r g u m e n t s i n l ig h to f t h e i r p r e c o n c e p t i o n s a n d p r e j u d ic e s ( a c -c e p t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n a t f a c e v a l u e , o r s u b j e c t i n gi t t o h a r s h s c r u t i n y , a s a f u n c t i o n o f it s c o n -g r u e n c e w i t h t h e s e p r e c o n c e p t i o n s a n d p r e j -u d i c es ) a r e b o u n d t o b e l ie v e t h a t t h e p r e p o n -d e r a n c e o f r e li a b le , p e r t i n e n t e v i d e n c e f a v o r st h e i r v i e w p o i n t . A c c o r d i n g ly , t o t h e e x t e n t t h a tt h e sm a l l s a m p l e o f e v i d e n ce a n d a r g u m e n tf e a t u re d i n a m e d i a p r e s e n t a t i o n s e e m s u n -r e p r e se n t a ti v e o f th i s l ar g er " p o p u l a t i o n " o fi n f o r m a t i o n , p e r c e i v e r s w i ll c h a r g e b i a s i n t h ep r e s e n t a t i o n a n d w i l l b e l i k e ly t o i n f e r h o s t i l i tya n d b i a s o n th e p a r t o f t h o s e r e s p o n s i b l e f o ri t . T h u s t h e p a r t i s a n g r o u p s c o u l d e s s e n t i a l l ya g r e e a b o u t t h e n a t u r e o f th e s t i m u l u s ( i. e. , i tsc o n t e n t a n d v a l e n c e ) b u t d i s a g r e e a b o u t t h ea p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f t h e c o n t e n t a n d v a l e n ce i nl i g h t o f t h e i r d i f f e r i n g v i e w s a b o u t t h e l a r g e rt r u t h t h a t t h e s t i m u l u s w a s d e si g n e d t o p o r t r ay .I n c a se s in w h i c h b o t h g r o u p s b e l ie v e t h a t a c -t u a l p r o g r a m c o n t e n t f a v o r e d n e i t h e r s i d e , f o re x a m p l e , b o t h g r o u p s a r e a p t t o p r o t e s t s u c h" u n w a r r a n t e d " o b j e c t i v i t y .

A l t h o u g h s u c h a m e c h a n i s m is h i gh l y p l a u -s i b l e a n d w e a t t e m p t t o d o c u m e n t i t s o p e r a -t i o n , w e d o u b t t h a t i t i s s u f f i c i e n t t o a c c o u n tf u ll y fo r t h e t y p e o f a n e c d o t a l e v i d e n c e t h a tp r o m p t e d o u r r es e ar c h. C o m p l a i n t s o f m e d i ab i a s , e s p e c i a ll y w h e n s o c i al o r p o l i ti c a l p a s s i o n sr u n h o t , su g g e s t a f u rt h e r , m o r e r a d i c a l m e c h -a n i s m , o n e i n v o l v i n g a d if f e r e n c e n o t i n t h ee v a l u a t i o n o f a g i v e n s t i m u l u s r e l a ti v e to s o m es t a n d a r d b u t r a t h e r i n t h e p e r c e p t i o n o r r e c -o l l e c ti o n o f i ts b a s ic c o n t e n t a n d v a l e n c e . I no t h e r w o r d s, t h e tw o p a r t i s a n g r o u p s m a y p e r -c e iv e , o r r e m e m b e r , v e r y d i f f e re n t s t im u l i ; e a c hp a r t is a n g r o u p m a y r e p o r t t h a t th e m e d i a s p e n tt h e m o s t t im e a n d g a v e t h e m o s t e m p h a s i s tot h e o t h e r s i d e .T h e s u g g es ti o n t h a t t w o g r o u p s o f p a r t i s a n sm a y e a c h s e e a d i ff e re n t s t im u l u s p r o m p t s u s


