Volume 16 Issue 6, 2015

Volume 16

Issue 6, 2015

Contents Page The financial news ecosystem: Journalists’ perceptions of group 711-729 hierarchy Scientific objectivity in journalism? How journalists and academics 730-749 define objectivity, assess its attainability, and rate its desirability Lost in a house of mirrors: Journalists come to terms with myth and 750-767 reality in The Newsroom Differences between the quality of the printed version and online editions 768-790 of the European reference press The DC factor? Advocacy groups in the news 791-811 The politicization of entertainment media: A study of the Italian tabloid 812-829 Chi during the 2013 electoral campaign Print and online newspapers as material artifacts 830-846

2 Journalism a lack of attention to journalists’ evaluations of leading media entities and news professionals, whose influence is recognized by their peers. In reality, group hierarchies are a universal, natural feature of social groups as people rank order group members (Anderson and Kilduff, 2009a, 2009b). ‘Prestige’ organizations and individuals perceived as having superior expertise tend to set trends and influence the decisions of group members (Bikhchandani et al., 1988, 1992; DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). Journalism is one such field in which imitative behavior is prevalent (Boczkowski, 2010). An important professional routine is the cross-checking of elite media outlets to guide story selections and news decisions (Dearing and Rogers, 1996). The vast majority of research into the influence of the key players within a news ecosystem has largely focused on political reporting (Breed, 1955; Crouse, 2003; Gans, 1979). While business journalism has witnessed explosive global growth in the past two decades (see Kjaer and Langer, 2005; Koikkalainen, 2007; Shrikhande, 2004; Tambini, 2010; Usher, 2013), research into the inner workings, as well as perceptions, of members of this professional group remains cursory (Davis, 2000; Doyle, 2006; Oberlechner and Hocking, 2004). Some business news experts proclaim which media entities lead the pack (e.g. Roush, 2009; Starkman, 2009), yet these rankings are largely anecdotal. Consequently, little is known about which news outlets and professionals are actually perceived as being influential among financial journalists as a whole, and whether there are differences in opinion among journalist subgroups. This study attempts to fill this gap. The purpose of the current undertaking is to advance our empirical understanding of the group hierarchy within the financial news ecosystem, a subset of business journalism (Doyle, 2006). The United States was selected as the setting for this study as it has the world’s largest financial markets and employs the most financial journalists (Roush, 2011; Usher, 2013). The inferences reported here have important implications for both journalism theory and practice at a time when business news is increasingly relevant to civic life.

Literature review Journalists’ perceptions and group hierarchies Journalism studies have long been interested in news people’s perceptions. This literature gauges how journalists perceive their work roles and news routines (Becker and Vlad, 2009; Berkowitz, 1993; Sigal, 1973; Tuchman, 1972, 1978). Related work focuses on levels of perceived professional autonomy (Reich and Hanitzsch, 2013; Weaver et al., 2007), factors journalists believe to influence their work (Berkowitz, 1993; Hanitzsch and Mellado, 2011), and job satisfaction (see Brownlee and Beam, 2012, for a review). To a lesser extent, scholars study perceived credibility as it pertains to journalists’ attitudes toward sources (Hanusch, 2012), poll data (Kohut, 1986), and media trust (Cassidy, 2007; Stroud and Lee, 2013). Nevertheless, research remains lacking in examining journalists’ assessments of the influencers within a news ecosystem. Studies of the sociology of the news indicate that journalism has its own sets of routines, traditions, norms, and values, similar to other

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 3 social groups and systems (e.g. Becker and Vlad, 2009; Bourdieu, 2005; Breed, 1955; Gans, 1979; Shoemaker and Reese, 1996; Shoemaker et al., 2009). Due to limited time and resources, journalists rely on these routines to make their work manageable, including cross-checking higher prestige media outlets and journalists to form, validate, and confirm their sense of the news (Boczkowski, 2010; McCombs et al., 2011). Therefore, it is necessary to further explore how journalists perceive the leaders they look up to. According to social competition theorists, group hierarchies emerge whenever people congregate (Anderson and Kilduff, 2009a, 2009b). Groups tend to give influence to members who possess superior competence, expertise, or prestige, which specifically refers to social rank granted to individuals who are recognized and respected for their skills, success, or knowledge (Henrich and Gil-White, 2001; Magee and Galinsky, 2008). Economists use somewhat different language, saying organizations and individuals choose to follow those that are perceived as having ‘superior information’ (Bikhchandani et al., 1988, 1992; Lieberman and Asaba, 2006) or have attained greater success. Social systems typically agree upon a hierarchy of elite actors and imitate some of their behaviors, leading to homogenization.

The business news ecosystem Some studies (Dominick, 1981; Ragas, 2014) show that business news coverage across the media often overlaps, although there is little empirical work into which media outlets and which journalists lead the rest of the pack. Previous scholarship does indicate that business journalists turn to the work of their peers as a source for story ideas (Doyle, 2006; Oberlechner and Hocking, 2004; Usher, 2013). Doyle’s (2006) study of UK business journalists, for example, finds that most ideas ‘stem from scanning other media (especially newswires)’ (p. 436). Furthermore, Usher’s (2013) study of US business news organizations recognizes The New York Times as an influential leader in the field. Much of the research into business journalism has focused on the roles, responsibili- ties, and performance of watchdog journalism following the 2000 stock market collapse (e.g. Doyle, 2006; Henriques, 2000), the 2007–2009 housing market bubble, and the global financial crisis (e.g. Tambini, 2010; Usher, 2013). The current study takes on a different task. It deals with how financial news organizations and journalists perceive influential players in their news ecosystem. If we want to further investigate the normative expectations of this field, then it is important to understand a group hierarchy as seen through the eyes of the journalists working within it.

Anecdotal evidence of group hierarchy Looking beyond the academic research, there is a mix of anecdotal evidence regarding the perceived financial journalism hierarchy. Most notably, The Wall Street Journal is hailed by many as the bellwether for financial news (Kurtz, 2001; Roush, 2009, 2011; Starkman, 2009). Roush (2009) identifies the following outlets as ‘the powerful players’ (para. 24): The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, the Washington Post, Bloomberg Businessweek, and FORTUNE. Starkman (2009), in turn, offers his own list: The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Bloomberg

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 4 Journalism

News, the Financial Times, FORTUNE, Businessweek, and Forbes. In addition, Reuters and Dow Jones News have also been highlighted (Chozik and Barbaro, 2012; Kurtz, 2001). Turning to individual journalists, the business columnists at The New York Times are noted for having a wide following (e.g. Kurtz, 2001; Roush, 2009; Starkman, 2009). Andrew Ross Sorkin and Michael Lewis receive accolades for their reputation and influence on fellow financial journalists (Pressler, 2011; Sherman, 2009). While not always discussed in flattering light, news people at CNBC, particularly Jim Cramer and Maria Bartiromo, are singled out for their high profiles (Brady, 2003; Stelter, 2011; Tkacik, 2009). Based on this review of the literature, financial journalists, as with any other social group, should be able to collectively articulate a group hierarchy in terms of who holds positions of perceived influence within their field. Although anecdotal evidence helps identify such influential financial media outlets and professionals, no scientific, empirical findings are available to confirm these lists. Therefore, the first set of research questions is submitted:

RQ1a. What is the rank order of most influential financial news outlets according to the surveyed respondents? RQ1b. What is the rank order of most influential financial journalists according to the surveyed respondents?

Variations in perceptions While journalists share values, norms, and routines, they have never been a monolithic entity (Benson, 2006; Bourdieu, 2005). Surveys of journalists suggest that journalists’ assessments may differ among groups, depending on various determinants. Becker and Vlad (2009), for instance, suggested that news routines vary across settings, among organizations, and among journalists. As early as the 1970s, Sigal (1973) subdivided journalists by their individual and organizational characteristics to gauge perceptual differences. Subsequent studies (Reich and Hanitzsch, 2013; Weaver et al., 2007) further define individual factors as journalists’ professional backgrounds and functions (e.g. experience, editorial rank, beat, income) as well as personal characteristics (e.g. gender, age, race, education, political view). Structural characteristics of the organization are defined by size, medium, and geography among others (Cassidy, 2007; Filak, 2004). Recent research divides journalists into subgroups based on their demographics and work- related conditions (Brownlee and Beam, 2012; Hanusch, 2012; Stroud and Lee, 2013). These variables, in different degrees, have been found to stimulate variations in the way groups of journalists perceive credibility (Cassidy, 2007; Hanusch, 2012; Stroud and Lee, 2013), professional autonomy (Reich and Hanitzsch, 2013; Weaver et al., 2007), news routines (Becker and Vlad, 2009; Berkowitz, 1993), and job satisfaction (Brownlee and Beam, 2012). No previous studies have examined the influence of demographic and work-environment characteristics on the way journalists perceive and rank the key players in a news

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 5 ecosystem. However, it is plausible and important to look at possible variations based on the characteristics of respondents. Filak (2004) demonstrates that journalists carry characteristics of groups in an intergroup-bias dynamic, in which members of competing groups tend to show favor toward their own group. Individuals, including journalists, choose to associate with certain social groups in order to gain a sense of belonging. Once the decision is made, they enact their role within the group and adopt intergroup-bias in making judgments (Filak, 2004). Applied to the present study, the researchers set out to explore whether demographic and work-related variables have some predictive value in financial journalists’ perceptions of the most influential outlets and individuals within their field. Thus, the following research questions are presented:

RQ2a. Which demographic characteristics are significant determinants of respondents’ nominations of influential financial media outlets? RQ2b. Which work-related characteristics are significant determinants of respondents’ nominations of influential financial media outlets? RQ3a. Which demographic characteristics are significant determinants of respondents’ nominations of influential financial journalists? RQ3b. Which work-related characteristics are significant determinants of respondents’ nominations of influential financial journalists?

Methodology Data collection The data for this study were collected through an online, self-administered survey of US-based financial journalists, defined as those responsible for gathering, reporting, and disseminating finance-related news and information. These included reporters/writers, editors, columnists, and producers/news directors (Brownlee and Beam, 2012). This survey of financial journalists, one of the first of its kind in the United States, was completed in December 2011. A month prior to data collection, a pilot test was conducted and the main study questionnaire was refined based on this feedback. In order to solicit participation, the researchers used a journalist database maintained by the Gorkana Group, an international media intelligence firm that tracks professionals in the world of business journalism (Doty, 2008). An invitation was delivered to 3,109 e-mail addresses, informing potential participants that for each journalist completing the survey, a US$2.50 donation would be made to the Society for American Business Editors and Writers (SABEW). Each respondent had the option of entering to win an Apple iPad2 as an incentive. In addition to advanced notifications, three waves of reminder e-mails and/or phone calls were conducted to reach out to non-respondents (Kaplowitz et al., 2004; Keusch, 2012). This process drew participation from 349 individuals, who identified themselves as journalists primarily covering finance-related beats. Overall, the response rate was 11.2 percent, which is typical for surveys of US business journalists (SABEW, 2013) and list-based online samples (Keusch, 2012). The study sample represented a diverse community of experienced financial journalists. For those who provided information regarding their age (n = 232) and work

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 6 Journalism

Table 1. Respondent profile.

Variable Valid percentage Total percentage Editorial rank Junior: 56.4 Junior: 38.1 (n = 236) Senior: 43.5 Senior: 29.5 Newsroom size Fewer than 10 reporters/ Fewer than 10 reporters/ editors: 35.7 editors: 24.1 (n = 235) Between 10 and 20 reporters/ Between 10 and 20 reporters/ editors: 15.7 editors: 10.6 Between 21 and 30 reporters/ Between 21 and 30 reporters/ editors: 5.5 editors: 3.7 Between 31 and 40 reporters/ Between 31 and 40 reporters/ editors: 3.0 editors: 2.0 Between 41 and 50 reporters/ Between 41 and 50 reporters/ editors: 4. editors: 3.2 More than 50 reporters/ More than 50 reporters/ editors: 35.3 editors: 23.8 News platform Online: 42.1 Online: 28.1 (n = 233) Traditional: 57.9 Traditional: 38.7 Work location Northeast: 68.9 Northeast: 47.0 (n = 238) Others: 31.1 Others: 21.2 Race Caucasian: 83.7 Caucasian: 54.4 (n = 227) Non-Caucasian: 16.3 Non-Caucasian: 10.6 Gender Male: 59.7 Male: 40.4 (n = 236) Female: 40.3 Female: 27.2 experience (n = 237), an average participant is 43 years old and has worked in financial journalism for over 13 years. Table 1 detailed other characteristics of the surveyed respondents.

Measures and analysis In order to examine perceptions of leading media outlets, participants were asked to respond to an open-ended question asking them to name up to three news organizations they perceived as being the most influential in financial journalism. Perceptions of influential financial journalists were gauged in a similar way. Respondents were allowed to nominate up to three individuals. The raw number of nominations mentioned by the respondents was counted and aggregated to form a list of five media outlets and five professionals perceived as being the most influential in financial journalism in the United States. The researchers examined the responses from each participant to screen out dupli- cations, ensuring that every count was unique. In an effort to offer greater insight into the way financial journalists nominated influential media outlets and professionals, the survey questionnaire asked respondents to provide details pertaining to their demographic and work-related characteristics. Demographics comprised race, gender (female vs male), and age. Work-related variables consisted of professional experience (years of work experience), editorial rank,

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 7

Table 2. Top five most influential financial news outlets and journalists in United States.

All respondents Respondents without (percent) missing data (percent) Financial news outlets The Wall Street Journal 71.9 68.5 Bloomberg News 60.1 59.7 The New York Times 32.3 31.9 Reuters News 26.0 23.1 Financial Times 19.9 19.9 Financial journalists Andrew Ross Sorkin, The New York Times 23.9 15.0 Gretchen Morgenson, The New York Times 21.1 14.4 Michael Lewis, Vanity Fair and author 17.7 12.0 Paul Krugman, The New York Times 15.3 9.7 Jim Cramer, CNBC and TheStreet 9.1 6.0

Note: Respondents were asked, ‘In your opinion, what is the most influential financial news outlet in the United States today?’, and ‘In your opinion, who is the most influential financial journalist in the United States today?’. Respondents were allowed to nominate up to three choices for each question. newsroom size (Likert-scale with ‘1’ being ‘fewer than 10 reporters/editors’ and ‘6’ being ‘more than 50 reporters/editors’), news platform (dominant medium for work published), and work location (regions of the country). Variations in perceptions of influential media outlets and journalists as a function of respondents’ characteristics were examined through logistic regression analysis, a statistical procedure used to predict categorical outcome variables from various categorical and continuous independent variables (Agresti, 2013). In order to facilitate data analysis and to address issues pertaining to non-response, some variables were recoded. Specifically, race was collapsed as Caucasian and non-Caucasian.1 Editorial rank was coded as junior (reporter/writer) and senior (editor/producer/news director/columnist). News platforms were categorized as Web/online and traditional media. Work locations comprised the Northeast United States and others (i.e. non-Northeast).

Results RQ1a asked about the rank order or perceived hierarchy of influential business news outlets according to the respondents. Overall, 889 nominations were made for 62 news organizations. As shown in Table 2, The Wall Street Journal captured the top spot in the US business news ecosystem, receiving nominations from 71.9 percent (n = 238) of the respondents. In second place was Bloomberg News with nominations from 6 out of 10 respondents (n = 199, 60.1%). After the top two, there was a significant drop-off in the number of nominations with The New York Times in third place (n = 107, 32.3%). Rounding out the top five was Reuters News (n = 86, 26%) and the Financial Times (n = 66, 19.9%), both global media outlets that are headquartered in London. The top three outlets are all based in New York City.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 8 Journalism

RQ1b examined the rank order of influential financial journalists. A total of 456 nominations were made for 158 different individuals. According to the respondents, The New York Times employs the top two most influential financial journalists (Andrew Ross Sorkin and Gretchen Morgenson) and three of the top five (see Table 2). Sorkin and Morgenson attracted nominations from 23.9% (n = 50) and 21.1% (n = 44) of respondents, respectively. In third place was Michael Lewis, the best-selling business book author (n = 37, 17.7%). Receiving the fourth most nominations (n = 32, 15.3%) was the economist Paul Krugman, also a columnist for The New York Times. Closing out the top five was former hedge fund manager and CNBC and TheStreet commentator Jim Cramer (n = 19, 9.1%). In order to avoid non-response bias, an additional analysis was conducted with cases containing no missing data in all demographic and work-related variables (n = 216). The results further confirmed the rank order of influential news organizations and journalists with minor percentage fluctuations (see Table 2). The second set of research questions (RQ2a, RQ2b) examined respondents’ characteristics as determinants of whether or not they had nominated these top five news outlets for their perceived influence. Because the list consisted of five media outlets, the analysis involved the probability of respondents selecting each of the five, given a set of independent variables. There were five different outcome variables, which were not mutually exclusive, rather than five mutually exclusive categories of one single dependent variable. Thus, five separate regression models were constructed and run, one at a time. In each model, the outcome variable was binary: whether the respondent nominated (1 = Yes) or did not nominate (0 = No), a news organization that was ranked collectively as one of the top five outlets. Both work-related characteristics and demographics served as predictors. An interaction term for work-related variables and another interaction term for demographic variables were also included. Because the additive models (i.e. main effect of each predictor on the odds) showed a poor fit, the presence of interactions helped explain more variance in the models. This approach sought to account for the combined effect of each set of predictors on each outcome variable. After the data had been checked against the assumptions underlying logistic regression (Field, 2009), all variables and interaction terms were entered for each model simultaneously. Due to missing data across the selected variables, 216 valid cases were retained for analysis. According to the results, a test of the full model against a constant-only model was significant in the case of Reuters, indicating that respondents’ characteristics as a whole distinguished between those who nominated Reuters and those who did not when ranking influential news organizations, χ2(10) = 27.62, p < .005. The Nagelkerke R2 value of .18 indicated a moderate relationship between prediction and grouping. Prediction success overall was 78.7 percent. As shown in Table 3, newsroom size was the best predictor in the model, suggesting that when newsroom size increased by one unit, the odds ratio of nominating Reuters was 1.3 times higher. The confidence interval (CI) for this ratio was above 1.00, which is satisfactory. All other predictors in the model were not significant. While the full model for The Wall Street Journal was not statistically robust, χ2(10) = 16.21, p = .094, the interaction term of demographic variables was significant, indicating that race, gender, and age as combined helped predict whether or not respondents nominated this media outlet as being influential. According to the odds ratio and CI (see Table 3), Caucasian, male, and older journalists were 1.03 times more likely to

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 9

Table 3. Respondents’ characteristics as predictors of nominations of influential news outlets.

Outlet nominated Respondent’s characteristics B (SE) Odds ratio 95% CI

The Wall Street Journal Professional experience 0.01 (0.02) 1.01 0.96–1.06 Editorial rank 0.50 (0.38) 1.65 0.79–3.44 Newsroom size −0.01 (0.08) 0.99 0.85–1.17 News platform 0.45 (0.34) 1.58 0.80–3.08 Work location −0.57 (0.36) 0.57 0.28–1.15 Interaction (work-related) −0.01 (0.01) 0.99 0.99–1.01 Race −0.36 (0.58) 0.70 0.22–2.18 Gender −1.45 (0.64) 0.24 0.07–0.82 Age −0.05 (0.02)* 0.95 0.91–0.98 Interaction (demographic) 0.03 (0.02)* 1.03 1.00–1.06 Constant 3.36 (1.10)** Bloomberg News Professional experience 0.01 (0.02) 1.01 0.96–1.05 Editorial rank −0.25 (0.34) 0.78 0.40–1.51 Newsroom size −0.06 (0.07) 0.94 0.81–1.09 News platform 0.15 (0.32) 1.16 0.63–2.15 Work location 0.01 (0.33) 1.01 0.53–1.91 Interaction (work-related) 0.01 (0.01) 1.00 0.99–1.01 Race 0.23 (0.47) 1.25 0.50–3.15 Gender 0.45 (0.53) 1.56 0.56–4.40 Age −0.01 (0.02) 0.99 0.96–1.03 Interaction (demographic) −0.01 (0.01) 0.99 0.97–1.02 Constant 1.27 (0.99) The New York Times Professional experience 0.02 (0.02) 1.02 0.98–1.07 Editorial rank −0.29 (0.36) 0.75 0.37–1.52 Newsroom size −0.13 (0.08) 0.88 0.75–1.03 News platform −0.01 (0.34) 0.99 0.51–1.91 Work location −0.59 (0.34) 0.56 0.29–1.09 Interaction (work-related) 0.01 (0.01) 1.01 0.99–1.02 Race 0.08 (0.51) 1.08 0.40–2.94 Gender 0.30 (0.57) 1.35 0.45–4.08 Age −0.01 (0.02) 0.99 0.96–1.03 Interaction (demographic) −0.02 (0.01) 0.98 0.96–1.01 Constant 0.15 (0.94) Reuters Professional experience −0.06 (0.03) 0.95 0.89–1.01 Editorial rank 0.11 (0.44) 1.12 0.47–2.67 Newsroom size 0.28 (0.09)** 1.32 1.10–1.58 News platform 0.39 (0.40) 1.48 0.68–3.25 Work location 0.20 (0.44) 1.22 0.52–2.91 Interaction (work-related) 0.01 (0.01) 1.01 0.99–1.02 Race 0.66 (0.61) 1.94 0.58–6.46 Gender 0.92 (0.64) 2.50 0.71–8.84 Age 0.01 (0.02) 1.01 0.97–1.06 Interaction (demographic) −0.02 (0.02) 0.98 0.95–1.01 Constant −3.12 (.1.19)** (Continued)

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 10 Journalism

Table 3. (Continued)

Outlet nominated Respondent’s characteristics B (SE) Odds ratio 95% CI

Financial Times Professional experience −0.04 (0.03) 0.96 0.92–1.02 Editorial rank 0.45 (0.43) 1.56 0.68–3.59 Newsroom size 0.03 (0.09) 1.04 0.87–1.24 News platform 0.19 (0.40) 1.21 0.55–2.64 Work location 0.75 (0.44) 2.12 0.90–4.97 Interaction (work-related) 0.01 (0.01) 0.99 0.98–1.01 Race −0.46 (0.60) 0.63 0.19–2.06 Gender 0.20 (0.64) 1.22 0.35–4.25 Age 0.03 (0.02) 1.03 0.99–1.07 Interaction (demographic) 0.01 (0.02) 1.01 0.98–1.04 Constant −2.86 (1.12)*

B = beta; SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval. *p < .05; **p < .01. nominate The Wall Street Journal. Age alone seemed to negatively associate with the probability to rank this news organization, but the value of the proportionate of change in odds and the CI were below the 1.00 benchmark and difficult to interpret. The remaining regression models for Bloomberg News, The New York Times, and the Financial Times were not statistically significant and no variables, whether demographic or work-related characteristics, were found to predict whether respondents nominated these media outlets as being influential. RQ3a and RQ3b were concerned with respondents’ characteristics as predictors of whether or not they had nominated each of the top five individuals in financial journalism. Because there were five binary dependent variables, five logistic regression models were analyzed in a similar manner described in the previous section. These models were run separately with the outcome being whether the respondent actually did (1 = Yes) or did not nominate (0 = No) an individual identified as one of the five most influential financial journalists. Work-related and demographic predictors and two interaction terms (one for each set of predictors) were entered for each model simultaneously, following the forced entry method. The analysis was conducted on 216 valid cases. In comparison with the main effect models, adding interactions improved model fits and helped gauge the effect of each set of predictor variables in combination. As indicated in the results, the full model in the case of Sorkin was an improvement as compared to the constant-only model. Respondents’ characteristics, as a whole, helped predict those who nominated and perceived Sorkin as influential and those who did not, χ2(10) = 20.89, p < .05. According to the Nagelkerke R2 value of .16, there was a significant association between prediction and outcome. Prediction success overall was 86.1 percent. A closer examination of the odds ratio and CI suggests that editorial rank was the most significant predictor. Senior journalists were 4.55 times more likely to rank Sorkin. According to Table 4, there seemed to be a significant contribution of the interaction term for work-related variables. However, both the odds ratio and its CI crossed 1.00, indicating a lack of robustness in this finding.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 11

Table 4. Respondents’ characteristics as predictors of nominations of influential journalists.

Journalist nominated Respondent’s characteristics B (SE) Odds ratio 95 percent CI

Andrew Ross Sorkin Professional experience 0.04 (0.04) 1.04 0.97–1.11 Editorial rank 1.52 (0.52)** 4.55 1.65–12.58 Newsroom size 0.14 (0.11) 1.15 0.94–1.42 News platform 0.09 (0.47) 1.10 0.44–2.75 Work location 0.42 (0.49) 1.52 0.58–3.98 Interaction (work-related) −0.03 (0.01)* 0.97 0.95–0.99 Race 0.99 (0.87) 2.71 0.49–14.84 Gender 1.36 (0.90) 3.90 0.67–22.75 Age −0.05 (0.03) 0.95 0.90–1.02 Interaction (demographic) −0.02 (0.02) 0.98 0.93–1.02 Constant −2.74 (1.68) Gretchen Professional experience −0.01 (0.03) 0.99 0.93–1.05 Morgenson Editorial rank −0.12 (0.48) 0.89 0.35–2.27 Newsroom size −0.13 (0.11) 0.88 0.71–1.10 News platform 0.07 (0.46) 1.07 0.44–2.61 Work location 0.52 (0.48) 1.68 0.65–4.34 Interaction (work-related) 0.01 (0.01) 1.01 0.99–1.02 Race 0.27 (0.77) 1.31 0.29–5.88 Gender 0.81 (0.80) 2.26 0.47–10.82 Age 0.04 (0.02) 1.04 0.99–1.08 Interaction (demographic) −0.02 (0.02) 0.98 0.94–1.02 Constant −3.61 (1.33)** Michael Lewis Professional experience 0.05 (0.04) 1.05 0.98–1.12 Editorial rank −0.08 (0.56) 0.92 0.31–2.74 Newsroom size −0.08 (0.12) 0.93 0.74–1.16 News platform 0.07 (0.51) 1.07 0.40–2.88 Work location 1.22 (0.60)* 3.38 1.05–10.91 Interaction (work-related) −0.01 (0.01) 0.99 0.98–1.01 Race 1.99 (1.44) 7.32 0.44–121.74 Gender 3.35 (1.45)* 28.46 1.65–490.06 Age −0.01 (0.03) 0.99 0.94–1.06 Interaction (demographic) −0.06 (0.03) 0.95 0.89–1.01 Constant −5.81 (2.50)* Paul Krugman Professional experience 0.07 (0.04) 1.08 0.99–1.16 Editorial rank −0.23 (0.57) 0.79 0.26–2.43 Newsroom size 0.03 (0.12) 1.03 0.81–1.31 News platform −0.88 (0.54) 0.46 0.14–1.20 Work location −0.07 (0.53) 0.93 0.33–2.67 Interaction (work-related) −0.01 (0.01) 0.99 0.98–1.02 Race 2.43 (1.50) 11.41 0.60–215.44 Gender 2.83 (1.50) 16.89 0.90–317.70 Age 0.01 (0.03) 1.00 0.95–1.06 Interaction (demographic) −0.07 (0.03)* 0.93 0.88–0.99 Constant −5.11 (2.40)* Jim Cramer Professional experience 0.03 (0.04) 1.03 0.94–1.12 Editorial rank −0.32 (.84) 0.72 0.14–3.75

(Continued)

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 12 Journalism

Table 4. (Continued)

Journalist nominated Respondent’s characteristics B (SE) Odds ratio 95 percent CI

Newsroom size 0.37 (0.16)* 1.44 1.06–1.97 News platform 0.41 (0.71) 1.51 0.38–5.99 Work location 0.02 (0.71) 1.02 0.26–4.09 Interaction (work-related) −0.01 (0.01) 0.99 0.96–1.01 Race 18.61 (6020.46) 120639.11 0.00–0.00 Gender 0.96 (2.80) 2.62 0.01–633.55 Age 0.01 (0.07) 1.00 0.88–1.14 Interaction (demographic) 0.01 (0.07) 1.01 0.89–1.14 Constant −23.93 (6020.46)

B = beta; SE = standard error; CI = confidence interval. * p < .05; **p < .01.

Although the complete model for Lewis was not statistically significant, χ2(10) = 16.34, p = .090, Table 4 shows the significant role of work location and gender as two stand- alone predictors of whether respondents chose to nominate Lewis. Specifically, those based in the Northeast United States were 3.38 times more likely to nominate him; and the odds of a male respondent who nominated Lewis were almost 29 times higher than those of a female respondent. Newsroom size proved to be a single determinant in Cramer’s case, though the full model was not significant, χ2(10) = 17.34, p = .067. As suggested by the odds ratio and CI, when newsroom size increased by one unit, the probability of nominating Cramer increased 1.44 times. In other words, journalists in larger newsrooms were more likely to nominate Cramer. The logistic regression models for Morgenson and Krugman were not statistically significant, and all variables did not predict the way respondents ranked the two individuals. There seemed to be a significant contribution of the interaction term for demographic variables to the Krugman model, but this finding could not be confirmed due to inadequacies in the odds ratio and its CI, all of which were below 1.00 (see Table 4). Overall, decisions to nominate Morgenson and Krugman did not vary as a function of respondents’ demographic or work-related characteristics.

Discussion Across a wide range of fields, professionals often engage in imitative behavior, monitor- ing and following the perceived trendsetters within their particular ecosystem (Lieberman and Asaba, 2006). Within journalism studies, the cross-checking of prestige news outlets and journalists for guidance is an established news routine (Boczkowski, 2010; Du, 2013). While business news has witnessed global growth, little is known about the perceived hierarchy of media outlets and journalists among the news people working in this field (Doyle, 2006; Usher, 2013). This study, based on a national representative survey of financial journalists in the United States, explored this topic.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 13

By and large, the hierarchical list of financial media outlets revealed by this national survey aligns with the anecdotal claims made previously. Many business news experts (e.g. Kurtz, 2001; Roush, 2009, 2011; Starkman, 2009) have long called The Wall Street Journal the top business news source in the United States (Benson, 2006). The results of this survey empirically bear this out. Following close behind was Bloomberg News. Third on this list was The New York Times, long viewed as a general barometer of journalistic excellence on a global basis (Benson, 2006; Gans, 1979; Golan, 2006; Reese and Danielian, 1994). Business news has been described as a niche global news product that is increasingly produced for a global professional audience (Machin and Niblock, 2010). As evidenced by the 2008–2009 global financial crisis, financial markets are increasingly intercon- nected, which necessitates the need for more than simply an American perspective on the markets. Not surprisingly, all five of the news organizations viewed as most influential by US financial journalists have news bureaus around the world. Two of these organizations – Reuters News and the Financial Times – are headquartered in London rather than the United States. Increasing globalization in the years ahead may further contribute to the blurring of country boundaries in business news (Brownlee and Beam, 2012; Machin and Niblock, 2010; Weaver and Willnat, 2012). Already the Financial Times has announced that it is moving to a single global print edition (Yu, 2013). Andrew Ross Sorkin and Gretchen Morgenson, both columnists for The New York Times, were perceived by survey respondents as the top two most influential financial journalists in the United States. What all five of the most nominated journalists share in common (besides having large media platforms to distribute their work) is that they do not simply provide reporting, but rather focus on expert inputs and unique insights. Given that the respondents are already well-versed in the business news of the day, this suggests that financial journalists may interpret influence through the prism of which fellow journalists they feel best contextualize and advance the news. Overall, these results indicate that the opinions of financial journalists in the United States often converge in terms of which outlets and individuals they perceive as being the most influential. However, subtle perceptual differences among respondents were also detected. Half of the logistic regression models (i.e. five out of ten) detected significant differences in at least one demographic or work-related variable regarding the likelihood to nominate that outlet or individual. Most notably, men were much more likely to nominate Michael Lewis than women, suggesting perhaps that Lewis’ work appeals more broadly to men than women. Of the variables examined, the work-related variable of newsroom size appeared to be the greatest predictor of differences in perception, emerging in two cases. In short, financial journalists (just like journalists working in other fields) should not be treated as a monolithic entity (Benson, 2006; Bourdieu, 2005); there were isolated points of divergence among the general patterns of agreement. Detailed statistical analysis of this sort is necessary so as to not make sweeping generalizations that may not be fully supported by the data upon deeper analysis.

Theoretical implications This study and its outcomes contribute new theoretical perspectives and help advance existing perspectives in journalism studies. Prior research tends to gauge journalists’

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 14 Journalism perceptions from a generic approach, which lumps individuals from a variety of fields into an aggregate sum representing the journalism world as a whole (Brownlee and Beam, 2012; Reich and Hanitzsch, 2013). Although financial journalists constitute a distinct group that is growing in size and importance on a global scale, little empirical, theory-driven work exists to offer insights into this niche population (Doyle, 2006; Tambini, 2010; Usher, 2013). This survey is among the first to explore journalists’ perceptions within the financial news ecosystem, specifically its group hierarchy. By focusing on a narrowly defined sample, while looking beyond journalism studies for theoretical connections in other disciplines (Anderson and Kilduff, 2009a, 2009b), the data reported here help enrich our theorizations within the field. This study finds that the news outlets and individuals perceived by fellow news people as the most influential tend to have the greatest visibility, audience reach, financial resources, and recognized successes. Group hierarchy research, which theorizes prestige and dominance as possible pathways to social rank attainment (Cheng et al., 2013; Henrich and Gil-White, 2001; Magee and Galinsky, 2008), might provide a tentative explanation for these rankings. The findings further confirm that journalists’ characteristics (demographic and work- related variables) can play at least a modest role in detecting differences in their perceptions of influential news outlets and professionals. Past research has documented variations pertaining to journalists’ assessments of their job or perceived credibility in the broader context of journalism. The present analysis found this phenomenon applicable to perceived group hierarchies among financial journalists, a subset of the larger field (Filak, 2004; Usher, 2013). These findings also have implications for other theoretical perspectives within journalism studies. Bourdieu’s (2005) field theory recognizes the central role of elite media organizations and journalists in wielding ‘symbolic power over the entire field’ and playing ‘a crucial role in establishing or modifying the dominant “rules” of journalistic practice’ (Benson, 2006: 190). Field theory scholar Benson (2006) has argued that The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal play this role; the results of the current study empirically support this. The results of this study also have implications for agenda-setting scholars. Inter- media agenda-setting examines how elite media outlets and leading journalists influence the news patterns within a media ecosystem (Reese and Danielian, 1994). Determining which media outlets and journalists are perceived as most influential by fellow journalists is essential to advancing work in this area (Du, 2013). Up until this study, some assumptions (Carroll, 2011) had been made about which outlets may drive inter-media agenda-setting for financial news, but empirical testing has been limited. Moreover, this study offers a reference point to revisit a technological determinism view in journalism studies (see Örnebring, 2010 for a review). An influx of online technology in the media system has led to the notion that a big gap would emerge between the new and old media worlds and only those who thrive on the new technology would prosper. These data suggest otherwise, particularly when looking at a certain degree of homogeneity in opinions reported here. Specifically, no differences were found in the way financial journalists across platforms ranked outlets or individuals they perceived as being influential.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 15

Practical implications There are also several notable practical implications to this study’s findings. Faced with uncertain job prospects (Brownlee and Beam, 2012), journalists are increasingly interested in building their personal brands. Based on the journalists perceived as most influential in this study, several observations relevant to career growth may be made. The nominated journalists tend to work across multiple platforms and outlets (e.g. Sorkin is not only a columnist for The Times, but a CNBC co-host with a large Twitter following and a best-selling book); they all have unique and recognizable voices that go beyond straightforward reporting; they have generally received high-profile awards for their work (Pulitzer Prize, Nobel Prize, Gerald Loeb awards); and they are generally accessible to fellow media for quotes and interviews. This study’s findings also point to the increased convergence taking place not only in financial journalism but across journalism as a whole. Looking at these lists, while news organizations with traditional print roots still play an important role, outlets and journalists with electronic news wire, cable TV, and website origins also dot these rankings.2 This suggests that financial journalists may be fairly platform agnostic when it comes to journalistic influence, paying more attention to the quality of the work product and its impact. Business journalists have been criticized for not playing enough of a watchdog role (Henriques, 2000; Tambini, 2010). Normatively speaking, an encouraging note from this study is that financial journalists are most likely to name as leaders outlets and individuals that are known for upholding high journalistic standards and values. This does not excuse financial journalism for not more aggressively covering the global crises of the past decade, but it does at least indicate that the field still coalesces around those journalists that believe in fact-checking, accuracy, and fairness, rather than speed, gossip, and rumors.

Limitations and future research As with any study, there are limitations that should be taken into account. First, self- reports and self-selection bias are a potential weakness of any self-administered survey. Second, while the Gorkana media database represents one of the largest sample frames available, these results are not necessarily generalizable to financial journalists not included in this database or based in other countries. There is an opportunity for future cross-national studies that compare the findings of the current research with similar surveys in Europe, Asia, and other parts of the world (Doyle, 2006; Kjaer and Langer, 2005; Koikkalainen, 2007; Shrikhande, 2004). In addition to future media analyses assessing the inter-media relationships between the news content produced by various outlets and journalists, more qualitative research is also needed (Tambini, 2010). The current study importantly identifies which outlets and journalists are perceived as ‘leading the pack’, but it cannot answer why and how journalists came to these conclusions. Qualitative and quantitative research can further probe into the underlying motivations and specific criteria used by journalists when ranking influential group members. Understanding social hierarchies is a topic that is not

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 16 Journalism only relevant to financial journalism, but many other beats. There is an opportunity to replicate and extend the design of this study into other areas of journalism. In conclusion, it is hoped that this study will serve as a springboard for not just future financial news research, but more studies into the dynamics of news ecosystems as a whole.

Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes 1. Because 84 percent of the respondents were Caucasian, race was recoded as a dichotomous variable (Caucasian and non-Caucasian) in order to generate the variance sufficient for statistical analysis. 2. A more comprehensive list of rankings is available from the authors upon request.

