THE HOSTILE MEDIA EFFECT in a GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE the Hostile Media Effect in Lebanon: Differences in Perceptions of Western
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE HOSTILE MEDIA EFFECT IN A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE The Hostile Media Effect in Lebanon: Differences in Perceptions of Western and Arabic News Sources Nicole van Batenburg 10510028 Master’s Thesis Graduate School of Communication Master’s Programme Political Communication Supervisor: Penny Thibaut Sheets 28/02/2019 THE HOSTILE MEDIA EFFECT IN A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE Abstract The hostile media effect -defined as the tendency for individuals with a strong preexisting attitude on an issue to perceive media coverage as biased against their side and in favor of their opponents’ point of view- has mostly been studied in the context of traditional media (i.e., print and radio) within a specific nation. Nowadays, however, globalization of media is more actual than ever. Polarization, fragmentation and mediatization of society have increasingly become prevalent, yet little is known about the effects of these developments on people’s perception of foreign news sources. This study investigated whether a news source can create a HME in a global setting, and if this effect is moderated by political ideology or political engagement. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions in which they read an identical article about Middle-Eastern affairs, but the news source was varied between a Western, non- Western or Lebanese newspaper. Results indicated the existence of a HME between a Western and Lebanese news source, independent of participants’ political ideology or political engagement. No results were found for the existence of a HME between a Western and Non- Western news source, nor between a Non-Western and Lebanese news source. Overall, this study highlights the importance of studying the HME on a global scale, and calls for more research into its consequences and implications for the fragmentation of the global media landscape. Keywords: hostile media effect, political ideology, political engagement, source credibility, media use, selective exposure 2 THE HOSTILE MEDIA EFFECT IN A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE The Hostile Media Effect in Lebanon: Differences in Perceptions of Western and Arabic News Sources Nowadays, the messages sent by news outlets are not necessarily the messages received by the audience. News consumers may process information in different ways; it’s these differences that can produce diverse perceptions and interpretations of content (Bauer, 1973). Even when a message is framed in an objective or neutral way, people tend to be skeptical about information from media sources such as newspapers and television. Credibility, liking, quality and representativeness of the source are some examples of criteria used by news receivers (D'Alessio & Allen, 2000; Gunter, 1992; Sundar, 1999). Not only these criteria affect how people perceive a message; a person’s own ideology, values, beliefs, knowledge or involvement in an issue or group that is covered in the news also affects people’s interpretation of a news article (Christen, Kannaovakun & Gunther, 2002; Duck, Terry & Hogg, 1998; Eveland & Shah, 2003; Groseclose & Milyo, 2005; Morris, 2007; Vallone, Ross & Lepper, 1985). In this master thesis, a well-known theory in the field of political communication will be tested in an online experiment. The hostile media phenomenon, which is related to the perception of news and the tendency for individuals with a strong preexisting attitude on an issue to perceive media coverage as biased against their side and in favor of their antagonists’ point of view, will be the central theory of this study (Vallone, Ross & Lepper, 1985). In 1985, a study of Vallone, Ross and Lepper found evidence for the existence of the hostile media effect phenomenon for the first time by focusing on the Israel-Palestine conflict. In their study, pro-Israeli and pro-Arab participants viewed the same news report discussing the conflict; each group perceived the report as biased in favor of the opposing side. Moreover, within both partisan groups, greater knowledge of the crisis was associated with stronger perceptions of media bias (Vallone et al., 1985). Also, Gunther (1992) found that people who identified strongly with a particular group were more likely to think that the newspaper they were most familiar with gave unfavorable coverage to that group than were people who did not strongly identify with that group. Hostile media effect studies have found that people with strong opinions about the topic of a news story believe the coverage favors the other side of the issue, rather than their own opinions (Giner- Sorolla & Chaiken, 1994). In addition to these findings, many other studies found support for the existence of the hostile media effect (Arpan and Raney, 2003; Vallone et al., 1985; Gunther & Liebhart, 2006; Lee, Kim, & Coe, 2018; Reid, 2012). The hostile media effect could be explained by the selective exposure theory, that states individuals tend to favor information from a source 3 THE HOSTILE MEDIA EFFECT IN A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE that reinforces their pre-existing views while avoiding contradictory information (Vallone et al., 1985). In addition to the studies mentioned above, other studies such as Reid (2012) and Lee et al., (2018) have examined the existence of the hostile media effect in relation to news source as well. Both studies found differences in hostile media perceptions between Democrats and Republicans within the United States of America. This study, however, tried to shine new light on the hostile media effect phenomenon by investigating it in a foreign-versus-domestic setting as it includes different international news papers. To date, the HME has been studied almost entirely in the context of traditional media (e.g., television news, hard-copy newspapers) within a specific nation, especially in the United States. The present study focuses on potential cross-border effects, and will be derived from what we already know from earlier studies and understudied contexts (e.g., Gunther & Liebhart, 2006; Gunther & Schmitt, 2004; Hartmann & Tanis, 2013; Matheson & Dursun, 2001; Reid, 2012). This experimental study focuses on the potential existence of the hostile media effect between foreign and domestic news sources—specifically, Western and Middle-Eastern news sources. Furthermore, it investigates whether the relationship between news source and hostile media effect is moderated by political engagement and political ideology, as previous studies would suggest. This current research aims to combine the elements described above: with a focus on a Lebanese case, the potential existence of the hostile media effect between Western, non-Western and local news sources in a politically dynamic country will be tested. It is expected the hostile media effect will occur depending on the news source, but the political ideology and political engagement of the Lebanese respondents will also be taken into account. All taken together, this research is guided by the following central research question: Do foreign news sources (versus domestic news sources) behind a news article prompt hostile media perceptions, and is this effect moderated by political ideology and political engagement? Objectivity, mediatization and polarization in the media landscape. First, I would like to address the importance of both objectivity in journalism as well as the mediatization of cultures and societies, a theory that states that the media shapes and frames the processes and discourse of political communication and the society in which this communication takes place (Schultz, 2004; Hjavard, 2008). Although objectivity is predominantly supported in the Western democratic debate as being of high value to news reporting, the journalists and people working in the media field are becoming more aware of various problems that it raises (Westernstahl, 1983). Western scholars 4 THE HOSTILE MEDIA EFFECT IN A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE argue that journalism can be seen as an important profession in order to achieve a perfectly functioning modern democracy. For instance, Stromback (2005) states that journalism needs democracy for its freedom and independence, and that democracy needs journalism to ensure that flow of information. Moreover, journalism is needed for public discussions about political issues and it should function as a watchdog against the abuse of power. The media landscape should allow journalists to work in a way it allows them to fulfill their job as disseminator, interpreter, mobilizer and adversary (Skovgaard, Albæk, Bro, & de Vreese, 2015). However, in the current century the audience have more options for news consumption because of the growth of cable television and Internet outlets like never before. This development has provided a more fragmented media environment where audiences have more options for news consumption, in which news outlets with certain partisan perspectives have emerged and competed for audiences’ attention in this new environment (Fletcher & Nielsen, 2017). Today, we are witnessing an evolution towards a more complex economic, technological, cultural, social, political and ecological relations across continents, and toward potential or actual global crises such as climate change or the nuclear threat (van Leuven & Berglez, 2015). We live in a world that has become radically interconnected, interdependent and communicated in the complex formations and flows of news journalism. The consequences of decisions made in one country, make themselves felt in other countries or regions all over the world. The boundary between domestic and foreign coverage