4/9

58 0 R . VALLONE, L . R OS S , A ND M. LEP P ERt o c o n s i d e r , a t l ea s t b ri e fl y , t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e -t w e e n t h i s s t u d y a n d o n e o f t h e c l as s ic s t u d ie so f o u r f ie ld , H a s t o r f a n d C a n t r i l ' s ( 1 9 5 4 ) r a d -i ca l A m e s i a n o p u s , " T h e y s a w a g a m e . " I nH a s t o r f a n d C a n t r i l ' s s tu d y , D a r t m o u t h a n dP r i n c e t o n s u p p o r t e r s v i e w i n g a f i lm o f a p a r -t i c u l a r l y r o u g h g r i d i r o n s t r u g g l e b e t w e e n t h e i rr e s p e c t i v e t e a m s s e e m e d t o s e e t w o d i f f e r e n tg a m e s : T h e P r i n c e t o n f a ns sa w a c o n t i n u i n gp a t t e r n o f D a r t m o u t h a t r o c i t ie s a n d o c c a s i o n a lP r i n c e t o n r e t a l i a t i o n s, th e D a r t m o u t h f a n s s a wb r u t a l P r i n c e t o n p r o v o c a t i o n s a n d o c c a s i o n a l ,m e a s u r e d , D a r t m o u t h r e sp o n s e s . I n t h e H a s -t o r f a n d C a n t r i l e x p e r i m e n t t h e p a r t i s a n s a p -p a r e n t l y s a w a s t r u g g l e i n w h i c h t h e i r s id e w a sc l e a r l y t h e h e r o a n d t h e o t h e r s i d e t h e v i l l i an .O u r s u g g e s t io n i s t h a t v i e w e r s o f m e d i a c o v -e r a g e o f a c o n t i n u i n g p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g le m a y s e et h e i r s i d e p o r t r a y e d a s t h e v i l l ia n , a n d t h e o t h e rs i d e a s t h e h e r o .

I n s u m m a r y , w e h a d t w o b a s i c o b je c t i v e s .F i r s t w e s o u g h t t o p r o v i d e a c o n v i n c i n g d e m -o n s t r a t i o n o f t h e h o s t i l e m e d i a o r b i a s e d p e r -c e p t i o n o f b i as p h e n o m e n o n t h a t h a d b e e ns u g g es t e d b o t h b y a n e c d o t a l e v i d e n c e a n d b yo u r p r e l i m i n a r y t e l e p h o n e s u rv e y . S e c o n d , w es o u g h t t o e x p l o r e s o m e u n d e r l y i n g m e c h a -n i s m s o r p ro c e s se s t h a t m i g h t a c c o u n t f o r t h ep h e n o m e n o n i n q u e s t i o n a n d m i g h t , a s w es u g g e s t l a t e r , a l s o p l a y a r o l e i n o t h e r s o c i a lc o n t e x t s i n w h i c h d i s p u t a n t s f o r m i m p r e s s i o n sa b o u t f a ir n e ss o r b i as i n t h e m e d i a t i o n p r o c es s .

general sympathies in the Mid dle East and, m ore specifi-cally, the ir views abo ut Israel 's responsibility for the m as-sacre . W e were able to identify three gro ups for subsequentinvestigation: (a) students (n = 68) who characterizedthemselves as generally pro-Israeli, (b) students (n = 27)who described themselves as general ly pro-Arab, and (c)students (n = 49) who described themselves as having"general ly m ixed" or "n eutr al" feel ings. These groups, notsurprisingly, had very different views of Israel 's responsi-bi l i ty for the m assacre in re la t ion to the responsibil ity ofother part ies such as Lebanese offic ia ls or the Christ ianmili t iamen who actual ly invaded the camps. On average,the pro-lsraeli group assigned only 22% o f the responsibilityto Israel , whereas the p ro-A rab grou p assigned 57% of theresponsibility to Israel.M ost subjects were individually recrui ted b y te lephon eand viewed the videotapes in small groups ranging in sizefrom 6 to 12. These groups were genera lly of m ixed com-position, each containing pro-Israeli, pro-Arab, and neutralsubjects. 5Th e subjects w ere told that they wou ld be part ic ipat ingin a study o f the med ia coverage of the confl ic t in Lebanon,and th at they w ould be viewing six segments o f nat ionallytelevised netwo rk news program s that were a ired in the 10days after the Israel i move into West Beirut in la te Sep-tember.Procedure. Afte r the v ideotape of the news programs,subjects com pleted a quest ion naire designed to e l ic i t theirperceptions of the fa irness an d object ivi ty of the specificnews programs they had jus t v iewed. In addi t ion to anitem dealing with overall bias, subjects responded to severalm ore specific i tem s allowing them to e labo rate their viewsabout the "standards" applied to Israel in re la t ion to thestandards applied to its adversaries, the am ou nt o f attentionfocused on Israe l ' s role in the massacre , the strength withwhich the positive case for and the negative case againstIsrael was presented, and th e appare nt personal views ofthe editors responsible for the programs. Subjects were alsoasked to identify the percentage of favorable, neu tral, andunfavorable references to Israel , and to est imate the per-M e t h o d