References Agresti A (2013) Categorical Data Analysis, 3rd edn. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Anderson C and Kilduff GJ (2009a) The pursuit of status in social groups. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18(5): 295–298. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01655.x. Anderson C and Kilduff GJ (2009b) Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to- face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96(2): 491–503. DOI:10.1037/a0014201. Becker LB and Vlad T (2009) News organizations and routines. In: Wahl-Jorgensen K and Hanitzsch T (eds) The Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 59–72. Benson R (2006) News media as a ‘journalistic field’: What Bourdieu adds to new institutionalism, and vice versa. Political Communication 23(2): 187–202. DOI:10.1080/10584600600629802. Berkowitz D (1993) Work roles and news selection in local TV: Examining the business- journalism dialectic. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 37(1): 67–81. DOI:10.1080/08838159309364204. Bikhchandani S, Hirshleifer D and Welch I (1988) Learning from the behavior of others: Conformity, fads, and informational cascades. Journal of Economic Perspectives 12(3): 151–170. DOI:10.1257/jep.12.3.151. Bikhchandani S, Hirshleifer D and Welch I (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy 100(5): 992–1026. DOI:10.1086%2F261849. Boczkowski PJ (2010) News at Work: Imitation in an Age of Information Abundance. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Bourdieu P (2005) The political field, the social science field, and the journalistic field. In: Benson R and Neveu E (eds) Bourdieu and the Journalistic Field. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 29–47. Brady R (2003) Makeover: CNBC fell from grace when the bubble burst. How does it look now? Columbia Journalism Review 42(4): 50–51. Breed W (1955) Social control in the newsroom. Social Forces 33(4): 326–355. DOI:10.2307%2F2573002. Brownlee BJ and Beam RA (2012) U.S. journalist in the tumultuous early years of the 21st century. In: Weaver DH and Willnat L (eds) The Global Journalist in the 21st Century. New York: Routledge, pp. 348–362. Carroll C (ed.) (2011) Corporate Reputation and the News Media. New York: Routledge.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 17

Cassidy WP (2007) Online news credibility: An examination of the perceptions of newspaper journalists. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12(2): 478–498. DOI:10.1111/ j.1083-6101.2007.00334.x. Cheng JT, Tracy JL, Foulsham T, et al. (2013) Two ways to the top: Evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 104(1): 103–125. DOI:10.1037/a0030398. Chozik A and Barbaro M (2012) Bloomberg weighs making bid for The Financial Times. The New York Times, 9 December. Available at: http://nyti.ms/WWOReV (accessed 27 February 2013). Crouse T (2003) The Boys on the Bus. New York: Ballantine Books. Davis A (2000) Public relations, business news and the reproduction of corporate elite power. Journalism 1(3): 282–304. DOI:10.1177/146488490000100301. Dearing JW and Rogers EM (1996) Agenda Setting. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. DiMaggio PJ and Powell W (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields. American Sociological Review 48(2): 147–160. Dominick JR (1981) Business coverage in network newscasts. Journalism Quarterly 58(2): 179– 191. DOI:10.1177/107769908105800201. Doty C (2008) E-newsletter tracks job changes of business journalists. The New York Times, 25 February. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/25/business/media/25gorkana. html?_r=0 (accessed 9 March 2013). Doyle G (2006) Financial news journalism: A post-Enron analysis of approaches towards economic and financial news production in the UK. Journalism 7(4): 433–452. DOI:10.1177/1464884906068361. Du YR (2013) Intermedia agenda-setting in the age of globalization: A multinational agenda- setting test. Global Media and Communication 9(1): 19–36. DOI:10.1177/1742766512463038. Field A (2009) Discovering Statistics using SPSS, 3rd edn Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Filak VF (2004) Cultural convergence: Intergroup bias among journalists and its impact on convergence. Atlantic Journal of Communication 12(4): 216–232. DOI:10.1207/ s15456889ajc1204_3. Gans HJ (1979) Deciding What’s News. New York: Pantheon Books. Golan G (2006) Inter-media agenda setting and global news coverage: Assessing the influence of the New York Times on three television evening news programs. Journalism Studies 7(2): 323-334. DOI:10.1080/14616700500533643. Hanitzsch T and Mellado C (2011) What shapes the news around the world? How journalists in eighteen countries perceive influences on their work. International Journal of Press-Politics 16(3): 404–426. DOI:10.1177/1940161211407334. Hanusch F (2012) Travel journalists’ attitudes toward public relations: Findings from a representative survey. Public Relations Review 38(1): 69–75. DOI:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.10.001. Henrich J and Gil-White FJ (2001) The evolution of prestige: Freely conferred deference as a mechanism for enhancing the benefits of cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior 22(3): 165–196. DOI:10.1016/S1090-5138(00)00071-4. Henriques D (2000) What journalists should be doing about business coverage – But aren’t. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics 5(2): 118–121. DOI:10.1162/108118000569038. Kaplowitz MD, Hadlock TD and Levine R (2004) A comparison of web and mail survey response rates. Public Opinion Quarterly 68(1): 94–101. DOI:10.1093/poq/nfh006. Keusch F (2012) How to increase response rates in list-based web survey samples. Social Science Computer Review 30(3): 380–388. DOI:10.1177/0894439311409709. Kjaer P and Langer R (2005) Infused with news value: Management, managerial knowledge and the institutionalization of business news. Scandinavian Journal of Management 21(2): 209– 233. DOI:10.1016/j.scaman.200.02.012.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 18 Journalism

Kohut A (1986) Rating the polls: The views of media elites and the general public. Public Opinion Quarterly 50(1): 1–10. DOI:10.1086/268954. Koikkalainen K (2007) The local and the international in Russian business journalism: Structures and practices. Europe-Asia Studies 59(8): 1315–1329. DOI:10.1080/09668130701655176. Kurtz H (2001) The Fortune Tellers: Inside Wall Street’s Game of Money, Media and Manipulation. New York: Touchstone. Lieberman MB and Asaba S (2006) Why do firms imitate each other? Academy of Management Review 31(2): 366–385. DOI:10.5465/AMR.2006.20208686. McCombs M, Holbert RL, Kiousis S, et al. (2011) The News and Public Opinion: Media Effects on Civic Life. Malden, MA: Polity Press. Machin D and Niblock S (2010) The new breed of business journalism for niche global news: The case of Bloomberg News. Journalism Studies 11(6): 783–798. DOI:10.1080/14616701003760543. Magee JC and Galinsky AD (2008) Social hierarchy: The self-reinforcing nature of power and status. Academy of Management Annals 2(1): 351–398. DOI:10.1080/19416520802211628. Oberlechner T and Hocking S (2004) Information sources, news, and rumors in financial markets: Insights into the foreign exchange market. Journal of Economic Psychology 25: 407–424. DOI:10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00189-7. Örnebring H (2010) Technology and journalism-as-labour: Historical perspectives. Journalism 11(1): 57–74. DOI:10.1177/1464884909350644. Pressler J (2011) It’s good to be Michael Lewis. New York Magazine, October. Available at: http:// nymag.com/news/features/michael-lewis-2011-10/ (accessed 27 February 2013). Ragas MW (2014) Intermedia agenda setting in business news coverage. In: Hart R (ed.) Communication and Language Analysis in the Public Sphere. Hershey, PA: IGI-Global, pp. 332–354. Reese SD and Danielian LH (1994) Intermedia influence and the drug issue: Converging on cocaine. In: Shoemaker P (ed) Communication Campaigns against Drugs: Government, Media and the Public. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 47–66. Reich Z and Hanitzsch T (2013) Determinants of journalists’ professional autonomy: Individual and national level factors matter more than organizational ones. Mass Communication and Society 16(1): 133–156. DOI:10.1080/15205436.2012.669002. Roush C (2009) Unheeded warnings. American Journalism Review, December/January. Available at: http://www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=5023 (accessed 29 December 2012). Roush C (2011) Show Me the Money: Writing Business and Economics Stories for Mass Communication, 2nd edn. New York: Routledge. SABEW (2013) SABEW poll: Majority of business journalists have seen a pay raise in the past year. Available at: http://sabew.org/?s=salary+survey (accessed 11 October 2013). Sherman G (2009) The information broker. New York Magazine, 8 November. Available at: http:// nymag.com/news/media/61870/ (accessed 27 March 2013). Shoemaker PJ and Reese SD (1996) Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content, 2nd edn. White Plains, NY: Longman. Shoemaker PJ, Vos TP and Reese SD (2009) Journalists as gatekeepers. In: Wahl-Jorgensen K and Hanitzsch T (eds) The Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 73–87. Shrikhande S (2004) Business news channels in Asia: Strategies and challenges. Asian Journal of Communication 14(1): 38–52. DOI:10.1080/01292988042000195143. Sigal VS (1973) Reporters and Officials. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath and Company. Starkman D (2009) Power problem: The business press did everything but take on the institutions that brought down the financial system. Columbia Journalism Review 48(1): 24–30. Stelter B (2011) Market ills give CNBC a bounce. The New York Times, 14 August. Available at: http://nyti.ms/1bh4aL0 (accessed 27 February 2012).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ragas and Tran 19

Stroud NJ and Lee JK (2013) Perceptions of cable news credibility. Mass Communication and Society 16(1): 67–88. DOI:10.1080/15205436.2011.646449. Tambini D (2010) What are financial journalists for? Journalism Studies 11(2): 158–174. DOI:10.1080/14616700903378661. Tkacik M (2009) Waiting for CNBC: A tragicomedy in one long act. Columbia Journalism Review 48(1): 35–39. Tuchman G (1972) Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology 77(4): 660–679. DOI:10.2307/2776752. Tuchman G (1978) Making News. New York: Free Press. Usher N (2013) Ignored, uninterested, and the blame game: How The New York Times, Marketplace, and TheStreet distanced themselves from preventing the 2007-2009 financial crisis. Journalism 14(2): 190–207. DOI:10.1177/1464884912455904. Weaver DH and Willnat L (eds) (2012) The Global Journalist in the 21st Century. New York: Routledge. Weaver DH, Beam RA, Brownlee BJ, et al. (2007) The American Journalist in the 21st Century: U.S. News People at the Dawn of a New Millennium. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Yu R (2013) ‘Financial Times’ moves to single global edition. USA Today, 9 October. Available at: http://usat.ly/1fZHUsl (accessed 11 October 2013).

Author biographies Matthew W Ragas is Assistant Professor of Strategic Communication in the College of Communication at DePaul University in Chicago. His research examines mass media processes and effects in political and corporate settings, including business news. He is co-author of the forthcoming Business Essentials for Strategic Communicators (Palgrave Macmillan, 2014). Hai L Tran is Assistant Professor of Journalism in the College of Communication at DePaul University. He studies multimedia news, journalism theories, online agenda-setting, and research methodology. His research has been published in several mass communication journals.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Journalism http://jou.sagepub.com/

Scientific objectivity in journalism? How journalists and academics define objectivity, assess its attainability, and rate its desirability Senja Post Journalism published online 11 August 2014 DOI: 10.1177/1464884914541067

The online version of this article can be found at: http://jou.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/08/07/1464884914541067

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journalism can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jou.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jou.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Aug 11, 2014

What is This?

Downloaded fromDownloaded http://www.elearnica.ir from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 JOU0010.1177/1464884914541067JournalismPost research-article5410672014

Article

Journalism 20–1 Scientific objectivity in © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: journalism? How journalists sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1464884914541067 and academics define jou.sagepub.com objectivity, assess its attainability, and rate its desirability

Senja Post University of Koblenz-Landau, Germany

Abstract Journalism critics have repeatedly proposed that journalists adopt scientific standards of objectivity. A comparative survey of 134 German journalists (34%) and 163 academics (33%) from different subject areas was conducted to investigate to what degree scientific criteria of objectivity resonate in journalists’ attitudes toward and understandings of objectivity. Results show that journalists and academics equally think that objectivity is attainable and desirable. Yet members of both professions dealing with cultural or historical subjects consider it less desirable than members dealing with social or natural scientific subjects. Journalists and academics define objectivity in different terms. Journalists think objectivity demands ‘trying to let the facts speak for themselves’, and academics think it requires systematic methods and transparent accounts. In others words, respondents’ attitudes toward objectivity depend on the subjects they deal with, while their understandings of objectivity depend on their professional belonging.

Keywords Journalism studies, journalistic ethics, journalistic practice, objectivity in journalism, objectivity in science, science communication, sociology of knowledge, survey research

Corresponding author: Senja Post, Department of Communication Psychology, University of Koblenz-Landau, Landau D-76829, Germany. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 2 Journalism

Journalism and scientific objectivity Scientific objectivity has repeatedly been regarded as a model for journalists to follow. For the first time, such normative comparisons between journalists and scientists were prominent in the late 19th and early 20th centuries when scientists sought objectivity by observing and depicting the objects of their inquiries in a quasi-mechanical way (Daston and Galison, 2007: 115–190). Although the US press was still widely partisan before the 1920s (Schudson, 1978: 155–159; Streckfuss, 1990; Vos, 2012), influential publishers proposed that journalists follow the scientific ideal to give mechanical-like accounts of reality that were true to the given facts (Schiller, 1979: 49; Vos, 2012). When objectivity was codified in journalistic codes of ethics and handbooks in the 1920s (Schudson, 1978: 121–144, 2001; Streckfuss, 1990; Vos, 2012), many sources envisioned journalists working like scientists, ‘registering’ or ‘weighing’ (Vos, 2012: 444) the news (Schiller, 1979: 56; Schudson, 2001: 161–162; Streckfuss, 1990: 975). From the 1940s, US journalists increasingly criticized the ideal of factual objectivity as they found it more important to deliver interpretations of the facts they reported (Schudson, 1978: 134–143; Weaver and McCombs, 1980: 487–488). As a consequence, journalism critics again proposed scientists as a model for journalists. By that time, the scientific concept of objectivity had changed. Karl Popper (1965 [1959]: 93–111) had argued influentially that investigators could neither observe nor depict any ‘given’ facts because human observations and their representations were necessarily guided by pre- conceptions of reality. Instead, Popper (1965 [1959]: 31–34) suggested checking whether investigators’ presuppositions corresponded with reality. Following this, it became crucial for scientists to disclose their methods so that everybody could reproduce their tests of hypotheses under the same or similar conditions (Popper (1965 [1959]: 31–34). When journalists increasingly interpreted the facts they reported, journalism critics pointed out that journalists generalize facts or connect them without checking the validity of their assertions. Proposing that journalists put their assertions on representative empirical bases, test the validity of their claims in systematic ways (Dennis, 1990; Donsbach, 2004: 151–152; Meyer, 1973: 8; Tankard, 1976: 60–71), and make their methods transparent (e.g. Kovach and Rosenstiel, 2007: 69), they drew on the new scientific standards of objectivity. Proposing that journalists use scientific criteria of objectivity, critics imply that such criteria would enhance the quality of journalistic reporting. They argue that, like scientists, journalists seek to describe and explain reality and can thus borrow from the standards and practices scientists have developed over centuries. Although critics have repeatedly put forth these ideas, little is known about how they resonate in practicing journalists’ attitudes toward and understandings of objectivity. Do journalists accept scientific criteria of objectivity and do they think that objectivity is appropriate for their goals? Is the scientific concept of objectivity adequate to the job journalists aim to ful- fill? The goal of this article is to shed light on these knowledge gaps for the case of German journalists and academics. It seeks to investigate journalists’ and academics’ attitudes toward and understandings of objectivity and to answer to what degree their concepts of objectivity converge. The goal is, essentially, to test whether the proposition that journalists use scientific criteria of objectivity is practical or reasonable with respect

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 3 to journalists’ goals and working conditions. In the following, the literature will be reviewed to answer what is known about (1) the acceptance of objectivity among scientists and German journalists and (2) journalists’ and academics’ understandings of objectivity. Based on this, the research questions of this study will be derived.

Literature review Acceptance of objectivity The pursuit of objectivity implies that it is attainable and desirable. Yet these assumptions are debated. Some challenge the idea of an external reality existing independently of the subjects perceiving and describing it. In their view, scientific facts and journalistic information cannot be objective as they do not reflect reality but the social and cognitive conditions underlying them (for science: for example, Kuhn, 1967; Polanyi, 1964 [1946]; for journalism: for example, Tuchman, 1978; Fishman, 1978; Glasser, 1984; Merrill, 1990). Others question that objectivity is desirable because it reinforces social structures by favoring established modes of thinking or inhibits specific insights or conclusions (for science: for example, Code, 1991: 323–324; for journalism: cf. Schudson, 1978: 160; Glasser, 1984; McQuail, 1992: 188; Lichtenberg, 2000: 249). This is why some claim that scientists or journalists rather ought to empathize with people (cf. Merton, 1972; Bell, 1998), partici- pate in social debates, or criticize social grievances (for science: for example, Habermas, 1979; for journalism: Glasser, 1984) than seek to be objective. Others yet defend objectivity. Although many concede that it may not be fully attainable, they suggest pursuing it as a ‘regulative idea’ (for science: Popper, 1965 [1959]: 89; for journalism: Lichtenberg, 2000: 249). They argue that even if the truth may not be captured perfectly, it can still be approximated. In this view, it is possible to distinguish more from less appropriate accounts of reality (Lichtenberg, 2000: 241; Popper, 1965 [1959]: 49–50). While there is no empirical data on how these epistemic positions are distributed among practicing academics, several surveys indicate that most journalists in Germany and the United States commit themselves to objectivity. In a survey of 50 leading editors at 50 US newspapers in the 1970s, Boyer (1981) found that about two-thirds believed objectivity was more or less attainable. More than 10 years later, Donsbach and Klett (1993) showed that almost all US journalists as well as four in five German journalists believed that objectivity was ‘very important’. In addition, findings on their self-image show that most German journalists consider themselves ‘a neutral reporter of events’ (Köcher, 1986: 54–55; Schönbach et al., 1998: 222–224). Most of them want to ‘get information to the public neutrally and precisely’ and to ‘present reality as it is’ (Weischenberg et al., 1998: 242–246, 2006: 279). Some journalists, however, seem to be skeptical about objectivity. In the 1970s, about one-third of the leading editors at 50 leading US newspapers thought that ‘objectivity is in a pure sense unattainable – a myth’ and that ‘the obsession with objectivity is itself a distortion of reality’ (Boyer, 1981). There are no similar data on German journalists. Yet data on their self-image show that most German journalists consider themselves ‘a spokesperson for the underdog’ (Köcher, 1986: 55; Schönbach et al., 1998: 223; Weischenberg et al., 1998: 242–246) although this share seems to have decreased recently

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 4 Journalism

(Weischenberg et al., 2006: 279). In addition, most journalists aim at ‘taking up grievances’ (Köcher, 1986: 55; Schönbach et al., 1998: 223) or want to ‘criticize bad states of affairs’ (Weischenberg et al., 1998: 242–246, 2006: 279). Thus, presumptively, many journalists do not consider objectivity an exclusive goal but one that may collide with alternative ideals in day-to-day practice.

Criteria of objectivity Telling from ethical and methodological guidelines, one can assume that the commonly accepted scientific meaning of objectivity corresponds to Popper’s theory of knowledge, his critical rationalism. One of its premises is the methodological, inter-subjective test of hypotheses (Anderson, 2008: 3351). Many authors agree that in journalism, objectivity requires factuality and accuracy (Merrill, 1990; Westerstahl, 1983: 406; cp. McQuail, 1992: 185). But while some apply the need for accuracy to factual statements (cf. Ekstrom, 2002), some extend it to relational statements (Meyer, 1973; Tankard, 1976). They argue that as journalists frequently start their investigations with concrete assumptions (Stocking and LaMarca, 1990), they should test them in a scientific fashion (Dennis, 1990; Donsbach, 2004: 151–152; Meyer, 1973: 8; Tankard, 1976: 60–71). Some authors have proposed that journalists also base their presentation of sources’ views on scientific methods by selecting them in proportion to their distribution in society (Meyer, 1973: 115–245; Rothman and Lichter, 1987; Snyderman and Rothman, 1990; Tankard, 1976: 53–54; Weaver and McCombs, 1980: 489–490). Yet some authors have pointed at differing working conditions. They argue that scientists deal with repetitive, foreseeable occurrences aiming at discovering regularities, whereas journalists deal with singular occurrences aiming at giving timely cross-cut sections of day-to-day affairs (Lippmann, 1997 [1922]: 215–217; Park, 1940). These differences raise doubts about the practicability of scientific criteria of objectivity in journalism – especially about journalists’ capabilities to test assumptions. Some sources suggest indeed that, with respect to objectivity, journalists are more concerned about the truth of their facts than about the validity of their assumptions (cf. Tankard, 1976; Merrill, 1990; Ekstrom, 2002). Little support for the scientific criteria of objectivity was also found in a survey of 175 German newspaper editors in the early 2000s. Only 48 percent of them thought objectivity required that ‘the content of a news report must be considered true by several observers of the reported events’ (Knirsch, 2005: 72–76). Instead, almost all agreed that an objective ‘news report contains all relevant information’ and that ‘reports on controversies put equal weight on the views of both sides’ (Knirsch, 2005: 72–76). Wide support for the latter had already been documented in the 1990s. At that time, a great majority of the German journalists also believed that objectivity required going ‘beyond the statements of the contending sides to the hard facts of a political dispute’ (Donsbach and Klett, 1993: 65).

Assumptions and research questions The goal of this article is to determine journalists’ and academics’ attitudes toward and understandings of objectivity. Specifically, it seeks to answer three research questions:

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 5

1. To what degree do academics and journalists consider objectivity attainable?

As several authors have pointed out, academics and journalists work in different conditions and may thus consider objectivity attainable to different degrees. Scientists assert a high degree of control over the objects of their inquiry as they deal with repetitive incidents. In experimental research, they even induce certain incidents to occur. For these reasons, they can determine causal relationships relatively unambiguously. Journalists, as well as scholars from the humanities, by contrast, have no control over the occurrence they investigate. They mostly deal with singular, unique incidents. Most often, they reconstruct certain developments or occurrences from hindsight. This is why they can determine causal relationships only by making occurrences and the developments that led to them plausible. For these reasons one, can assume that

a. Academics are more convinced that objectivity is attainable than journalists and that b. Professionals dealing with (natural) scientific phenomena are more convinced that objectivity is attainable than professionals dealing with social phenomena, who, in turn, are more convinced that objectivity is attainable than professionals dealing with historical or cultural phenomena.

Journalists and academics may think that objectivity is more or less attainable but still think that it is undesirable. This study seeks to clarify.

2. To what degree do academics and journalists consider objectivity an appropriate goal?

As epistemological discussions of objectivity have shown, the pursuit of objectivity may have certain advantages and disadvantages, depending on the subject and purpose of an inquiry. As was argued, the strength of objectivity lies in its potential to reveal inter- subjective, that is, more or less indisputable aspects of reality. Its limitation is a consequence of this. The realm of objective knowledge excludes subjective insights such as those that follow from empathy or value judgments. It seems plausible that the limitations of objectivity are particularly relevant when dealing with issues in a social context, which is why it is assumed that

a. Academics consider the advantages of objectivity more relevant than journalists, while journalists consider the limitations of objectivity more relevant than academics and that b. Professionals dealing with natural (scientific) phenomena consider the advantages of objectivity more relevant and its limitations less relevant than professionals dealing with social or cultural subjects.

In the course of the 20th century, philosophers of knowledge have proposed different criteria of objectivity. Around 1900, philosophers believed that objectivity was about determining the given facts as they were. Karl Popper later argued that objectivity was

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 6 Journalism about testing one’s assumptions in a way that everybody can reproduce the outcome under the same or similar conditions. Although historical studies show that journalists have adopted the scientific ideal of factual objectivity in the early 20th century, survey results suggest that they have not adopted the two requirements of objectivity that follow from Popper’s philosophy of knowledge – systematic and transparent methods that allow everybody to reproduce the results in question. This study asks the following question:

3. How do journalists and academics think they can attain objectivity?

In particular, it is assumed that

a. Journalists think more than academics that objectivity is about being exact about the facts, while b. Academics think more than journalists that objectivity is about applying systematic methods and making them transparent.

Method The inquiry is based on a comparative survey of journalists and academics fulfilling two criteria. First, subjects with a high norm-awareness were sought. They were assumed to work in leading positions in the most acknowledged and influential newsrooms or academic institutes. Journalists were selected from the most widely circulated German daily newspapers (>100,000). Academics were selected from the most renowned research departments according to the German university ranking. The selection of journalists was restricted to newspapers to ensure that the members of both professions present their findings primarily in print. Second, participants dealing with comparable subjects were sought, that is, cultural, natural, and social phenomena. Journalists were recruited from the arts and culture, the science, politics, and economics sections. Academics were selected from the humanities, the natural sciences, and social sciences sections. The subjects were selected in two steps. First, the newspapers and academic departments were identified. Based on a list compiling the circulations of all German newspapers (Schütz, 2009), 63 dailies were selected. Based on the German university ranking, the leading departments of classical subjects within each subject area were identified.1 Second, the subjects were recruited. The journalists were selected propor- tionally to the newspapers’ circulations. For each newsroom and section, they were drawn randomly from a compilation of the leading German editors (Zimpel, 2010). The academics were selected randomly from the websites of the most renowned academic institutes. Only full professors were recruited. Overall, 404 journalists were selected evenly from the science, politics, economics, and culture sections, and 500 academics were selected, 150 each from the natural sciences and humanities and 200 from the social sciences.2 In February 2011, the journalists and academics were sent a standardized paper-and- pencil questionnaire. After 1 month each, they were sent two more requests to partici- pate. The questionnaire contained questions on the job conditions, the professional goals, objectivity, and other professional norms (e.g. accuracy). For both professions,

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 7 the questionnaires were nearly identical. They differed only in naming different professions (e.g. journalism vs science) and using different job-related terms (e.g. information vs data). Of the 404 journalists addressed, 14 were ineligible. Of the 390 eligible ones, 134 (34%) participated. And 127 journalists were sent a postcard that was attached to the questionnaire to confirm their participation. The return rate was highest among political editors (44%), second among art/culture (34%) and economics editors (31%), and weakest among science editors (26%). Of the 500 academics contacted, three were ineligible. Of the 497 eligible ones, 163 (33%) participated and 147 confirmed their participation. The return rate was highest among natural scientists (37%), second among scholars from the humanities (32%), and weakest among social scientists (26%). On average, the participating journalists are 47 years old. In all, 72 percent are male and 27 percent female.3 The academics have an average age of 51 years; 74 percent of them are male and 25 percent are female. In the sample, the journalists and academics from different subfields are nearly evenly distributed. Of the participating journalists, 19 percent are from the science, 33 percent from the politics, 23 percent from the economics, and 25 percent from the culture sections. Thus, the science editors are slightly underrepresented, and the politics editors slightly overrepresented. Of the academics, 34 percent work in the natural sciences, 32 percent in the social sciences, and 29 percent in the humanities. In all, 4 percent did not mention their area of research. In the following, the views of journalists and academics will be contrasted in mean comparisons. In addition, professionals dealing with comparable subjects will be compared, that is, science editors will be contrasted with natural scientists, politics and economics editors with social scientists, and culture editors with scholars from the humanities.

Results Attainability of objectivity It was assumed that academics are more convinced than journalists that objectivity is attainable. In order to test this, respondents were asked to assess the possibilities of being objective in several aspects of their work.4 The question was, ‘How objective can a journalist in your editorial section (academic in you subject) be in the following steps of their work?’ Respondents were asked to rate each work step on a 5-point scale from −2 (‘can impossibly be objective’) to +2 (‘can totally be objective’). When ‘collecting singular facts’, journalists and academics equally think that objectivity is attainable (Table 1). Without any significant difference, the members of both professions are a bit more skeptical about being objective when ‘inferring states of affairs from singular facts’. Asked about the possibility of being objective when ‘determining the causes’ or ‘assessing the consequences’ of something, their answers differ. As assumed, journalists have more doubts about the feasibility of objectivity when determining causes and consequences than academics.5 It was further assumed that professionals dealing with natural scientific subjects are more convinced that objectivity is attainable than professionals dealing with social or

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 8 Journalism 5; 5; 5; 5;

= = = =

.005 .005 3.678; df 4.525; df 1.893; df 0.653; df

< < = = = =

F p F p F ns F ns One-factor ANOVA n a 5-point scale 0.559 (0.934) 1.001 (0.857) 0.930 (0.909) 1.43 (0.911) 0.184 (1.062) 0.622 (0.861) 0.658 (0.966) 1.32 (0.809) Humanities Total 0.796 (0.935) 1.10 (0.963) 1.06 (0.845) 1.43 (0.842) Social sciences 0.615 (0.771) 1.19 (0.658) 1.04 (0.885) 1.50 (1.019) Natural sciences Academics from the … 0.294 (1.004) 0.667 (0.876) 0.712 (0.990) 1.53 (0.771) Total 0.310 (0.891) 0.679 (0.863) 0.778 (0.801) 1.45 (0.686) Arts/ culture Mean ratings of respondents (standard deviations) 0.164 (1.080) 0.595 (0.843) 0.689 (1.006) 1.57 (0.701) economy 0.667 (0.817) 0.875 (0.992) 0.708 (1.160) 1.52 (1.046) Journalists writing about … Science Politics/

Practicability of objectivity in several steps journalists’ and scientists’ work.

… assessing the consequences of events or developments?’ … determining the causes of some state of affairs?’ … inferring states of affairs from singular facts?’ … collecting singular facts?’ ‘How objective can a journalist in your section (an academic in your subject) be when Bases: 24 journalists from the science, 73–75 politics/economics, and 26–28 arts/culture sections; 52 natural scientists, 47–49 social scientists, and 32–37 scholars from the humanities – all of whom consider objectivity more or less attainable worthwhile from −2 (‘one cannot possibly be objective’) to +2 can totally objective’). Question: ‘How objective can a journalist in your section (academic subject) be the following work steps?’ Ratings o Table 1.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 9 cultural subjects. The results partly confirm this. Professionals dealing with natural scientific subjects are more convinced that objectivity is possible when determining causes and consequences than professionals dealing with cultural subjects. But there is a remarkable contrast between academics and editors dealing with social subjects. Social scientists are almost as convinced that causes and effects can be determined objectively as natural scientists. Politics and economics editors, by contrast, doubt that causes and consequences can be determined objectively almost as much as culture editors. This difference may be due to different working conditions. Social scientists deal with recurring incidents. For this reason, they may be able to control the subjects of their investigation and determine causes and consequences relatively unambiguously. Political and economics editors, by contrast, usually deal with unique occurrences and can often only speculate about causal relationships in hindsight. This may explain their different degrees of skepticism toward the possibilities to be objective when determining causes and consequences.

Desirability of objectivity It was assumed that academics consider the advantages of objectivity more and the limitations of objectivity less relevant than journalists. To test this, they were asked, ‘One can argue for or against objectivity for several reason. How relevant are the following reasons for your work?’ Respondents were asked to rate two arguments for and three arguments against objectivity on a scale from −2 (‘irrelevant for my work’) to +2 (‘relevant for my work’). The journalists and academics are about equally convinced that the pursuit of objectivity has epistemic advantages. They think that by seeking objectivity, ‘one has a good chance of giving a truthful account of particular states of affairs and that ‘one obtains results one can rely on’ (Table 2). As assumed, journalists and academics dealing with cultural phenomena consider these arguments less relevant than professionals dealing with natural or social phenomena. The journalists and academics consider the limitations of objectivity similarly irrelevant. Academics think a little more than journalists that it is irrelevant that the pursuit of objectivity makes it difficult to ‘empathize with those affected by human or social problems’.6 They equally think that it is irrelevant that ‘striving for objectivity, one easily overlooks deeper issues behind the facts’ and makes it impossible ‘to declare oneself against objectionable views’. As assumed, there are differences between professionals dealing with different subjects. Professionals who deal with cultural phenomena consider it more relevant than professionals who deal with social or natural scientific phenomena that objectivity does not allow them to go beyond the facts or to voice their opinions against objectionable views. When it comes to the lack of empathy, there is an unexpected difference between natural scientists and science journalists. Natural scientists consider the lack of empathy almost completely irrelevant, whereas the science journalists think much less so. This may be due to the fact that in their research, natural scientists are totally detached from social or individual human problems. Science journalists, by contrast, report natural scientific findings and presumably seek to point out their social significance – for example, for the environment and medical cures.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 10 Journalism - .001 .001 .001 .005 .001

< < < < <

5; p 5; p 5; p 5; p 5; p

4.682; 6.066; 9.187; 4.154; 4.956;

= = = = =

One-factor ANOVA F df F df F df F df F df ons for you work?’ Total 1.16 (0.949) 0.820 (1.159) –0.980 (1.283) –0.767 (1.255) –1.04 (1.135) Humanities 0.750 (1.149) 0.262 (1.270) 0.310 (1.473) –0.415 (1.360) –0.80 (1.203) Social sciences 1.39 (0.640) 2.00 (1.021) –0.878 (1.201) –0.612 (1.204) –1.00 (1.123) Academics from the … Natural sciences 1.34 (0.783) 1.19 (0.973) –1.56 (0.898) –1.18 (1.107) –1.24 (1.069) Total 1.19 (0.867) 0.769 (1.016) –0.534 (1.152) –0.850 (1.099) –0.578 (1.326) Arts/ culture 0.813 (1.120) 0.303 (1.104) –0.364 (1.319) –0.375 (1.338) 0.062 (1.435) Mean ratings of respondents (standard deviations) economy 1.34 (0.708) 0.877 (0.957) –0.760 (1.025) –1.08 (0.868) –0.836 (1.118)

Science Politics / Journalists writing about … 1.23 (0.813) 1.08 (0.881) –0.014 (1.147) –0.783 (1.204) –0.652 (1.526) Relevance of arguments for and against objectivity.

Bases : 22–24 journalists from the science, 72–74 politics/economics, and 32–33 culture/arts sections; 51–55 natural scien tists, 47–49 social scientists, and 40–42 scholars form the humanities. Ratings on a 5-point scale from −2 (‘irrelevant for my work’) to +2 (‘relevant work’). Question: ‘There are a number of reasons arguing for or against the pursuit objectivity. How relevant following reas Table 2.

‘Trying to be objective, one has a good chance of giving truthful accounts of particular states affairs.’ ‘Pursuing objectivity, one obtains results one can rely on.’ ‘Keeping objective distance, it is hard to empathize with those affected by human or social problems.’ ‘Seeking objectivity, one easily overlooks deeper issues behind the facts.’ ‘Always seeking objectivity, one cannot declare oneself against objectionable views.’

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 11 .05 .001 .001

a < < <

5; p 5; p 5; p

3.057; 10.048; 7.123;

= = =

One-factor. ANOVA df F df F F df pply at all’) to 2 Total 1.61 (0.817) 1.29 (1.005) 0.442 (1.244) Humanities 1.54 (0.897) 1.16 (0.973) 0.158 (1.285) Social Science 1.55 (0.914) 1.49 (0.938) 0.333 (1.243) Academics from … Natural Science 1.76 (0.612) 1.25 (1.022) 0.873 (1.019) Total 1.25 (0.896) 0.488 (0.983) 1.10 (0.877) Arts/ culture 1.28 (0.702) 0.621 (0.979) 0.966 (0.944) Mean ratings (standard deviations) economy 1.25 (0.931) 0.467 (1.057) 1.12 (0.821) Journalists writing about … Science Politics/ 1.21 (1.021) 0.391 (0.722) 1.21 (0.977) Criteria of objectivity.

… present findings in a way that others can understand how they were obtained.’ Bases: 22–24 science editors, 74–75 politics/economics, and 28 culture arts editors; 54–55 natural scientists, 48–49 social 36–39 scholars from the humanities, all surveyed in 2011. Question: ‘And, in your opinion, what does one have to do be objective?’ Ratings on a 5-point scale from −2 (‘does not Table 3. (‘totally applies’). Selected rules. ‘One needs to … … consistently follow a systematic method in an investigation.’ … try to let the facts speak for themselves.’

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 12 Journalism

Criteria of objectivity According to the premises of Popper’s critical rationalism, objectivity is a matter of method demanding that investigators test their assumptions in a systematic and transparent way. According to a more fact-centered view, it is a matter of attitude demanding that investigators register the supposedly ‘given’ facts. It was assumed that academics consider systematic and transparent methods more a requirement of objectivity than journalists. Furthermore, it was assumed that journalists accept transmitting the mere facts more a requirement of objectivity than academics. In order to test this they were asked, ‘What does one have to do to be objective?’ The journalists and academics were asked to rate to what degree certain practical rules apply to their understandings of objectivity on a 5-point scale from −2 (‘does not apply at all’) to +2 (‘totally applies’). Scientists and scholars typically agree with the critical rational criteria of objectivity, while journalists have a rather fact-centered definition of it. There is almost no variation within the two professional groups. Academics consider the demands that ‘one needs to present findings in a way that others can understand how they were obtained’ and that ‘one needs to follow a systematic method consistently in an investigation’, much more in line with objectivity than journalists (Table 3).7 Journalists, by contrast, think much more than academics that one must ‘try to let the facts speak for themselves’ to be objective.8

Summary Journalists’ and academics’ understandings of objectivity largely depend on their profession. Irrespective of the subjects they deal with, journalists consider objectivity a matter of getting the facts rights, while academics consider it a matter of applying systematic methods and making them transparent. Journalists’ and academics’ attitudes toward objectivity, by contrast, largely depend on the subjects they deal with. To summarize their attitudes toward objectivity, three indices were calculated.9 The belief in the attainability of objectivity when making inferences includes respondents’ ratings of the feasibility of objectivity when drawing conclusions, determining causes, and assessing consequences. With a high internal consistency (Cronbach’s ( = .744) its values range between (6 and +6. Higher values indicate that respondents consider objectivity feasible. As assumed, academics (x = 2.48) think a little more than journalists (.x =173) that objective inferences are feasible.10 Furthermore, as assumed, professionals dealing with natural scientific phenomena (academics: x = 2.85 ; journalists: x = 2.25 ) are more convinced that objective inferences are possible than professionals dealing with cultural phenomena (academics: x =143. ; journalists: x = 2.04 ). There is a striking contrast, however, between journalists and academics dealing with social subjects. Among the academics, the social scientists are most convinced that objective inferences are feasible (.x = 2 94) . Among the journalists, the politics and economics editors are least convinced that objective inferences are feasible (.x =145) . As was presumed before, the different levels of control social scientists and journalists from the economics or politics section have of the objects of their inquiries may be an explanation for this contrast.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 13

The perceived relevance of objectivity as a means to ensure reliability includes respondents’ ratings of the arguments that the pursuit of objectivity facilitates reliable and truthful claims. With a sufficient internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .674), its values range between −4 and +4. High values indicate that respondents consider it relevant. Academics (.x =197) and journalists (.x =195) perceive objectivity as a means to ensure reliability equally relevant. As assumed, professionals dealing with natural scientific subjects consider it most relevant (academics: x = 2.53 ; journalists: x = 2.36 ), followed by professionals dealing with social subjects (academics: x = 2.39 ; journalists: x = 2.21 ), followed by professionals dealing with cultural subjects (academics: x = 0.98 ; journalists: x =106. ). To what degree respondents appreciate objectivity as a means to ensure reliability thus depends on the subjects they deal with and not on their professional belongings. The results of a two-factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) make this clear (factor professional belonging: F = 0.787,; not significant (ns); factor 2 subjects area: F = 10.579; p < .001; and ηpart = .144).11 The perceived relevance of objectivity limiting important insights includes respondents’ ratings of the arguments that the pursuit of objectivity inhibits empathy, disallows opinioned claims, and conceals what goes on behind the facts. With a sufficient internal consistency (Cronbach’s α= .668), its values range between −6 and +6. High values indicate that respondents consider the limitations of objectivity relevant. As assumed, journalists consider them more relevant (.x =−191) than academics (.x =−2 84) .12 In both groups, professionals dealing with culture consider the shortcomings of objectivity most relevant (academics: x =−1.60 ; journalists: x = 0.63 ). Among the academics, the natural scientists consider the shortcomings of objectivity least (.x =−4 04) , the social scientists more relevant (.x =−257) . Among the journalists, the politics and economics editors consider the shortcomings of objectivity least (.x =−2 62) , the science editors more relevant (.x =−1 50) . As mentioned, the striking contrast between the natural scientists and the science editors may be due to the fact that natural scientists are not concerned with social issues, while science editors try to give natural scientific findings a social meaning. Journalists’ and academics’ understandings of and attitudes toward objectivity can be clearly distinguished by two criteria. Figure 1 illustrates this. Their understandings of objectivity largely depend on their profession. Regardless of their subject areas, academics agree that objectivity requires systematic methods, while the journalists from all editorial sections have more doubts about that. Their attitudes toward objectivity, by contrast, largely depend on the subjects they deal with. Regardless of their profession, professionals dealing with cultural phenomena appreciate the strength of objectivity – its function as a means to ensure reliability – least. Those dealing with social phenomena appreciate the strength of objectivity more and those dealing with natural scientific subjects appreciate it most.

Discussion Critics of journalism have repeatedly proposed that journalists borrow from the scientific concept of objectivity. Since the 1970s, they have particularly suggested that, just like scientists, journalists use systematic methods and make them transparent to ensure the

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 14 Journalism

2 BBelief that oobjectivity requires ssystematicy methods Social scientists

Scholars Academics

Natural scientists 1 Culture editors Politics / Economics editors

Journalists Science editors

0 –1 001234 Relevance of objectivity ensuring reliabilty

–1

Figure 1. Journalists’ and academics’ belief that objectivity requires systematic methods and attitude toward objectivity as a means to ensure reliability. Bases – Acceptance of objectivity requiring systematic methods: 55 natural scientists, 49 social scientists, and 38 scholars from the humanities; 23 science editors, 75 politics/economics editors, and 29 culture editors. Atti- tude toward objectivity as a means to ensure reliability: 53 natural scientists, 49 social scientists, and 40 scholars from the humanities; 22 science editors, 73 politics/economics editors, and 32 culture editors. reliability of their accounts. Yet these ideas resonate in journalists’ understandings of objectivity only weakly. Journalists and academics appreciate objectivity to a similar degree. How far they acknowledge the strength or regret the limitations of objectivity is much less a question of their profession than of the subjects they deal with. It shows that while there may be a significant body of literature questioning the sense of objectivity in journalism (e.g. Glasser, 1984; Merrill, 1990), such arguments are not relevant to practicing journalists. As previous studies have suggested (Donsbach and Klett 1993; Knirsch, 2005), journalists do not accept the scientific criteria of objectivity. While academics think objectivity requires systematic and transparent methods, journalists think it requires ‘letting the facts speak for themselves’. Their different understandings of objectivity may be related to their beliefs in the attainability of objectivity. Like academics, journalists are rather optimistic about being objective when reporting facts. Yet journalists, particularly politics and economics editors, are more skeptical than academics when making causal inferences from singular facts. Journalists’ fact-centered view of objectivity may result from their working conditions. As Lippmann (1997) and Park (1940) have pointed out early on, journalists and academics work in different conditions. Compared with scientists, journalists have little control over the subjects they investigate and thus limited capabilities to detect causal

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 15 relationships in an unambiguous way. This may not only cause journalists to be skeptical about the attainability of objectivity when making inferences, but their pessimism may also function as an excuse for not being objective or reliable when reporting the causes and consequences of events or developments. In its extreme, this may result in an anything-goes attitude when making causal inferences. When there is no standard of objectivity, there is no point of reference to criticize journalists’ causal inferences. The purpose of critics proposing that journalists adopt scientific criteria of objectivity was to provide a standard against which journalistic accounts could be criticized and held accountable for (Donsbach, 2004). Although journalists appreciate the strength of objectivity as much as academics, they lack a practicable criterion of objectivity when making causal inferences. Despite the repeated proposition that journalists adopt scientific standards of objectivity, journalists refuse to do so. The question remains what kinds of standards journalists could adopt to enhance their optimism about objectivity. While the scientific criteria of objectivity, particularly the testing of hypotheses, may be impractical in journalism, one possibility would be to cultivate a general ethos of objectivity in journalism by encouraging discussions of objectivity. Such discussions could include references to the potential of objectivity in science as well as its strength and limitations in journalism. An awareness of objectivity and the willingness to aspire to objectivity would presumably affect journalists’ news reporting as various works indicate. For instance, in a survey of British and German journalists, Köcher (1986: 60) found that journalists’ general commitment to impartiality strengthens their inclination to report fully and neutrally about a political party. A more recent survey of German newspaper journalists showed that journalists’ definitions of objectivity correlate with their criticism toward flaws: The more they think objectivity requires factuality, the more they criticize exaggerations; the more they think it requires balance, the more they criticize one-sided accounts (Knirsch, 2005: 123–125). Efforts should be made in future research to find out more about the practical effects of objectivity on journalistic news accounts. This would help to specify and cultivate a journalistic understanding of objectivity that is practical and effective at the same time.

Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes 1. Natural Sciences: biology, chemistry, geology, and physics. Social sciences: economics, political sciences, psychology, and sociology. Humanities: anthropology, history, musicol- ogy, and philology. 2. Initially, the social scientists should have been subdivided into groups working with qualitative or quantitative methods. As only 12% (n = 20) of the participating social scientists worked ‘primarily with qualitative methods’, they will not be divided here. 3. The rest did not tell. 4. The questions were asked in German and were translated into English by the author (Appendix).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 16 Journalism

5. For determining the causes, the difference is significant (T-test for inhomogeneous variances, with T = 3.291; df = 259.171; and p < .05). For assessing the consequences, the difference is significant (T-test for homogenous variances, with T = 2.254; df = 267; and p < .05). 6. The difference is significant (T-test for inhomogeneous variances, with T = 3.05; df = 280; and p < .005). 7. The differences are significant (T-tests). Demand for transparency: T = 3.345; df = 258.637; and p < .005, with inhomogeneous variances; demand that investigations must follow a systematic method: T = 6.499; df = 270; and p < .001, with homogeneous variances. 8. The difference is significant (T-tests): T = −5.033; df = 260.669; and p < .001, with inhomogeneous variances. 9. A factor analysis of all the items on the attainability of objectivity as well as on the relevance of the advantages and limitations of objectivity presented yielded three factors: The belief in the attainability of objectivity including respondents ratings of the possibility to be objective when making inferences from facts (.743), when determining the causes (.767), and assessing the consequences (.869) of events or developments; the perceived relevance of objectivity as a means to make reliable claims including respondents ratings of the relevance of objectivity as a means to ensure reliable claims (.857) and truthful accounts (.755); and the perceived relevance of the limitations of objectivity including respondents ratings of the relevance of objectivity inhibiting empathy (.753), speaking out against objectionable views (.676), and going beyond the mere facts (.794). The factor analysis explains 64 percent of the total variance. 10. The difference is significant (T-test for homogeneous variances, with T = 2.0; df = 263; and p < .01). 11. Analyses of variance (ANOVAs) require, among others, that the variances of the individual variables are homogenous across the groups. For this variable, this condition is not fulfilled. The demand of homogeneity can be neglected, however, if the size of the groups analyzed is equal (Bortz, 2005: 286–287). For this reason, a random sample of the respondents from each group (i.e. journalists from the science section; journalists from the politics or economics section; journalists from the arts and culture sections; natural scientists, social scientists, and scholars from the humanities) was drawn to assimilate the group sizes. This ANOVA is hence based on 22 randomly selected subjects in each group. 12. The difference is significant (T-test for homogeneous variances, with T = 2.698; df = 266; and p < .01).

References Anderson JA (2008) Objectivity in science. In: Donsbach W (ed.) The International Encyclopedia of Communication. Boston, MA: Blackwell, pp. 3351–3354. Bell M (1998) The truth is our currency. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 3(1): 102–109. Bortz J (2005) Statistik für Sozial- und Humanwissenschaftler. Berlin: Springer. Boyer JH (1981) How editors view objectivity. Journalism Quarterly 58(1): 24–28. Code L (1991) What Can She Know? Feminist Theory and the Construction of Knowledge. Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press. Daston L and Galison P (2007) Objectivity. New York and Cambridge, MA: Zone Books. Dennis EE (1990) Objectivity is possible. In: Dennis EE and Merrill JC (eds) Media Debates: Issues in Mass Communication. New York: Longman, pp. 116–122. Donsbach W (2004) Psychology of news decisions: Factors behind journalists’ professional behavior. Journalism 5(2): 131–157. Donsbach W and Klett B (1993) Subjective objectivity. How journalists in four countries define a key term of their profession. International Communication Gazette 51(1): 53–83.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 17

Ekstrom M (2002) Epistemologies of TV journalism: A theoretical framework. Journalism 3(3): 259–282. Fishman M (1978) Crimes waves as ideology. Social Problems 25(5): 531–543. Glasser TJ (1984) Objectivity precludes responsibility. The Quill 72(2): 13–16. Habermas J (1979) Erkenntnis und Interesse. In: Albert H and Topitsch E (eds) Werturteilsstreit. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, pp. 334–352. Knirsch K (2005) Zweck und Mittel im Journalismus. Warum Journalisten die Wirklichkeit gele- gentlich anders darstellen als sie sie sehen und wie sie mit den Folgen umgehen. Unpublished Dissertation, Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz. Köcher R (1986) Bloodhounds or missionaries: Role definitions of German and British journalists. European Journal of Communication 1(1): 43–64. Kovach B and Rosenstiel T (2007) The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. New York: Three Rivers Press. Kuhn TS (1967) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Lichtenberg J (2000) In defense of objectivity revisited. In: Curran J and Gurevitch M (eds) Mass Media and Society. London and New York: Arnold, pp. 238–254. Lippmann W (1997 [1922]) Public Opinion. New York: Free Press. McQuail D (1992) Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London and Newbury Park, CA: SAGE. Merrill JC (1990) Objectivity is not possible. In: Dennis EE and Merrill JC (eds) Media Debates: Issues in Mass Communication. New York: Longman, pp. 110–115. Merton RK (1972) Insiders and outsiders: A chapter in the sociology of knowledge. American Journal of Sociology 78(1): 9–47. Meyer P (1973) Precision Journalism: A Reporter’s Introduction to Social Science Methods. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Park RE (1940) News as a form of knowledge: A chapter in the sociology of knowledge. American Journal of Sociology 45(5): 669–686. Polanyi M [1964 [1946]) Science, Faith and Society: A Searching Examination of the Meaning and Nature of Scientific Inquiry. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Popper KR (1965 [1959]) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson. Rothman S and Lichter SR (1987) Elite ideology and risk perception in nuclear energy policy. American Political Science Review 81(2): 383–404. Schiller D (1979) An historical approach to objectivity and professionalism in American news reporting. Journal of Communication 49(4): 46–57. Schönbach K, Stürzebecher D and Schneider B (1998) German journalists in the early 1990s: East and west. In: Weaver DH (ed.) The Global Journalist: News People around the World (IAMCR Book Series). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp. 213–227. Schudson M (1978) Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers. New York: Basic Books. Schudson M (2001) The objectivity norm in American journalism. Journalism 2(2): 149–170. Schütz WJ (2009) Deutsche Tagespresse 2008. Zeitungsangebot und Wettbewerbssituation im Zeitungsmarkt kaum verändert. Media Perspektiven 2009(9): 454–483. Snyderman M and Rothman S (1990) The IQ-Controversy, the Media and Public Policy. New Brunswick, NJ and London: Transaction Publishers. Stocking HS and LaMarca N (1990) How journalists describe their stories: Hypotheses and assumptions in newsmaking. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 67(2): 295–301. Streckfuss R (1990) Objectivity in journalism: A search and a reassessment. Journalism Quarterly 67(4): 973–983.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 18 Journalism

Tankard J (1976) Reporting and scientific method. In: McCombs M, Shaw DJ and Grey D (eds) Handbook of Reporting Methods. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, pp. 42–77. Tuchman G (1978) Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: Free Press. Vos TP (2012) ‘Homo Journalisticus’: Journalism education’s role in articulating the objectivity norm. Journalism 13(4): 435–449. Weaver DH and McCombs ME (1980) Journalism and social science: A new relationship? Public Opinion Quarterly 44(4): 477–494. Weischenberg S, Löffelholz M and Scholl A (1998) Journalism in Germany. In: Weaver DH (ed.) The Global Journalist. News People around the World (IAMCR Book Series). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, pp. 229–256. Weischenberg S, Malik M and Scholl A (2006) Die Souffleure der Mediengesellschaft: Report über die Journalisten in Deutschland. Konstanz: UVK Verlagsgesellschaft. Westerstahl J (1983) Objective news reporting: General premises. Communication Research 10(3): 403–424. Zimpel D (2010) Zimpel-Online. Wiesbaden: Verlag Dieter Zimpel.

Author biography Senja Post studied Communication Research and English at the Technische Universität Dresden, Boston University, and the Johannes Gutenberg-University Mainz. In 2007, she completed her Master’s Degree at the Johannes Gutenberg-University in Mainz with a thesis on German climate change communication. In 2012, she completed her PhD at the Johannes Gutenberg- University in Mainz with a doctoral thesis on journalists’ and scientists’ criteria of truth. Since 2013, she has worked at the University of Koblenz-Landau as a Post-Doc Researcher in Science Communication.

Appendix Translation Of Questions (German–English)

1. German: Wie objektiv kann man als Wissenschaftler in Ihrem Fach [Journalist in Ihrem Ressort] bei den folgenden Arbeitsschritten sein?

Wie objektiv kann man sein, Da kann man Da kann man wenn man… unmöglich objektiv durchaus objektiv sein sein … einzelne Fakten sammelt? ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ … Sachverhalte aus einzelnen ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Fakten ableitet? … Folgen von Ereignissen oder ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Entwicklungen abschätzt? … die Ursachen für einen ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Sachverhalt bestimmt?

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 Post 19

English: How objective ca an academic in your subject [journalist in your editorial section] be in the following work steps?

How objective can they be can impossibly be can totally be when… objective objective … collecting singular facts? ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ … infering states of affairs ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ from singular facts? … assessing the ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ consequences of events or developments? … determining the causes ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ of some state of affairs?

2. German: Und was muss man nach Ihrer Ansicht tun, um objektiv zu sein?

Man muss … trifft gar trifft voll zu nicht zu … sich in einer Untersuchung konsequent an eine ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ systematische Vorgehensweise halten. … Erkenntnisse so darstellen, dass andere ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ nachvollziehen können, wie sie ermittelt wurden. … versuchen, die Fakten für sich sprechen zu lassen. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

English: And, in your opinion, what does one have to do to be objective?

One needs to … does not apply totally applies at all … consistently follow a systematic method ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ in an investigation. … present findings in a way that others can ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ understand how they were obtained. … try to let the facts speak for themselves. ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 20 Journalism

3. German: Es gibt eine Reihe von Gründen, die für oder gegen das Streben nach Objektivität sprechen. Wie relevant sind die folgenden Gründe für Ihre Arbeit?

für meine Arbeit für meine Arbeit relevant irrelevant Wenn man objektive Distanz wahrt, kann ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ man sich schlecht in menschliche oder soziale Probleme einfühlen. Wenn man sich um Objektivität bemüht, ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ermittelt man Befunde, auf die man sich verlassen kann. Wenn man objektiv sein will, übersieht ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ man leicht tieferliegende Sachverhalte hinter den Fakten. Wenn man sich um Objektivität bemüht, ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ist man weniger angreifbar. Wenn man immer objektiv sein will, kann ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ man nicht Stellung gegen verwerfliche Ansichten beziehen. Wenn man sich um Objektivität bemüht, ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ hat man eine gute Chance, Sachverhalte wahrheitsgemäß zu ermitteln.

English: One can argue for or against objectivity for the following reasons. How relevant are the following reasons for you work?

irrelevant for relevant for my work my work Keeping objective distance, it is hard to empathize ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ with those affected by human or social problems. Pursing objectivity, one obtains results one can ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ rely on. Aspiring to be objective, one easily overlooks deeper ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ issues behind the facts. Always seeking objectivity, one cannot declare ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ oneself against objectionable views. Trying to be objective, one has a good chance of ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ giving truthful accounts of particular states of affairs.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Library - Periodicals Dept on October 5, 2014 JOU0010.1177/1464884914537778JournalismKoliska and Eckert 537778research-article2014

Article

Journalism 2015, Vol. 16(6) 750–767 Lost in a house of mirrors: © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: Journalists come to terms sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1464884914537778 with myth and reality in jou.sagepub.com The Newsroom

Michael Koliska* University of Maryland, USA

Stine Eckert* University of Maryland, USA

Abstract The first season of the television drama The Newsroom drew predominantly negative critiques by journalists. A textual analysis of The Newsroom’s first season and more than 90 articles in US news media about that season showed that journalists rejected the idealistic depiction of the journalism profession. Applying new institutional theory and the concepts of decoupling/coupling, we argue journalists criticized such a depiction because it clashed with their own institutional myth that is understood to legitimize journalism to the broader public. Journalists’ mostly negative responses were an attempt to rhetorically restore this myth by decoupling it from journalistic practice.

Keywords Coupling, decoupling, institutional myth, institutional theory, journalism criticism, professional role, television drama, The Newsroom

The Newsroom and its ‘press bonanza’ So when you ask what makes us the greatest country in the world, I don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. … We sure used to be… because we were informed. By great men, men who were revered. Will McAvoy, The Newsroom (first episode)

*Both the authors contributed equally to this research. Corresponding author: Michael Koliska, College of Journalism, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from http://www.elearnica.ir Koliska and Eckert 751

The Newsroom’s premiere on 24 June 2012 reached more than 3 million viewers and marked the third most-watched Home Box Office (HBO) premiere1 in recent years (De Moraes, 2012). Aaron Sorkin’s drama series, whose first 10 episodes ran until 26 August 2012, about a team of journalists producing a nightly newscast received two Golden Globe nominations, including for best drama series (Hollywood Foreign Press Association, 2013). Its second season continued the series’ success in 2013, drawing 2.2 million viewers for its premiere (Weprin, 2013). The Newsroom’s first season sparked ‘a press bonanza; there isn’t a serious press outlet that hasn’t covered it’, the Guardian wrote (Wolff, 2012). In more than 90 reviews, interviews, and articles covering its first season, US news media reported and opined on the show, many taking each episode apart on a weekly basis, resulting in mostly (very) negative or mixed comments. Notably, the fifth season of The Wire, which focused on criticizing a fictional Baltimore Sun, received similarly unfavorable reviews. The negative responses to the portrayal of journalists in The Wire and The Newsroom stand in stark contrast to the much more positive reception of previous TV shows centering on a newsroom. For example, Daniel (1996) found that Lou Grant, which aired from 1977 to 1982, was one of the ‘most-respected journalism series’ on TV (IJPC, 2010), winning an Emmy for depicting modern journalism realisti- cally, albeit sometimes sacrificing accuracy. Daniel showed that most journalists reviewed the drama favorably, with some writing obituaries when the show ended. Given the overwhelmingly negative responses by US news media about The Newsroom, our study asked: Why did journalists respond predominantly negatively to very idealistic and fictional narratives of their profession? We argue journalists’ critiques were overwhelmingly negative for two reasons. First, the show created tensions for ‘real’ journalists watching The Newsroom, which promoted institutional ideals or myths of journalism they perceived as unrealistic and impractical. The idealized depictions of news coverage of real events, which served as blueprints for the episodes, contributed to these tensions. Second, we propose that in the eyes of the journalists writing the reviews, the show delegitimized the profession by coupling day-to-day practices with an institutional myth of journalism. This coupling challenged journalists’ narratives of their profession and their professional identity.

The professional role of journalism: A contested narrative The rise of the Internet has created many opportunities for journalists but also has dealt serious blows to journalism. The closing and/or downsizing of many US newspapers are just one indication that the industry and the institution of journalism are suffering. Simultaneously, technological advances in producing and distributing news have affected journalists’ understanding of their profession. The already intangible definition of who is a journalist (Schudson and Anderson, 2009) has been further undermined by the fact that virtually everyone with a computer and Internet access can produce news (Bruns, 2006; Gillmor, 2004; Rosen, 2006). Participatory and citizen journalism are believed to further the democratic process (Benkler, 2006; Bruns, 2006; Rosen, 2006). Yet, these forms of journalism also undermine the traditional institutional narrative and normative theories of journalism, which have largely defined journalists as professionals who are vital, if not also necessary, to democracy (McNair, 2009; McQuail, 2010). The institutional myth 752 Journalism 16(6) of journalism has often been connected to values such as objectivity in reporting (Tuchman, 1972) as well as political and commercial independence (Hallin and Mancini, 2004). The myth is also closely linked to a professional image of the journalist as a lone hero or rebel (Ehrlich, 2004). Journalism has gone through several crises during the past century, especially during structural and technological changes (McChesney and Nichols, 2010). Despite these challenges, the institutional myth (Meyer and Rowan, 1977) of journalism as the ‘fourth estate’ remains alive as a core principle today in the industry and in popular culture, particularly in Hollywood productions (Ehrlich, 2004). Popular culture is often a mani- festation of what is happening in a particular time and place as ‘cultural forms can be read as a culture thinking out loud about itself’ (Mukerji and Schudson, 1991: 23). The portrayal of journalism in popular culture has ‘enormous influence’ on how the public understands the effectiveness of news media (Saltzman, 2005: 2). The Newsroom can be read as such a cultural form of thinking about journalism during a time of turmoil, during which established news media seek to justify their continued existence economically (in the ongoing aftermath of increased deregulation of broadcasting since the 1980s) and epistemologically (competing with new information gathering and distributing technologies and habits). Research into the image of journalism in popular culture has included analyzing music, comic books, poetry, art, photography, and TV, but mostly focused on film (Saltzman, 2005). Between the 1920s and 2008, almost 2300 English-language movies portraying journalism have been released in theaters in the Unites States and in the United Kingdom (McNair, 2010; Ness, 1997). In contrast, fictional depictions of journalists on TV have received less attention (Saltzman, 2005), possibly because TV series use more local references to target audiences in a particular nation while movies aim for international audiences (McNair, 2010). This makes The Newsroom an ideal way to study how US viewers, including journalists, perceived the portrayal of journalism in the United States. Except for a discussion of The Newsroom as a pedagogical tool for defining contemporary journalism issues (Peters, 2013), we know of no other study analyzing its content or reception among journalists. To understand the overwhelmingly negative responses by journalists to The Newsroom, we apply new institutional theory, particularly the concepts of decoupling and coupling. We argue that these concepts, which have not been previously applied to journalism studies, provide a more nuanced understanding of journalists’ negative responses to the highly idealized depiction of journalism than the more widely used notion of paradigm repair.

Institutional myths in journalism New institutional theory explains how institutional myths, which are defined as professional ideals, norms and values, and changing everyday practices shape the occupational values of members of an institution and also shape how outside stakeholders perceive those practitioners (Meyer and Rowan, 1977; Scott, 2005). It ‘considers the processes by which structures, including schemas, rules, norms, and routines, become established as authoritative guidelines for social behavior’ (Scott, 2005: 460). In contrast, the more Koliska and Eckert 753 amorphous notion of the paradigm points to an all-encompassing belief system; paradigms are devoid of the influence of concrete organizational settings and provide generic examples rather than explicit rules (Kuhn, 1996). From the perspective of new institutional theory, a paradigm describes a part of the shared values within institutions without considering the public presentation and perception of these values. Meyer and Rowan (1977) argue that institutional myths are necessary for the survival of an institution; these serve as models that define social roles, which are ‘made up of particular behaviors, relations and expectations’ (p. 341). Institutional myths

exert their power, not via their effect on the task activities of organizational participants – work activities are often decoupled from rule systems or from the accounts depicting them – but on stakeholders and audiences external to the organization. Their adoption by the organization garners social legitimacy. (Scott, 2005: 462–463)

The public does not or cannot always distinguish between myths and practices; it only perceives the myth. Presenting myths publicly along with practices (i.e. coupled), for instance, on TV, can cause severe tensions for members of an institution (Hallett, 2010) because this process challenges the socially accepted narratives of professional self- identification. Before further detailing the concept of decoupling and coupling, we will provide a short account of the role of myths within the institution of journalism. When asked, US journalists tend to describe their vocation as public service (Ehrlich, 2004), independent of political and commercial pressures (Hallin and Mancini, 2004). They highlight normative journalistic ideals or myths such as objectivity, truthfulness, impartiality, accuracy, fairness, and accountability to support their claims of providing a public service. They also tend to evoke stories that are often stellar examples of journalism within a democratic society. Yet, the picture of journalism as a profession is neither comprehensive nor always in focus (Schudson and Anderson, 2009; Zelizer, 1993). Zelizer (1993) suggests that journalists work as interpretive communities. They create stories about their past to ‘consolidate authoritative evaluations of events that valorize them regardless of how problematic they might have been initially’ (p. 232). Thus, journalists iron out problems rhetorically, which may contradict their institutional myth. W. Joseph Campbell (2010) argues many narratives of journalistic greatness lack accuracy and are merely fictional myths. Among other examples, he debunks the widely assumed notion that Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward alone brought down President Nixon and criticizes a missing portrayal of actual reporting processes. New institutional theory suggests that myths affect our everyday understanding of institutions as they consolidate or help increase institutions’ legitimacy and survival prospects (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Hallett and Ventresca, 2006; Meyer and Rowan, 1977). We argue journalism operates similarly as ‘rationalized institutions [which] create myths of formal structure [to] mobilize the commitments of internal participants and external constituents’ (Meyer and Rowan, 1977: 350). Members of an institution define their professional identity through institutional myths. The public also defines professional roles through such myths (Weick, 1976). More generally, myths not only provide justifications for the existence of institutions but also reference points to make sense of the world (Campbell, 1949; Kluckhohn, 1968; Lévi-Strauss, 1969; Raglan, 1975). Myths supply ‘models for human behavior and, by that very fact, give meaning and value to life’ (Eliade, 1968: 2). 754 Journalism 16(6)

Institutional myths, while they legitimize organizations, can conflict with an organization’s actual practice. Organizations try to avoid such inconsistencies ‘by building gaps between formal structures and core activities’ (Hallett, 2010: 54). Meyer and Rowan (1977) describe this gap as decoupling. Scholars have observed decoupling across different institutions and organizations, from advertising and economic policy to climate change implementation (Beverland and Luxton, 2005; Frandsen and Johansen, 2011; Jetschke and Ruland, 2009; Rizzi et al., 2009). We suggest that decoupling also occurs in public narratives of journalistic endeavors such as the Watergate scandal, when the actual reporting process received little public attention. Journalistic practice is also only rudimentarily displayed in Hollywood movies that often become blueprints for public understanding of journalism as a profession and an institution (Ehrlich, 2004; Saltzman, 2005). Since most people cannot see how journalists work, fictional accounts become ‘very real in the public mind’ so much so that ‘it really doesn’t matter to the public if these images are true or false’ (Saltzman, 2005: 41). Criticism of journalism by journalists often surfaces when gaps between norms and actual activities become public (Ehrlich, 2004). Steiner et al. (2013) studied strategies to repair this schism between the norms and the actual practice by looking at US news media responses to the fifth season of the US TV drama The Wire, which centered on a fictional Baltimore Sun. They applied Kuhn’s (1996) concept of scientific paradigms that suggests, ‘some accepted examples of actual scientific practice … provide models from which spring coherent traditions of scientific research’ (p. 10). Journalism also follows accepted practices such as the ritual of objectivity (Tuchman, 1972), which would fit Kuhn’s understanding of paradigm. But as Steiner et al. (2013) stress, journalism scholars have mainly focused on the second definition of paradigm as ‘shared beliefs and values required for “normal science”’(p. 4). Journalism researchers used this notion primarily to look at breaches of the norm of objectivity (Berkowitz, 2000). Using the theory of paradigm repair, Steiner et al. (2013) found that news media’s reviews, especially by outlets belonging to the company depicted in The Wire (the Baltimore Sun is owned by the Tribune Company), attacked the series’ portrayal of newspaper journalism. They did so, Steiner et al. write, to defend their own work and credibility against the harsh critiques of the corporatized fictional newsroom that The Wire creator David Simon depicted, supposedly based on his previous experience working for the Baltimore Sun. Yet, we argue that the notions of ‘shared beliefs and values’ in an organizational setting such as news media are better understood through the concept of new institutional theory than paradigms. The public display of myths is, after all, part of the organizational rationale (Meyer and Rowan, 1977) to garner legitimacy for a profession in the wider public (Elsbach and Sutton, 1992). Steiner et al. (2013) contrasted the paradigm to actual journalistic practices of a group of fictional journalists within a particular organization that failed to follow the paradigmatic norm. They showed that, in particular, journalists belonging to the Baltimore Sun and the Tribune Group undertook the repair work using different techniques such as distancing, marginalization, or reassertion of journalistic routines (Reese, 1990). We argue that the repair work described above is not so much an attempt to repair the paradigm but to publicly decouple alleged practices from journalists’ value system (myth). It is this interplay in the public presentation of myth and practice that new institutional theory addresses because it affects the legitimacy of an institution among its Koliska and Eckert 755 members and public stakeholders. Tensions among members of an organization arise when myth and actual practice are coupled (Hallett, 2010; Hallett and Ventresca, 2006) because ‘institutionalized organizations must not only conform to myths but must also maintain the appearance that the myths actually work’ (Meyer and Rowan, 1977: 356). When institutional myths and practices are presented together – thus undermining the common practice of decoupling the institutional myth from practice – it can create ‘a threat to organizational legitimacy’ (Dowling and Pfeffer, 1975: 122). During times of uncertainty in an industry – as journalism is currently experiencing – institutional myths are often enhanced to increase legitimacy or to display confidence (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Jetschke and Ruland, 2009; Lowrey, 2011). Journalists thus may experience double pressure: a threat to occupational self-identity and a threat to self-presentation to the wider public. For professional journalists, the problem with The Newsroom was that it coupled narratives of journalistic myths with a fictional depiction of allegedly current day-to-day practices. This presentation challenged the reality of journalists because as ‘interpretive communities’ (Zelizer, 1993), they split (or decouple) myths and practice within their own institution. The Newsroom therefore appears to delegitimize the institution by adopting a different public narrative, which threatens journalists’ concept of self-identity and self-presentation. The Newsroom also raises expectations for journalistic performance by over-idealizing the profession. The show’s use of real news events did both: it coupled myth with practices and raised expectations of ‘unrealistic’ journalistic performance. These expectations, we argue, appeared too high for journalists, who therefore rejected them. As our textual analysis demonstrates, most journalists stressed that the show’s depiction has nothing to do with real practices. They thus rhetorically decoupled myth and practice to restore their own legitimate presentation of their profession.

Textual analysis of the first season and its reviews We applied textual analysis to the 10 episodes of the first season of The Newsroom and over 90 articles about them in major US news media and trade magazines: The New York Times, New York Post, The New Yorker, USA Today, Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, American Journalism Review, Columbia Journalism Review, American Broadcasting Company (ABC), National Broadcasting Company (NBC), CBS (initially Columbia Broadcasting System), Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), National Public Radio (NPR), FOX, CNN, Gawker, Salon, Slate, Buzzfeed, and Huffington Post. The articles were published between 30 May 2012, shortly before the first episode aired, and 31 August 2012, a few days after the final episode of the first season.2 They thus include articles beyond the initial episodes and previews, covering the entire first season. We used the search terms ‘The Newsroom’ in LexisNexis and Google to obtain as many articles as possible. We included print, broadcast, and online media to gauge the entire spectrum of news coverage, which is also influenced by the structure and production culture of the different media platforms (McLuhan and Lapham, 1994). Media and TV critics, veteran reporters, media industry correspondents, essayists, and scholars, many with long years of newsroom experience, wrote the articles. 756 Journalism 16(6)

Textual analysis allowed us to interpret meanings of the show’s texts and what journalists wrote about the show (Fairclough, 2003) while taking cultural context into account (McKee, 2006). We first undertook a ‘long preliminary soak, a submission by the analyst to the mass of the material’ (Hall, 1975: 15) to become familiar with the show and criticism of it. We then followed Hall’s instruction of a close reading of selected texts to identify themes and we interpreted the findings in a larger framework. This process enabled us to select representative examples for intense examination, to distinguish these from exceptional stories. While textual analysis only permits limited quantifiable data, it enabled us to discern emphases in discourse (Hall, 1975). Discourse is speech or writing that presents a certain point of view of the ‘beliefs, values and categories, which it embodies’ (Deacon et al., 1999: 147). It thus creates a way of organizing and representing experience. Discourse also connects with ‘culturally ingrained and institutionally powerful ways of looking at […] particular areas of social life’ (p. 147) and consequently presents knowledge that is perceived as socially legitimate while excluding other perspectives.

Journalistic practices and myths in The Newsroom The Newsroom tells the story of the contemporary Atlantis Cable Network (ACN) and a team of journalists around anchor Will McAvoy (played by Jeff Daniels) and executive producer MacKenzie McHale (Emily Mortimer); together they produce a nightly newscast with the ‘quixotic mission to do the news well in the face of corporate and commercial obstacles’ (HBO, 2012). While featuring TV drama’s typical line of main characters, side-kicks, and love interests, the series is also concerned with the state of contemporary US network news as a phenomenon in and of itself: the journalism it can produce, the hierarchies within its microcosm, and the larger political and economical structures in which this microcosm is precariously suspended. It questions the assumption that the success of the US news media system is based on ratings and that its primary corporate drivers are profits. The Newsroom serves as a useful mirror directed at the state of US cable and TV news while also magnifying institutional myths of journalism and linking the state of journalism with the fate of US democracy. Throughout its first season, The Newsroom crew reported on actual events that were reported in ‘real’ US news media over the past few years, such as the British Petroleum (BP) oil spill, controversies around the National Rifle Association, Casey Anthony, Arizona’s immigration law, the Arab Spring, the death of Osama bin Laden, and the Tea Party. But The Newsroom creator Aaron Sorkin contrasted these real events with mythic figures and newsroom processes. He said, ‘I like writing about heroes that don’t wear capes or disguises. It’s aspirational’ (Gross, 2012). Mythical references abound in The Newsroom, starting with the network’s name, the ‘Atlantis Cable Network’. Sorkin deliberatively chose the reference to the mythical city (Gross, 2012). The introduction to each episode shows black-and-white videos and photographs of legendary US (white, male) journalists Walter Cronkite, Edward Murrow, Dan Rather, and others – who have become icons of the institutional myth of US journalism. The show’s characters and HBO’s web site (2012) often reference the mythical character of Don Quixote and The Newsroom’s ‘quixotic mission’. Koliska and Eckert 757

The Newsroom attempts the portrayal of idealistic journalism, which it locates in a mythical past of the anchorman as a white man, a hero fighting for the public, independent of commercial pressures. Its main characters repeatedly state that they intend to defy the market logic of counting consumers’ eyeballs by addressing their viewers as citizens. Executive producer MacKenzie McHale sets out three questions to guide the news production for the fictional newscast ‘News Night’:

Is this information we need in the voting booth? Is this the best possible form of the argument? Is the story in historical context?

The Newsroom crew struggles to keep up its mission. In a shouting match in the third episode, between Leona Lansing (Jane Fonda), the CEO of Atlantis Media World and parent to ACN, and ACN news director Charlie Skinner (Sam Waterston), Charlie argues for news ‘to be proud of’. He reminds Leona of broadcasting’s origins. In contrast, her response symbolizes the entanglement of politics, media, and business when she com- plains that Will, the anchor, humiliated congressional candidates ‘on my air’:

Charlie: It’s not your air, Leona. Leona: Excuse me. Charlie: He needs to continue … Leona: Listen to me. Charlie: America just elected the most dangerous and addle-minded Congress in my lifetime. Leona: I have business in front of this Congress, Charlie!

The Newsroom keeps asking the larger question regarding the significance remaining in the news media – an institution turned into a money-making machine amid increased deregulation and media concentration, declared dead by some bloggers, circumvented by people sticking to Facebook. It also showcases the continued debate over profitability of network journalism, a ‘major concern’ since the beginning of US broadcasting history, with news often framed as money losers feeding a myth of network news being unprofit- able (Socolow, 2010: 678). What is the task of a news network today? Apart from serving the public as citizens, Sorkin said, news media should not be based on ratings: ‘The commoditization of news has created an environment in which we’re told that certain things are important that simply aren’t’ (Itzkoff, 2012). While striving to live up to the normative ideals in the face of corporate and historically private-owned broadcasting, The Newsroom nevertheless replicates the demographic inequalities of real TV networks, fueling a nostalgia of journalism with powerful White, heterosexual men, with some White women also occupying powerful positions. Critics have addressed the seemingly skewed portrayal of women (Henneberger, 2012; Magary, 2012; Patterson, 2012) yet only The New Yorker and the Huffington Post addressed the problematic portrayal of race. Race in The Newsroom is 758 Journalism 16(6) expressed as overwhelming Whiteness. Its only four people of color are ghettoized in minor characters: Gary and Kendra (who were not given last names), both African– American staffers, are seen nagging each other and are portrayed as somewhat unintel- ligent. For instance, in the second episode, Kendra appears not to know that the University of Phoenix is not a traditional university. A more frequently appearing character is Indian–American staffer Neal Sampat (Dev Patel), who is portrayed according to the stereotype of the ‘imported’ computer nerd, who is interested in blogging, hacking, and obscure ‘science’ such as Bigfoot. Asian–American business reporter Sloan Sabbith (Olivia Munn), modeled partly after CNN’s Christine Ramons (New York Post, 2012), is portrayed as another nerd, unsure of her social interactions. In episode 6, which focused on the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Sloan makes several mistakes, including manhan- dling guests on air, correcting their translations, and eventually revealing crucial off-the- record information about the level of threat. The show often presents new aspects of journalism as unfavorable. For instance, only once a blogger from the Middle East is allowed to chime in via Skype. Anchor McAvoy frequently ridicules blogging and ignores threats leveled against him online, eventually forcing him to hire a bodyguard. Labeling characters of color as ignorant and social media practices as not journalistic, The Newsroom displays nostalgia for an ‘elite’ that mostly excludes people of color and participatory journalism, perpetuating old power structures and thus upholding a rigid and conservative representation of journalism. The Newsroom’s approach to reinvigorate journalism remains mainly limited to challenging the ideal of objectivity, demonstrated when McAvoy abandons his neutral stance to acknowledge that some debates only have one side while others might have more than two. This way, The Newsroom addresses a trend in which current US cable news channels are losing viewers, particularly the CNN, with its centrist political outlook (Pew Research Center, 2007), if they do not choose an extreme position. The show thus revealed the institutional myth of journalistic objectivity as ineffective. McAvoy color- fully performs this in his speech at the beginning of the first episode, in which he breaks with objectivity but maintains the idealistic notion that the fate of the United States is tied to the state of journalism and an informed public. After rattling off examples of why America is not the greatest country in the world anymore, he finishes, ‘But it can be’. The Newsroom, we argue, publicly questioned the validity of objectivity as one of the core values of the institutional myth of journalism by highlighting it as dysfunctional. The show thus undermines narratives that journalists as an interpretive community have developed to ‘consolidate authoritative evaluations of events that valorize them regardless of how problematic they might have been initially’ (Zelizer, 1993: 232). While deconstructing the objectivity norm, journalism is still described as vital to US democracy. The final sentence of McAvoy’s first speech places journalism at the center of America’s return to greatness, thus feeding the institutional myth that justifies publicly the existence of journalism as a profession (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Hallett and Ventresca, 2006; Meyer and Rowan, 1977). In sum, The Newsroom’s portrayal of journalism, we suggest, is similar to the depiction of journalistic myths in movies that are ‘colored by nostalgia … [but they also] address the contradictions at the heart of both journalism and American culture’ (Ehrlich, 2004: 1). Koliska and Eckert 759

The clash of myths with practices in reviews The Newsroom received a lot of news media attention. As NPR and PBS show host Tavis Smiley (2012) said, ‘everybody is talking about this thing’. The majority of articles expressed mixed or negative views about its unrealistic portrayal of journalism, while several acknowledged that the show was good TV. This theme persisted across print, broadcast, and online reports. The only noticeable difference between the three was the tendency among TV news media and their web sites to refrain from in-depth critique and to focus on plot lines and summaries of critiques in magazines and newspapers. Below, we detail what journalists wrote or said about The Newsroom, emphasizing themes that stood out among all articles. USA Today wrote, ‘the good and bad are so tightly entwined in The Newsroom, even the best surgeon could never separate them’ (Bianco, 2012). Buzzfeed called it ‘obnoxious, garish, completely self-involved, and totally unfair to its female characters but damn if it isn’t compelling’ (Broderick, 2012). Similarly, the Huffington Post’s TV critic Maureen Ryan (2012) wrote that The Newsroom is a ‘dramatically inert, infuriating mess’ that ‘gets almost everything wrong’. Greg Gutfeld (2012), co-host of The Five on Fox News, called it ‘a loser’s lament from a marginalized mindset harkening back to a time when the left ran everything’. The number of negative reactions toward the unrealistic depiction of journalism as a profession even sparked their own coverage such as Politico’s ‘10 vicious reviews of “The Newsroom”’ (Gavin, 2012). Distinct support for the show was rare. David Denby (2012) wrote in The New Yorker: ‘It’s wonderful to have a series that discusses current affairs and the way they’re covered, even if The Newsroom can be self-righteous about it, and Sorkin does have a gift for amusing chatter, even if he does overindulge it’. Others appreciated Sorkin’s wit and ‘magic way with words’ as Stanley (2012) wrote in the New York Times. The American Journalism Review’s Carl Sessions Stepp (2012) wrote he liked ‘the idealism, which underlies a lot of great journalism’ and did not ‘mind the progressive tone, which, as long as it stops short of partisan zealotry, seems proper’. Dan Rather (2012a) praised the show on Gawker as ‘the best new television of the year’ that portrays ‘real newsroom situa- tions with stunning accuracy, authenticity and authority’. One theme emerged in almost all commentary: the gap between what reviewing journalists perceived as the reality of their profession and the way journalism was depicted. CBS (2012) asked, ‘how realistic was it?’ ABC wrote, ‘it’s entirely fictional’ (Stern, 2012) and USA Today titled ‘Sorkin finds TV journalism utopia in “The Newsroom”’ (Levin, 2012). Nussbaum (2012) wrote in The New Yorker, ‘Sorkin’s fantasy is of a cabal of proud, disdainful brainiacs, a “media élite”, who swallow accusations of arrogance and shoot them back as lava’. Salon’s Michael Barthel (2012) saw a ‘classic hero’s journey sort of stuff, “Star Wars” with a teleprompter’. Hale (2012) wrote in the New York Times of a ‘highly wrought, sometimes dangerously extended fantasy world’; former Nightline anchor Dave Marash (2012) likewise called it, in the Columbia Journalism Review, ‘the stuff of fairy tales’. Even the most positive reviews took issue with the show’s detachment from ‘real’ journalism. For instance, Stepp (2012) wrote, 760 Journalism 16(6)

What bothered me was the show’s seeming disengagement from the real world or any real audience. It was as if the journalists were living in a bubble, playing a kind of depersonalized video game version of the news.

Dan Rather (2012b) stressed that real reporting is not as ‘seamless’ as the show portrays and ‘people are seldom as smart or as high minded as most of the lead characters’. Critics frequently called out the show’s references to a ‘glorious’ past of journalism as shown in iconic movies about broadcast journalism such as Network and Broadcast News. Salon’s Barthel (2012) argued that Sorkin wished that American journalism were ‘more like the ‘60s!’ But he concluded that the days of a single network anchor supposedly impacting the world are over: ‘A lone maverick can’t make much of a difference’. Smith (2012) wrote in the New York Post, ‘Sorkin’s intellectual error is Nostalgism, a lazy faith in some perfect past’. Gawker’s Drew Magary (2012) wrote more bluntly,

No one in their right mind wants to go back to a world where you had to watch a fucking nightly newscast to get all your information about the world. The media environment we live in now is light years better than what we used to have. We have an army of people online ready to call bullshit on the media, and we have a second army of people online ready to call bullshit on the people calling bullshit.