Stimulus materials. Six scgments of nationally televisedevening and la te-night news program s, a ired over a 10-dayperiod beginning with the Israel i move into West Beiruton Sep temb er 15, 1982, were selected from an a lmo st ex-haustive sam ple o f majo r netwo rk coverage. Thes e six vid-eotaped segments, presented in chronological order andoffering 36 min devoted almost exclusively to the Beirutmassacre a nd q uestio ns of Israeli responsibility for the ci-vi l ian casualties, const i tuted th e st imulus m ateria ls for ours t udy )Subjects. Our subjects were 144 Stanford Universi tystudents, wh o held varying ini t ia l views abou t the M iddleEast and were recru i ted w ithin a 6-week period after theseevents to part ic ipa te in a "study o f the m edia coverage ofthe conf lict in L ebanon." Mem bers of pro-A rab and p ro-Israeli student associations were specifically recruited inorder to augm ent the bas ic sample o f s tudents drawn fromintroductory psychology classes. Before seeing the video-taped news segments, part ic ipants completed a quest ion-naire in which they rated, among other things, their factualknowledge about the Beirut massacre and i ts historicalantecedents. 4 Part ic ipants were a lso asked to indicate the ir

3 Th e six segments were presented on the following datesand networks, respectively: Septem ber 15, 1982 , NB C;Septemb er 18, 19 82, ABC ; Septem ber 19, 198 2, NBC ;Septemb er 21, 1982, ABC; September 22 , 1982, CBS;September 24, 1982, NBC. These segments were chosensimply because th ey offered the m ost detailed coverage andthe m ost f ilm footage o f those a i red dur ing the re levantt ime pe r iod .4 We also attem pte d to assess know ledge ob jectively, viaa 16-item quiz , but prob lem s in interpretat ion an d scoringthat w ere due to factual disputes m ade its use questionable.We do not discuss this object ive measure further, exceptto n ote that th e results o f analyses in wh ich we used thism easur e were com pletely consistent with those that weperf orm ed using subjective assessments of knowledge, a l-though significance levels were generally lower.5 Generally, the subjects and th e expe rim enter were un-aware of the political affiliations o r views of those seeingthe videotapes. Th e single exception was a case in w hichthe experimenter personally recrui ted eight subjects topar t ic ipa te in the s tudy imm edia te ly a f te r a mee t ing of theCo mm it tee for Jus t ice in the M iddle East .


5/9

THE HOSTILE MEDIA PHENOMENON 581T a b l e 1M e a n G r o u p R e s p o n s e s t o Q u e s t i o n n a i r e I t e m s C o n c e r n i n g P e r c e iv e d B i a s i n T e l e vi s io nN e w s C o v e r a g e o f t h e B e i r u t M a s s a c r e

Subject groupsItem Pro-Israel Neutral Pro-Arab

1. Overall treatm ent o f Israel in program s a2. Standards ap plied to Israel in relation to othe rcountries b3. Degree of attention focused on Israel's role in relationto tha t o f other partiesc4. Strength o f case for Israel minu s strength of caseagainst Israeld5. Percentage of favorable and unfavorable references toIsraelc6. Estimated percentage of neutral viewers who w ouldbecom e m ore negative to Israel after viewing thenews coverage7. Perceptions of the personal views of editors of theseprograms

2.9 3.8 6.72.1 3.0 5.02.9 3.9 5.9

- 3 . 6 - 2 . 3 7 .916/57 19/54 42/26

68 65 373.8 4.2 6.9

Note . Al l scale item s (excluding percentages) have been reoriented so that higher num bers indicate perceptions o f greaterpro-lsraet bias. For all items, the p ro-A rab group differs from th e pro-Israeli group, p ~ .01; for Item s 1-4, the pa rtisangroups differ from the ne utral group, p < .05; for Items 5-7, the pro-A rab group differs from the neutral group, p


6/9

58 2 R. VALLONE, L. ROSS, AND M. LEPPE Rs ub j ec t s be l i eved t ha t t he ed i t o r i a l s t a f f s we r es o m e w h a t p r o - I s r a e l , w h e r e a s t h e p r o - I s r a e l is u b j e c ts b e l i e v e d t h e y w e r e s o m e w h a t a n t i- I s-r ae l , F ( 1 , 141 ) = 64 . 57 , p < . 001 .

M e c h a n i s m s . T h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e a l s o a l -l o w e d u s t o i n v e s t i g a t e t h e r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u -t io n s t o t h e h o s ti le m e d i a p h e n o m e n o n o f th et w o m e c h a n i s m s d i s c u s s e d i n o u r i n t r o d u c -t i o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , i t a l lo w e d u s t o a s k t ow h a t e x t e n t t h e p a r t is a n s ' c o n t r a d i c t o r yc h a r g e s o f b ia s w e r e a m a t t e r o f d i ff e r in g e v a l-u a t i o n , a n d t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h t h e y w e r e am a t t e r o f d i ff e r in g p e r c e p t i o n s o r r e c o l l e c t io n so f t h e p r o g r a m s ' c o n t e n t . D i d t h e t w o g r o u p sa g r ee a b o u t t h e n a t u r e o f p r o g r a m c o n t e n t a n dem p has i s , and d i s ag r ee on l y abo u t t he f a ir ne s s,a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s, o r r e p r e s e n ta t iv e n e s s o f t h a tc o n t e n t a n d e m p h a s i s , o r d id t h e y p e r c e iv e ad i f fe r e n t s t i m u l u s w i t h d i f fe r e n t c o n t e n t a n de m p h a s i s ?

T w o q u e s t i o n n a i r e i t e m s s u gg e st th a t p r o -A r a b a n d p r o - I s r a e l i s u b j e c t s " s a w " d i f f e r e n tn e w s p r o g r a m s - - t h a t i s, t h e y d i s a g r ee d a b o u tt h e v e r y n a t u r e o f t h e s t i m u l u s t h e y h a dv i e w e d . F i r s t , p r o - A r a b s u b j e c t s r e p o r t e d t h a t4 2 % o f th e r e f e r e n c e s t o I s r a e l i n t h e n e w s p r o -g r a m s w e r e f a v o ra b l e a n d t h a t o n l y 2 6% w e r eu n f a v o r a b l e , w h e r e a s p r o - I s r a e l i s u b j e c t s r e -p o r t e d t h a t o n l y 1 6% o f th e r e f e re n c e s t o I sr a elw e r e f a v o ra b l e , a n d t h a t 5 7 % w e r e u n f a v o r a b l e ,F ( 1, 141 ) = 54 . 84 , p < . 001 . Seco nd , pa r t i s anso n b o t h s id e s b e li e v e d t h a t t h i s o v e r a ll s a m p l eo f n e w s c o v e r a g e w o u l d l ea d u n d e c i d e d o r a m -b i v a l e n t v ie w e r s t o b e c o m e m o r e h o s ti le t o t h es id e t h a t t h e p a r t i s a n s p e r s o n a l l y fa v o r e d : P r o -A r a b s u b j e ct s b e li e v e d t h a t o n l y 3 7 % o f n e u t r a lv i e w e r s w o u l d b e c o m e m o r e n e g a t i v e t o w a r dI s rae l , whe r ea s t he p r o - I s r ae l i s ub j ec t s be l i evedt h a t 6 8 % w o u l d b e c o m e m o r e n e g a t i v e , F ( 1 ,141) = 34 . 02 , p < . 001 . I n o t h e r wo r ds , p r o -A r a b s b e l i e v e d th a t t h e c o v e r a g e a s a w h o l e ,w i t h i ts m i x o f f ac t s, a r g u m e n t s , a n d i m a g e so b j e c t iv e l y o f f e r e d th e u n c r i t i c a l n e u t r a l v i e w e rm o r e b a s i s f o r f a v o r i n g I s r a e l , w h e r e a s p r o -I s rae l is be l ieved t ha t t he s a m e co ve r age o f f e r edt h a t v i e w e r m o r e b a s i s f o r o p p o s i n g I s ra e l .G i v e n t h e s e d i f f e re n c e s i n p a r t i s a n s ' p e r -c e p t i o n s o r r e c o l le c t i o n s o f th e p r o g r a m s ' c o n -t e n t , w e m u s t a s k w h e t h e r s u c h d i f f e r e n c e sw e r e t h e s o le b a s is f o r t h e i r c h a r g e s o f h o s t il eb i a s; m o r e s p e c if ic a ll y , w e m u s t a s k w h e t h e rt h e y e v a l u a t e d t h e f a i r n e s s a n d o b j e c t i v i t y o ft h e p r o g r a m s d i ff e re n t ly , h o l d i n g c o n s t a n t t h e i r