Critics found many other discrepancies between reality and the show that they disagreed with, especially the portrayal of reporting, details about day-to-day activities within a network TV newsroom, and The Newsroom’s relation to its audience. Washington Post’s Melinda Henneberger (2012) wrote, ‘it isn’t remotely true that all that Grade-A journalism requires is that we stop being so lazy and craven and just decide to commit it’. Salon’s Willa Paskin (2012) blamed Sorkin for failing ‘to show us our better selves’, instead using the show to make himself seem ‘smarter than us’. Nussbaum (2012) wrote in The New Yorker that the show treated its audience as if ‘we were extremely stupid. Characters describe events we have witnessed … [T]hat sounds like an innovative concept, but it turns the characters into back-seat drivers, telling us how the news should have been delivered’. Ryan (2012) commented in the Huffington Post,

[T]he show is the worst possible vehicle for promulgating the values and beliefs that the core characters profess. With shrill, self-righteous friends like these, journalism doesn’t need enemies.

In contrast, Marash (2012) pointed toward the unrealistic selection of news stories, noting that only ‘Big Stories’ are valued enough to be mentioned, ‘everything else is contemptible “human interest”. Those stupid humans, who cares what’s news to them?’ Several reviews linked the show to existing cable news, mentioning either CNN (Carr, 2012; Stuever, 2012) or MSNBC and its former anchor Keith Olbermann (Stanley, 2012; Stuever, 2012). Sorkin ‘was embedded’ in MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann and hired one of its assistants as well as the son of MSNBC’s Chris Matthew to act in The Newsroom (Itzkoff, 2012). But Sorkin insisted he did not base the character of Will McAvoy on Keith Olbermann (New York Post, 2012). Koliska and Eckert 761

Many reviews, such as Salon’s, claimed ‘Sorkin has no interest in the process of news gathering’ (Pareene, 2012). NPR’s Linda Holmes (2012) added,

Oddly, for a guy whose crusade is to save news, Sorkin has very little use for actual reporting, which here mostly consists of happening to have a sister who works at Halliburton or a friend at BP, and relies on the idea that if you call someone up and ask them a question, they will (1) instantly take your call, (2) rattle off everything you need to know, and (3) be right every time.

Yet, Marash (2012) commented that among all the unrealistic depictions, one thing is true: news is made in the newsroom, and increasingly less reporting goes on outside the newsroom. While reviewers often seemed to measure The Newsroom against their own insights into journalism, they rarely used the show’s criticism of a commercially driven US news media system – with commoditized news that defines the audience as consumers rather than citizens – to seriously ponder the economic and epistemological crisis of journalism. Only Dan Rather (2012a) questioned whether ‘news reporting is to be considered and practiced … as a public service, in the public interest, or is to exist solely as just another money-making operation for owners of news outlets’. The New York Times acknowledged the issue but disagreed with the show’s approach: ‘The Newsroom may be right, but it’s saying it wrong’, (Stanley, 2012). USA Today pointed out ‘[T]he characters in Newsroom don’t run “The Media”. … It’s fine for them to think the weight of the world is on their shoulders; at one time or another, almost all of us do. But the show has to stop asking us to agree with them’ (Bianco, 2012). Despite the ‘unusually harsh’ (Hale, 2012) reviews, several critics also remarked that it has not kept them from watching the show. They described a kind of addictive love–hate relationship or ‘guilty pleasure’ as Stuever (2012) wrote in The Washington Post. Similarly, Henneberger (2012) admitted that ‘none of these minor inflammations have kept The Newsroom from being my new favorite show, though; the writing is irresistible, the subject matters’. Denby (2012) wrote in The New Yorker,

Thank heavens the swelling, angry, sarcastic, one-upping talk of ‘The Newsroom’ is unafraid of embarrassing anyone … [I]t’s a wonderful, witty, erudite territory, and I, for one, love visiting. When it doesn’t drive me crazy.

Even Nussbaum’s (2012) mostly negative New Yorker review agreed that McAvoy’s initial speech was ‘exciting to watch’. In sum, most journalists criticized The Newsroom for the show’s unrealistic portrayal of journalism, which we argue is an attempt to restore the prevalent institutional myth by decoupling it from the depicted journalistic practice within The Newsroom. While journalists commented on Sorkin’s style, they nevertheless focused on the perceived gap between what they experience as reality in their profession and its portrayal. Thus, when taking the references to Sorkin out of the reviews, the stark emphasis on an unrealistic portrayal of journalism would still remain. Yet, hardly any journalist accounted for her or his partiality in the matter. Only NPR’s Robert Schoon (2012) suggested journalists displayed an ‘inside baseball bias (or maybe there’s a real name for it)’. He wrote journalists were too close to the topic: 762 Journalism 16(6)

This time, critics can’t buy it because they’ve worked in that particular environment and (rightly) can’t picture themselves or their colleagues speechifying in such high-minded ways during their coffee breaks.

Conclusion Whereas journalists tend to mystify their accomplishments and professional roles by turning reality into almost fictional narratives (Campbell, 2010; Zelizer, 1993), our findings suggest that journalists also appear to turn fiction into reality by taking the TV show The Newsroom literally, often too literally. We propose that journalists’ process of upholding an institutional myth of journalism and their simultaneous attempt to reinter- pret fictional accounts about journalism as inaccurate reflect journalistic biases that may be best explained through the lens of new institutional theory. Shared principles and common practice can spark solidarity among journalists (Schudson and Anderson, 2009; Tuchman, 1972) as they define them as members of an institution. Simultaneously, shared institutional myths enhance the legitimacy of the professional role toward the public, especially during times of uncertainty (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Jetschke and Ruland, 2009; Lowrey, 2011). Normally, institutional myth and actual practice are decoupled within an institution to ensure the functioning of an organization (Meyer and Rowan, 1977). To the public, only the myth is presented to legitimize the institution. This legitimacy is threatened when myth and practice appear together in public because it undermines the public narrative that shows only the institutional myth. The Newsroom did couple myth and practice. This coupling then caused severe tensions or resistance among journalists because it would mean that they would have to actually embody the myth (Hallett, 2010) – that is journalists would need to be ‘heroines/heroes’ every day. By presenting the ideal next to the mundane, The Newsroom threatened the narrative that journalists as interpretive communities and the institution of journalism maintain. Thus, in their commentary and reviews, journalists rhetorically decoupled the myth and the practice to restore their own presentation or myth that legitimizes their profession to the broader public. We also argue that the show upheld representations of myths of their profession generated in the 1960s to 1980s, which are not applicable today. The hero myth with the image of a lone (White, male) anchor informing the world defies current diverse narratives produced via social media that highlight the power of the many. This suggests that the myths The Newsroom represented as journalistic practice need to be more in sync with new and emerging journalistic forms to avoid criticism. The high quantity of articles and their mostly negative critiques of the portrayal of journalism indicate that journalists care about the depiction of their profession in public. Yet, journalists avoided addressing the underlying criticism of The Newsroom, which questioned the quality of current journalism under commercial and epistemological pressures, and focused on image management instead.

Acknowledgements Thanks to Professor Linda Steiner and Professor Maurine Beasley at the University of Maryland, Stanton Paddock, Assistant Professor at Concordia University and to the anonymous reviewers who all provided useful insights and feedback. Koliska and Eckert 763

Funding This research received no specific funding from any agency in the public, commercial, or not-for- profit sectors.

Notes 1. The highest viewership for a premiere recently was Boardwalk Empire in 2008 with 4.8 million, followed by Game of Thrones with 2.2 million in 2010 (De Moraes, 2012). 2. One exception was Gawker’s Drew Magary (2012) who published his review on 20 January 2012.

References Barthel M (2012) ‘The Newsroom’: Clichéd as hell. Salon. Available at: http://www.salon. com/2012/06/21/the_newsroom_cliched_as_hell/ Benkler Y (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Berkowitz D (2000) Doing double duty: Paradigm repair and the Princess Diana what-a-story. Journalism 1(2): 125–143. Beverland M and Luxton S (2005) Managing integrated marketing communication (IMC) through strategic decoupling: How luxury wine firms retain brand leadership while appearing to be wedded to the past. Journal of Advertising 34(4): 103–116. Bianco R (2012) Prime-time ideas power this ‘Newsroom’: Sorkin is all talk – and a lot of heart. USA Today, 22 June, p. D1. Broderick R (2012) What’s the number one TV show you love to hate? Buzzfeed. Available at: http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/whats-your-number-one-tv-show-you-love-to-hate Bruns A (2006) Towards produsage: Futures for user-led content production. In: Sudweeks F, Hrachovec H and Ess C (eds) Proceedings Cultural Attitudes towards Communication and Technology, 28 June–1 July 2006, Tartu, Estonia, Perth: Murdoch University, pp. 275–284. Campbell J (1949) The Hero with a Thousand Faces. New York: Pantheon Books. Campbell WJ (2010) Getting it Wrong: Ten of the Greatest Misreported Stories in American Journalism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Carr D (2012) ‘Newsroom’ as a map for CNN. The New York Times. Available at: http://www. nytimes.com/2012/06/25/business/media/aaron-sorkins-newsroom-as-a-lofty-map-for-cnn. html?pagewanted=all&;_r=0 CBS (2012) ‘The Newsroom’ debuts with ripped-from-the-headlines plot. Available at: http:// www.cbsnews.com/8301-31749_162-57459681-10391698/the-newsroom-debuts-with- ripped-from-the-headlines-plot/ Daniel DK (1996) Lou Grant: The Making of TV’s Top Newspaper Drama. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press. Deacon D, Pickering M, Golding P and Murdock G (1999) Researching Communications: A Practical Guide to Methods in Media and Cultural Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN: 0340596856. De Moraes L (2012) ‘The Newsroom’ gets nearly 3 million viewers, and an ‘Amen’ from the Rev. Rather. The Washington Post, 26 June, p. C6. Denby D (2012) In defense of Aaron’s ‘The Newsroom’. The New Yorker. Available at: http:// www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/culture/2012/06/in-defense-of-aaron-sorkins-newsroom. html 764 Journalism 16(6)

DiMaggio PJ and Powell WW (1983) The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review 48(2): 147–160. Dowling J and Pfeffer J (1975) Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review 18(1): 122–136. Ehrlich MC (2004) Journalism in the Movies. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press. Eliade M (1968) Myth and Reality. New York: Harper & Row. Elsbach KD and Sutton RI (1992) Acquiring organizational legitimacy through illegitimate actions: A marriage of institutional and impression management theories. Academy of Management Journal 35(4): 699–738. Fairclough N (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. New York: Routledge. Frandsen F and Johansen W (2011) Rhetoric, climate change, and corporate identity management. Management Communication Quarterly 25(3): 511–530. Gavin P (2012) 10 vicious reviews of ‘The Newsroom’. Politico. Available at: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0612/77735.html Gillmor D (2004) We the Media: Grassroots Journalism By the People, For the People. Beijing, China: O’Reilly. Gross T (2012) Aaron Sorkin: The writer behind ‘The Newsroom’. NPR Fresh Air. Available at: http://www.npr.org/2012/07/16/156841165/aaron-sorkin-the-writer-behind-the-newsroom Gutfeld G (2012) Why liberals love ‘The Newsroom’. Fox News. Available at: http://video. foxnews.com/v/1708281098001/why-liberals-love-the-newsroom/ Hale M (2012) Broken hearts and breaking news. The New York Times. Available at: http://www. nytimes.com/2012/08/24/arts/television/the-newsroom-finale-and-both-sides-of-aaron-sorkin.html Hall S (1975) Introduction. In: Smith ACH, Immirzi E and Blackwell T (eds) Paper Voices: The Popular Press and Social Change 1935–1965. London: Chatto and Windus, pp. 11–24. Hallett T (2010) The myth incarnate: Recoupling processes, turmoil, and inhabited institutions in an urban elementary school. American Sociological Review 75(1): 52–74. Hallett T and Ventresca M (2006) How institutions form. American Behavioral Scientist 49(7): 908–924. Hallin DC and Mancini P (2004) Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press. HBO (2012) The Newsroom FAQs. Available at: https://www.hbo.com/about/faqs/programs/the- newsroom.html Henneberger M (2012) In defense of the ‘Newsroom’ women. The Washington Post. Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she-the-people/post/in-defense-of-the-women-in- sorkins-the-newsroom/2012/07/10/gJQAn8AYbW_blog.html Hollywood Foreign Press Association (2013) 2013 Golden Globe nominations. Available at: http://www.goldenglobes.org/2012/12/nominations-2013/ Holmes L (2012) Sorkin’s ‘Newsroom’ is no place for optimism. NPR. Available at: http://www. npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2012/06/23/155632386/sorkins-newsroom-is-no-place-for-optimism IJPC (2010) The image of the journalist in popular culture. Available at: http://www.ijpc.org/page/ resources_–_recommended_books_and_web_sites.htm Itzkoff D (2012) This just in. The New York Times. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/ 10/arts/television/the-newsroom-aaron-sorkins-return-to-tv.html?pagewanted=all Jetschke A and Ruland J (2009) Decoupling rhetoric and practice: The cultural limits of ASEAN cooperation. The Pacific Review 22(2): 179–203. Koliska and Eckert 765

Kluckhohn C (1968) Recurrent themes in myths and mythmaking. In: Murray HA (ed.) Myth and Mythmaking. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, pp. 46–60. Kuhn TS (1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Levin G (2012) Aaron Sorkin finds TV journalism utopia in ‘The Newsroom’. USA Today. Available at: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/life/television/news/story/2012-06-20/newsroom-hbo/55695388/1 Lévi-Strauss C (1969) The Raw and the Cooked. New York: Harper & Row. Lowrey W (2011) Institutionalism, news organizations and innovations. Journalism Studies 12(1): 64–79. McChesney RW and Nichols J (2010) The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again. Philadelphia, PA: Nation Books. McKee A (2006) Textual Analysis: A Beginner’s Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. McLuhan M and Lapham LH (1994) Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. McNair B (2009) Journalism and democracy. In: Wahl-Jorgensen K and Hanitzsch T (eds) Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 237–249. McNair B (2010) Journalists in Film: Heroes and Villains. Edinburgh: Edinburg University Press. McQuail D (2010) Mass Communication Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Magary D (2012) Aaron Sorkin is ready to masturbate all over your HBO with The Newsroom. Gawker. Available at: http://gawker.com/5877973/aaron-sorkin-is-ready-to-masturbate-all- over-your-hbo-with-the-newsroom?tag=the-newsroom Marash D (2012) And that’s not the way it is. Columbia Journalism Review. Available at: http:// www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/emmy_award-winning_tv_reporter.php Meyer J and Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and cer- emony. American Journal of Sociology 83(2): 340–363. Mukerji C and Schudson M (1991) Rethinking Popular Culture: Contemporary Perspectives in Cultural Studies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Ness R (1997) From Headline Hunter to Superman. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press. New York Post (2012) Olbermann uninspiring. Available at: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/ olbermann_uninspiring_GRcCoepuSzHbV4WTvsZgxM Nussbaum E (2012) The artificial intelligence of The Newsroom. The New Yorker. Available at: http:// www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/television/2012/06/25/120625crte_television_nussbaum Pareene A (2012) Aaron Sorkin versus reality. Salon. Available at: http://www.salon. com/2012/07/19/aaron_sorkin_versus_frivolity/ Paskin W (2012) ‘Newsroom’: Aaron Sorkin does ‘The Daily Show’. Salon. Available at: http:// www.salon.com/2012/06/20/newsroom_aaron_sorkin_does_the_daily_show/ Patterson T (2012) Extra! Extra! Extra!!! - Aaron Sorkin’s The Newsroom takes just two episodes to go awesomely over the top. Slate. Available at: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/television/2012/06/aaron_sorkin_s_the_newsroom_on_hbo_jeff_daniels_drama_reviewed_.html Peters C (2013) ‘Not the greatest anymore’: Fictional anchors, nonfictional events, and semific- tional journalism in HBO’s ‘The Newsroom’. Presentation at the annual conference of the International Communication Association, London, 17–21 June. Pew Research Center (2007) Views of press values and performance: 1985–2007. Available at: http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/348.pdf Raglan B (1975) The Hero: A Study in Tradition, Myth, and Drama. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Rather D (2012a) Dan Rather: Every anchorman is an ass sometimes. Gawker. Available at: http:// gawker.com/5922830/dan-rather-every-anchorman-is-an-ass-sometimes?tag=danrather Rather D (2012b) Dan Rather reviewed The Newsroom for us and liked it. Gawker. Available at: http://gawker.com/5920929/ 766 Journalism 16(6)

Reese SD (1990) The news paradigm and the ideology of objectivity: A socialist at the wall street journal. Critical Studies in Mass Communication 7(4): 390–409. Rizzi C, Ponte D and Bonifacio M (2009) A new institutional reading of knowledge management technology adoption. Journal of Knowledge Management 13(4): 75–85. Rosen J (2006) The people formerly known as the audience. Available at: http://archive.press- think.org/2006/06/27/ppl_frmr.html Ryan M (2012) ‘The Newsroom’ review: Aaron Sorkin’s new HBO show gets almost everything wrong. Huffington Post. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maureen-ryan/the- newsroom-review-aaron-sorkin-hbo_b_1609544.html Saltzman J (2005) Analyzing the images of the journalist in popular culture: A unique method of studying the public’s perception of its journalists and the news media. IJPC. Available at: http:// www.ijpc.org/uploads/files/AEJMC%20Paper%20San%20Antonio%20Saltzman%202005.pdf Schoon R (2012) The problem with ‘The Newsroom’s’ critics – they’re journalists. NPR: On The Media. Available at: http://www.onthemedia.org/story/219146-problem-newsrooms-critics/ Schudson M and Anderson C (2009) Objectivity, professionalism and truth seeking in journalism. In: Wahl-Jorgenson K and Hanitzsch T (eds) Handbook of Journalism Studies. New York: Routledge, pp. 88–101. Scott WR (2005) Institutional theory: Contributing to a theoretical research program. In: Smith KG and Hitt MA (eds) Great Minds in Management: The Process of Theory Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 460–484. Smiley T (2012) Interview with Actor Jeff Daniels. PBS. Available at: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/ tavissmiley/interviews/actor-jeff-daniels/ Smith K (2012) Aaron Sorkin’s liberal drama isn’t just bad: He can’t get the facts right. New York Post, 14 June, p. 27. Socolow MJ (2010) ‘We should make money on our news’: The problem of profitability in network broadcast journalism history. Journalism 11(6): 675–691. Stanley A (2012) So sayeth the anchorman. The New York Times. Available at: http://www.nytimes. com/2012/06/22/arts/television/the-newsroom-an-hbo-series-from-aaron-sorkin.html?_r=0 Steiner L, Guo J, McCaffrey R, et al. (2013) The wire and repair of the journalistic paradigm. Journalism 14(6): 1–18. Available at: http://jou.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/08/08/ 1464884912455901 Stepp CS (2012) The advantage of authenticity. American Journalism Review. Available at: http:// www.ajr.org/article.asp?id=5355 Stern J (2012) Characters in ‘The Newsroom’ not real people, says Aaron Sorkin. ABC. Available at: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/05/characters-in-the-newsroom-not-real- people-says-aaron-sorkin/ Stuever H (2012) ‘Newsroom’ isn’t something to talk about. Washington Post, 24 June, p. T02. Tuchman G (1972) Objectivity as strategic ritual: An examination of newsmen’s notions of objectivity. American Journal of Sociology 77(4): 660–679. Weick KE (1976) Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly 21: 1–19. Weprin A (2013) Ratings: HBO’s ‘The Newsroom’ steady in season two premiere. Mediabistro. Available at: http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/ratings-hbos-the-newsroom-steady-in- season-two-premiere_b188490 Wolff M (2012) Aaron Sorkin’s The Newsroom’s missing reality principle. The Guardian. Available at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jun/25/aaron-sorkin-thenews- room-reality-principle Zelizer B (1993) Journalists as interpretive communities. Critical Studies in Mass Communications 10(3): 219–237. Koliska and Eckert 767

Author biographies Michael Koliska is a doctoral candidate in the College of Journalism at the University of Maryland. He studies the implementation and effects of transparency in journalism. Stine Eckert is a doctoral candidate in the College of Journalism at the University of Maryland. She studies the intersections of power hierarchies, democracies and media with a focus on gender, minorities and online media. She has published articles in the International Journal of Communication, Media, Culture and Society and the Journal of Communication Inquiry. Journalism http://jou.sagepub.com/

Differences between the quality of the printed version and online editions of the European reference press Txema Ramírez de la Piscina, Maria González Gorosarri, Alazne Aiestaran, Beatriz Zabalondo and Antxoka Agirre Journalism published online 10 July 2014 DOI: 10.1177/1464884914540432

The online version of this article can be found at: http://jou.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/07/08/1464884914540432

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journalism can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jou.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jou.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Jul 10, 2014

What is This?

DownloadedDownloaded from http://www.elearnica.ir from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 JOU0010.1177/1464884914540432JournalismRamírez de la Piscina et al. research-article5404322014

Article

Journalism 23–1 Differences between the © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: quality of the printed version sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1464884914540432 and online editions of the jou.sagepub.com European reference press*

Txema Ramírez de la Piscina University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, Spain

Maria González Gorosarri University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, Spain

Alazne Aiestaran University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, Spain

Beatriz Zabalondo University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, Spain

Antxoka Agirre University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, Spain

Abstract This article deals with a key question for the future of journalism: the repercussion which new technologies are having on news quality. The authors compared digital and printed versions of five major European reference newspapers, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Financial Times, Le Monde, Corriere della Sera and El País throughout the first 3 months of 2013. The study provides specific data about the quality indices of each of these versions and confirms that there is a deterioration in news quality online.

*Translated by Angela Jones. Corresponding author: Txema Ramírez de la Piscina, Head of Research Team HGH (Hedabideak, Gizartea, Hezkuntza; Media, Society, Education), Department of Journalism, University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU, Barrio Sarriena s/n, Leioa, Bizkaia 48940, Spain. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 2 Journalism

The average index obtained by the printed version is 6.06 out of 10, against 5.66 for the digital version, a difference of 40 hundredths. Finally, the work compares the 2013 results with those registered in the period 2001–2012 by these newspapers in their printed versions. Printed news quality shows greater stability.

Keywords European reference press, future of journalism, news quality, news values, professionalism, quality journalism

Introduction The establishment of new technologies has provoked a number of consequences in the media throughout the world. The rapid sustained development of the Internet has especially affected the printed media. These media, as a general rule, have reinforced their electronic editions, furnishing them with greater content and implementing multimedia resources. As a consequence of all this, the number of readers of the digital press has increased exponentially all over the world, while sales of the printed press have plum- meted, especially in the West, home of the so-called reference press or quality press. Any reader can see at first glance the differences which exist between the online and printed versions of the same newspaper. But, and here lies the question on which our research is based: are there substantial differences in the quality of the two versions? The present article brings together the main results of a comparative study between the electronic and printed editions of the five major European reference newspapers during the first 3 months of 2013. The work has involved evaluating the quality of 105 news items which appeared in the digital editions of these five papers and comparing them with the versions of the same information which appeared in paper in said newspapers the next day. The study forms part of a wider research which analyses the evolution in news quality of the European reference press between 2001 and 2013.1 The HGH research team (Media, Society and Education in the Basque language) wanted to observe the evolution of news quality in the European reference press during the first 13 years of the current century, compare their printed and digital versions and determine whether an improvement in quality has any influence on the results. According to a report by the German consultancy IMH (Internationale Medienhilfe), the five most influential newspapers of the old continent are: Financial Times (FT), Corriere della Sera (CDS), Le Monde (LM), Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) and El País (EP). They all have decades of experience behind them (the first two have been going for over a century), and they have sales of between 300,000 and 400,000 copies daily, not counting their electronic editions.

Literature review The academic literature in relation to journalistic quality is abundant and varied, based on eras, authors and aims. By way of summary, it could be said that while trends in the

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 3

United States have a more commercial orientation, Scandinavian ones revolve mainly around the concept of informativity, those from Latin America are more centred on journalistic quality (the contribution of Pellegrini and Múgica (2006) stands out with her Value-Added Journalism method) and the German ones around the term professionalism. The essential connection between journalism and society has generated work which demonstrates that journalistic quality is a sine qua non for the effective development of democracy (Gripsrud and Weibull, 2010). The existence of a European public arena has been highlighted in different studies (Risse, 2003; Semetko and Valkenberg, 2000; Trenz, 2004). However, the ‘old Europe’ maintains its three journalistic models, linked to the political system and described in detail by Hallin and Mancini (2004): Mediterranean or Polarized Pluralist Model, Democratic Corporatist Model and Liberal Model. It is worth highlighting those theoretical contributions from the last few years which have tackled aspects relating to journalistic quality from different viewpoints, such as those carried out by Bogart (2004), Picard (2004), Deuze (2005), Medina (2006), Weischenberg et al. (2006), Amado (2007), Gómez Mompart (2009) and Beck et al. (2010) among others. In the field of applied research, it is worth mentioning the recent contributions from García Avilés et al. (2004), Lewis et al. (2007), González Gorosarri (2011), Pujadas (2011), Costera (2013), Esser and Umbricht (2013), Ramírez de la Piscina et al. (2014) and finally, the compilation of research and suggestions edited by Gómez Mompart et al. (2013). One of the most recent researches, such as that carried out in July 2012 by Penny O’Donnell and McKnight at the University of Sydney (Journalism at the speed of bytes. Australian newspapers in the 21st century), alerts us to the dramatic consequences which the immediacy demanded by new technologies is having on news quality.

Aims, hypotheses and research questions The fundamental aim of this research is clear: To contrast the quality indices of the digital and printed versions of the five major European quality newspapers during a specific time period (the first trimester of 2013). The idea is also to compare these results with the diachronic analysis carried out by this team for the same five newspapers, but only for their printed versions, from 2001–2012. We believe that the global period covered by both studies (2001–2013) offers sufficient guarantees to allow us to draw certain conclusions with a modicum of rigorousness. We understand that a piece of news is of quality when it satisfactorily fulfils a series of minimums related as much to the selection (gatekeeping) and elaboration processes (newsmaking) of the news, as to the social contribution which the reported event makes to society. In order to achieve said aims, and focussing exclusively on the research of 2013, the work team has used the following hypotheses (H) and Research Questions (RQ) as its starting point:

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 4 Journalism

H1. The digitalisation of the content of the written press, together with the immediacy demanded by electronic editions, provokes an acceleration in the news selection and elaboration processes which may affect news quality.

Research Questions associated to the hypothesis:

RQ1. Are there substantial differences between the quality of the digital and printed versions of the same piece of news? RQ2. Are there differences between the newspapers analysed? RQ3. What percentage of digital and printed news satisfactorily passes the quality index? RQ4. Are the results of the synchronic examination of 2013 coherent with those registered in the diachronic research from 2001 to 2012?

Second hypothesis of this research:

H2. The preparation process of the news, which among other variables systematically penalises the inaccuracy of journalistic language, seems, a priori, to be the most appropriate to observe the hypothetical differences between the electronic and printed versions of these newspapers.

Research Questions associated with the hypothesis:

RQ5. Are there differences between the elaboration process of the same news item in electronic and printed format? RQ6. Does the journalistic style vary in the digital and printed versions? RQ7. What kind of mistakes are the most frequent?

Third hypothesis of this research:

H3. All the analysed newspapers have tried to improve their online version over the last few years in an attempt to make their presence on the web more visible and with a view to increasing their income via digital subscriptions.

Research Questions associated with the hypothesis:

RQ8. Have those efforts been reflected in the quality of their digital versions? RQ9. Does celerity take precedence over quality in the online editions of these reference newspapers? RQ10. Is there a direct relationship between the quality of online editions and the digital subscriptions to the same newspaper?

Methodology The research team responsible for this work has used its own methodology, a pioneer method which draws on the main contributions to this field produced in the last decades,

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 5 particularly from Germanic and Anglo-Saxon literature (Bucher and Altmeppen, 2003; Maurer, 2005; Meyer, 2004; Trebbe, 2008; Vehlow, 2006). The method establishes veri- fiable and quantifiable parameters capable of rigorously determining the quality of a specific news item whether it be in paper format or on the Internet and allows the use of crossmedia parameters to evaluate news quality. The methodology provides data about both the format quality of the analysed item (technical, aesthetic and functional aspects, among others), and about its quality index, evaluating in a precise way the selection and elaboration processes of the news, and also its degree of social contribution. As a result of all this, it is awarded a value between 0 and 10 which graphically shows the quality of that news item in particular, both in its online and printed versions. According to the traditional normative theories, evaluating the quality of the news posed serious challenges. However, the concept of media performance introduced by Denis McQuail supplied a very interesting viewpoint (McQuail, 1992):

The independent assessment of mass media provision according to alternative ‘public interest’ criteria, by way of objective and systematic methods of research, taking account of other relevant evidence and the normal operating conditions and requirements of the media concerned. (p. 17)

The concept of media performance took hold especially in western democracies, gradually becoming linked to ‘social responsibility’. Gonzalez Gorosarri (2011) developed an integrating concept of News Quality inventing a method which could even allow a crossmedia analysis, following the German news quality model. While some authors have analysed this question from an organisational perspective: the impact of economic and labour questions on the product (Gripsrud and Weibull, 2010; O’Donnell and McKnight, 2012; Picard, 2004), news quality has traditionally been analysed through its content. The German model has created a theoretical corpus based on the standard theory of ‘media performance’ proposed by McQuail, from which to derive standards of excellence, as opposed to other authors (Bogart, 2004; Maurer, 2005: 85–88; Meyer, 2004; Vehlow, 2006: 23–24). The method used in this research to determine news quality was included in a code book where all the doubts expressed during the process prior to data collection were clarified. This code book turned out to be a fundamental tool for the group’s work. It was developed following numerous group meetings through 9 months and took the form of a 32-page document which served as a vade mecum throughout the whole research. The following table shows all the variables which make up each level of analysis, both quantitative and qualitative (Table 1). The resulting method combines both qualitative and quantitative aspects.2 The first section includes questions relating to format quality (technical aspects, aesthetic or functional mistakes, such as the presence of lapsus clavis), a section in which appears the profile of the protagonists, their gender and scope of influence. These sections are not scored from 0 to 10. Their presence or absence is simply noted and used to draw final conclusions. The quantitative aspects reflect the quality index of the news, rated from 0 to 10 and which is divided into three very different segments: Selection process (maximum 2.5), elaboration (5) and the social contribution of the news (2.5). The selection process

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 6 Journalism

Table 1. Data sheet used in the study.

Code Date Sample type Headline FORMAL QUALITY (1) Technical aspects Major defects Minor defects (2) Presentation aspects Aesthetical deficiencies White spaces in headlines White spaces in kickers White spaces in the caption Orphan lines Widow lines A fractioned word in the last line of the paragraph Operational deficiencies Lapsus clavis DIVERSITY SECTIONS (Topics) PROTAGONISTS Informational ‘deviant’ groups Gender GEOGRAPHICAL DIVERSITY NEWS QUALITY INDEX (NQI) SELECTION PROCESS VALUES Mention of the source Mentioned (0.5); Indirectly (0.25); Not Mentioned (0) Nature of the source Documents (0.5); Experts (0.4); Identified (0.3); Indirectly (0.1); Not mentioned (0) Factuality of the reported fact Event (0.5); Statements (0.25); Advertisement (0) Degree of factualness Digital: The last two hours (0.5); Digital: ‘Yesterday’, ‘today’, ‘tomorrow’ (0.4); Printed: ‘Yesterday’, ‘today’, ‘tomorrow’ (0.5); 2–7 days (0.25); More than a week (0.1); Without date (0) Newsworthiness Social consequences (0.5); Personal consequences (0.25); Pseudo-event (0) ELABORATION PROCESS VALUES Accuracy Summarises / Advances a news story (1); Highlights just a part/characteristic (0.5); Is ambiguous/deceitful (0) Depth 7 W (1); 5–6 W (0.5); 4W (0) Presence of different perspectives 3 perspectives (1); 2 perspectives (0.5) 1 perspective, within the item reasoned (0.25); 1 perspective, without reasoning (0) Contributions made by other informative elements Informational aspects Very significant (4–5W) (0.5); Significant (2–3 W) (0.25); Filling (1 W) (0); Do not coincide (−0.25) Artistic aspects Very elaborated (0.5); Quite elaborated (0.25); Simple (0.1); Has no additional elements (0); Minor defects (−0.25); Serious defects (−0.5); Very serious defects (−0.75)

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 7

Table 1. (Continued)

Use of language Journalistic register Clear and concise (1); Cannot be understood from an initial reading (0); Not professional (−0.5); Mediocre (−1) Orthographical and grammar errors Errors: headline, introductory heading, subheading (−1); Errors: windows, caption, subhead (−0.5); Errors: text (−0.25) SOCIAL CONTRIBUTION VALUES Power watchdog Controls power (0.5); Doesn’t control power (0); Accepts the discourse of power (−0.5) Promotion of social debate Encourages debate (0.5); Does not encourage debate (0); Divides, ruptures (−0.5) Respect for human dignity Guarantees dignity (0.5); Does not guarantee dignity (−0.5); Neither one nor the other (0) Presence of cultural references from Local or world culture (0.5); With no cultural other countries reference (0); Culture assimilator (−0.5) The fight against social marginalisation Fights marginalisation (0.5); Does not fight marginalisation (0); Insults, scorns (−0.5)

Selection (2.5 points) Elaboration (5 points) Social contribution (2.5 points)

Total includes five aspects, each one rated with a maximum of 0.5: mention from the source of the news, the character of the sources, factuality of the reported fact (event or statement), degree of factualness and newsworthiness (the degree of interest in the news item). The elaboration process is the most important and includes five sections, each with a maximum possible score of one point: accuracy (correspondence between the headline and body of the item), depth (presence of the 5 Ws), presence of different perspectives within the item, contributions made by other informative elements (photographs, graphics, infographics, etc.) and correctness of journalistic language (errors in the text). Lastly, the section relative to social contribution (according to the UNESCO Declaration of Principles of Professional Ethics in Journalism of 1983) also includes further five sections, each rated with a maximum of 0.5 points: power watchdog, promotion of social debate, respect for human dignity, presence of cultural references from other countries and the combating of social marginalisation. By adding up the scores from all these variables, a value of 0 to 10 is obtained for each news item. The sample used as the basis for our research was developed using the widely contrasted and verified constructed week technique (Zabaleta, 1997: 197). Three complete weeks were analysed during the months of January, February and March of 2013. The selected weeks were from 23 to 29 January, from 6 to 12 February and from 13 to 19 March (both dates inclusive in all cases). This sample was made with the five analysed newspapers. The procedure used was the following: during the sample days, a researcher looked at the electronic version of the newspaper in question, always between 12:00 and 16:00 hours. They chose the most outstanding front page news story of that moment

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 8 Journalism

Figure 1. Quality index of the European reference press (2013). Online versus printed version.

(provided that it was news and not some other interpretative genre such as interview, feature or in-depth report), they did a screen capture, clicked on the main link related to it, printed it and analysed it in depth following the method used in the research. The following day, they followed the same procedure with the exact same news story published by the newspaper in its printed edition. In a few cases, the most outstanding news story in the digital version did not appear in the paper edition the next day, either because its informative cycle had expired, or for some other reason. 21 days were analysed in total. Taking the five newspapers examined, the resulting sample was of 105 news stories which, multiplied by 2 (digital and printed versions), gave 210 items to be scrutinised. The results obtained for 2013 were collated with those obtained from the diachronic research (2001–2012), provided that they were elements comparable between each other, in this case large format news stories in printed version.

General results of the five newspapers The main information thrown up by this research (Figure 1) shows that the quality index of the printed version of the five major European newspapers, 6.06, is slightly higher than that of their digital editions, 5.66. This means an improvement of 40 hundredths, a far from negligible margin if we take into account the parameters of our analysis. With the exception of LM, all the papers obtain better results for their printed versions, which is, in itself a very significant fact. As with the diachronic research, FAZ continues to be the leading European newspaper in quality, both in its digital and printed versions. The printed version exceeds the digital one by 21 hundredths, breaking the

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 9

6.07 6.06 6.06 6.05 6.04 6.03 6.02 6.01 6 6 5.99 5.98 5.97 2001-2012 2013 Source: HGH group

Figure 2. Evolution of the quality index of large format printed news (2001–2013).

7-point barrier (7.08), something not seen previously in this research. As far as EP is concerned, the glaring difference between its printed and digital versions is surprising (1.41 points in favour of the first one). The printed edition of the FT is clearly better than online (43 hundredths), while CDS also shows a important difference (31 hundredths). LM is the exception, with their digital version exceeding the printed one by 34 hundredths. All the news items included in the sample fit within the profile of large format news stories. If we compare the marks obtained by these five newspapers in 2013 (printed version) with those of the same type of news during the period 2001–2012, we can observe a slight improvement (6 hundredths) during the last analysed year (Figure 2). These data do not allow us to draw major conclusions, although it does certify the coherence of the previous research. We can see a high degree of coherence in the results obtained by these five newspapers during the periods 2001–2012 and 2013, even though there do not seem to be great changes in trend.

Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) Just as in the previous researched period (2001–2012), the newspaper FAZ also obtains the highest score among the European reference newspapers in 2013, both in its printed and digital editions. Its scores are considerably higher than the other papers. The news quality index awards it 6.87 points for the digital edition and 7.08 for the printed one. Therefore, the gap between the two editions is reduced to 0.21. The German newspaper FAZ is characterised by its own investigative news reports, which are very well prepared journalistically and generally published in the printed edition. From there, the article later includes them in its digital edition, allowing free access to readers. In fact, 42.85 per cent of the news items covered by the analysis period had

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 10 Journalism

5 4.04 4.25 4 3 2.16 2.16 2 1 0.67 0.67 0 Selecon Elaboraon Social contribuon

Source: HGH group Online Printed

Figure 3. Quality index for FAZ (2013). Online versus printed version. been published in the printed version in the previous days. If we only consider the online news prepared originally for that version, the gap between the digital and printed edition grows. The news primarily published on the Internet obtained 6.32 points, making the difference between the two editions 0.76. This research corroborates the theory that the news produced for the website www. faz.net reflects the immediacy of the digital publication. In this sense, the elaboration of that same news in the printed edition is more complete (Figure 3). First, the headlines of the digital news tend to contain statements from the sources while the printed news summarises the whole story in one headline.3 Second, online news normally presents two perspectives, while the printed version is characterised by up to three perspectives on the reported information. Furthermore, the relevance of said perspectives is greater in the printed edition than in the digital one.4 Third, the digital edition contains a greater number of spelling and grammatical mistakes than the printed one. Moreover, the online edition does not correct typing errors (apostro- phes and commas in the wrong place) contained in the printed version of the news which are later uploaded onto the net. Finally, although both the digital and printed news include the answers to the W questions, the digital news items do not take advantage of the resources of this medium to develop them further. That is, the German newspaper does not create hyperlinks in its digital news, beyond those which refer to older articles in the same paper. However, the digital edition of FAZ stands out against the printed version for the informative and artistic quality of its complementary informative elements (graphics, videos, photos, etc.). The interactive graphics which accompany the digital news deserve a special mention, in which the journalistic work of the German newspaper forms an alliance with the technological resources characteristic of electronic editions. However, the speed of digital information implies that the online edition does not take as much care with journalistic language as the printed one.5 Similarly, the digital edition contains a higher number of spelling and grammatical mistakes than the printed version. Furthermore, the digital edition contains aesthetic errors which the printed edition never makes, such as orphan and widow lines in paragraphs.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 11

3.5 3.31 3 2.5 2.09 2.14 2.01 2 1.5 0.9 1 0.83 0.5 0 SeleconElaboraonSocial contribuon

Source: HGH group online Printed

Figure 4. Quality index for FA (2013). Online versus printed version.

With reference to qualitative aspects of the news, both editions also present different characteristics. On the one hand, the digital version offers a lower number of political news items than the printed edition (26.27% and 29.27%, respectively). However, the digital edition almost doubles the number of economic news items of the printed newspaper (19.51% and 12.20%, respectively). However, the economic news published in the digital edition gets a higher score with respect to its journalistic quality than those in the printed edition (6.68 points against 7.2). Likewise, the digital edition gives priority to the news from Germany: 14.64 per cent of the news published in the online edition refer to the German State, while in the printed edition, it is 9.76 per cent of the total information. In this sense, the digital edition informs to a lesser extent on issues relating to the European Union than the printed one (4.88% and 7.32%, respectively). Finally, it is worth stating the little importance which this newspaper gives to the social contribution of the news, although a slight improvement can be seen from the period 2001–2012 to 2013 (going from 0.57 to 0.67).

El País (EP) EP is the newspaper which shows the largest imbalance between the quality index of its online version (4.93) and printed one (6.43). No other paper, of the five analysed, comes close to this gap of 1.41 points between the two values, which speaks clearly of the differences in quality which exist between the two formats. The news in its digital version does not achieve a pass mark, getting the second lowest score of the five analysed papers (only the FT is below EP with a score of 4.79). The causes of this imbalance can clearly be seen in Figure 4. The news which EP publishes in its digital version has serious problems, particularly with regard to the elaboration process. The pressures of immediacy provoke rushed writing, with inaccuracies,6 repetitions,7 extremely long sentences,8 confused ideas9 and/or unintelligible10 and frequent mistakes in accentuation, spelling-typing and/or punctua- tion,11 mistakes which in the majority of cases are later corrected in the printed version

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 12 Journalism

Figure 5. Front page of the first printed edition of EP from 24 January 2013 with the false photo of Hugo Chávez. of these same news items published the next day. In short, bad quality, clumsy elaboration, which is not up to the standard of a European reference newspaper. On the other hand, the period analysed in this research allowed us to observe one of the most serious mistakes ever made by EP throughout its almost 40 years of history. We are referring to the first printed edition published on 24 January 2013 (a day which is included in our research). EP opened its edition with a large photo of a man in hospital, lying in bed, apparently unconscious and connected to breathing equipment. The person in the photo was supposedly the then president of Venezuela Hugo Chávez. The photo was accompanied by the following headline: El secreto de la enfermedad de Chávez. (The secret of Chavez’s illness). It was later discovered that the photo was not, in fact, Hugo Chavez, and the paper publicly recognised its ‘tremendous mistake’.12 The false photo hardly left a mark on the digital version, as it was corrected 30 minutes after its publication online (Figure 5). On realising the mistake, EP withdrew this edition which was already on the news- stands and substituted it with a completely different one, which cost the paper €225,000. The corrected edition of the article arrived to the sale points much later than usual, at around 12:00 mid-day at the earliest. This was a ‘serious mistake’ (included in the format section) which was registered as such in our research. Just a week later, EP managed a scoop which would have international repercussions, the so-called Barcenas Papers, in which alleged illegal financing of the Popular Party during the period 1990 to 2008 was revealed. This happened on 31 January 2013, 1 week after the ‘big mistake’, which undoubtedly aided in the forgetting of that error.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 13

3.5 3.22 2.94 3 2.5 1.98 2.02 2 1.5 1 0.8 0.69 0.5 0 Selecon Elaboraon Social contribuon

Source: HGH group Online Printed

Figure 6. Quality index for LM (2013). Online versus printed version.

Le Monde (LM) The newspaper LM has noticeably improved its electronic edition over the last few years, as is reflected in the high number of digital subscriptions it achieved. It has 32,000 subscribers (13% of its total paper edition readership) and hopes to attract 200,000 new subscribers over the following years. This rise in subscriptions has allowed it to offset the drop in advertising in the paper version.13 The first digital version of LM appeared in 2002. The number of subscribers has risen throughout the last decade, but it is in the last year that an exponential increase has occurred (10,000 new ones between 2012 and 2013). This is due largely to a marketing strategy based on affordable pricing: €15 per month. In April 2013, LM brought out its fourth digital version, adapted to new formats, be they mobile phones or tablets. This version develops the content of the paper version and offers more analysis, particularly in the International section. Of the 60 journalists on the newspaper, five work exclusively on the digital version. LM is currently the leader of online newspapers in France. In absolute terms, the LM quality index for its electronic version is of 5.99 (the second best score for the five analysed newspapers) against the 5.65 for the printed version, which is a difference of 34 hundredths. One interpretation applicable to both versions could be the following: during 2013, LM made a considerable effort with both the selection process and the elaboration process of the news, but it neglected the section concerning the social contribution of the reported fact (a tendency which was observed in the previous research). There are some keys which explain digital LM’s high mark, which are the painstaking design of its website, the numerous hyperlinks (textual and audiovisual) and photos on the front page, in addition to the general accuracy of its journalistic style. If we analyse the global LM score by segments (Figure 6), we can clearly see that it is in the preparation process of the news where the differences can be witnessed (a difference of 28 hundredths), while they appear to a lesser extent in the social contribution section (11 hundredths in favour of the online version).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 14 Journalism

If we analyse the data more deeply, we can see that, within the section of news elaboration (3.22 in the online version and 2.94 in the printed one, out of a possible maximum of 5), the digital version exceeds the printed one in all the variables. The digital news shows a higher score of accuracy (correspondence between the headline and the body of the news), more depth (presence of Ws), higher number of different perspectives,14 higher presence of complementary informative elements (infographics, graphics, photographs, etc.), better artistic contribution (indicative of creativity) and identical level of accuracy in its journalistic language (1 point, the maximum possible). The only proviso in favour of print against Internet, in this section, refers to the errors in the text. The online version scores −0.06 against −0.02 for the printed version. This same trend can be seen in the section about the social contribution of the news. Both the digital version and the printed one score very modestly (0.8 the former and 0.69 the latter out of a possible 2.5). Neither the digital version nor the printed one have gone to great lengths in this aspect. The only exception is that concerning the section ‘respect for human dignity’, in which the digital version gets the maximum possible (0.5) against the 0.42 of the printed version. The remaining variables show identically low values in some cases (0.15 out of 0.5 in the section dedicated to power watchdog and 0.0 with regard to the inclusion of cultural references other than its own) or similarly low (promotion of social debate: 0.1 in the online version against 0.08 for the printed one; the combating of marginalisation: 0.05 for the digital against 0.04 for print). With regard to the selection process of the news item, the registered differences are only 4 hundredths in favour of print, a margin which does not allow us to draw major conclusions. As a last reflection, we would like to underline two points: one positive and one negative. The first one is the more than acceptable degree of quality in the digital version of LM, 5.99 points, which puts it in second place after FAZ. The second, the confirmation of the decline in the quality of the printed version, already witnessed in the period 2001– 2012 and which continued during the first trimester of 2013.

Corriere della Sera (CDS) The digital edition of the Italian newspaper CDS gets a score of 5.72 in the news quality index, notably inferior to the score obtained by those same news items in the printed edition (6.03).15 This variation of 31 hundredths in news quality can be better seen by analysing the score obtained in each one of the segments which make up the total news index. In this case, the preparation process of the news marks the difference in favour of the printed edition (Figure 7) exceeding the digital by 47 hundredths. However, as we can see in the figure, the digital edition of CDS gets better scores for its printed edition in the selection phase of the news and in social contribution of the same, albeit symbolically (15 hundredths in one case and 2 in the other). The score obtained by the digital edition, characterised by speed, during the selection process of the news is higher than that of the printed edition (1.95 and 1.8, respectively). Also, the social contribution of the information is slightly higher in the digital edition (1.05) than the printed one (1.03), due to online news tending to more frequently include references which promote social debate.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 15

3.5 3.2 3 2.73 2.5 1.95 2 1.8 1.5 1.05 1.03 1 0.5 0 Selecon Elaboraon Social contribuon

Source: HGH group Online Printed

Figure 7. Quality index for CDS (2013). Online versus printed version.

Nevertheless, the elaboration phase of the news shows the biggest differences between the two editions. The printed version of CDS gets 3.20 out of 5 in the indicators which measure the process of the news, while the digital version only gets 2.73. This is, in fact, the largest gap which exists between the two editions, due to the fact that the complementary informative elements and the journalistic language used in the printed version adapt better to informative necessities. On the one hand, the news in printed format contains illustrations, photos and graphics of a higher quality than the digital news (35% and 20%, respectively). In this sense, 27.5 per cent of the complementary informative elements of online news do not add any further information to the news itself. Likewise, the complementary informative elements in the printed news are artistically relevant in 17.5 per cent of the news, while in the digital edition they are in no more than 10 per cent of cases. On the other hand, the gap which exists between the printed edition and the digital one in the news elaboration process also points to the language used. Although both editions take care with their journalistic style, the digital edition contains more than double the number of spelling and grammatical mistakes than the printed one: 22.5 per cent of the digital news contains some sort of spelling or grammatical mistake, while in the printed version, the ratio was of 10 per cent. Going beyond the quantitative data, the printed edition tends to diversify the news. The news published online, on the other hand, is brought together in two big sections: politics (47.62%) and economy (23.81%). However, the news in printed format continues to be of a higher quality. The political news in the printed edition got 6.33 in the quality index, while online it only achieved 5.82. The news related to economics, furthermore, shows an even wider gap: 6.71 in the printed edition and 5.46 in the digital. Finally, if we look at aesthetic aspects, the digital edition of the Italian newspaper takes great care with the aesthetics of its news items. The news analysed in this research shows a higher laxity in aesthetic aspects in the printed version. In fact, nearly half of the news stories from the printed edition contain orphan lines (31.58%) or widow lines (15.79%).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 16 Journalism

The better preparation in the printed news constitutes one of the main potentials of the Italian newspaper. The depth of the news prevails over the digital edition, which stands out for the speed of its news. In that sense, the weaknesses present in the informative work of CDS affect the essence of journalism. On the one hand, the relaxation in journalistic standards affects to a greater extent the elaboration of the news. On the other hand, the Italian newspaper gives scarce relevance to the indicators of the social contribution of the news. Such an informative strategy will mean that the topicality of the news will prevail over the treatment and social contribution of it, given that the journalistic task will be relegated to the mere transmission of data, under the axiom that the information is neutral.

Financial Times (FT) As with the majority of the previous cases, the quality of the printed version of FT (5.22) exceeds that of its online edition (4.79), in this case by 43 hundredths. This research reiterates the trend already apparent in the FT during the period 2001–2012, with this newspaper also getting the lowest results of the five analysed in 2013. Paradoxically, the credibility of this newspaper in financial circles worldwide does not fit with the poor results obtained by its quality index in this research. The situation is that the FT owes a large part of its current circulation to the great success achieved by its digital edition in the last few years. The newspaper currently has an estimated readership of 2.2 million around the world.16 The average circulation of all the printed editions it publishes put together, reached 269,000 copies in February 2013, of which 88,000 correspond to its British edition.17 In a context of general decline, the total circulation of the newspaper was, in 2012, 28 per cent higher than 5 years earlier. That increase is due to digital subscription: in July 2012 the newspaper announced that there were more subscriptions to ft.com (313,000) than printed copies, with the total being around 600,000.18 Born in May 1995, the website ft.com is today one of the few successful examples of pay per view in the daily press. Although it began by financing itself through advertising, its subscription service started functioning in 2002, and today works under the premise of allowing free, open access to a determined number of articles before payment being required. Similarly, FT has also adapted its format to be read on smartphones and tablets, which is an important route for the consumption of its articles.19 The profile of the FT reader is slightly different from the rest of the newspapers analysed in this research. Despite being a general information medium, the majority of its news is connected to the economic-financial world. FT has always boasted about having contacts at the highest level in the financial world, as well as maintaining excellent relationships with its sources, although in many cases, as we can see, these remain confiden- tial. The key to the reliability which the public confers to this newspaper lies in the confidence acquired throughout its history. It could be summed up by saying that the readership of the FT continues to traditionally trust the newspaper’s sources, even though, in many cases, these are not sufficiently certified.20 We must suppose that such trust does not mean a blank cheque for the newspaper, but rather the passage of time has demonstrated the veracity of certain news items which at the outset did not appear to be very well contrasted.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 17

3.5 3.01 3.08 3 2.5 1.83 2 1.6 1.5 1 0.3 0.5 0.12 0 SeleconElaboraonSocial contribuon

Source: HGH group Online Printed

Figure 8. Quality index for FT (2013). Online versus printed version.

The digital version of FT suffers from the same deficiencies which had already appeared in the previously analysed period (2001–2012): lack of attribution to some sources and scarce mention of the origin of the information, among others. In this case (2013), the digital and printed versions appear to complement each other. We rarely find the same texts in both editions, which would indicate specific writing for each medium, which in the digital version means they are more immediate, while in the printed one they benefit from more time and the possibility of expanding the information within its context. Normally, the pieces analysed in print are more extensive and get better results. Furthermore, some of the printed news items refer to complementary videos which can be found in the online version. Therefore, they could be considered mediums which are intimately related and which complement each other. Therein lies precisely the fact that the printed version gets a higher score than the electronic one, given that this improvement can be observed in the three segments of the quality index: selection, elaboration and social contribution of the news (Figure 8).

General conclusions 1. In general terms, the quality of the printed versions of the European reference press is slightly higher than that of their digital editions. A difference of 40 hundredths (6.06 against 5.66), in such tight parameters as those used in this research, provides sufficient margin to establish some reflections. The haste with which the digital editions are written up provokes all kinds of errors, relaxes quality controls and accelerates the elaboration process of the news. All this has repercussions on the quality of the end product. 2. The news quality index of the European reference press has maintained a uniform tendency during the first 13 years of this century. In fact, the indices scored by these newspapers during 2013 maintain a high degree of coherence with those obtained during the period 2001–2012. Thus, the quality index of the large format printed news only varied by 6 hundredths going from 6.00 (2001–2012) to 6.06 in the last year.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 18 Journalism

3. The good or bad quality of the news does not always result in reward or punish- ment on behalf of the readers. The experience of the FT is enlightening in this sense. The low quality scores obtained in this research contrast with the increase in its digital subscriptions. FT is the newspaper of the European financial elite, a paper with over 125 years of history. Its prestige lies not so much in the detailed and exact certification of the origins of its information, as in the plus of credibility which its readers historically appear to have placed on the sources used by this newspaper over the years. 4. What has happened with the FT cannot be elevated to the category of paradigm, nor is it necessarily comparable to the other newspapers. Quality influences readers’ trust in the newspaper, although that confidence does not always translate into an increase in sales. There are other factors, apart from the quality of the news, involved in the crisis of credibility which citizens are increasingly showing towards the media, but these fall outside the remit of this research. 5. FAZ is confirmed as the best European reference newspaper in terms of quality. In the study carried out in 2013, both its digital and printed editions come out in first place with a noticeable advantage over the rest. This corroborates that which was advanced by the previous study (2001–2012) in which it also came outstand- ingly first. FAZ is characterised by a professional treatment of information, which leads it to include much of its own investigative news. The result of all this is a quality index in 2013 of 7.08, a score previously unheard of in this research. 6. The speed imposed on digital versions has clear repercussions on the quality of the news in all the newspapers (except LM). The biggest differences in quality between the digital and printed formats are observed in EP. This newspaper gets a bad digital score (4.79) against an acceptable printed one (6.34). The gap of 1.41 between the two editions is the highest of all the newspapers and is based on a deficient news elaboration process in its digital version where, among other things, inaccuracies, repetition, confused ideas, extremely long sentences and accentuation errors proliferate. 7. LM gets the second best digital score of the five newspapers analysed (5.99) exceeding its score for the printed version (5.65). The keys to this behaviour can be found in the effort which this newspaper is making to improve its digital edition, with a painstaking design, important presence of hyperlinks and photos on its homepage and an improvement in its journalistic style. In this case, the high quality of its digital version is being rewarded by its readers. Proof of this is the notable increase in digital subscriptions to this newspaper in the last few years. 8. CDS is another newspaper which ratifies the general trend: its printed edition exceeds the digital one by 31 hundredths. This gap lies, as with the rest of the newspapers, in the best score obtained for the elaboration process of the news. Complementary informative elements and the journalistic language used in the printed version exceed the parameters of the digital edition. Likewise, the latter registers more than twice the number of spelling and grammatical mistakes, which shows once again that the obsession with speed ends up damaging the quality of the news.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 19

9. The future: Everything would lead us to think that the printed editions of newspapers have an increasingly uncertain future, despite their quality being superior to that of their digital versions. In this sense, the generalised eagerness of all newspapers to increase their digital subscriptions must be accompanied by an improvement in their electronic editions.

Acknowledgements The signatories of the article would also like to underline the special fieldwork collaboration, of Estefania Jimenez, lecturer of the Department of Audiovisual Communication and Advertising at the University of the Basque Country (UPV / EHU); Ludivine Thuverez, Doctor of Iberian Studies and lecturer at the University of Poitiers (Faculty of Humanities and Languages); and Ilaria Di Bonito, pre-doctorate researcher in the Communication Department of the UPF (Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona). They are responsible for the data collection of Financial Times, Le Monde and Corriere della Sera, respectively.

Funding This work is the fruit of a research project (CSO 2011-23237) financed by MICINN Ministry of Science and Innovation and by the UPV/EHU University of the Basque Country (GIU 11/04).

Notes 1. This same research group HGH (Media, Society and Education in the Basque language) has carried out a diachronic study about the evolution of the quality of the printed edition of these same papers from 2001 to 2012. The results from this research were presented in the International Association for Media Communication and Research (IAMCR) Congress (Section JRE: Journalism Research and Education) held in Dublin from 25 to 29 June 2013. 2. It should be underlined that the pieces analysed in this research were always written news, discounting other interpretative genre such as interview, feature, in-depth report, analysis or others directly related to opinion. 3. While the digital news on 14 March 2013 included the comments of the Bishop of Buenos Aires in the headline (‘Franziskus wird über gewöhnliche Grenzen hinausgehen’), the printed edition that day included the content of the story in its entirety (‘Anerkennung und Lob für Papst Franziskus’). 4. For example, the main news item in the digital edition on 14 March 2013 gave a privileged position to the comments of the acting Venezuelan Vice-President (Nicolas Maduro), who claimed that the recently deceased President Chavez had intervened ‘from heaven’ so that the new pope would be South American. The printed version of the information omitted these comments, considering them to be irrelevant, but included the reactions of many more leading figures to the election of the new pope. 5. In the digital news headlined ‘Merkel-Effekt und Ypsilante-Effekt’ of 26 January 2013, the two first sentences of the lead repeat the same expression: ‘Die CSU will unbedingt Abstand zur Bundestagswahl. Die CDU in Hessen nicht unbegindt’. 6. News published by El País (EP) in its digital version on 10 February 2013. Sub-heading of the news: ‘The leader of the PSOE party [Rubalcaba] presents a decalogue of measures to fight corruption)’. Text of the news: ‘The General Secretary of the PSOE party Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba presents today in Bilbao four specific proposals …) Is it possible to have a four point decalogue?’

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 20 Journalism

7. The online version of EP frequently repeats words, even a number of them, in the headlines and sub-headings of its news, something which doesn’t happen in the printed version. This occurred in the main digital news published by this paper on 24 January 2013, 11 February 2013, 12 February 2013, 14 March 2013, 14 March 2013 and 19 March 2013. 8. On 25 January 2012 [captured at 13:13 hours], 8 February 2013 [captured at 15:35 hours] and 9 February 2013 [captured at 12:42 hours], EP opened its digital version with news items in which appeared sentences of 69, 85 and 75 words, respectively. 9. An example of this was the first paragraph of the news published by EP in its digital version on 09 February 2013 [captured at 12:42 hours] News relating to the ‘Caso Urdangarin’. 10. Opening news item in the EP online version on 18 March 2013 [captured at 13:04 hours]. News relating to the Cypriot crisis:

Last July, on the verge of the BCE announcing that it was prepared to intervene in the market if the problems worsened, it is an indicator (!?), which conditions both the conditions of the financing of a State and the companies which reside in it (!?), showed its lowest level in decades, exceeding 640 points. 11. One example: the homepage news of the digital version of EP on 27 January 2013 [captured at 12:06 hours] reports the tragedy produced in a discothèque in Santa María, in the region of Río Grande do Sul (Brasil), neither the words María, nor Río appeared with accentuation. In the printed version both these mistakes were corrected. 12. See EP 25 January 2013, p. 35. 13. Source: Diffusion de la presse en numérique: des débuts contrastés mais en croissance, France Culture, 01.03.2013. Available online: http://www.franceculture.fr/emission-pixel- diffusion-de-la-presse-en-numerique-des-debuts-contrastes-mais-en-croissance-2013-03- 14. During the period analysed, the journalists of Le Monde (LM) showed a clear tendency to contrast their information, especially when dealing with social or international conflicts. In these cases, the journalists used contrasted sources, be they civil, military, governmental or non-governmental. 15. The analysis of the news in Corriere della Sera (CDS) was interrupted by the journalists’ strike, to show their rejection of the staffing cuts decided by the directors of the Italian newspaper. No news was published in the digital edition during 19 and 20 March 2013, and the printed edition did not appear on 20 and 21 March 2013. 16. According to the audit carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers in November 2011. 17. http://www.abc.org.uk/Certificates/18234567.pdf. Data from October 2012. 18. http://aboutus.ft.com/2012/07/27/ft-digital-subscriptions-surpass-print-circulation- globally/#axzz2BYSMUlox. Data from July 2012. 19. This increase does not automatically run in parallel with the increase in business profits but it does mean, in any case, an attempt to adapt to a different pattern of financing, which relies much more on income from subscriptions than advertising investment. Compared to advertising, which represents 39 per cent of the newspapers income, subscriptions make up over half of the Financial Times (FT) Group income (http://mashable.com/2013/04/02/ financial-times-john-ridding-strategy/). 20. FT frequently uses a somewhat unorthodox system of attributing information to its sources. They are formulas such as ‘according to people,’ or ‘close to …’. These types of formulae are not considered rigorous and are penalised in this research.

References Amado A (ed.) (2007) Periodismo de calidad: Debates y desafíos. Buenos Aires: La Crujía y Fopea.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 21

Beck K, Reineck D and Schubert C (2010) Journalistische Qualität in der Wirtschaftskrise. Konstanz: UVK. Bogart L (2004) Reflections on content quality in newspapers. Newspapers Research Journal 25(1): 40–65. Bucher H and Altmeppen K (eds) (2003) Qualität im Journalismus: Grundlagen, Dimensionen, Praxismodelle. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Costera I (2013) Valuable journalism: A search for quality from the vantage point of the user. Journalism 14(6): 754–770. Deuze M (2005) What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsid- ered journalism. Journalism 6(4): 442–464. Esser F and Umbricht A (2013) Competing models of journalism? Political affairs coverage in US, British, German, Swiss, French and Italian newspapers. Journalism 14: 989–1007. García Avilés JA, Leóna JB, Sanders K, et al. (2004) Journalists at digital television newsrooms in Britain and Spain: Workflow and multi-skilling in a competitive environment. Journalism Studies 5(1): 87–100. Gómez Mompart JL (2009) From quality journalism to speculative journalism. Transfer: Journal of Contemporary Culture 4: 51–61. Gómez Mompart JL, Gutiérrez JF and Palau D (eds) (2013) La calidad periodística: Teorías, investigaciones y sugerencias profesionales. Barcelona: UAB. González Gorosarri M (2011) Albisteen Kalitatea (Research on Basque Media’s News Quality). Leioa: UPV/EHU. Gripsrud J and Weibull L (2010) Media, Markets & Public Spheres: European Media at the Crossroads. Bristol: Intellect. Halin D C and Mancini P (2004) Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Lewis J, Williams A, Franklin B, et al. (2007) The Quality and Independence of British Journalism: Tracking the Changes Over 20 Years. Cardiff: Cardiff University. Available at: http://www. cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/resources/QualityIndependenceofBritishJournalism.pdf McQuail D (1992) Media Performance: Mass Communication and the Public Interest. London: SAGE. Maurer T (2005) Fernsehnachrichten und Nachrichtenqualität: Eine Längsschnittstudie zur Nachrichtenentwicklung in Deutschland. München: Reinhard Fischer. Medina M (2006) Calidad y contenidos audiovisuales. Pamplona: Eunsa. Meyer P (2004) The Vanishing Newspaper: Saving Journalism in the Information Age. Columbia: University of Missouri Press. O’Donnell P and McKnight D (2012) Journalism at the Speed of Bytes: Australian Newspapers in the 21st Century, Department of Media and Communications. Sydney, NSW, Australia: The University of Sydney. Pellegrini S and Múgica MC (2006) Valor Agregado Periodístico (VAP) La Calidad Periodística como un factor productivo en un entorno medial complejo. Palabra Clave 9(1): 11–28. Picard R (2004) Commercialism and newspaper quality. Newspaper Research Journal 25(1): 54–65. Pujadas E (2011) La television de calidad: Contenidos y debates. Barcelona: UAB. Ramírez de la Piscina T, González Gorosarri M, Aiestaran A, et al. (2014) Quality journalism in times of crisis: An analysis of the evolution of the European reference press (2001–2012). Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, 69: 248–274. Available at: http://www.revistalati- nacs.org/069/paper/1011_UPV/14ten.html. doi: 10.4185/RLCS-2014-1011en Risse T (2003) An emerging European public sphere? Empirical evidence and theoretical clarifica- tions. Collegium 28: 31–40.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 22 Journalism

Semetko H and Valkenburg P. (2000) Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50: 93–109. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000. tb02843.x Trebbe J (2008) Fernsehprogrammanalyse Schweiz: Methode, Durchführung, Ergebnisse. Zürich: Rüegger Verlag. Trenz H (2004) Media coverage on European governance: Exploring the European public sphere in national quality newspapers. European Journal of Communication 19(3): 291–319. Vehlow B (2006) Qualität von Spätnachrichten-Sendungen. München: Reinhard Fischer. Weischenberg S, Loosen W and Beuthner M (eds) (2006) Medien-Qualitäten: Öffentliche Kommunikation zwischen ökonomischem Kalkül und Sozialverantwortung. Konstanz: UVK. Zabaleta I (1997) Komunikazioaren eta ikerkuntzako metodologia. Bilbao: UEU.

Author biographies Txema Ramírez de la Piscina worked as a Journalist in different media from 1979 to 1989; took a Degree in Journalism (UPV/EHU, 1982); worked as a Lecturer at the EHU-UPV since 1990; did his PhD in Journalism (1993); worked as a Lecturer of UPV/EHU since 1998; was accredited as Professor by the agency ANECA in 2012 and as Full Professor in 2010 by the Basque agency Unibasq; and worked as Director since 2011 of the Research Team HGH recognised officially by the University of the Basque Country. Since February 2013, he is member of the Board of Directors of EiTB (Basque Country’s Public Broadcast Service). He is the author or co-author of 12 scientific books. The last one was about Spokesperson trainings and was published in 2011. Another one, Gabinetes de Comunicación (1995), is still today used as a text-book at numerous universities. He has participated in a lot of national and international scientific congresses. He is the author or co-author of more than 55 specialised articles in scientific reviews. Maria González Gorosarri is a PhD in Communication, mention Europeus (2011); is the author of the thesis Albisteen kalitatea (Research on Basque Media´s News Quality); has a Degree in Law and Journalism; has done a Postdoctoral Fellowship at the University of the Basque Country; is a blogger at ‘Albistetan’, as well as contributor for Tas-Tas and Bizkaia, on the quality of news. She has worked as a journalist for the weekly newspaper Anboto and Anboto Radio, as well as numerous collaborations in media (Argia, Aizu!, Euskaldunon Egunkaria …). She has also been media officer at Topagunea Euskara Elkarteen Federazioa, UEU and First Congress on Basque Journalism. Alazne Aiestaran obtained her PhD in Communication Studies in 2007 from the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU). She worked for 7 years as head of Drogetenitturri, a monthly publication in Basque. She has been a lecturer at the University of the Basque Country for 5 years at the Department of Journalism. She has participated in several projects as a researcher financed by the Spanish Central Government, by the University of the Basque Country and the Basque Autonomous Government. She has been a board member of the Rikardo Arregi Journalism Award, 2008–2011. Since January 2011, she is a member of the Editorial Board of the Journal of Communication Studies ZER. Beatriz Zabalondo has a Degree in Communication Sciences from the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU); she obtained the Advanced Studies Diploma through research on the attitudes of Basque-speaking young people to dubbed programmes on Basque public TV. Since 2011, she lectures at the University of the Basque Country. Before that date, she lectured at the University of Mondragon for 7 years and worked as an audiovisual translator for over 25 years. She has also contributed to different Basque media (newspaper, television, …). She is currently working on her

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 Ramírez de la Piscina et al. 23 thesis about Basque audiovisual translation and is a Member of the Board of Directors of the Berria Taldea (editorial group of the daily Berria, the only paper in Basque) since June 2011; she has been president of the Group since June 2013. Antxoka Agirre has a Degree in Law and in Journalism, both at the UPV/EHU (University of the Basque Country). He worked in the Court of Bergara as a process manager for 2 years. He was a journalist in magazines such as Baleike, Gaztezulo and Bertsolari Aldizkaria. He was in charge of communication for the platform Itziar Herria Sortzen and worked as a community manager in the euskaltegi Legazpi 6. In 2008–2011, he worked as a Lecturer in UPV/EHU, in the Department of Journalism II, and since 2011, he has been working as an Associate Professor. He also is the Director of the magazine Bertsolari and he is working on a PhD about the relationships between creative Basque culture and Spanish cultural community.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at MEMORIAL UNIV OF NEWFOUNDLAND on July 12, 2014 JOU0010.1177/1464884914541068JournalismKim and McCluskey research-article5410682014

Article

Journalism 2015, Vol. 16(6) 791–811 The DC factor? Advocacy © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: groups in the news sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1464884914541068 jou.sagepub.com

Young Mie Kim University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

Michael McCluskey American University, USA

Abstract This study examines dynamics among organized interests’ characteristics, the organizations’ strategic activities, and news coverage of organizations’ activities by incorporating theoretical perspectives from group politics and journalism. To examine the relationship among groups’ characteristics, strategic efforts, and news coverage (visibility and prominence), the study combines three large data sets: group profile data (208 US organizations based on the Internal Revenue Service data collected by the National Center for Charitable Statistics), telephone interviews with groups’ executive members (208 randomly sampled organizations nationwide), and content coding of newspaper articles that covered the same organizations (548 newspaper articles). Findings from this study show that the ‘DC factor’, that is, being located in Washington, DC, is consistently a significant factor in explaining the presence of groups in newspapers, even after controlling for group resources, including total revenue. The implications of the findings are discussed.

Keywords Advocacy groups, interest groups, news, newspaper, organized interests, Washington DC

Organized interests engage in a variety of strategic activities to further their goals. These efforts may spur reciprocal effects in which public officials, citizens, and news influence each other, potentially leading to changes that advance their goals. More than a century

Corresponding author: Young Mie Kim, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 5115 Vilas Communication Hall, 821 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53706, USA. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded fromDownloaded http://www.elearnica.ir from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 792 Journalism 16(6) ago, the value of news salience in the dynamic political communication process was recognized by Bryce (1889). News salience is a valuable resource for advocacy groups attempting to achieve political change (Bryce, 1889). Only in recent years, however, have scholars systematically examined the interplay among advocacy groups, their strategic activities, and news coverage (e.g. Danielian and Page, 1994; McCluskey, 2008; Thrall, 2006; Tresch and Fischer, 2008). Prior research was limited by conceptual and methodological shortcomings. Some research categorized groups’ strategies into a dichotomy (inside vs outside lobbying), neglecting nuanced differences among a variety of strategies (e.g. McCluskey, 2008). Although Tresch and Fischer (2008) analyzed a wide range of groups across seven European countries, their analysis excluded groups’ resources (e.g. revenue), which other scholars found to be a crucial element of group politics (e.g. Berry, 1999; Berry and Arons, 2003; Danielian and Page, 1994; Schlozman and Tierney, 1986; Thrall, 2006). Even groundbreaking work (e.g. Danielian and Page, 1994; Thrall, 2006) equated news coverage to outside lobbying, assuming that organizations, not journalists, make the news. Little attention has been paid to the role of journalism practices. This study attempts to advance our knowledge about the relationship among advocacy groups, their strategic activities, and news coverage – that is, the volume of news and an organization’s salience in the news. First, drawing upon group politics literature, this study examines groups’ activities beyond the simple dichotomy of inside versus outside lobbying to incorporate various strategic efforts in the changing political environment. Second, understanding that not all efforts made by organizations make the news, this study pays attention to journalistic values, norms, and practices to examine what types of group activities do make the news. Acknowledging the disproportional distribution in news coverage of advocacy groups, this study focuses on systematic differences in group activities in the news, moving above and beyond the sheer volume of news. In doing so, this study identifies various organizational factors (i.e. total revenue, location in Washington, DC, the number of fixed staff members, membership dues, history, existence of a Political Action Committee (PAC), ideology) that make a group’s activities prominent in the news. By merging data of 208 advocacy group profiles and interview data with 548 news stories mentioning the same groups drawn from 118 newspapers, this study analyzes the interplay among advocacy groups, their strategic activities, and the news media.

Theoretical framework: Advocacy groups, journalistic practices, and news prominence Advocacy groups and news attention Groups, institutions, and advocates compete to define their issues and attempt to move their issues onto the public agenda (Entman, 2007) because they see social problems as social constructions (Reese, 2007). Media play a significant role in social constructions by setting priorities around these issues in the public’s mind (McCombs and Shaw, 1972). Sato (2003) demonstrates that in addition to setting the public agenda, policy discussions and actions are heavily influenced by the media’s agenda. Kosicki (1993)

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 793 argues that media agenda setting is influenced by the dynamics taking place among various political actors. The interplay among groups, institutions, advocates and their agenda-setting processes are well documented (e.g. health issues, Campbell and Sato, 2009; Glanz et al., 2008). However, the advocacy–news relationship is one of asymmetrical dependency (Gamson and Wolfsfeld, 1993) since groups rely on media for public attention much more than media rely on groups for news. The absence of coverage – described as ‘symbolic annihilation’ (e.g. Shanahan et al., 1997; Shoemaker and Reese, 1996; Tuchman, 1978) – or no coverage of events (Gamson and Wolfsfeld, 1993) suggests that the organization and its goals may never reach the public agenda. For this reason, Bryce (1889) underscores the value of news salience much more than the tone of news content. Delineating the details of advocacy groups’ campaigns in the agenda-building dynamics, Manheim (1991, 2010) argues that visibility (sheer volume of news) and salience (prominence cues in the news)1 are as important as persuasive tones (valence) in strategic communication. The presence of (or the lack of) certain information (i.e. coverage bias) and the prominence of certain information in the news (i.e. content bias) are even more important than the valence in tone (i.e. tone bias) because such systematic differences in news attention creates systematic biases toward certain groups with power in political communication (D’Alessio and Allen, 2000; Entman, 2007).

Groups’ strategic activities for influence: Group politics Advocacy groups engage in a variety of strategic efforts involving access to public officials, attempting to affect public opinion through campaigns or news attention, or directly engaging in public mobilization. Manheim (2010) explains groups’ strategic communication as an Information-influence Campaign Continuum (ICC): on one end of the spectrum, we have communication that is informational (managing information), and on the other end, communication that focuses on exercising influence (managing relationships). This acknowledges that a group’s every effort is strategic, but strategic activities vary widely in terms of goals, scope, target, focus, style, and visibility. Previous research, however, has categorized these strategic activities into a dichotomy (i.e. inside versus outside lobbying), neglecting nuanced differences among a variety of strategies (e.g. McCluskey, 2008). Taking into account the emergence of new techniques (e.g. Chadwick, 2007; Norris, 2002), we explore a wider range of activities beyond the previous dichotomy of ‘inside vs outside lobbying’. We focus on four distinc- tive categories: Traditional Inside Lobbying, Activist Facilitation, Informational Mobilization, and Participatory Mobilization. Inside Lobbying focuses on efforts by advocacy groups to influence public policy through traditional government institutions (legislative, executive, and judicial branches, at the federal, state, or local levels). Traditional forms of Inside Lobbying involve building interpersonal relationships with governmental officials to express a group’s preferences or even help draft legislation (Berry, 1999; Schlozman and Tierney, 1986; Walker, 1991). Efforts range from private meetings to giving testimony at public hearings or from implicit efforts to influence legislation by expressing preferences to explicit efforts such as drafting legislative language. Empirical evidence from the 1980s

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 794 Journalism 16(6) and 1990s consistently showed that most organizations, even small civic advocacy groups, heavily invested their collective action on Inside Lobbying (Berry, 1999; Nownes and Freeman, 1998; Schlozman and Tierney, 1986; Walker, 1991). This pattern was consistent with Washington-based groups, but also state- and local-level groups (Nownes and Freeman, 1998).2 Activist Facilitation refers to a group’s recruitment of formal members. Sustaining or expanding membership is crucial for collective action. Olson (1965) argues that groups provide selective benefits – especially tangible, material benefits (e.g. salary, cheap insurance, travel discounts) – for group members based on formal membership in order to sustain and maintain the organization. Groups with an established history, stable institutional basis, and ample resources (especially financial) are more capable of providing such tangible benefits. Informational Mobilization describes a group’s efforts to provide relevant information on issues of concern with latent issue publics (e.g. position papers and supporting documents, voting records of elected officials). Information Mobilization goes beyond gaining mass publicity by targeting issue-specific supporters and engaging in direct, interactive, and situational forms of activity utilizing the reduced information cost of digital technology. Digital technology also benefits groups in their attempts to draw news media attention; for example, e-mail messages target specific journalists with their stand on an issue, directing journalists to the groups’ website to view position papers. Participatory Mobilization encompasses strategic efforts to induce latent supporters into information-based collective action, such as helping citizens contact public officials or sign petitions, and organizing rallies or demonstrations. Participatory Mobilization is more grassroots-oriented and fluid as it targets latent supporters and coalitions. Participatory Mobilization strategies are also profoundly influenced by digital technology, which decreases the cost of accessing information and locating potential supporters. The Internet enables organized interests to form horizontally integrated networks (Bennett, 2003) even if they lack an institutionalized and bureaucratic structure. Since fewer resources and fewer fixed members are needed for collective action, organized interests rely less on membership and bureaucratic structure (Bimber, 2003). Instead, collective actions are based on fluid ‘supporters’ (Bennett, 2003). Given that each activity is designed to influence the public and public policies differently and that each has its own purposes and tactical values, it is important to understand how each strategic activity receives the attention of political actors and the public, ulti- mately influencing public policies. To this end, we explore news attention – how each of the four major strategic activities receives different levels of news attention and what factors influence varying news attention.

News attention to groups’ strategic activities: journalistic norms, values, and practices Too simplistic, however, is understanding the advocacy–news relationship from groups’ news-making efforts only. It underestimates the role played by journalistic values, norms, and practices in news-making processes; but it also underspecifies the differences in groups’ various strategic activities, which may or may not be directly related to a group’s

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 795 news-making efforts. Some activities may receive more news attention not simply because those activities are designed by advocacy groups to receive news attention, but because such activities are newsworthy from a journalistic perspective. To better understand the advocacy–news relationship, we should examine journalistic values, norms, and practices as well as the nuanced differences in groups’ various strategic activities. Journalism scholars have demonstrated that news is a product of choices. Rather than holding a mirror up to society, news producers decide what is worth covering or not. Not all organizations are treated the same; news attention reflects internal influences like news values, constraints, and ideology, and external influences like audience and adver- tiser preferences (for an overview, see Shoemaker and Reese, 1996). Newsworthiness standards vary by medium and audience, but several basic principles apply. Those principles give greater weight to stories based on facts rather than interpretation, to stories based on events rather than issues, and to known actors rather than the unknown, as well as dramatic and personalized stories (Galtung and Ruge, 1965; Staab, 1990). Tuchman (1978) points out that events are easier for the media to cover since they are based on facts and have a clear beginning and end, while issues are open to interpretation and often continue over time. Similarly, groups’ emotional and dramatic rhetoric is more likely to be adopted by news media because it is easier to understand (e.g. Andsager, 2000). Thus, groups engaging in planned events (e.g. protest) have a better chance of gaining news coverage. Considerations of media format also play an important role in journalistic judgments. According to Gans (1979), medium considerations ‘enable story selectors to exploit technological distinctiveness of their news to distinguish themselves’ (p. 158). Television journalists believe they should provide a headline service and quality visuals, while print journalists see themselves offering more in-depth views on an issue. For this reason, we might find less visually dramatic group activities in print news compared to television news. Considering both group politics and journalism perspectives, this study explores how the four major activities are connected to news attention. From the group politics perspectives, Tresch and Fischer (2008) find that groups gain more news coverage when engaged in participatory mobilization such as a protest, but little news attention for inside lobbying. For example, the largest proportion of stories on the National Organization for Women were generated by demonstrations (Barker-Plummer, 2002). However, McCluskey (2008) found that the more organizations engaged in both inside and outside lobbying activities, the more news coverage they received. Manheim (2010) argues that strategic activities such as Inside Lobbying would not receive news attention because such activities are not designed to gain news attention. However, Manheim also notes that much of the media attention is gained not by directly recruiting or explicitly informing journalists, but by engaging in strategic activities that serve the cultural needs and wants of society, satisfying journalists’ values, norms, and professional practices. From the journalism perspective, therefore, the mention of a group’s activities in the news does not necessarily mirror their actual activities in reality.

RQ1a. Which of the four group strategies (Traditional Inside Lobbying, Activist Facilitation, Informational Mobilization, and Participatory Mobilization) receives relatively more news attention than others?

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 796 Journalism 16(6)

RQ1b. Do the patterns in the news of groups’ activities differ than those of groups’ self-report? RQ1c. What kinds of groups’ strategic activities in reality would predict general visibility in the news (in terms of the volume of news)?