p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e p r o g r a m s ' c o n t e n t . W e a d -d r e s s e d t h i s q u e s t i o n v i a a n a l y s e s o f c o v a r i-a n c e , i n w h i c h w e t r e a t e d p e r c e iv e d c o n t e n t a sa c o v a r i a t e in c o m p a r i n g b ia s p e r c e i v e d b y t h et w o p a r t i s a n g r o u p s . T h e r e s u lt s o f s u c h a n a l -y s e s a r e u n e q u i v o c a l : T h e p r o - I s r a e l i v e r su sp r o - A r a b d i f fe r e n c e s i n p e r c e p t i o n s o f b ia s r e -m a i n s i g n i fi c a n t e v e n w h e n d i f f e re n c e s i n p e r -c e iv e d c o n t e n t w e r e c o n t ro l le d F ( l , 9 2 ) =30 . 89 , p < . 001 . Th i s is a l s o t r u e f o r t he d i f -f e r e n c e i n o u r p a r t is a n s ' c o m p l a i n t s a b o u t t h er e l a ti v e s t a n d a r d s a p p l i e d t o I s r a el , F ( 1 ,9 2 ) = 4 0 . l l , p < . 0 0 l , t h e d e g r e e o f a t t e n t i o nf o c u s e d o n Is r ae l , F ( l , 9 2 ) = 2 3 . 4 4 , p < . 0 0 1 ,a n d t h e r e l a ti v e s tr e n g t h s o f c a s e s f o r a n daga i ns t e a ch s i de , F ( 1 , 92 ) = 47 . 44 , p < . 00 l .I n o t h e r w o r d s , a n y g i v en l ev e l o f p e r c e i v e dp r o - A r a b v e r s u s p r o - I s r a e l i c o n t e n t w a s e v a ] -u a t e d d i ff e r en t ly in t e r m s o f i ts a p p a r e n t b i a so r e v e n h a n d e d n e s s b y p r o - A r a b a n d p r o -I s ra e liv i e w e r s . T h u s b o t h p o s t u l a t e d m e c h a n i s m sa p p e a r t o m a k e s e p a r a t e c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h eh o st il e m e d i a p h e n o m e n o n .Add i t iona l f ind ings . T w o a d d i t i o n a l f i n d -i n g s m e r i t s o m e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . B o t h p r o m p tu s t o t r y to b e m o r e s p ec i fi c a b o u t w h i c h s u b -j e c t s s h o w e d e v a l u a t i v e a n d / o r p e r c e p t u a lb i a s e s and wh i ch d i d no t . T he f ir s t f i nd i ng dea l sw i t h t h e r o le o f in t e l le c t u a l a n d e m o t i o n a l i n -v o l v e m e n t . T h e r e su l ts o f o u r d i s a p p o i n t i n gp o s t e l e c ti o n r e se a r c h h i n t e d t h a t p e r c e p t i o n so f h o s t il e b ia s a r e d i f f ic u l t t o d o c u m e n t u n l e s ss u b j e c t s a r e i n t e l l e c t u a l ly a n d a f f ec t iv e l y e n -g a g e d b y t h e m a t t e r s b e in g c o v e r e d in t h e m e -d i a . I n t h i s s t u d y w e n o w d e m o n s t r a t e ( s e eF i g u r e 1 ) t h a t w i t h i n b o t h t h e p r o - I s r a e l i a n dp r o - A r a b g r o u p s i t is t h e m o r e k n o w l e d g e a b l es u b j e c t s w h o w e r e m o s t i n c l i n e d t o v i e w t h em e d i a a s b ia s e d a g a in s t th e m . A m o n g p r o - I s -r a e li s t u d e n t s , h i g h r a t i n g s o f s e l f- k n o w l e d g ew e r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h h i g h l e v e ls o f p e r c e i v e dm ed i a b i a s aga i n s t I s r ae l ( r = . 31 , p < . 01 ) ;a m o n g p r o - A r a b s t u d en t s , h i g h r a t in g s o f s el f-k n o w l e d g e w e r e a s s o c i a t e d w i t h l o w l e v e l s o fp e r c e i v e d m e d i a b i a s a g a i n s t I sr a e l ( r = - , 4 1 ,p < . 0 5 ) - - t h a t is , w i t h h i g h l e v e ls o f p e r c e i v e dm e d i a b i a s i n f a v o r o f I sr a el . T h e d i f f e r e n c eb e t w e e n t h e s e c o r r e l a t i o n s i s h i g h l y s i g n i fi c a n t(z = 3 .18 , p < .001) .T h e s e d a t a a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h a r e l a t i v e l yc o g n i ti v e in t e r p r e t a t i o n o f o u r m a i n r e su l t,n a m e l y , t h a t t h o s e s u b j e c t s w i t h t h e m o s tk n o w l e d g e r e p o r t t h e m o s t b i a s b e c a u s e t h e y


7/9

T H E H O S T I L E M E D I A P H E N O M E N O N 5 8 3

rn u3

W6I 10 J

I.-- n -z $ 5U.li f )~ 4Wif) -< 3z. < -W '

the hostile media phenomenon biased perception and

Documents