Organizational factors and groups’ strategic activities in the news News content analysis of groups’ activities alone provides little information about what actually influences news attention on those groups, however. Certain activities (e.g. protest) might have been overestimated, and the actual conflict in policy discussion between organizers and policymakers might have been underestimated. Furthermore, news coverage of public mobilization could be better explained by organizational factors that characterize a group rather than the strategic activities themselves. The complexity of this relationship leads us to examine how organizational factors (e.g. groups’ ‘resources’) are associated with journalistic values, norms, and practices, thus influencing news attention. The nature of a group itself, indeed, plays a role in news-making. The resource mobilization theory (McCarthy and Zald, 1977) suggests that groups with greater resources, especially financial resources, engage in a variety of activities ranging from Inside Lobbying to Public Mobilization. Groups with greater resources are also more newsworthy because they have greater access to public officials (Pross, 1986). Resource-rich groups have greater ‘news capability’ (Thrall, 2006) and are better able to provide news releases, news conferences, and other types of information subsidies (Gandy, 1982).3 Groups with more paid staff can pursue a wider range of media strategies and provide more expertise than resource-poor groups that lack professional staff. For instance, spe- cialists in public relations are trained to present the group in newsworthy ways, while staff with specific expertise (e.g. science background in an environmental group) or technical knowledge can be valuable in crafting stories. Previous research, however, has defined ‘resources’ too broadly. Even studies exploring various group resources (e.g. total revenue, number of formal members, years in existence – see Barker-Plummer, 2002; Thrall, 2006) largely relied upon bivariate relationships, which do not identify the unique effect of one factor as distinguished from others. We address this issue by exploring various types of group factors with multivariate analyses. Characteristics of resource-rich groups used in previous research (e.g. Barker-Plummer, 2002; McCluskey, 2008; Thrall, 2006) include annual revenue, number of formal members, size of paid staff, and years in existence. Other relevant characteristics include whether it is located in Washington, DC, and whether it has a PAC. Being located in Washington, DC, provides groups with greater access and opportunity to interact, both formally and informally, with those in power. A PAC gives groups a way to focus resources toward a specific political goal.

H1a. Organizational ‘resources’ – total revenue, membership dues, staff, history, existence of a PAC, and a DC location – are positively associated with general visibility in the news (the volume of news). H1b. Organizational ‘resources’ – total revenue, membership dues, staff, history, existence of a PAC, and a DC location – are positively associated with the prominence of the groups in the news.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 797

‘The DC factor’ From a journalism perspective, certain types of ‘resources’ would be taken into significant consideration in news production processes. Based on an ethnographic study of news-making, Gans found that news decisions are largely determined not only by availability (access to story sources) but also suitability – whether the story is appropriate from the audience perspective. Suitability is judged by journalists (both reporters and editors) in consideration of importance and interest. Criteria of importance include the ‘hierarchy in governmental relationship’ and ‘impact on nation and the national interest’ (Gans, 1979: 147–148), ‘impact on large number of people’, and ‘significance for the past or future’. The prominence or prestige of a political actor, for instance, has proven to be an important news consideration. High-ranking officials or elite groups have an inherent news value. Power in the policymaking process is more likely to make news (e.g. Gans, 1979; Sigal, 1973; Tresch, 2009). From the journalism perspective, groups located in Washington, DC, signify multiple meanings. First, the geographical location itself means an increased availability (Gans, 1979). While local groups’ strategic efforts may be important and potentially interesting nationwide, if the story is not accessible, the story is not as viable. For this reason, DC-based groups with the ability to feed a wide range of news organizations or wire services would have more chances of receiving news attention. Jones (2008) examined network news stories over two periods, finding DC was the top geographical source for domestic news, partly due to journalists’ heavy reliance on official sources. Many news organizations have news bureaus in Washington to cover government stories. A group’s ‘established’ relationship with journalists would simply make newsgathering easier (e.g. Kuklinski and Sigelman, 1992). Additionally, elite journalists located in Washington influence news coverage outside of the nation’s capital, referred to as intra-media agenda setting (Shaw and Sparrow, 1999). Second, groups located in DC may be seen by news organizations as having greater news value because their interactions with governmental officials imply national importance. Groups that routinely engage in national-level Inside Lobbying exhibit formal com- petency in policymaking. These ‘DC-based lobbying groups’ gain importance because of their presence and privilege; thus, they have a potential impact on legislative changes that could represent a historical turning point for a large constituency. From a journalist’s point of view, it would be safe to assume that groups routinely engaging in legislative processes in Washington, DC, would be more relevant and newsworthy (e.g. Tresch, 2009). Brooker- Gross’s (1983) study found that this orientation for national importance led to the dominance of DC in television news. Being located in DC, therefore, implies not only a high level of resources but a high ‘news impact’ as well, which plays an important role in determining whether groups’ activities, especially lobbying activities (e.g. legislative hearings, groups’ presenting case to Congress), are covered. Thus,

H2a. Groups’ Traditional Inside Lobbying in the news would be positively associated with the ‘DC factor’.4

Brooker-Gross’s (1983) study also found that DC stories were more dominant in issue areas that are closely related to the national economy, public well-being, and civil rights.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 798 Journalism 16(6)

Issue information, legislative information, policy discussions, Congressmen’s voting records on issues – which are the foci of groups’ Informational Mobilization – would have more news values as those are important to the national population. Thus,

H2b. Groups’ Informational Mobilization activities in the news would be positively associated with the ‘DC factor’.

Third, groups based in DC are engaged in more events and activities that are both important and interesting to the general public. Nationally important protests or groups’ Participatory Mobilization are organized around DC as there are many important political actors located in the Capital, such as federal government offices, the Supreme Court, and other political groups. Those mobilizing events would garner more interest from the general public; hence, there is an increased news attention on DC-based groups engaging in such activities. Thus,

H2c. Groups’ Participatory Mobilization in the news would be positively associated with the ‘DC factor’.

Finally, as Brooker-Gross notes, groups located in DC simply reinforce journalists’ stereotypes on DC groups (i.e. their national importance). Johnson-Cartee (2004) suggests Washington, DC, represents legitimacy. She writes, ‘And even in terms of domestic news, interest groups, protest groups, and social movements vying for media access that are outside the media capitals are carefully screened for legitimacy by news assemblers’ (p. 235).

Method We merged three data sets to examine the relationship among groups’ characteristics (Internal Revenue Service–National Center for Charitable Statistics (IRS-NCCS) data combined with telephone interview data and news coverage of advocacy groups, that is, newspaper content data).

Group profile data (IRS databases) Data first included 1176 public advocacy groups, labor unions, and professional associations registered and labeled 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) and randomly drawn from IRS databases organized by the NCCS. Total revenue (M = US$1,002,312, SD = US$2,307,417), dues (M = US$22,710, SD = US$144,627), region (East coast = 20.1%, Midwest = 26.8%, South = 22.0%, West coast = 20.1%, Washington, DC, = 11.0 %), and history (rule date) (M = 17.972 years, SD = 10.905 years) variables were obtained from the IRS data.

Telephone interview data Six trained interviewers conducted telephone interviews of those randomly selected 1176 groups by using the computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) system. Screen

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 799 questions were used to identify the chief executive of each group. Interviews with 242 chief executives were obtained, yielding a response rate of 43.5 percent (based on the RR2 formula of the American Association for Public Opinion Research). A total of 209 cases were analyzed, excluding the 31 partially completed interviews and two interviews that were conducted incorrectly. The telephone interview included questions regarding a group’s strategic activities. Using established measures that have been utilized in previous studies (Kollman, 1998; Nownes and Freeman, 1998; Schlozman and Tierney, 1986), groups’ strategic activities were measured by frequency items (8-point scale – 0: not used, 1: very rarely, 7: very often). Inside Lobbying was based on eight items relating to classic legislative lobbying (M = 18.760, SD = 11.641, Cronbach’s α = .826). Informational Mobilization was created by combining eight items concerning the provision of information for latent supporters regarding issues, policy implementation processes, and group activities (M = 21.070, SD = 7.762, Cronbach’s α = .752). Participatory Mobilization was based on eight items concerning the facilitation of political participation in a group’s collective action (M = 29.190, SD = 13.360, Cronbach’s α = .858). Activist Facilitation was measured by four items concerning the organization’s formal member recruitment activities (M = 15.1, SD = 4.33, Cronbach’s α = .605). By comparing these two data sets, we could estimate how closely news coverage of groups’ activities reflects their activities in reality. While most group characteristics were obtained from the group profile data, information about a group’s ideological stance (liberal scale – 1: extremely conservative, 7: extremely liberal; M = 4.646, SD = 1.709), PAC (yes, 13.9%), number of fixed staff members (M = 12.331, SD = 25.371), and the estimated number of members and supporters (M = 14,461, SD = 128,488) were constructed through the telephone interviews. There was no systematic representation bias in the sample in terms of groups’ profiles such as total revenue, dues, region, and history (for more information about the telephone interview data, please contact the lead author).

Newspaper content data The population was drawn from 118 newspapers based on size (the 20 largest general- interest daily newspapers in circulation, according to BurrellesLuce, 2007) and proximity to each organization’s headquarters (the largest daily newspaper within 50 miles, or for those with no daily newspaper within 50 miles, the nearest daily newspaper). The name of each organization with a completed survey was entered separately in a full-text search of article databases using LexisNexis or the archives of each newspaper.5 One organization had to be excluded because its name matched a common phrase (the LexisNexis search turned up more than 2000 articles each day). The database searches turned up 5576 potential articles published in the year the telephone interviews were conducted from the remaining 208 organizations. After excluding articles in which the group name did not appear (often when a common phrase matched the group name) or the article was fewer than five sentences, the adjusted total number of articles across the 208 organizations was 4304 (M = 20.7 articles per group, median = 5).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 800 Journalism 16(6)

Visibility in the news. The total number of newspaper articles was used to assess the visibility of news, the Total Volume of the News, utilizing the entire newspaper articles. The total number of newspaper articles had a huge variation. A total of 47 organizations did not have any articles, and 83 organizations had fewer than five articles, but one organization appeared in 1332 articles.

Prominence in the news. Since the portrayal of each specific organization should be analyzed in prominence analyses, we created a sampling scheme that would capture up to five articles from each organization whenever possible. A random sample of five articles was pulled from within each organization for analysis. This left us with 548 articles. Of the 548 articles analyzed, the organization was mentioned in the first paragraph in 51 articles (9.3%) and mentioned in just one paragraph in 342 articles (62.4%). To create a prominence scale, articles in which the organization appeared in just one paragraph and fewer than 10 percent of the paragraphs in the article (N = 253 articles) were assigned score ‘1’, and articles where the organization was more of a focus (N = 295) were scored ‘2’. Then, the scores were summed up to the group level.6 The summative aggregate tends to avoid the overestimation of the impact of the articles in which organizations were not even mentioned as well as the underestimation of the impact of the articles where organizations were more of a focus. In this way, we are also able to weigh the impact by the number of articles that were actually relevant.

Intercoder reliability. Two undergraduates were trained for several weeks before pilot testing, followed by an intercoder reliability analysis.7 Each variable about the presence of the group in the newspaper had a Krippendorff’s alpha of .80 or higher (see Krippen- dorff, 2004). Popular methods of reliability testing that take chance agreement into account can suppress coefficients of reliability when variables have extreme distributions.8 Since the variables tested in this study had extreme distributions – the vast majority were not present – we used the prevalence and bias–adjusted kappa (PABAK) method of reliability testing.9

Groups’ strategic activities in the news. The same categories of group activity measures utilized in the telephone interviews were employed in analyzing the news presence of groups’ strategic activities. Content data included seven variables on Inside Lobbying,10 four variables on Activist Facilitation,11 five variables on Informational Mobilization,12 and six variables on Participatory Mobilization.13 Each variable was coded as either present (1) or absent (0) and later combined into an additive measure.

Results Groups, news attention, and groups’ strategic activities in the news What types of activities are more or less covered (RQ1a)? Our results diverged from previous studies (Figure 1). The most covered activity was ‘Informational Mobilization’, especially information regarding legislation-oriented issues. The second-most covered activity was Traditional Inside Lobbying. The results indicate that groups’ Participatory

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 801

Group Acvies in News (Newspaper Content Analysis Data) 1.903

0.385 0.378 0.276

Tradional Inside Acvist Facilitaon Informaonal Parcipatory Lobbying Mobilizaon Mobilizaon

Self-Report Group Acvies (Telephone Interview Data)

29.19

21.07 18.76 15.1

Tradional Inside Acvist Facilitaon Informaonal Parcipatory Lobbying Mobilizaon Mobilizaon

Figure 1. Comparison of group activities in the news (presence score) and self-report (frequency) of group activities.

Mobilization (e.g. protests, demonstrations) and recruitment efforts (Activists Facilitation) were covered less often than Inside Lobbying. We explored whether news coverage of the groups matched the range and frequency of groups’ activities reported through the telephone interviews (RQ1b). While Inside Lobbying is the second-most mentioned activity in the news, telephone interview data showed that organizations engage in Inside Lobbying less frequently than Informational and Participatory Mobilizations. The bivariate correlations confirmed that the groups’ actual strategic activities self- reported in their telephone interviews were overlapped with the groups’ strategic activities covered in the news at only moderate levels. Participatory Mobilizations were indeed significantly less covered than the reality (Inside Lobbying – r = .204, p = .011; Activist

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 802 Journalism 16(6)

Table 1. Advocacy group characteristics and news volume (total number of news articles).

Total number of news articles in the population

Unstandardized (b) Standardized (beta) Ideology 0.388 4.241 (3.888) History −0.040 −0.051 (0.053) Total revenue 7.800 0.054 (11.113) DCa 63.835** 0.198 (22.286) PACb 8.762 0.030 (19.482) Dues −0.000 −0.033 (0.000) Fixed members 1.356** 0.339 (0.292) Adjusted R2 .123***

OLS: ordinary least squares; PAC: Political Action Committee. N = 207, OLS regressions. Values in parentheses are standard errors. a,bDummy variables. **p < .05; ***p < .01.

Facilitation – r = .155, p = .054; Informational Participation – r = .160, p = .048; Participatory Mobilization r = −.219, p = .006). A slightly different question, RQ1c, asks which activities would predict the volume of news. When controlling for group factors, in fact, none of the actual group activities predict the volume of news groups received. This confirms that not all of a group’s strategic efforts make the news. The determinants of news attention appear to be more related to organizational factors – in other words, journalistic values associated with organizations rather than actual group activities in reality.

Organizational factors and groups’ strategic activities in the news News attention and organizational factors. Based on the group politics literature, we hypothesized that advocacy groups’ resources would be positively associated with news attention in terms of the volume of news (H1a, the total number of newspaper articles) as well as the prominence in the news (H1b). First, to address H1a, we conducted a multivariate analysis by regressing the total number of newspaper articles on groups’ characteristics including ideology, history, total revenue, a location in DC, the existence of a PAC, and the number of fixed staff members (Table 1). A location in Washington, DC, and the number of fixed members were positively associated with the volume of news a group received. Excluding one outlier group (the group with 1332 articles), we still observed the same pattern.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 803

Table 2. Advocacy group characteristics and news prominence.

Summative prominence scores in the news

Unstandardized (b) Standardized (beta) Ideology 0.014 .009 (0.115) History 0.001 0.067 (.002) Total revenue 0.732** 0.211 (0.319) DCa 1.547** 0.199 (0.639) PACb 0.602 0.086 (0.549) Dues −0.000 −0.042 (0.000) Fixed members 0.007 0.074 (0.008) Adjusted R2 0.101***

OLS: ordinary least squares; PAC: Political Action Committee. N = 156, OLS regressions. Values in parentheses are standard errors. a,bDummy variables. **p < .05; ***p < .01.

Given the huge variance in the total number of newspaper articles, the volume of news may have overestimated the impact of the groups that did not receive news attention and underestimated the impact of the groups that achieved a heavy news focus. To weigh in news focus of groups, we created the summative prominence scores (see section ‘Method’). To address H1b, we conducted a multivariate analysis by regressing organizations’ summative aggregates of the news prominence scores on groups’ characteristics (Table 2). Interestingly, location in Washington, DC, still had an influence in determining news prominence, equally as powerful as a group’s revenue. This result suggests that beyond financial resources, the ‘DC factor’ is important in predicting the prominence of groups in the news.

Groups’ activities in the news and organizational factors. To address H2a, H2b, and H2c, we conducted a multiple regression analysis for each type of strategic activity reported in the news. Being based in DC consistently came out as the most influential in explaining groups’ strategic activities in the news (except for the coverage of Activist Facilitation). One might argue that the associations between group factors and groups activities in the news might be a spurious relationship, as the news would indeed be influenced by the actual frequencies of those activities. To rule out this possibility, the frequency of the group activity self- reported in telephone interviews was included in each model that predicts the same activity in the news (Table 3).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 804 Journalism 16(6)

Table 3. Group characteristics and group activities in the news (controlling for the frequency of the corresponding activity in groups’ self-report in telephone interview data).

Activities in the news

Inside Activist Informational Participatory Lobbying Facilitation Mobilization Mobilization

b Beta b Beta b Beta b Beta Ideology 0.011 0.021 0.044 0.123 −0.028 −0.032 −0.007 −0.013 (0.043) (0.031) (0.070) (0.045) History 0.000 0.001 0.001* −0.141 0.000 0.029 −0.001 −0.131 (0.001) (0.000) (0.001) (0.001) Total revenue 0.181 0.148 −0.129 −0.154 0.193 0.116 0.014 0.010 (0.117) (0.080) (0.116) (0.125) DCa 0.362* 0.149 0.062 0.033 0.880** 0.193 0.574** 0.198 (0.216) (0.159) (0.384) (0.250) PACb 0.125 0.046 −0.052 −0.031 −0.186 −0.023 −0.110 −0.042 (0.232) (0.142) (0.331) (0.232) Dues −0.000 −0.045 −0.000 −0.030 −0.000** −0.163 −0.000 −0.056 (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) (0.000) Fixed members −0.005* 0.159 0.002 0.080 −0.000 −0.016 −0.002 −0.071 (0.003) (0.002) (0.005) (0.003) Frequency 0.011 0.142 0.024* 0.156 0.026 0.129 0.008 0.109 of the activity (0.007) (0.013) (0.019) (0.007) (interview) Adjusted R2 0.029* 0.041* 0.054** 0.012

OLS: ordinary least squares; PAC: Political Action Committee. N = 156, OLS regressions. Values in parentheses are standard errors. a,bDummy variables. ***p < .001; **p < .05; *p < .01.

Even after controlling for actual frequencies of groups’ strategic activities in their telephone interviews, the ‘DC factor’ was consistently the most important across different types of group activities in the news. Only Activist Facilitation in the news was positively associated with the actual frequency of the activity.

Discussion The study explored the dynamics among organizations’ characteristics, strategic activities, and the news attention to those activities by combining three data sets: group profile data, interviews with executive members of randomly sampled organizations nationwide, and content coding of newspaper articles covering these same organizations. The merged data set has several methodological advantages. The sample increases the generalizability of findings by collecting group and content data from around the country and from a wide variety of groups and newspapers. The mix of telephone

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 805 interviews and content data allowed analysis beyond the raw amount of news stories to investigate ‘how’ groups were reported in the news. Instead of equating groups’ strategies to the group activities reported in the news (e.g. Thrall, 2006), the merged data set enabled us to explore the relationship between the news attention to groups’ activities and their actual strategic activities in reality, taking into account the notion that the news may not necessarily reflect a reality, rather that it constructs the reality (Schudson, 1978; Tuchman, 1978). The findings also highlight the dynamics among organizational profiles, groups’ strategic activities, and news attention. Contrary to conventional wisdom, financial resources contributed little to explaining news coverage, after controlling for other group characteristics. While revenue was positively associated with news prominence of groups in general, the impact of financial resources was less significant when analysis moved into depth. Instead, the ‘DC factor’ – being located in Washington, DC – exerted consistent influence onto the sheer volume of news (visibility) and general prominence, but also across different types of activities reported in the news, even after controlling for other organizational factors. Our finding is particularly strong in that the news sample was drawn from 118 newspapers of varying size from around the United States rather than merely from prestigious publications like The New York Times and the Washington Post. Coverage was not spurred by intra-media agenda-setting effects (Shaw and Sparrow, 1999) from elite newspapers either; a random sample of 236 of the coded articles showed just 11 were preceded in the previous 7 days by stories mentioning the organization in either The New York Times or the Washington Post, although it is possible that local newspapers referenced such elite newspapers. Moreover, only 2.4 percent of the sampled articles had a Washington, DC, dateline. Fewer than 2 percent of the sample consisted of stories from wire services, so it was primarily a matter of news judgment around the country. The most important implication of the findings is that organizations’ ‘resources’ or ‘news capability’ does not necessarily land the groups in the news. Rather, journalists develop news values and norms through professional practices and socialization (Gans, 1979), and news decisions are heavily influenced by such news values and norms (Shoemaker and Reese, 1996). News about advocacy groups perhaps is more complex than previous research of group politics has presumed. In particular, this study introduced the ‘DC factor’ in news-making. That is, journalists do not merely latch onto organizational resources as important, but instead weigh ‘availability’, ‘national importance’, ‘national impact on policy discussions’, ‘nationally important and interesting events’, and ‘political legitimacy’ in assessing newsworthiness (e.g. Brooker-Gross, 1983; Gans, 1979; Tresch, 2009). The ‘DC factor’ has all of those elements, or perhaps it is an amalgam of all. As this study focuses on the dynamics between advocacy groups and news media through the lens of social construction and not based on the simplistic assumption of the linear relationship between groups’ information news feeding and the success or failure of it, the study has limitations in determining which element of the DC factor exactly predicts news attention on groups’ strategies. Future research perhaps can further investigate this.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 806 Journalism 16(6)

Another notable set of findings is that while groups have increasingly adopted more ‘grassroots-oriented’ mobilization strategies (Chadwick, 2007; Norris, 2002) such as Participatory Mobilization, Informational Mobilization activities (primarily concerning legislative information) and Traditional Inside Lobbying still got the most news coverage. The findings also diverged from previous research that found more news coverage of protest-type activities. From groups’ strategic point, this is extremely noteworthy because the activities that are supposed to function based on ‘inside’ networks or the ‘iron triangle of politics’ (i.e. relationship among interest groups, bureaucracy, and Congress) received relatively more news attention than did the activities designed to grab mass attention, such as Participatory Mobilization. This divergence, however, might be due to the differences in the contexts of the studies. Research in European countries (e.g. Tresch and Fischer, 2008) may reflect a cultural context in which protests and demonstrations are more common than in the United States. Our study sampled only newspapers, whereas previous findings primarily focused on television news (e.g. Danielian and Page, 1994). Given that television journalists consider stories with ‘drama’, ‘negativity’, and ‘attentive visuals’ to have a high news value (i.e. media consideration; Gans, 1979), the divergent findings make sense. Future research needs to take into account those contextual factors. Taken altogether, the findings suggest that groups located in DC are more likely to receive news attention. More direct, interactive, and situational strategic activities (e.g. Participatory Mobilization) are less covered than the groups’ actual activities, unless the groups are located in DC. Although we found less influence of conventional resource variables than news values, the findings echo scholars who emphasize an uneven distribution in representation (e.g. Berry and Arons, 2003; Danielian and Page, 1994; Schattschneider, 1960; Thrall, 2006). However, groups do not necessarily have a disadvantage in public mobilization. Groups can better communicate with journalists by effectively conveying the potential impact to the general population, not necessarily constrained by their resources. Groups must communicate, for instance, their influences on a large constituency or the significance for the future when they organize activities. Building a coalition with national- level groups located in DC might be a strategic way for groups to make news. Indeed, advocacy groups appeared to find a new venue of collective action with fewer barriers. By adopting new technologies rather than depending upon news coverage as a means to inform and mobilize the public, groups can bypass media gatekeepers and directly target people who are more likely to be activated (Bimber, 2003; Flanagin et al., 2006). Accordingly, journalists appear to develop a norm that differentiates types of activities for traditional news coverage. Journalists may consider narrative stories that have legislative implications to be more appropriate for newspapers. They may think a group’s direct public mobilization does not deserve much news unless it has a national- level impact. Or perhaps organizations engaged in direct public mobilization do not provide information subsidies for traditional news production (Gandy, 1982). Reporters, for instance, tend to direct such information to their own or even a group’s website. In support of this, a recent study found that even advocacy groups themselves tend to differen- tiate appropriate media outlets for different strategic efforts, choosing a ‘niche’ medium for a ‘niche’ activity (Min and Kim, 2012).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 807

The emerging trends would pose challenges for those who study advocacy group politics and communication, both methodologically and theoretically. As advocacy groups develop a ‘new’ approach to information dissemination and public mobilization through digital media, and as journalists develop a ‘new’ norm in dealing the abundance of groups’ online information, for instance, researchers need to reevaluate the importance of traditional news data and online information data. Scholars also need to revisit traditional group politics theories and media theories in order to adequately explain the dynamic relationship among advocacy groups and media professionals in the changing media environment. How the emerging trends in the changing media landscape would influence the changes in group politics would be of extreme interest and importance for future research.

Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes 1. Prominence cues (Manheim, 2010; McCombs and Shaw, 1972) include salient features in news coverage, such as repeated mentioning, frequency, order (first story vs last story; first paragraph vs last paragraph), or emphasis (e.g. mentioned in headlines) of stories (or objects). 2. However, since many aspects of Inside Lobbying are controlled by government officials, insider access is largely set by those in power (Grant, 2000). Weak groups may be organized ‘out’ of politics by elites who manipulated the agenda toward their own interests through institutionalization processes (E. E. Schattschneider, 1960). 3. For instance, Greenpeace used video subsidies to news organizations to gain media access (Anderson, 1991), and the National Organization for Women used studies, legal research, campaigns, and a news service as information subsidies (Barker-Plummer 2002). 4. To maintain groups’ Traditional Inside Lobbying activities, organizations should recruit formal members regularly. In theory, therefore, groups’ Traditional Inside Lobbying and formal membership recruitment activities (i.e. Activist Facilitation) should go together. However, as we focus on news coverage, and as groups’ Activist Facilitation activities are usually based on existing members’ strong ties and informal networks, we do not generate the hypotheses on the relationship between news coverage and groups’ Activist Facilitation. 5. A total of 43 newspapers were searched using LexisNexis and the remainder with the archive of the individual newspapers. 6. At the group level, group’s mean prominence score was 1.527 (SD = .342). 7. Reliability testing was done on 97 articles. 8. Krippendorff’s alpha, Scott’s pi, and Cohen’s kappa were all correct for chance agreement in a generally similar way that has a bias toward balance values (see Potter and Levine- Donnerstein, 1999; Neuendorf, 2002; Feinstein and Cicchetti, 1990). 9. Prevalence-adjusted, bias-adjusted kappa (Byrt et al., 1993) modifies Cohen’s kappa to reduce the biases against prevalence while still accounting for chance agreement. PABAK has been widely used in various academic areas (e.g. Barakatt et al., 2009; Fathelrahman, 2009; Gray et al., 2008; Pit et al., 2008). 10. Inside Lobbying variables: Contacting government officials or members of Congress directly to present group’s point of view (prevalence and bias adjusted kappa (PABAK) = .75); presenting cases, research, or technical reports to policymakers (PABAK = .75); testifying at

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 808 Journalism 16(6)

legislative hearings (PABAK = .75); helping to draft legislation, regulations, rules, or guidelines (PABAK = .74); filing lawsuits or engaging in litigation (PABAK = .74); consulting with government officials to plan legislative strategy (PABAK = .75); and serving on advisory commissions and boards (PABAK = .75). 11. Activist Facilitation variables: facilitating donations to group (PABAK = .73), recruiting members (PABAK = .75), entering into coalitions with other groups (PABAK = .72), and activist education (PABAK = .75). 12. Informational Mobilization variables included one variable with a balanced distribution: providing information about legislation and policy implementation processes with the public, sharing policy areas of concerns with the public, sharing the group’s position on policy issues, and sharing what the group is currently doing (Krippendorff’s alpha = .83). The other four variables had unbalanced distributions and the PABAK method was used: organizing conferences and meetings for group members (PABAK = .74), organizing conferences and meetings for interested citizens (PABAK = .71), conducting and organizing public service campaigns (PABAK = .73), and publicizing voting records of lawmakers (PABAK = .74). 13. Participatory Mobilization variables: helping citizens to contact public officials and Congress members (PABAK = .75); petitioning or mobilizing citizens to petition (PABAK = .74); inspir- ing letter-writing to government officials and Congress members (PABAK = .75); organizing or engaging in demonstrations, protests, or participatory events (PABAK = .69); facilitating public discussions on policy issues of group’s concerns (PABAK = .75); and urging citizens to share policy issues of group’s concerns (PABAK = .74).

References Anderson A (1991) Source strategies and the communication of environmental affairs. Media, Culture and Society 13: 459–476. Andsager JL (2000) How Interest groups attempt to shape public opinion with competing news frames. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 77(3): 577–592. Barakatt ET, Romano PS, Riddle DL, et al. (2009) The reliability of Maitland’s irritability judgments in patients with low back pain. Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy 17(3): 135–140. Barker-Plummer B (2002) Producing public voice: Resource mobilization and media access in the national organization for women. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 79(1): 188–205. Bennett WL (2003) Communicating global activism. Information, Communication & Society 6(2): 143–168. Berry JM (1999) The New Liberalism: The Rising Power of Citizen Groups. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Berry JM and Arons DF (2003) A Voice for Nonprofits. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Bimber BA (2003) Information and American Democracy: Technology in the Evolution of Political Power, Communication, Society, and Politics. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Brooker-Gross SR (1983) Spatial aspects of newsworthiness. Geografiska Annaler Series B: Human Geography 65(1): 1–9. Bryce J (1889) The American Commonwealth. London and New York: Macmillan & Co. BurrellesLuce (2008) Top newspapers, blogs, & consumer magazines. Available at: http://www. BurrellesLuce.com/topmedia Byrt T, Bishop J and Carlin JB (1993) Bias, prevalence and kappa. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 46(5): 423–429.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 809

Campbell RG and Sato H (2009) Examination of a global prohibition regime: A comparative study of Japanese and US newspapers on the issue of tobacco regulation. International Communication Gazette 71(3): 161–179. Chadwick A (2007) Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity. Political Communication 24(3): 283–301. D’Alessio D and Allen M (2000) Media bias in presidential elections: A meta-analysis. Journal of Communication 50(4): 133–156. Danielian LH and Page BI (1994) The heavenly chorus: Interest group voices on TV news. American Journal of Political Science 38(4): 1056–1078. Entman RM (2007) Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication 57(1): 163–173. Fathelrahman AI (2009) Agreement between questionnaire and medical records on some health and socioeconomic problems among poisoning cases. BMC Research Notes 2: 183–188. Feinstein AR and Cicchetti DV (1990) High agreement but low kappa: I. the problems of two paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 43(6): 543–549. Flanagin AJ, Stohl C and Bimber B (2006) Modeling the structure of collective action1. Communication Monographs 73(1): 29–54. Galtung J and Rauge MH (1965) The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research 2(1): 64–91. Gamson WA and Wolfsfeld G (1993) Movements and media as interacting systems. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 528: 114–125. Gandy OH (1982) Beyond Agenda Setting: Information Subsidies and Public Policy, Communication and Information Science. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Gans HJ (1979) Deciding What’s News: A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. New York: Random House. Glanz K, Rimmer BK and Viswanath K (2008) Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Grant W (2000) Pressure Group and British Politics. London: Macmillan Gray KM, Tonge BJ, Sweeney DJ, et al. (2008) Screening for autism in young children with developmental delay: An evaluation of the developmental behaviour checklist: Early screen. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 38(6): 1003–1010. Johnson-Cartee K (2004) News Narratives and News Framing: Constructing Political Reality. Washington, DC: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Jones S (2008) Television news: Geographic and source biases, 1982–2004. International Journal of Communication 2: 223–252. Kollman K (1998) Outside lobbying: Public Opinion and Interest Group Strategies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Kosicki GM (1993) Problems and opportunities in agenda-setting research. Journal of Communication 43(2): 100–127. Krippendorff K (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Kuklinski JH and Sigelman L (1992) When objectivity is not objective: Network television news coverage of U.S. senators and the ‘Paradox of Objectivity’. Journal of Politics 54(3): 810– 833. McCarthy JD and Zald MN (1977) Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory. American Journal of Sociology 82(6): 1212–1241. McCluskey MR (2008) Activist group attributes and their influences on news portrayal. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 85(4): 769–784. McCombs ME and Shaw DL (1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36(2): 176–187.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 810 Journalism 16(6)

Manheim J (1991) All of the People All the Time: Strategic Communication and American Politics. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe Inc. Manheim J (2010) Strategy in Information and Influence Campaigns: How Policy Advocates, Social Movements, Insurgent Groups, Corporations, Governments and Others Get What They Want. New York: Routledge. Min S-J and Kim YM (2012) Choosing the right media for mobilization: Issue advocacy groups’ niche media choices in the competitive media environment. Mass Communication and Society 15: 225–244. Neuendorf KA (2002) The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Norris P (2002) Democratic Phoenix: Reinventing Political Activism. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Nownes AJ and Freeman P (1998) Interest group activity in the states. Journal of Politics 60(1): 86–112. Olson M (1965) The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Harvard Economic Studies, V. 124). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pit SW, Byles JE and Cockburn J (2008) Accuracy of telephone self-report of drug use in older people and agreement with pharmaceutical claims data. Drugs & Aging 25(1): 71–80. Potter WJ and Levine-Donnerstein D (1999) Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. Journal of Applied Communication Research 27(3): 258–284. Pross AP (1986) Group Politics and Public Policy. Toronto, ON, Canada: Oxford University Press. Reese SD (2007) The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited. Journal of Communication 57(1): 148–154. Sato H (2003) Agenda setting for smoking control in Japan, 1945–1990: Influence of the mass media on national health policy making. Journal of Health Communication 8(1): 23–40. Schattschneider EE (1960) The Semisovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Schlozman KL and Tierney JT (1986) Organized Interests and American Democracy. New York: Harper & Row. Schudson M (1978) Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers. New York: Basic Books. Shanahan J, Morgan M and Stenbjerre M (1997) Green or brown? Television and the cultivation of environmental concern. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 41(3): 305–323. Shaw DR and Sparrow B (1999) From innerring out: News congruence, cue-taking, and campaign coverage. Political Research Quarterly 52: 323–351. Shoemaker PJ and Reese SD (1996) Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content, 2nd edn. New York: Longman. Sigal LV (1973) Reporters and Officials: The Organization and Politics of Newsmaking. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Staab JF (1990) The role of news factors in news selction: A theoretical reconsideration. European Journal of Communication 5(4): 423–443. Thrall AT (2006) The myth of the outside strategy: Mass media news coverage of interest groups. Political Communication 23(4): 407–420. Tresch A (2009) Politicians in the media: Determinants of legislators’ presence and prominence in Swiss newspapers. International Journal of Press/Politics 14(1): 67–90. Tresch A and Fischer M (2008) Political actors in search of media attention: An analysis of mobi- lisation and communication strategies in seven European countries. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA, 28–31 August, 29pp. Tuchman G (1978) Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality. New York: Free Press.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Kim and McCluskey 811

Walker JL (1991) Mobilizing Interest Groups in America: Patrons, Professions, and Social Movements. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Author biographies Young Mie Kim (PhD, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) is an Associate Professor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Her research discusses the role of media playing in politics, with an emphasis on ‘issue publics’ and their organized collective action in the digital media environment. Michael McCluskey (PhD, University of Wisconsin-Madison) is an instructor in the School of Communication at American University. His research interests focus on advocacy group communication, journalism, and public policy.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at University of Haifa Library on October 11, 2015 Journalism http://jou.sagepub.com/

The politicization of entertainment media: A study of the Italian tabloid Chi during the 2013 electoral campaign Antonio Ciaglia and Marco Mazzoni Journalism published online 5 August 2014 DOI: 10.1177/1464884914543169

The online version of this article can be found at: http://jou.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/07/31/1464884914543169

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Journalism can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jou.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jou.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Aug 5, 2014

What is This?

Downloaded fromDownloaded http://www.elearnica.ir from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 JOU0010.1177/1464884914543169JournalismCiaglia and Mazzoni research-article5431692014

Article

Journalism 18–1 The politicization of © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: entertainment media: A study sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1464884914543169 of the Italian tabloid Chi during jou.sagepub.com the 2013 electoral campaign

Antonio Ciaglia University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

Marco Mazzoni University of Perugia, Italy

Abstract The concept of political parallelism identifies the different forms in which the media and politics can interact. However, media partisanship has always been almost exclusively limited to news media. This study shows that the Italian media system is at the center of a significant change, in regard to the way in which mass media political parallelism works and develops. Due to structural reasons, Italy’s political parallelism crosses the threshold of the news media and seems to fully apply to popular media as well. The politicization of popular media has been investigated through a content analysis of the Berlusconi-owned Chi (the most read magazine in Italy with 3.5 million readers on average). By proposing four models of coverage, the authors will show that the coverage strategies put in place by Chi convey the extent to which the covered subjects are politically and personally close to the undisputed leader, Berlusconi.

Keywords Electoral campaigns, Italy, political parallelism, popular media, qualitative research, tabloid press

Theoretical framework Today’s advanced democracies are experiencing a continual increase in the importance of the media in shaping and influencing the balance of power among political and

Corresponding author: Antonio Ciaglia, School of Literature, Language and Media, Faculty of Humanities, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, Wits 2050, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South Africa. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 2 Journalism institutional actors. Political leaders themselves are increasingly acknowledging the necessity of mastering the media if they want to become successful leaders. However, mastering the media does not necessarily mean making use of it for one’s personal advantage. The media works differently. As Mazzoleni and Schulz (1999) have rightly noted, while it is true that politicians have grown accustomed to approaching the media in a professional way, it is also true that they have become more dependent on it. Nevertheless, another caveat is worth pointing out. On the one hand, the media does not easily let external agents master it. On the other hand, once the media has become a key player in the political game, content production and dissemination are likely to be governed, or at least influenced, by politics. One element through which one can understand the influence of politics on the media is the extent to which politics and the media overlap (Strömbäck, 2008). Colin Seymour-Ure (1974) was the first to label the different forms of interaction between politics and the media, and the term he used is particularly cogent: political parallelism. This article examines the case of Italy – a high-political parallelism media system (Hallin and Mancini, 2004). The Italian media is characterized by its marked and long- running tendency to overlap with politics and act according to ideological and party affiliation. Another example is represented by the party press (Giugliano and Lloyd, 2013). The party press has a strong presence in the Mediterranean countries, which are characterized by a polarized-pluralist media system (Hallin and Mancini, 2004). The collapse of the 19th-century’s ideologies in recent decades, however, has rendered the party press increasingly impotent in influencing the national political debate. Indeed, party press outlets have been gradually usurped by other printed outlets, which are not always directly owned or managed by political parties, but which are nonetheless characterized by marked political biases. This is the case for il Giornale and la Repubblica. These cases testify to how strongly rooted the marriage between media and politics is in the Italian society. In Italy, political parallelism always finds a way to express itself, despite the fact that the secular ideological pillars have fallen under the pressure of modernization. The argument made in this study is that – due to the mass media’s long-running political involvement and the anomaly embodied in Berlusconi’s conflicts of interest – media partisanship has spread beyond its ordinary boundaries in Italy. As previously mentioned, Seymour-Ure was the first researcher to conceptualize party-press parallelism. Later, other scholars interestingly noted that political and media systems can interact in different ways. In fact, mass media political parallelism can be created by diversified political actors, such as political parties, the government, or parliament, through the actions they take toward the media (Ciaglia, 2013; Humphreys, 1996; Mancini, 2012). Additionally, political parallelism is not a dichotomous phenomenon. Consequently, there can be different degrees of media partisanship, depending on the amount of pressure exerted by the political hand on the media (Blumler and Gurevitch, 1995). However, irrespective of both the degree of contiguousness between the two systems and the nature of the political actor primarily involved in this process, political parallelism has always been conceived of as a phenomenon that exclusively applies to the news media. We argue that in Italy because of the exceptional circumstances that characterize this country’s media system, this phenomenon has crossed the boundaries of news media and spread to entertainment media.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 3

Before clarifying this point, however, it must be acknowledged that numerous studies (Baum, 2005; Delli Carpini and Williams, 2001; Jones, 2005; Riegert, 2007; Van Zoonen, 2005; Zaller, 2003) show that within Western democracies, politicians tend to regularly appear in media outlets that are primarily aimed at entertaining the public. These outlets are permeated by celebrity gossip (Pedote, 2013), which many times is directed toward politicians’ private lives. Thus, politicians’ private lives increasingly gain the interest of the public (Corner and Pels, 2003). Political leaders cannot escape the media’s attempts to intrude into their private spheres because the entertainment culture has now become one of the principal tools through which to understand and decrypt social life in general terms (Dahlgren, 2000; Postman 1985; Van Zoonen, 2005). Gossip about politicians’ families, vacations, and how they spend their spare time circulate ever more frequently in the media, in most cases without the politicians’ consent. Such gossip has become a key ingredient in building the media visibility a politician needs (Stanyer, 2012). Consequently, political leaders are now called on to pay equal attention to their (pseudo) private persona as they are to their political work (Langer, 2010). However, successfully managing one’s private persona is difficult. In fact, politicians are likely to fall into many traps set by the media, which may want to circulate information that can be damaging to a politician’s reputation. The leaders are nearly never capable of controlling such a process, which under certain circumstances can profoundly undermine their political careers (Allern and Pollack, 2012; Downey and Stanyer, 2013; Thompson, 2000). The phenomenon that has been described in this article is developed through a process of celebritization of the politician, by which the media increasingly covers politicians in the same way it covers celebrities (Indiana, 2005; Mazzoni and Ciaglia, 2013; West and Orman, 2003). As various studies suggest (Marshall, 1997; Rojek, 2001; Turner, 2004), having celebrity status allows politicians to take advantage of new forms of social legitimization.

Research question and methodology This article provides a theoretical interpretation, through data-based evidence, of how the boundaries of the Italian mass media’s political partisanship are being reshaped. This study examines the following question:

In the Italian scenario, how does political parallelism cross the threshold of the news media and spread to entertainment and popular media?

As mentioned previously, political parallelism normally applies to the news media. This study shows that in Italy, due to both the long-time partisan tendency shown by the press and to the Berlusconi anomaly, political partisanship can also affect the media outlets that would normally be very far from political actors and debates. This is the main reason behind the choice to analyze the magazine Chi only. Chi is the most read weekly magazine in Italy (3.5 million average readers per week) and is owned by the Mondadori Group, a company led by Marina Berlusconi, Silvio’s older daughter. As data from Audipresse show, Chi’s readership is very similar to that of another gossip magazine owned by the Mondadori Group: France’s Closer. This readership is mostly composed of

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 4 Journalism older people with a low degree of education who live in the less developed areas of Italy. In short, Chi’s primary target is represented by people who are typically not interested in political affairs. We are aware that by only studying Chi, our findings are neither generalizable nor applicable to the Italian entertainment media. However, our objective is not to identify a systemic phenomenon. On the contrary, we aim to emphasize an exceptionalism generated by what are likely to be unique circumstances, such as the combination of a consolidated tradition of media partisanship with the Berlusconi anomaly. The choice of Chi, therefore, is consistent with our aim of understanding what these two tendencies can produce. Furthermore, we enlighten the dual role played by Chi. We argue that, due to the high number of readers it reaches every week, Chi is the primary arena for self-promotion for those politicians who make their private lives more public. In this sense, Chi’s role does not deviate from that of other entertainment media. However, Chi is also and most remarkably a war machine, the real political armed branch of the Berlusconi galaxy. And this branch is led by managing editor Alfonso Signorini, one of the most important figures operating in Berlusconi’s TV network, Mediaset. In fact, in addition to being Chi’s managing editor, Alfonso Signorini is one of the most powerful figures within Berlusconi’s group, Mediaset. He has been for many years one of the hosts of Verissimo and the Italian Big Brother (broadcast on Mediaset’s Canale 5) for 7 years, and the leading host of Kalispéra, one of the most successful shows on Mediaset’s Canale 5. Furthermore, it should be noted that since 2006, the leading host of Verissimo has been Silvia Toffanin, partner of Berlusconi’s older son, Piersilvio, who is Mediaset’s vice-president. This aspect further highlights the very strong ties that link the Berlusconi family, the Mediaset group, and Mondadori’s Chi. Although Signorini is commonly defined as ‘the prince of gossip’, he is a direct expression of the political parallelism of Berlusconi’s Italy. This was confirmed by Massimiliano Panarari (2009), who said,

Alfonso Signorini is Berlusconi’s Minister for Political Propaganda […]. The weekly led by Signorini has strongly contributed to build Berlusconi’s image, which successfully combines glam and pop. Signorini is fully convinced that even in the pale and disoriented today’s liberal post-democracies, fairy tales continue to pay off. (p. 673)

The analysis period is 1 September 2012 to 28 February 2013, which corresponds to the 6 months prior to the general elections held on 24 and 25 February 2013. This period was chosen to cover two crucial events in Italian politics: the Partito Democratico (PD) primary elections held on 25 November 2012 and the aforementioned general elections. The electoral campaign is, by definition, the period in which political parties claim their territories, accentuate their differences, and polarize the debate. It is the democratic moment in which it can be expected that political partisanship will find complete expression, within both the political and media systems. We develop the research in two phases. In the first phase, we carried out a content analysis that is exclusively aimed at understanding Chi’s ‘quantity of coverage’ of various political and politically relevant actors. With the expression ‘politically relevant actor’, we identify journalists and other personalities who have political significance even without being formally affiliated with any parties. Most importantly, due to the type of medium that will be examined, politicians’

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 5 partners, relatives, and lovers have also been included. Indeed, in most cases, they are the personalities who carry the real political messages. For each article, the central actor was identified. Furthermore, the space occupied by each article was noted and finally added up per each actor. This procedure allowed us to draw a rank on the basis of the quantity of coverage received by each political and politically relevant personality. Intercoder reliability was assessed by having two coders analyze 60 randomly selected reports and calculating Cohen’s k (.91), a value that, according to Fleiss (1981), can be considered excellent. In the second phase, four models of coverage will be proposed. To do that, two specific categories of analysis were adopted. The first one is typically referred to as a very important variable in media and journalism studies. This is the tone of coverage toward the covered actors, which can generally be positive, neutral, and negative (De Vreese et al., 2006). Due to the high degree of media and political polarization that characterizes the country, Italy, on which this article is exclusively focused, and due to the limited number of articles that were selected for analysis, we deemed that a dichotomous approach would be more appropriate. Coverage was therefore classified as either ‘mostly positive’ or ‘mostly negative’. The second variable that was considered is political placement of the covered actors. Given the acknowledged high degree of parallelism between media and politics that sets Italy apart from many Western countries, this variable gains here a completely peculiar significance and is therefore particularly worth examining. In fact, as will be shown, politicians are not the only actors who can be classified according to their political or party placement. In Italy, political polarization spreads to other categories composing the country’s society, such as journalists, TV hosts, and even relatives. This is one of the reasons why even gossip magazines can acquire in Italy political significance. As said, on the basis of these two categories of analysis, four models of coverage have been identified and explained (see Figure 1 below). To do so, the six longest reportages have been selected and then textually and visually analyzed. We decided to rely on the variable of article length because it is particularly rare for politicians to appear on multiple-page reportages in gossip magazines. The fact that we came across a wide number of long articles testifies to the increasing relevance that politicians are gaining in Italy’s entertainment media. Furthermore, the articles that were selected are very much representative of the different coverage styles adopted by the magazine depending on the identity of the covered actor and its anthropological closeness to Berlusconi. In doing this, we have closely followed Ralph Negrine (1994), who argues that mass media partisanship is widely dependent on the extent to which political actors are actually allowed to intervene in the process of content creation. Most importantly, political parallelism is equally strongly reflected in the ‘content’ of the news and in the different ways in which different political actors can be depicted and ‘communicated’ to the public.

Empirical findings The role of Chi as an arena for politicians’ self-promotion Popular media today are completely and legitimately included among the communica- tive resources that modern politicians are required to master to render themselves fully functioning public as well as private figures. As mentioned in the previous section,

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 6 Journalism

Figure 1. Four models of coverage of political and politically relevant actors adopted by Chi between 1 September 2012 and 28 February 2013. politicians see many opportunities in this process. While they can continue to promote and advocate their political proposals through traditional channels, they can also advertise and promote their (pseudo-) private virtues through alternative media. However, this new scenario involves a number of risks as well. In fact, a higher attention from the media over public personalities’ private lives makes the latter more vul- nerable, especially when they have secrets that they would rather not to publicize. Unveiling these secrets and making them of public knowledge is one of gossip magazines’ core raison d’êtres. The weapon that these magazines normally make use of to denigrate politicians and other public figures is that of scandal (Entman, 2012). In this respect, a leading role is played by Chi in Italy. Due to its high rate of penetration, Chi is the primary magazine in which any politician needs to appear once they decide to play the game. Many political and institutional actors are now extremely keen to play by these rules. As such, it is prudent to examine the 20 most covered political or politically relevant actors that Chi covered during the 6 months preceding the elections. Berlusconi was the most covered actor in Chi between 1 September 2012 and 28 February 2013. Such evidence is not surprising. Chi is the Berlusconi family magazine, and the head of family comes before everything else. With 26.5 pages, Berlusconi receives nearly three times as much coverage as the then-premier, Mario Monti (9). Monti’s coverage was less predictable. Being a notoriously reserved and shy person, Monti is only second to Berlusconi in terms of newsworthiness for the leading Italian ‘soft magazine’. In attempting to advance an early interpretation, it could be said that, on

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 7

Table 1. The 20 most covered political or politically relevant actors in Chi between 1 September 2012 and 28 February 2013.

Actors No. of Pages % Silvio Berlusconi (leader of PDL) 26.5 7.4 Matteo Renzi (former Florence’s mayor; prime minister currently 23 6.4 in charge) Nicole Minetti (former counselor of the Lombardy Region, involved 18.5 5.2 in Berlusconi’s sex scandal) Barbara Berlusconi (Silvio’s second daughter) 16.5 4.6 Veronica Lario (Silvio’s ex-wife) 15.5 4.3 Antonio Ingroia (former prosecutor, leader of Rivoluzione Civile) 10 2.8 Mario Monti (prime minister at the time of analysis) 9 2.5 Mara Carfagna (MP of PDL) 8.5 2.4 Giorgio Gori (PD and Renzi’s former consultant) 7 1.9 Michele Santoro (journalist and anchor of Servizio Pubblico) 7 1.9 Pierluigi Bersani (former leader of PD) 7 1.9 Enrico Mentana (journalist) 6 1.7 Rosario Crocetta (president of Sicily) 6 1.7 Francesca Pascale (Silvio’s partner) 5.5 1.5 Vittorio Sgarbi (mayor of Salemi, Sicily) 5.5 1.5 Antonio Di Pietro (leader of IDV, one of the constituting parties of 5 1.4 Rivoluzione Civile) Romana Liuzzo (MP of PDL) 5 1.4 Sara Tommasi (showgirl involved in Berlusconi’s sex scandal) 5 1.4 Anna Paola Concia (MP of PD) 4.5 1.3 Nichi Vendola (leader of SEL) 4.5 1.3 Nunzia de Girolamo (former MP of PDL and Minister for 4.5 1.3 Agriculture; currently MP of NCD) Renata Polverini (MP of PDL) 4.5 1.3 Subtotal 204.5 57.0 Total 359 100.0

IDV: Italia dei Valori party; MP: member of Parliament; NCD: Nuovo Centrodestra party; PDL: Il Popolo della Libertà; SEL: Sinistra Ecologia Libertà party. the one hand, Mario Monti tries to soften and humanize his persona by opening himself to media outlets drastically different from those he is accustomed to. For the family magazine, however, Berlusconi’s family is considered highly newsworthy. In Table 1, we find Barbara Berlusconi, Silvio’s second daughter (16.5 pages) and Veronica Lario, Silvio’s ex-wife (15.5 pages). Furthermore, it is interesting to note that among the 20 most covered actors in Chi, female politicians strongly prevail. Among these figures are Nicole Minetti (Il Popolo della Libertà, PDL), former councilor to Lombardy and part of the Ruby scandal (31.5 pages); Mara Carfagna (PDL), former Minister for Equal Opportunities (8.5 pages); Romana Liuzzo, member of PDL (5); Nunzia De Girolamo (PDL), currently Minister for Agriculture (4.5); and Renata Polverini (PDL) with 4.5 pages.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 8 Journalism

Chi also makes room for some of il Cavaliere’s enemies. As we will see, however, the degree of enmity varies depending on the enemy. In fact, Chi covers some of Berlusconi’s sworn enemies, such as the journalist Michele Santoro (7), one of his long-time arch- enemies, and the Italia dei Valori’s (IDV) leader and former prosecutor, Antonio Di Pietro (5 pages). In the following pages, it will be interesting to show the nature of Chi’s coverage of personalities such as Santoro. Other types of opponents appear on Chi as well. In this case, however, they are simple political opponents (and not enemies), who are only opponents because they belong to other political parties. Berlusconi does not feel as anthropologically distant from them as he does from his sworn enemies. Within the category of simple opponents figure personalities such as the mayor of Florence, Matteo Renzi (23), Mario Monti (9), and Renzi’s collaborator, Giorgio Gori (7). The fact that politicians such as Monti and Renzi have garnered the most coverage suggests that Italy’s popular media are no longer exclusively used by center-right politicians the way they were only a few years ago. A wide range of leaders, whether respected public figures or promising rising stars, choose to appear in Chi when they want to unveil their private lives. In the Italian media landscape, Signorini’s magazine seems to have gained increasing importance. It is not by chance that Monti and Renzi have willingly and regularly opened up their private lives to Signorini, as demonstrated by their numerous interviews in Chi.

Four faces of the same coin. Toward an identification of models of coverage Table 1 provides a partial overview of the most covered actors during the 6 months preceding the elections. The table does not say much about the quality of Chi’s coverage. As already noted, popular magazines can be powerful tools for politicians to establish channels of communication with audiences that could not be reached through traditional media. Equally, entertainment media can help politicians improve and soften their public persona. By sharing detailed aspects of their private lives with the public, politicians try to reduce the gap between the office holders and ordinary people, a gap which they normally struggle to fill. This is the logic at the core of the concept of pop politics. However, such an objective can only be achieved if politicians have virtues to promote and positive aspects to emphasize, and if those magazines adopt an accommodating approach toward them. In this respect, reflection is needed. Unlike quality papers, popular magazines are not strictly dependent on current events. One political leader can appear on a pop magazine’s front pages without having been at the center of a recent political event. Walking in the city center, going on holiday with the family, and going shopping can be more than enough to grab the popular media’s attention. However, in such cases, popular magazines have a wide margin of discretion. In other words, in those cases, the true difference is made by the attitude the magazine decides to adopt toward the politician. This attitude is reflected in the magazine’s choice of particulars, in the ways in which it tells the story, and the way in which neutral activities, such as walking or shopping, are framed and communicated.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 9

However, as will be shown, Chi’s discretion in the choice of the nuances with which different political personalities are depicted strongly conveys Signorini’s intention to govern the process of news dissemination. By so doing, one of the fundamental rules of partisan media applies: different actors are associated with different attributes. Additionally, Chi’s angle operates in the Berlusconi galaxy. By relying on the analysis of the coverage provided by Chi, we have identified four categories of actors:

1. Berlusconi and his ‘domain of relationship’ 2. The women of PDL 3. Sworn enemies 4. Lukewarm enemies

As Figure 1 shows, given the angle (Berlusconi’s Mondadori and Mediaset) from which Chi looks at Italian politics and politicians, the center-left actors were classified as enemies. In fact, they can be considered as natural enemies, being part of, or somehow supporting, Berlusconi’s opposite coalition. However, the degree of enmity varies depending on each personality and this variation is reflected in the type of coverage that Chi provides. Hence emerges the differentiation between lukewarm and sworn enemies. In the following sections, an explanation will be attempted as to this difference in the tones of coverage of political opponents. As for Berlusconi’s closest personalities, as can be seen, it was not possible to come across any examples of negative coverage of PDL’s personalities or supporters. On the other hand, the category of center-right politicians and supporters who received mostly positive coverage turned out to be extremely broad. Due to that, attention was specifically paid to two subcategories upon which Chi is particularly keen on focusing: Berlusconi’s domain of relationship and the women of PDL.

Berlusconi and his ‘Domain of Relationship’ The first category is the least surprising one. Berlusconi and his closest entourage have maintained over the years a high degree of newsworthiness for TV shows and printed newspapers (for both quality and popular outlets). The degree of such newsworthiness has never been dependent on what office Berlusconi has held. Irrespective of the office he holds, Berlusconi is newsworthy. In regard to the quality of coverage, Berlusconi arouses the media’s interest in relation to a variety of areas: his family, the places where he uses to spend his holidays, and his obsession with physical shape. There are many articles in which Berlusconi appears smiling and comfortable while wearing his swim- ming trunks. The aim is clearly to show how good his shape is. Indeed, Chi’s articles on Berlusconi and his inner circle are characterized by an extremely accommodating tone. Chi aims to deliver an image of tranquility and normality, despite Berlusconi’s political career being notorious for abnormal events. This represents one of the most characteristic aspects of berlusconism: the tension between Berlusconi’s exceptionalism (which entails Arcore’s villa, his immense wealth, and his lifestyle) and his constant concern for delivering and disseminating a message of normality to establish a connection with ‘typical Italians’. These are the Italians who are shunned by the sectarian ‘left-wing’ elites, that is the Italians who love football and read Chi. Translating such a process into an

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 10 Journalism oxymoron, it is possible to say that Berlusconi aims to deliver a message that any ordinary person can attain exceptionalism. As many analyses have shown, this category of citizens/electors has been a key ingredient for Berlusconi’s political and electoral successes over time. Unlike the center-left parties, Berlusconi and his coalition have been able to establish a strong and long-lasting connection with the ‘typical Italian’, which primarily signifies middle-aged citizens with low levels of education. These citizens are generally distant from political debates and are more likely to regularly make use of entertainment and popular media, such as Chi. Furthermore, we see that the Chi issued on 20 February 2013, just 1 week before the elections, ran a 5-page article on Francesca Pascale, Berlusconi’s new partner. The article opens with a full-page image of the couple, where Berlusconi appears extremely comfortable, smiling, and serene (despite his troubles with the judiciary). Francesca stares at him with a wide smile, providing an image of natural complicity, which all happy couples display.1 The article is aimed at giving Chi’s readers more details about Berlusconi’s new partner, a woman whom everyone knows about, but of whom very few know. This is a typical example of media coverage ‘unbound’ and ‘independent’ from current events: it is completely centered on the actors it covers. The article is a journey through Francesca’s life. She has not been involved in any recent events. Therefore, the tone of the coverage is almost entirely dependent on Chi. And Chi’s tones will surely be positive. The headline is simple: ‘Francesca is back’, but as the article begins, different interesting elements begin to emerge: ‘Despite the rumors that she was about to get off the scenes to not obstacle Berlusconi’s campaign, and her love story was just an expedient for the media, Francesca Pascale is and will continue to be on Silvio’s side’. There are two principal keys of interpretation. First, the love story between Silvio and Francesca is real and much stronger than their enemies’ sarcasm and mockery regarding their age difference, as well as the alleged electoral convenience of their relationship. The second interpretation key: Francesca knows her stuff. Berlusconi’s troubles are well known, he is overwhelmed by a lot of pressure, and his opponents attack him more and more every day. Nevertheless, Francesca is and intends to continue being with the man she loves. Additionally, Francesca is a passionate supporter of the football team Napoli. The mission to paint Berlusconi as a normal man has been almost accomplished: despite being engaged to a wealthy man, Francesca cooks and hates going to the gym. As for the second aspect, Chi’s readers are told that Francesca is versed in politics. Indeed, she is qualified to counsel her partner and may one day hold a prestigious office her- self. She was one of the earliest subscribers to Forza Italia, and previously worked at Fuorigrotta Bagnoli Council and at the Provincial Council of Naples. This report is symbolic of Chi’s approach to Berlusconi and his inner circle. The majority of the articles do not refer to specific events. Thus, Signorini has a wide margin of discretion with regard to deciding the nuances through which to depict various people and suggest the categories by which to decrypt the message. In the case of Berlusconi and his entourage, the message is normality, namely, the serenity that characterizes all successful leaders.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 11

The women of PDL The second category, the women of PDL, displays many similarities with Berlusconi and his inner circle. Previous research has shown that popular and entertainment magazines tend to pay particular attention to female celebrities (Mazzoni and Ciaglia, 2013). Such logic also applies to those cases in which celebrities are political leaders. In the case of Chi, however, the application of this rule is strongly dependent on the identity (and the political background) of the covered subjects. Indeed, the way in which Chi covers PDL’s women is even more interesting if compared to how this magazine approaches and treats women who belong to political categories than PDL. For now, it suffices to say that while Berlusconi and his inner circle are characterized by an image of normality, the women of PDL are associated with an image of success, style, and elegance. This image contrasts with the old style characterizing left-wing politicians, whose concerns consist of approving new taxes and hating Berlusconi. This message is delivered, and sometimes shouted, by Chi through full-page articles, full-color photographs, redundant tones, and emphatic headlines. Chi often describes the women of PDL as ‘the most beautiful women in the world’. In other reports, they are shown as self-confi- dent and determined. One very interesting example for that is represented by Chi issued on 20 February 2013, in which articles about Valentine’s Day are published. How do politicians spend the day on which love is celebrated? With the objective of launching her can- didacy as member of Parliament (MP), PDL’s Romana Liuzzo invites a high number of people for dinner ‘under Cupid’s sign’. However, a precise political slogan is associated with this party. This is one of the most remarkable examples of how political parallelism is declined and implemented in the era of celebrity politics: ‘On the cry of only love will save us from Monti’s policies and Bersani’s property tax, the new PDL’s candidate Liuzzo organized a party with some special guests: Carfagna, Cicchitto, and Ravetto’.2 Mara Carfagna, Fabrizio Cicchitto, and Laura Ravetto are leading PDL figures. Therefore, PDL’s politicians are collaborating. Both new and long-serving MPs meet, celebrate, and talk on Valentine’s Day. They collaborate ‘in the name of love’, which sets them apart from the left-wing parties, who can only hate their political opponents. However, there is more to say about this article. Not only is the anthropological distance between the left and Berlusconi’s right emphasized, but two of the most important leaders running against Berlusconi (Monti and Bersani) are associated with damaging and undesirable policy measures. PDL’s female politicians are depicted here as fresh alterna- tives to both past allegedly disastrous policies (implemented during the Monti-led government) and future potential risks (represented by a government led by Bersani). However, because such a strong political message is delivered by a magazine such as Chi, it becomes part of a broader scenario characterized by radiant women, fancy clothing, and accurately chosen accessories. Pictures of two of PDL’s most important MPs, Mara Carfagna and Laura Ravetto, are emphasized. The two women are the most photographed people in the article. Furthermore, readers are provided with detailed information about the clothing they wear and the quality of their handbags (Chanel for Laura Ravetto, Louis Vuitton for Mara Carfagna). All the particulars are carefully described with the purpose of underlining the two women’s elegance and good taste.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 12 Journalism

Sworn enemies The image of both Berlusconi’s domain of relationship and the women of PDL that emerges from our analysis is, to a certain extent, predictable given the type of magazine selected for analysis. Nevertheless, various (and surprising) elements of interest emerge from the way Chi covers Berlusconi’s opponents (according to the degree of enmity it characterizes each of them by). Here lies another important feature of the new declina- tion of mass media’s political parallelism that we propose. Political parallelism does not exclusively result in the unconditional support of the political leader to whom one media outlet is ‘close’, it also discredits and detracts from that leader’s opponents. The strategy implemented by Chi during the 2013 election campaign is even more sophisticated. The magazine calibrates its tone according to the nature of the opponent it is called on to cover: that is, according to whether the opponent is a sworn enemy or a simple political opponent. Paradoxically, almost all of il Cavaliere’s sworn enemies stand outside of the politico- institutional spectrum. More specifically, the enemies that Chi identifies are magistrates, such as Ilda Boccassini, or journalists, such as Michele Santoro. The reportage on Ilda Boccassini that we examine is particularly interesting, as it can be closely compared to the previously analyzed article on PDL’s MPs. Chi on 26 December 2012 published a lengthy article on Ilda Boccassini, magistrate at the Tribunal of Milan, titled, ‘Classy shopping’. As will be shown, this title is clearly ironical and allusive. There are interesting bits, such as: ‘Milan’s prosecutor does not resist the temptation to go shopping to the luxurious “rectangle of fashion”. In the meanwhile, she throws her loved cigarette on the ground’. In a single sentence, two regrettable actions of Boccassini are noted. Not only does she love smoking (the loved cigarette), but, while so doing, she even disregards one of the basic civic rules, throwing the cigarette on the ground. The article describes Boccassini shopping in Via Montenapoleone, one of the most glamorous areas of Milan. The article is not composed of any written sections. The only exception is represented by a text box in which the clothing and accessories that Boccassini is wearing are minutely described. Their price is reported as well. Her Faliero Sarti scarf is worth €300, the Gallo stockings €21. She also exhibits a Car Shoe 2011/2012 Collection handbag. The headline of this text box is even more significant: ‘Matter of style’.3 This article becomes even more significant if compared to Liuzzo’s Valentine’s Day party. On that occasion, fancy clothing and accessories were noted as symbols of class and good taste. In Boccassini’s case, they represent vulgarity and bad taste, which are worsened by the magistrate’s civic misbehavior. It is not by chance that PDL’s female MPs pose in front of Chi’s photographers, whereas Boccassini is caught while shopping on Milan’s most luxurious street. Notably, how political parallelism applies to soft media: similar circumstances are imbued with completely opposite meanings according to whom the protagonists are. By referring to the known categorization by Stanyer (2012), it is fair to say that the different approaches that Chi adopted in the two aforementioned articles places them into two different caricatures: the coverage of Carfagna and Ravetto is consensual/non-scandalous, whereas the coverage of Boccassini is non-consensual/ scandalous.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 13

However, Berlusconi has many enemies. Therefore, the case of Ilda Boccassini cannot be the only example of how soft media partisanship attacks Berlusconi’s sworn enemies. In fact, the Boccassini method is also applied to Michele Santoro, anchorman of Servizio Pubblico and Berlusconi’s number one enemy among journalists. The reportage that we selected was published in Chi on 8 January 2013, a few days prior to the epic duel at Servizio Pubblico.4 The article contained a number of photos portraying Santoro on holiday on Cocoa Island, the Maldives. The journalist is photographed while diving into the water and relaxing with his wife on the beach. The heavenly island is described in the article, which has a seemingly neutral headline: ‘A relaxing vacation between snorkeling and foreign readings’. However, unlike the Valentine’s Day party, Chi meddles in Santoro’s affairs, reporting that the seaside bungalow where Santoro is staying is costing him €9000. The exclusivity of the location is therefore not emphasized as a choice of style, but as a privilege that very few can afford. How the article is framed clearly places it in the category of non-consensual/scandalous coverage. Although Santoro is not involved in any scandal, his vacation became scandalous to Chi readers, thanks to the interpretative mechanisms the magazine used. Such mechanisms directly stem from the strategies put into place by Chi. The magazine scientifically differentiates the implications of the events it covers (events that can be very similar at times) according to who the actors are.

Lukewarm enemies The typology proposed in this article ends with the category of lukewarm enemies. This term refers to simple political opponents, namely, those personalities who are only classifiable as enemies because they cannot be otherwise. These are people who belong to parties other than PDL, but toward whom Berlusconi does not feel anthropologically far, as in the case of his sworn enemies. For instance, il Cavaliere has never hidden the respect he has for PD’s Matteo Renzi, Florence’s mayor when this research was carried out and prime minister since 22 February 2014. At the same time, Antonio Ingroia, former prosecutor and currently leader of the leftist Rivoluzione civile (an electoral cartel which was dismissed soon after its disappointing electoral performance at the 2013 general elections), is perceived as a threatening electoral competitor by the PD to a greater extent than by PDL. Indeed, it is unlikely that Ingroia will steal a significant number of votes from Berlusconi’s party. It is reasonable to argue that Berlusconi may even hope for a good electoral performance by Rivoluzione civile, as this would entail that a high number of votes would likely be taken from PDL’s principal opponent, PD. The Chi articles analyzed here are about Renzi and Ingroia. The most famous Chi article on Renzi (an article which very soon went viral as it was continuatively referred to both on TV and on the principal social networking platforms) does not fall within our period of analysis but is worth mentioning because it represents the pop-politician’s manifesto. In this 5-page article, Renzi poses dressed like Happy Days’ Fonzie.5 One of the text boxes elaborates the following:

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 14 Journalism

Do people say I resemble Fonzie? Do they criticize me for attending Amici?6 These are radical- chic critiques. I want to talk with young and old, and to do that I need to go to the shows they watch and talk the language they speak. My duty is to be straightforward and not elitist.

The modern pop-politician’s credo could not be explained any clearer. Getting back to the period of analysis, Chi published, on 26 December 2012, an article dedicated to Matteo Renzi on holiday at the Abetone, where he was skiing. The 3-page article titled, ‘The mayor on the snow’ shows Renzi in perfect shape, smiling, and relaxing with his family. The allusive tones of Boccassini and Santoro’s articles have now disappeared. No reference is made to the possible cost of the trip. However, the article refers to the current political, stating that the mayor seems to have recovered from the defeat he suffered at the PD primary elections the previous November:

The mayor is surely not depressed for the defeat at the PD primary elections he suffered from Bersani. He goes to have some relax in the mountains. Renzi is an excellent skier, as revealed by the images in this reportage […]. Between all-American dreams of glory and skiing, Renzi keeps his muscles warm with a view to other eventual descents (to the field).

Just a few months earlier, on 17 October 2012, Chi published another masterpiece of pop politics. This article consisted of a dialogue between Renzi and his father. The PD primary elections were getting closer (25 November). The 7-page article gets the front page, with the headline, ‘Me, my father, and our dream: unified Italy’. Chi’s journalist almost abstracts himself from the context, as if a real dialogue were taking place between Renzi and his father on an ordinary Florentine day:

They talk about politics, drinking a glass of wine and eating a few slices of salami, as they sit on the family house lawn, in the surroundings of Florence.

Matteo: You and Bersani are the same age. You now need to yield to others. Father: You are not the first who wants to change things …

‘The world changes, but politicians remain always the same’, betrays Matteo.

The reader is provided with an image of Renzi, who although is strongly determined to change the status quo, is not hostile to an entire generation, as many media outlets assert. Renzi even discusses rottamazione7 with his father, who is part of the generation he encourages to step back. They eat bread and salami, and drink wine in a bucolic setting. The political implications here are more telling than in the previous article, however. Renzi is now running his electoral campaign – not against Berlusconi, but against Bersani. This is likely one of the main reasons why Renzi is being allowed to campaign in Chi: Father: I am proud of the choice your brother made. Matteo: Do you mean Samuele’s decision to leave Florence to avoid being seen as a ‘person with pulls’?

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 15

Father: Yes. It should not be taken for granted. He could have been a doctor at home. Instead, he is now a doctor in Switzerland and no one can say he is thanks to pulls. Matteo: Y ou and your generation have contributed to spread the message that one can only find a good job if they know somebody. We will be the ones who change this attitude. I want the young to find a job because they know something well, not because they know someone. ‘Pulls’ are an evil to which the generation of Renzi’s father (and Bersani) has contributed. The only hope is represented by people like Matteo’s brother. These people, on the strength of the things (and not the people) they know, do not fear leaving home to pursue their careers. Another hope is represented by Matteo himself, who stays in Italy without the fear of fighting a generation that has held power for too long and made a mess of it. Finally, it is worth mentioning an article on Antonio Ingroia, which was published in Chi on 30 January 2013. Remarkably, given this article’s argument, Ingroia discusses some of the views of his political opponents. As previously mentioned, Ingroia leads Rivoluzione civile, a left-wing coalition, but he immediately clears things up by stating, ‘[I have] never been a communist. I not even subscribed to the party’. Who is his number one (political) enemy? Surprisingly, it is not the leader of the opposite political coalition – Berlusconi – but ‘Monti, who has been fooling Italians’. Instead, Berlusconi ‘has always been humorous, like me’. On the other hand, Bersani ‘would do anything to grab the power’. These words are emblematic of the logic of political parallelism applied to the soft media. Even the leader of the most left-wing party must assimilate Chi’s politico-editorial rules if he wants to appear in the magazine. Indeed, the leader who best comes out of Ingroia’s words is paradoxically the one who is politically furthest from him. In conclusion, another aspect should be noted. When the coverage is positive (non-scandalous, à la Stanyer) as in the cases of Berlusconi, Carfagna, Renzi, and Ingroia, the articles are almost always arranged and agreed before- hand: the leaders pose, open the doors of their homes, and introduce their families. Conversely, when Chi aims to produce a scandal, even when there is none, the magazine chases its prey. It suffices to steal a few snapshots of the victims doing the most mundane of activities. The war machine will then create the perfect crime.

Conclusion Italy has historically been characterized by a strong contiguousness, if not overlap, of media and political systems. Such a connection was initially found in the party press and was one of its more evident expressions. The media–political connection then embraced TV, generating an anomaly par excellence: the 20-year media–politics blackout represented by Berlusconi’s conflicts of interest. However, as far as the press is concerned, mass media’s political parallelism has always been a phenomenon limited to the news media. As this research shows, due to both the long-running tendency toward partisanship displayed by Italian media and the political anomaly that characterizes part of that system, new forms of political partisanship are emerging. Media partisanship is crossing the

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 16 Journalism threshold of news media and spreading into entertainment media. Chi is the most obvi- ous expression of this process. Chi is a weekly magazine displaying a marked dual nature. First, Chi is the most popular magazine in Italy. It is the magazine in which every politician who decides to open his or her private life to the public wants to appear. Appearing in Chi makes it possible for a politician to reach a large number of people, thanks to the magazine’s attractiveness to readers who are normally uninterested in politics. On the other hand, Chi acts according to a partisan logic. In this respect, the Signorini-led magazine stops being an entertainment medium and becomes a war machine, an armed branch of the Berlusconi galaxy. And the effects of this shift can be clearly identified in the different nuances with which Chi approaches and covers personalities who belong to different political coalitions. However, the motive behind Chi’s modus operandi is not exactly that of the political parties to which its victims or heroes belong. Rather, it is the degree of political, anthropological, and even human proximity that these personalities show to the true and undisputed force behind the magazine: Silvio Berlusconi.

Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes 1. The picture can be seen by clicking on the following URL: http://www.nonmidire.it/foto/ le-foto-di-silvio-berlusconi-e-francesca-pascale_8415_2.html 2. One of the most interesting pictures that appeared in Chi in relation to this event can be seen here: http://www.liberoquotidiano.it/news/gossip-moda/1184929/Giornalisti–politici-e— cani—chiacchiere-e-gossip-in-casa-Liuzzo.html 3. The reportage’s main photo can be found at this URL: http://www.repubblica.it/politica/ 2012/12/20/foto/trattamento_mesiano_per_la_boccassini_su_chi-49134824/1/?ref=NRCT–2 4. One of the most memorable episodes of Servizio Pubblico took place when Berlusconi, on 10 January 2013, was invited by Michele Santoro as a host only. Berlusconi deflected each and every attack launched by hosts Santoro and Travaglio. As a result, the Italian media and most citizens agreed that Berlusconi had won the fight. 5. The picture portraying Renzi and Fonzie can be seen here: https://twitter.com/chimagazine/ status/337208592375619585/photo/1 6. Amici is a TV talent show broadcast on Mediaset’s Canale 5. This show is known in Italy for attracting a large and youthful audience. 7. Rottamazione is a term that was first used by Renzi to identify the necessity of replacing the older and inefficient generation of politicians with a new one composed of hardworking and honest politicians.

References Allern S and Pollack E (eds) (2012) Scandalous! The Mediated Construction of Political Scandals in Four Nordic Countries. Göteborg: Nordicom. Baum MA (2005) Talking the vote: Why presidential candidates hit the talk show circuit. American Journal of Political Science 49(2): 213–234. Blumler JG and Gurevitch M (1995) The Crisis of Public Communication. London: Routledge.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 Ciaglia and Mazzoni 17

Ciaglia A (2013) Politics in the media and the media in politics: A comparative study of the relationship between the media and political systems in three European countries. European Journal of Communication 28(5): 541–555. Corner J and Pels R (2003) Media and Restyling of Politics. London: SAGE. Dahlgren P (2000) Media, citizenship and civic culture. In: Curran J and Gurevitch M (eds) Mass Media and Society. London: Arnold, pp. 310–328. Delli Carpini MX and Williams BC (2001) Let us infotain you: Politics in the new media environment. In: Bennett WL and Entman RM (eds) Mediated Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 160–181. De Vreese CH, Banducci S, Semetko HA, et al. (2006) The news coverage of the 2004 European Parliamentary election campaign in 25 countries. European Union Politics 7(4): 477–504. Downey J and Stanyer J (2013) Exposing politicians’ peccadilloes in comparative context: Explaining the frequency of political sex scandals in eight democracies using fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis. Political Communication 30(3): 495–509. Entman RM (2012) Scandal and Silence: Media Responses to Presidential Misconduct. Cambridge: Polity Press. Fleiss JL (1981) Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. New York: John Wiley. Giugliano F and Lloyd J (2013) Eserciti di carta. Come si fa informazione in Italia. Milan: Feltrinelli. Hallin DC and Mancini P (2004) Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Humphreys PJ (1996) Mass Media and Media Policy in Western Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Indiana G (2005) Schwarzenegger Syndrome: Politics and Celebrity in the Age of Contempt. New York: The New Press. Jones J (2005) Entertaining Politics. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Langer AI (2010) The politicization of private persona: Exceptional leaders or the new rule? The case of the United Kingdom and the Blair effect. International Journal of Press/Politics 15(1): 60–76. Mancini P (2012) Instrumentalization of the media vs political parallelism. Chinese Journal of Communication 5(3): 262–280. Marshall D (1997) Celebrity and Power. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Mazzoleni G and Schulz W (1999) ‘Mediatization’ of politics: A challenge for democracy? Political Communication 16(3): 247–261. Mazzoni M and Ciaglia A (2014) An incomplete transition? How Italian politicians manage the celebritisation of politics. Celebrity Studies 5(1-2): 93–106. Negrine R (1994) Politics and the Media in Britain. London: Routledge. Panarari M (2009) Fenomenologia di Alfonso Signorini. Il Mulino 4: 671–677. Pedote P (2013) Gossip. Dalla Mesopotamia a Dagospia. Bologna: Odoya. Postman N (1985) Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin Group. Riegert K (ed.) (2007) Politicotainment. Television’s Take on the Real. New York: Peter Lang. Rojek C (2001) Celebrity. London: Reaktion Books. Seymour-Ure C (1974) The Political Impact of Mass Media. London: Constable. Stanyer J (2012) Intimate Politics: Publicity, Privacy and Personal Lives of Politicians in Media- Saturated Democracies. Cambridge: Polity Press. Strömbäck J (2008) Four phases of mediatization: An analysis of the mediatization of politics. International Journal of Press/Politics 13(3): 228–246.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 18 Journalism

Thompson JB (2000) Political Scandal: Power and Visability in the Media Age. Cambridge: Polity Press. Turner G (2004) Understanding Celebrity. London: SAGE. Van Zoonen L (2005) Entertaining the Citizen: When Politics and Popular Culture Converge. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. West DM and Orman J (2003) Celebrity Politics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Zaller J (2003) A new standard of news quality: Burglar alarms for the monitorial citizen. Political Communication 20: 109–130.

Author biographies Antonio Ciaglia is AW Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow at the School of Literature, Language and Media, Wits University, Johannesburg. His research interests include media and democracy and comparative political communication. His articles have appeared in the European Journal of Communication, the International Journal of Cultural Studies and the International Communication Gazette. Marco Mazzoni is Assistant Professor of Public Relations at Dipartimento Istituzioni e Società, University of Perugia. His research interests include popularization of politics and the role of public relations practitioners in the decision-making and news-making processes. His major publications include: Le relazioni pubbliche e il lobbying in Italia (Laterza, 2010). His articles have appeared in the International Journal of Cultural Studies and Celebrity Studies.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at UNIV OF IDAHO LIBRARY on August 29, 2014 JOU0010.1177/1464884914545439JournalismFortunati et al. 545439research-article2014

Article

Journalism 2015, Vol. 16(6) 830–846 Print and online newspapers © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: as material artefacts sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1464884914545439 jou.sagepub.com

Leopoldina Fortunati University of Udine, Italy

Sakari Taipale University of Jyväskylä, Finland

Manuela Farinosi University of Udine, Italy

Abstract Traditional newspaper journalism is in a state of crisis and there have been several attempts to overcome this. Many discourses have reiterated the triumphal march of a digital revolution in newspaper journalism and anticipated the end of the print newspaper. This moment calls for an in-depth analysis of reader habits of news consumption and use in order to understand the audiences for journalistic output and their relationship with the journalistic objects. In this study, we adopt a multi-method approach, integrating (1) qualitative content analysis of student essays dealing with the physicality of printed and online newspapers, (2) ethnographic observation of the use practices of readers and (3) expert interview. The findings show that informants perceive print and online newspapers as objects with which they have a different experience and highlight the need to develop bridging strategies combining print and digital media in order to overcome the crisis facing printed news media.

Keywords Emotion, gestures, material objects, online newspaper, postures, print newspaper, readership, ritualization, use practices

Corresponding author: Leopoldina Fortunati, Department of Human Sciences, University of Udine, Via Palladio, 8, 33100 Udine, Italy. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded fromDownloaded http://www.elearnica.ir from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 831

Introduction1 To date, many attempts have been made to understand how print newspapers can overcome their current crisis: declining sales, scandals and the rise of the Internet, as well as how print journalism can renew itself and build a possible future. Over the last two decades, the online world has launched an assault on print journalism, proving to be more attractive to readers than the print world. Online newspapers have challenged print with the strength of the Internet. In comparison with print journalism, online journalism includes many value-added services and functions, such as social and mobile media. This crisis can be attributed to inadequate understanding of the potential of new media as well as new challenges it poses to traditional print newspapers. In addition, media groups that own both print and online newspaper businesses have paid little attention to current analysis of the economic situation of online newspapers (e.g. Schiff, 2003). For many years, these media groups have made a loss, many are still in search of revenues today as the great fragmentation of the business models applied and the wide cross- cultural differences between these business models show (Bleyen and Van Hove, 2007). It follows that a faulty business model has also been applied by some traditional media groups declaring the end of the print edition and keeping only the online edition. The history of development of the Internet and its influence on print newspapers has been actively studied. For example, Van der Wurff and Lauf (2005), Boczkowski (2004), Deuze (2011) and Domingo (2008) have shown how online newspapers have been fundamentally a near transposition of print newspapers to the Internet. The fear of publishing houses that print newspapers would be cannibalized by online newspapers was overridden in the hope of attracting more readers online. What was completely lacking in that business model was a clear vision of the advertising which against all expectations was very slowly colonizing the Internet (Küng et al., 2008). Hence, media groups spent revenues gained from adding inserts (e.g. volumes of encyclopaedias, dictionaries, book series or DVDs) to print newspapers to support their unsuccessful Internet adventures. This strategy followed the business idea according to which these spin-off products could be efficiently commercialized through the purchasing power of the wide readership of printed newspapers. Many studies address how the journalism world has reacted to the Internet and how newsrooms have been restructured. According to Barnhurst and Napoli (2001), print newspapers are clearly the product of industrial capitalism, while the present crisis of print newspapers is the outcome of financial capitalism which makes it all the more liq- uid. This shift from industrial- to financial-based capitalism also explains the change in the ideology of journalism and its role in society. For example, Colombo (2013) reminds us that while American media were almost all sympathetic towards the civil rights move- ment, today large sectors of the journalistic world are very far from being watchdogs for democracy. In fact, by taking up the wide debate on journalistic values, Sarrica et al. (2010) argue that alongside the role of a watchdog, journalists have increasingly adopted the role of a lapdog, sometimes alternating between watchdogs and lapdogs (e.g. Massing, 2012). This shift has contributed to the current crisis of print journalism, given that many potential readers, especially young readers, are disenchanted with newspapers. Although lapdog journalism has mainly been attributed to print journalists, it should also be extended to online journalists. This is because print and online journalists do not work on separate professional regimes. Hence, the priority in journalism studies should be to

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 832 Journalism 16(6) discover how print newspapers can extricate themselves from this crisis as they are con- tinuously been perceived as the bulwark of journalism. The aim of this study is to investigate reader news consumption habits and usage in order to advance our knowledge about the mistakes of the business model that has guided the activities of media groups on the Internet and inspires the present strategies for handling the crisis of print newspapers. The solution to this crisis is not technical, yet technological changes must be part of the picture. Previous literature has focused mainly on the comparison between the information features of print and online newspapers (e.g. Domingo, 2008). Looking at the identity as media of print and online newspapers has led researchers to focus on their functionality and consider people as users of their main functions. Unfortunately, this kind of approach has pushed researchers to neglect many divergent but important aspects of newspaper usage. Although this wave of research has produced important knowledge, these studies have often been too descriptive and limited in their scope to elucidate possible ways of overcoming the crisis facing the journalistic world. For this reason, we have decided to adopt a completely different approach. We chose to investigate print and online newspapers as material objects. Furthermore, we investigated what people do with these objects.2 The rest of the article is structured as follows. The next section presents the theoretical framework of the study, and the research questions are detailed in section ‘Research Questions and hypotheses’. The two sections that follow deal with research material and methods used in the study and the results, respectively. The ‘Discussion and conclusive remarks’ section discusses the results with reference to the research questions. The article ends with conclusions, reflections on the strengths and weaknesses of the study and on future directions for research on this topic.

Theoretical framework This study investigated the physicality of print and online newspapers as objects. We have drawn on theoretical work on the micro-sociology of objects, following the examples of Douglas and Isherwood (1979) and Miller (1998). The ethnography of media, as a method of investigation, has in part responded to the need to understand media as objects (e.g. Casetti, 1995). The biography of technological objects (Turkle, 2007), technological autobiographies (Wyatt et al., 2000) and the history of news journalism (Barnhurst and Nerone, 2001) serve to describe media as objects. These studies, with the exception of Barnhurst and Nerone (2001), were conducted to investigate electronic technologies rather than print media, which also deserve more rigorous analysis. Focusing on the materiality of these two objects led us to apply another theoretical framework, the so-called new or neo-materialism that explores how ‘matter comes to matter’ (Barad, 2007). New materialism represents the great return from words to things. New materialists ask not how discourses come to matter, but rather how matter comes to matter. They consider ‘matter’ in its twofold meaning: matter as the object of the research and matter as the concrete, material building blocks of the research object. The ways in which matter matters were first discussed by Alaimo and Hekman (2008), Bennett and Joyce (2010), Coole and Frost (2010) and later Barrett and Bolt (2013). These authors advocated moving away from the study of representation, which applies ‘words’ to ‘worlds’ in a retrograde manner. New materialists are moved by a genuine

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 833 interest in what people really do with information and communication technologies (Bennet, 2010). They do not deny the importance of the intangible, cultural and symbolic aspects of the processes of production and consumption involving the readership, but they call on the research community to focus on the physicality of the objects and their uses (Komter, 2001) for building a wider vision of technological artefacts with the aim of obtaining a deep understanding of their identity. This theoretical framework is consistent with the theory of immaterial labour and other critical developments in Marxist analysis (Fuchs, 2010). The triangulation of these different strands of theory – micro-sociology of objects, neo-materialism and immaterial labour theory – makes it possible to study print and online newspapers, starting from their very essence as physical configurations. Furthermore, it enables us to begin by conceptualizing them as physical objects rather than as media, as well as considering their concrete uses, including, for example, reading styles, ritualization, gestures and postures and emotions as experienced by users.

Research questions and hypotheses The research questions addressed in this study are the following:

RQ1. What are the main physical characteristics of print newspapers and online newspapers as ‘objects’ perceived by users? RQ2. What are the concrete uses of these two different types of newspaper?

We expected to find more characteristics and uses than those reported in previously published work, because our focus was on the physical object, rather than on its communication and information functionalities. This study is in line with the theory of uses and gratifications (Katz et al., 1973–1974). With these two research questions, we aimed to advance understanding of how the crisis that has hit print newspapers can be overcome. The findings will provide insights for media groups and publishers, as well as for the research community.

Method This qualitative research uses three methodological tools. The first tool is written essays collected from 19 graduate students studying for a Master’s degree in Multimedia Communication and Information Technologies at the University of Udine. The students involved were particularly sensitive to the issue of print and digital reading. Understanding attributes and functionality of new media is part of their course syllabus. Furthermore, this class participated in a project on The Print Newspaper in the University promoted by the National Association of Print Newspaper Publishers. This project aimed to stimulate each class to read print newspapers by delivering two print newspapers for each student for free (Il Corriere della Sera – the most widely read Italian newspaper – and Il Sole 24 Ore – the most widely read economics newspaper at European level). We invited the students to reflect on the following themes: the physicality of print and online newspapers including ownership, mastering of the objects, physical sharing of them; the variety of uses extending beyond the concept of these two objects as information tools; the

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 834 Journalism 16(6) ritualization of their purchase; their gestures and postures while reading them; the emotion evoked by the objects; and the memorization of news. Students were not supplied with any other instruction on how to write about each theme. We were interested in their spontaneous thoughts. The decision to develop a research tool with this feature was dictated by the desire to have an instrument minimally influenced by the interaction between the researcher and the object of study. From a formal point of view, the texts obtained allowed more self-expression and spontaneity of content than a classical interview. Content analysis was used to assess the texts: they were broken down into discourse categories in order to capture the most relevant discur- sive frames (Altheide, 1996). The category frequencies were calculated and the most frequently occurring categories singled out. Those categories with relatively low frequency but possible importance to the clarification of some points of our analysis were also retained and discussed, as Silverman (1997) advises. This allowed us to trace a conceptual map of participants’ experience of reading print and online newspapers and to build a classifi- cation scheme which provides an analytical description of the most important issues. This style of content analysis is a notably non-intrusive and flexible methodology (McNeill and Chapman, 2005). The second research tool made use of ethnographic observations (cf. Ostrower, 1998), which was supported by a content analysis grid. With this technique, 21 observational cases were collected in various places: public libraries, train, houses and at a newsstand. The observed items include the following: duration of the observation, age range of the persons observed, type of reading device, reading place and reading posture, use practices (reading alone or with another person, search of the most interesting titles, and so on), gestures, quality of gestures and distance between the body and the reading device. This applied observational method can be considered as a relatively unobtrusive strategy for data collection. It allows the researcher to observe subjects’ behaviour without being actively part of the situation under scrutiny. Finally, we conducted an expert interview (Della Porta, 2010; King and Horrocks, 2010) with Lia Lucato, a psychologist, psychotherapist and specialist in anti-gymnastics. The interview lasted 5 hours in total, over two sessions, and dealt with reading and writing on paper and electronic media. Some excerpts from her interview dealing with cognitive aspects of the research questions are included in our results. The expert interview research technique is considered the best way to get lots of in-depth or technical information on a specific topic in a short period of time. The interview with Lia Lucato also helped with the evaluation and validation of the content analysis of the student essays and the ethnographic observational study.

Results Print and online newspapers as material objects Print and online newspapers were described and perceived very differently by the students participating in the essay exercise. A print newspaper is considered as an object completed, finished in itself whereas an online newspaper is a service provided by Web

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 835

2.0. In its physical dimensions, a print newspaper embodies the meaning and significance not only of its content but also of itself as specific object and of the overall experience of using it. Readers can take its measure at a glance, understand how large it is and roughly how many pages it has. Reading a print newspaper is an experiential continuum, whereas the online reading experience is much more fragmented; users can only see the main page on the screen. The experience of using an online newspaper is very different. First, users lose the sense of the totality of the object, as its physical dimensions are more evanescent and much less immediate. Second, online newspapers are one of the many resources offered by the Web. This means that they are third-order objects: the first-order object is the computer, the second-order object the Internet and the online newspaper is the third- order object. To access an online newspaper, one must first access the other two objects. Third, print and online newspapers present a radically different manipulability: when holding a print newspaper one can handle the object in its entirety and immediately access any chosen page. In contrast, with an online newspaper, one only has access to one page at a time. Fourth, differences in shape and consistency of print and online newspapers influence their content, since in general both information and knowledge are closely connected to the objects which convey them. The content of an online newspaper is also more fragmented than that of a print newspaper. The bases in fact of information and knowledge are constructed inside an experience which is above all multisensory. The physicality and materiality of the print newspaper convey ‘a sense of authenticity and verifiability that the online newspaper cannot provide’ argues the expert Lia Lucato. In conclusion, a print newspaper has a stronger sensory appeal than the online newspaper. The differences in the materiality of these two objects also mean that readers have a different degree of control over them. While readers totally control the ‘print newspaper’ object, they cannot do the same with online newspapers. An online newspaper is housed in a ‘universe’ which belongs to somebody else – the media groups – and requires other devices to function (e.g. a computer with Internet access, sockets and perhaps also a printer complete with toner). The ability to manipulate completely a print newspaper gives readers a greater sense of mastery of that medium which, for example, leads some people to use their finger to point at the line they are reading. This gesture is totally absent from the reading of online newspapers. Print and online newspapers also engen- der a different sense of ownership in their readers. Print newspapers are bought and pos- sessed, while online newspapers typically are not. Although the cost of a single copy of a print newspaper is not high, towards the end of the month this cumulative expense becomes relevant. As readers pay for a printed newspaper, they can interact with it as they want (for example, by cutting out articles that they want to keep). People can also give or lend their print newspaper to somebody else as they choose. In contrast, when readers do not own an online newspaper, they can only read it. Although print and online newspapers are designed to last 1 day, since the previous day’s newspaper becomes social memory, the real life of print newspapers makes strange paths. With regard to this, participant Serena writes that

The print newspaper can be something that lasts. I have kept newspapers for years until the space at home was suddenly reduced and I had to throw away a lot of them.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 836 Journalism 16(6)

The dimension of time – duration – is connected to that of space, which in many cases manifests itself as a limitation. The problem of space pointed out by Serena is faced often. Many people do not have time during the day or the week regularly to read the newspapers and they keep them for future reference. Others collect interesting articles as newspaper clippings. Gradually, the space in their house is reduced until the time when either they or the newspapers must leave the house. The same mechanism applies to books. With increased economic prosperity after the Second World War, books arrived in many houses and during the following decades they accumulated in the shelves and on the floor. This fact has created problems of coexistence between the inhabitants of the house and the books, as Baron (2015) argues in her forthcoming book Words Onscreen: The Fate of Reading in a Digital World.

The variety of reading styles and uses of print and online newspapers Like any other object, print newspapers have a form. As Barnhurst and Nerone (2001) argue, the form is

the persisting visible structure of the newspaper, the things that make the New York Times, for example, recognizable as the same newspaper day after day although its content changes. (p. 3)

This form varies according to the layout, design, illustration styles, schemes of depart- mentalization and so on, but more importantly it heavily affects readers. While the form of print newspapers is definite, stable and tangible for readers, the form of online newspapers is more flexible owing to Web 2.0 tools that enable more dynamic and interactive structure. One illustration of the relative inflexibility of print newspapers is that com- paratively large print newspapers are not designed for easy reading on the move. Their dimension often exceeds that of the seat of a train, bus or aeroplane. To read them, users have to fold the paper, which reduces the visible surface. It can be argued that that the form of print newspapers responds to the needs of a world that was less mobile than the contemporary one. Reading print newspapers is more comfortable, albeit not problem- free, when one is seated in an armchair or at table. The print newspaper, however, allows more sharing of the news and discussion with other members of the family, friends or acquaintances who are co-present. Thus, the reading of print newspapers at home or in public spaces provides an occasion to share opinions directly with others and to find body-to-body company. The reading of online newspapers on smartphones or tablets is less immediate in this regard; online newspapers allow asynchronous sharing of the information with Internet users, for example, on social networks. By contrast, in many cases, reading the print newspaper becomes a pretext for chatting with someone who is co-present. The form of a newspaper also influences the advertising, which in online assumes the form of a banner, pop-up, link, image or true page, while in print it may even aspire to be a work of art. For some students, print advertising is much more attractive than online advertising. Even the reading styles of print and online newspapers are different. From a cognitive point of view, linear reading on print seems to require less cognitive effort than online reading, which requires more decisions to be made and thus the use of more cerebral

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 837

‘real estate’, to borrow the words of Coiro and Dobler (2007). These results echo those already available produced by other research projects (Burke and Rowsell, 2008; Leu et al., 2008; Mokhtari et al., 2009), which show that reading on print and digitally are diverse in terms of brain activation, contextual environment, cognitive focus, comprehension and reading speed. But the most important thing to stress is that the style of reading of newspapers has influenced that of books: people increasingly read a book as if it were a newspaper. As Hillesund (2010) reports, scholars seldom read articles and books, instead jumping around in the text, maybe reading only the conclusions or only the chapters and paragraphs that they found interesting. Being different objects – one analogue and the other digital – print and online newspapers show a great diversity of use. Online newspapers offer only a use related to the bubble of functions designed for this digital object – all of these are immaterial. Print newspapers by contrast show many uses, which transcend that for which they have been expressively designed. Being material objects they lend themselves not only to immaterial but also to material uses. This may depend first on the fact that print newspapers are much older than online newspapers, so users have had more time to reinvent their design and thus to practise different uses; second, and also in contrast to online newspapers, print newspapers are tangible, material objects, made of a particular type of paper, which is very versatile and recyclable, hence many different uses have developed over time and have become everyday habits for people. The students’ essays report many kinds of uses for print newspapers: as a covering to avoid dirtying the floor or the car seats; as wrapping for objects or gifts; to protect fragile or precious objects such as silver, glass or pottery; to transport containers of plants or flowers; to clean windows or kitchen equipment soiled from cooking food; to protect the floor during maintenance work; to fill bags and shoes to give them a shape; to speed up the ripening of fruit; to light a fire; to protect the furniture and floor while decorating; as bedding for pets and so on. As seen from the ethnographic observation study, when print newspapers are abandoned on the train, they often become a shopping list or sheets of an album on which children’s creativity is freely expressed. Some people also reuse the paper for artistic purposes: for example, for making papier-mâché, necklaces, collage, earrings, hats and paper planes and so on. In reality, the print newspaper has also been a powerful source of artistic inspiration in the 20th century, as the exhibition Shock of the News admirably illustrated (Brodie et al., 2012). This list of material uses experienced by people shows how valuable the material support is to everyday life – the paper – of print newspapers and how many practical uses this support has inspired people. Print newspapers are an excellent example of how people reshape and reinvent technologies through their use practice, since reading is generally the first use and may be followed by many others. Sometimes the chronology is different, as participant Mirko explains,

For example, in my house I read news about Tangentopoli simply through discarding a component from a glass chandelier at home. It was exciting to discover the day (or period) in which it was wrapped and to re-read the news from that day.

The above examples of varied uses also show how articulated the lived experience of newspapers is. The diverse use of print newspaper helps us understand how profoundly

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 838 Journalism 16(6) newspapers are rooted in the folders of peoples’ daily life. These observations speak for the persistence of print newspapers even though they are wide open to reshaping in the present digitalized media landscape. The reading styles described by our essay writers were very diverse. Articles in print newspapers show more analytical qualities and are more reliable than those online; furthermore, the reading of online newspapers is personal, reading print newspapers is more collective, whether at home or in public places such as bars or waiting rooms.

Ritualization connected to the print and online newspapers According to Carey (1988), the transmission model fails to capture many dimensions of the practices of print newspaper use, such as the ritual functions of the media, which are important to understanding everyday life. Ritualization is especially important for print newspapers: in Italy, the majority of customers buy their paper from a newsstand; subscriptions are a very limited component of sales. The fact that people generally buy a print newspaper implies that they buy exactly the print newspaper that they like to read, that – according to Mirko – ‘mirrors their ideas’. By contrast, when people read newspapers online, Mirko continues, they more frequently read ‘news from many points of view, on the websites of different outlets, which leads to a more impartial reading’. While this might be good for users, it can be a catastrophe for media groups. In fact, according to participant Matteo, going online puts at risk the loy- alty of the readership towards a specific outlet. It seems that online the functionality – reading the newspaper – is more important than the outlet. While the readers of the print newspaper have generated a consolidated ritualization of its reading as part of everyday life, the same has not happened with online newspapers which can be accessed every- where and at any time. Hence, the different ritualization of the two practices of use has serious consequences for shaping different readership identities: the readership of print newspapers is generally a single and loyal audience, while that of online newspapers is multiple and unfaithful. This difference in ritualization also has unexpected effects on the reinvention by users of a newspaper’s identity, for instance, infrequent readers often treat a daily newspaper as a magazine. As participant Serena writes,

In my family, print newspapers are not thrown away the day after, because they include different types of information that last over time: a review of a book, for example, or the explanation of a scientific discovery or maybe some crosswords or other games. So, by reading it a little every day, we finish reading it only the following Saturday.

Gestures and postures related to the reading of print and online newspapers There has been a lack of attention to the gestures and postures which accompany the act of reading. The keyboard, positioned horizontally, concentrates the activity of writing in the same location as the tradition of writing on paper, while online reading has been concentrated vertically at the height of the screen and so in a completely new position for the reader. Electronic reading – on a desktop computer – requires people to raise their

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 839 head. The head is upright while one looks at the screen. People reading on paper read from top to bottom, with the head bent, in the classic position of prayer:

Online newspapers are read on screen with the page and the head of reader at the same level, which means that the reader is in an equal position in respect to the journalist. With print newspapers the head-down reading expresses readers’ subjection to the journalist, and maybe reflection and trust. (Mirko)

Raising the head in the shift from print to online newspapers has placed the reader in a position of parity with the writer: those who read on a screen symbolically position themselves on the same level as those who wrote the electronic text. E-actors with their capacity for both reading and producing electronic text (the famous ‘prosumer’) could develop only with this change in the reading posture of the reader using electronic devices. This change of almost 90° in head posture obviously could not but have consequences both at the cognitive and the emotional level. But what is regarded as a novelty for online reading is the rule for consumption of films. Director Jean-Luc Godard argued that the cinema screen must be at head-height, while television has to be watched by lowering the head. More precisely, use of the computer–Internet seems more similar to cinema use than to television use. The computer–Internet situates itself in the cultural heritage of cinema, not only because of the presence of a screen, as Manovich (2001) stresses, but also because of the user’s posture, which is very similar. However, this picture is made more complex by the increased variety in the shapes of computer and television screens. For example, the posture of a laptop user is halfway between the head-bent and the head-raised. The television has now emigrated to the wall and is watched at head-height, similar to the cinema screen. Also mobility brings changes. While ‘reading online newspapers on a desktop computer is a head-on reading’ (Serena), mobility makes reading with the head held high impossible. Mobile media, both tablets and mobile phones, have reintroduced to electronic reading the posture of the more-or-less lowered head. Not only postures but also gestures are affected in a different way by the online and the offline world as well as by the print world itself. For example, while reading a book requires micro-gestures of the arms, reading a print newspaper inspires a consistent opening of the arms at the height of the heart that mimics a broad opening towards the world. Reading a newspaper is in fact much more tiring physically than reading a book, because the gestures required are larger. The gestures are broad and start from the sternum, opening up expansively to the outside, showing also at a metaphorical level, that they express the largest opening to the world. Participant Mattia argues that ‘These gestures give readers a sensation of opening towards the object and of relying on it without restrictions’. Reading a newspaper removes the defence posture of arms gathered in front of the trunk and makes the reader feel open to the world. When a person reads the news, he or she is in a position in which news arrive directly at the heart. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why news has such an emotional structure and impact. Barnhurst and Nerone (2001) recall that the form of print newspapers is connected to democratic civic culture. This strong relationship is mirrored also in the gestures required to read a print newspaper. By contrast, on smartphones or tablets a finger suffices for

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 840 Journalism 16(6)

Table 1. Main results from the first ethnographic study.

Duration of the observation Average = 15 minutes Age range of the observed Two children; 8 subjects between 20 to 30 years; 11 subjects over 30 years Reading device The majority read print; two read newspapers on a smartphone; two on a tablet and one on a laptop The observed postures Sitting, sitting with the legs crossed, walking, standing, (most frequent) standing with the arms outstretched to hold up the newspaper, standing with the arms folded to hold the paper, putting a hand under the chin and lifting the newspaper with the other, every now and then adjusting the way the paper is folded. The observed gestures Browsing, marking the line with the finger to read, bringing the body to the newspaper or the newspaper closer to the body, underlining, taking notes. The observed gesture characteristics Amplitude, softness and distance from the body. Distance between the reading device Averages calculated by eye: 35 cm for those who placed and the body the newspaper on the table; 45 cm for those who have held it up; 55 cm for those who put the newspaper on the legs. pressing the keyboard or touching the screen. From broad gestures with print newspapers, we shift to micro, intimate gestures with online newspapers, which are adapted for reading snippets of information on mobile media and for an on-the-go lifestyle. However, as the ethnographic observational study shows, postures and gestures for reading newspapers (observed according to their amplitude, rigidity and direction) vary according to several factors such as changes of reading environment, support used, duration of reading, distance between the reader and the support and the purpose of reading (Table 1). A gesture that has migrated from print to online newspapers is the typical gesture of leafing through a newspaper. When reading print newspapers, gestures are much more frequent than when we read online newspapers; they involve intensive movements of the hands and arms in the former, but mainly use of the fingers in the latter. Another aspect that emerged from the ethnographic observational study is that the distance from the newspaper to the reader is slightly less with a print newspaper than with a tablet or smartphone. Finally, gestures in private indoor environments were softer than in public spaces. Larger gestures were observed only in public spaces and only in three cases.

Emotion, identity and memorization and the reading of print and online newspapers At first thought, the print newspaper, an object designed to last for 1 day, should not arouse an intense emotional effect and attachment in people. However, often the personal and social life of things reveals unexpected aspects (Appadurai, 1986). While cultural categories and the social system of objects (Baudrillard, 1988 [1970]) act as the sources of their meaning, McCracken (1990) argues that there is another set of instruments such as rituals or forms of symbolic actions that add meaning to the object. As Douglas and

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 841

Isherwood (1979: 74) have observed in their anthropological theory of the consumption of goods, things work as markers or classifiers. Emotions can arise from various elements: (1) the content of the newspaper – news related to wars, natural disasters and crimes might arouse highly emotional feelings; (2) the particular pleasure gained by the regular readers of a newspaper in recognizing in themselves the ideological and political stance of the newspaper as well as the opinions expressed by one or more of its journalists – this increases their sense of belonging to that specific readership; (3) the sensory channels involved in the interaction. The print newspaper, for example, conveys tactile sensations (related to a particular texture, roughness of pages), olfactory (many students report on the smell of the ink), auditory (the noise of the newspaper is also often reported) and visual (e.g. the specific layout of the newspaper that distin- guishes it from others and that the reader recognizes as habitual, or the particular colour of the pages or how titles are highlighted in yellow in order to mimic a common practice of highlighting some words or sentences while reading on paper). The multisensory experience offered by a print newspaper represents an important aspect, which is pleasantness. This might be found also online, but here, as Lia Lucato, our expert interviewee, argues,

… it derives mainly from the content, whereby it is another type of pleasure. In print you enter a certain atmosphere immediately, whilst with tablets, smartphones, computers which are rigid objects, users must respect certain procedures. In the online reading experience all activities tend to be traced to the mental experience, whilst reading in print multisensoriality obliges us to take into account that brain and mind are two different realities and that the latter is only a part of the former.

The context in which the reading of a newspaper takes place is also important. For example, participant Paolo talks about a sensation of coldness when reading online newspapers and a sensation of psychophysical well-being when reading print newspapers:

The majority of them go to the bar expressly to read the newspaper: the cappuccino, the espresso, the brioche, the other customers are a pleasant framework to the reading of the newspaper. This entails a sensation of relaxation, a well-being which raises morale. Reading newspapers online does not entail the same sensation of bliss because there is not the same contact with the printed paper, there is not the human contact with the newsagent or with bartenders and patrons of the bar. One is alone with the online newspaper; there is no space for co-present sociability.

An online newspaper, however, while carrying fewer physical sensations, permits rich interaction owing to the presence of multimedia content, for example, audio, video and so on. An online newspaper is more convenient than the print newspaper, particularly if read on a tablet or smartphone, and it can be constantly updated. Furthermore, through screenreaders even blind people can access its content, comment on it and share it. The emotional impact of newspapers is also dependent on the particular historical moment in which one considers it. For example, according to participant Alice A.,

… when the printed newspaper was one of the few sources of information, the emotional impact of the news was different (it is important how news is presented and what importance is given to each piece of news).

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 842 Journalism 16(6)

Participant Alice D says that in print newspapers she searches for news and insights that enable her to transform the information into knowledge, while on the Internet she looks for more commentable news. The other important element is that physical contact with the print newspaper and thus the various sensory channels elicits more accessible memorization. She also adds that given the overload of online information, it is much difficult to memorize what she reads in online newspapers. This opinion is shared by participant Serena who adds that, particularly with a print newspaper, it is possible to understand something of the identity of a person, for example, his/her political orientation, from see- ing which type newspaper he or she reads. In this study, the reading of print newspapers emerges as slow and relaxed while the reading of online newspapers is more hasty and tense. This does not mean that online reading is more rapid than print reading: on the contrary, as Dillon (1992) empha- sizes, reading on a screen is 20 to 30 per cent slower than on paper. Reading print newspapers is slower, argues participant Ares, because the reader is quieter and ‘this calm is the fruit of the defined space of the medium; one knows how much there is to read’.

Discussion and conclusive remarks The results of this study validate that our theoretical starting points – the physicality of online and offline newspapers, the decision to situate the research inside the micro- sociology of objects, new materialism framework and immaterial labour theory – were feasible. The study produced many answers to the first research question, ‘what are the main physical characteristics of the ‘objects’ print newspapers and online newspapers as they are perceived by users, that are in line with new materialism?’. Print newspapers as material objects are used to mark and stabilize social relations and daily activities. For this reason, they will hardly be replaced by online newspapers that are historically and socially less bound (Serres, 1995) The outside of a print newspaper, what Bennett (2010) called ‘thing-power’, drives users’ attention towards its operationality, and is much stronger than that of digital newspapers. Furthermore, our micro-sociological analysis showed that Italian students perceive that printed newspapers ‘do more things’ and have more capacity to catalyse multisensoriality and co-present social events (such as reading together and sharing the newspaper). In summary, the results of the study clearly show that there is no equivalence between print and online newspapers. They are two different objects with which users have completely different experiences. With respect to the second research question, what are the concrete practices of use of these two different newspapers, the study brought out several differences. The reader- ships of print and online newspapers have different degrees of freedom in their use practices with newspapers, different reading styles, emotion and effectiveness of memorization as well as rituals. They also use different gestures and postures. In particular, our findings about postures and gestures open new paths for future research. Findings show how the material characteristics of reading devices shape a reader’s body and how the human body mirrors the symbolic, cultural and social characteristics of the relationships between users, reading devices and journalistic contents. This also hints that reading print and online newspapers entails different types of immaterial labour. Printed newspapers trig- ger more social interactions and encounters – for example, on the way to and at a

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 843 newsstand, in the public reading place and so on – while online newspapers lead to more social participation and self-expression. Despite all of this, entire media groups sell these two very different products as if they were the same. Even the readers are not the same: people who read news frequently on only one platform make up less than a third of newspaper readers while those who con- sume news frequently on at least two platforms make up 44 per cent of newspaper readership (Fortunati et al., 2013). The strategy of replacing print newspapers with an online version applied by some media groups is therefore profoundly wrong and destined to fail. Recently, many corrective measures have been employed, such as the decision by Newsweek to re-launch a weekly print edition (Holpuch, 2013). Our research debunks the myth of the equivalence of print and online newspapers: they are two very different material objects. In this respect, our findings highlight the need to further develop the strategies that several publishers have already activated to tackle the current crisis facing the printed press. An example is providing alternative offerings and various paywall configurations. Producing online newspapers instead of print newspapers is not a good solution to the crisis. The readers of print and online newspapers have a different ritualization, different degrees of freedom in their use practices with newspapers, different reading styles, different emotions, different effectiveness of memorization and they use different gestures and postures. Print newspapers as material artefacts should be developed to meet the needs of today’s mobile and personal lifestyles. This might involve making print newspapers more readable on the move, for example, by changing the size of newspapers and including bridging elements – QR (Quick Response) Codes are the first thus far little used example of this – that maintain the physical properties of this highly valued artefact and add online conveniences and functionality to them. To conclude, by investigating print newspapers as material objects, this study has enriched the understanding of newspapers. It has moved the focus from the use of technical functionality to the physical properties, the public and users’ physical practices. While the majority of the existing research pays heed to the consequences of digitaliza- tion for professional practices in the newsroom, it often ignores the readers. The readership represents – among the others – the most crucial economic factor, so it is critical for news media to understand in depth users’ habits and try to address their needs and desires through a diversification of print and online products. The findings of this study can further be interpreted in the light of contemporary psycho-social perspectives. The importance of artefacts and their daily uses has been largely recognized, for example, by cultural psychology (Cole, 1996) and by social representations approach (Wagner and Hayes, 2005). Both argue that artefacts and their daily uses play the same role as daily discourse and common sense for cultural and rep- resentational analyses. For Cole, perception is culturally mediated and artefacts must be seen as mediators of reality as they are culturally shaped. This is especially relevant in the case of newspapers that mediate culturally bounded perceptions on multiple levels. These levels include the material and the immaterial reality, but in the case of online newspapers, these include also the first-, second- and third-order of objects. From another perspective, Wagner and Hayes argue, by referring to Bourdieu’s notion of habitus, that practices are related to behaviours, and behaviours to representations. This, in turn, reveals how knowledge is rooted in the materiality of everyday life.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 844 Journalism 16(6)

Limitations and future directions The limitations of this research are first and foremost related to its qualitative approach, which renders the results ungeneralizable. Second, it is without doubt that results relating to gestures, postures, ritualization and emotions need robust quantitative and cross- cultural studies. Third, the study depends heavily on students’ perceptions and is deeply rooted in the Italian context. The findings are dependent on Italian culture and reflect some common habits of Italian people, such as the socialization of the news in semi- public spaces like bars, cafes or public transport. Fourth, there is a need to further develop ethnographic studies on postures and gestures in order to produce a holistic view of the practices of online and offline newspaper uses. Fifth, it would be interesting to repeat the essay study and the ethnographic observational study in other countries to examine possible differences in the practices of newspaper use. Finally, as we mentioned, it would be worthwhile, to apply to print and online newspapers, a social representation study approach. The findings of this study could be used as a starting point.

Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Notes 1. The authors of the essays analysed here are the following students: Alice Aste, Marco Balbinot, Serena Chiara Beddini, Matteo Chini, Arianna Cristaldi, Alberto Dal Santo, Matteo Da Ros, Daniele D’Attanasio, Alice De Benetti, Paolo Furlan, Mirko Privitera, Silvia Scandurra, Marco Sericola, Ares Daniel Spinella, Mattia Spizzo, Asia Stefanizzi, Andrea Vanon, Francesca Verde and Enrico Zonta. They are also the authors of the research projects illustrated in this article. Although, in general, the essays are reported in an anonymized way, in these essays, the students expressed the desire to be cited with their name and surname. 2. A European network of scholars (FP1104 New possibilities for print media and packaging: combining print with digital) has been promoted and funded in order to carry out state-of-art experiments, projects and research studies in Europe on these themes.

References Alaimo S and Hekman S (eds) (2008) Material Feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Altheide DL (1966) Qualitative Media Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Appadurai A (ed.) (1986) The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Barad K (2007) Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Barnhurst KG and Nerone J (2001) The Form of News: A History. New York: The Guilford Press. Baron N (2015) Words Onscreen: The Fate of Reading in a Digital World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Barrett E and Bolt B (eds) (2013) Carnal Knowledge: Towards a ‘New Materialism’ through the Arts. London: I.B.Tauris. Baudrillard J (1988 [1970]) Consumer society. In: M Poster (ed.) Selected Writings. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 32–59.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 Fortunati et al. 845

Bennett J (2010) Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Bennett T and Joyce P (2010) Material Powers: History, Culture and the Material Turn. New York: Routledge. Bleyen VA and Van Hove L (2007) Western European newspapers and their online revenue models: An overview. First Monday 12(12). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/ fm/article/view/2014 Boczkowski PJ (2004) Digitizing the News: Innovation in Online Newspapers. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Brodie J, Boxer S, Mileaf J, et al. (2012) Shock of the News. Washington, DC: National Gallery of Art. Burke A and Rowsell J (2008) Screen pedagogy: Challenging perceptions of digital reading practices. Changing English: Studies in Culture & Education 15(4): 445–456. Carey JW (ed) (1988) Media, Myths, and Narratives: Television and the Press. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Casetti F (ed.) (1995) L’ospite fisso: Televisione e mass media nelle famiglie. Milano: San Paolo Edizioni. Coiro J and Dobler E (2007) Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth- grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly 42(2): 214–257. Cole M (1996) Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Colombo F (2013) Dalla mobilitazione televisiva del 1968 a quella informatica del 2013. lectio magistralis held at the course in Multimedia Sciences and Technologies of the University of Udine, Pordenone, 10 April 2013. Coole DH and Frost S (2010) New Materialisms: Ontology, Agency, and Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Della Porta D (2010) L’intervista qualitativa. Rome: Laterza. Deuze M (ed.) (2011) Managing Media Work. London: SAGE. Dillon A (1992) Reading from paper versus screens: A critical review of the empirical literature. Ergonomics 35(10): 1297–1326. Domingo D (2008) Interactivity in the daily routines of online newsrooms: Dealing with an uncomfortable myth. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13: 680–704. Douglas M and Isherwood B (1979) The World of Goods: Toward an Anthropology of Consumption. London: Allen Lane. Fortunati L, Deuze M and De Luca F. (2013) The new of the news: How print, online, free, and mobile coconstruct new audiences in Italy, France, Spain, the UK, and Germany. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19(2): 121–137. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12026 Fuchs C (2010) Labor in informational capitalism and on the Internet. The Information Society 26(3): 179–196. Hillesund T (2010) Digital reading spaces: How expert readers handle books, the Web and electronic paper. First Monday 15(4). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2762/2504 Holpuch A (2013) Newsweek to print weekly edition again one year after calling it quits. The Guardian, 4 December. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/dec/04/newsweek-to-print-weekly-again (accessed 12 January 2013). Katz E, Blumler JG and Gurevitch M (1973–1974) Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly 37(4): 509–523. King N and Horrocks C (2010) Interviews in Qualitative Research. London: SAGE. Komter A (2001) Heirlooms, Nikes and bribes: Towards a sociology of things. Sociology 35(1): 59–75.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015 846 Journalism 16(6)

Küng L, Picard R and Towse R (eds) (2008) The Internet and the Mass Media. London: SAGE. Leu DJ, Coiro J, Castek J, et al. (2008) Research on instruction and assessment in the new literacies of online reading comprehension. In: Collins Block C and Parris SR (eds) Comprehension Instruction: Research-Based Best Practices. New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 321–342. McCracken G (1990) Culture & Consumption. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Manovich L (2001) The Language of New Media. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Massing M (2012) When watchdog meets lapdog. Columbia Journalism Review, 4 June 2012. Available at: http://www.cjr.org/the_kicker/when_watchdog_meets_lapdog.php?page=all (accessed 3 February 2014). McNeil P and Chapman S (2005) Research Methods. Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis. Miller D (1998) (ed.) Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Mokhtari K, Reichard CA and Gardner A (2009) The impact of Internet and television use on the reading habits and practices of college students. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 52(7): 609–619. Ostrower F (1998) Nonparticipant observation as an introduction to qualitative research. Teaching Sociology 26(1): 57–61. Sarrica M, Fortunati L, Balcytiene A, et al. (2010) The integration of the Internet in European newsrooms. European Journal of Communication 25(4): 413–422. Schiff F (2003) Business models of news Web sites: A survey of empirical trends and expert opinion. First Monday 8(6). Available at: http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_6/schiff/index. html (accessed 3 February 2014). Serres M (1995) Genesis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Silverman D (ed.) (1997) Doing Qualitative Research: Theory, Method, and Practice. London: Sage. Turkle S (2007) Evocative Objects: Things We Think With. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Van der Wurff R and Lauf E (eds) (2005) Print and Online Newspapers in Europe: A Comparative Analysis in 16 Countries. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis. Wagner W and Hayes N (2005) Everyday Discourse and Common Sense: The Theory of Social Representations. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Wyatt S, Henwood F, Miller N, et al. (eds) (2000) Technology and In/equality: Questioning the Information Society. London: Routledge.

Author biographies Leopoldina Fortunati is the Director of the doctoral program in Multimedia Communication at the University of Udine, where she teaches Sociology of Communication and Culture. She has conducted several studies in the fields of gender studies, cultural processes, journalism and communication and information technologies. Her work has been published in 12 languages. Sakari Taipale is an Academy of Finland Research Fellow at the University of Jyväskylä, Finland. He is also an Adjunct Professor at the University of Eastern Finland. Dr Taipale has published numerous articles on new media, the Internet, mobile communication and mobilities in high- ranking international journals such as British Journal of Sociology, Telecommunications Policy, European Journal of Communication and Mobilities. Manuela Farinosi is a Post-Doctoral Researcher and Adjunct Professor of Sociology of Communication and Economic Sociology at University of Udine, Italy. Her main research interests are the social and cultural aspects of digital technologies, with particular reference to social media and their impact on public and private spheres. She is member of the COST Action FP1104.

Downloaded from jou.sagepub.com at Hacettepe Univeristy on October 12, 2015