Whose Views Made The News?

But see Media Research Center (2008) Media Research Center. Five years of slant against Iraq War success. 2. Our extensive search of political science and communications journals yielded very little sustained empirical research on U.S. George W. Bush’s speeches (Coe, Domke, Graham, Lockett, & Pickard, 2004 Coe, K., Domke, D., Graham, E., Lockett John, S. and Pickard, V. W. 2004. No shades of gray: The binary discourse of George W. Bush and the echoing press. Berinsky & Druckman, 2007 Berinsky, A. J. and Druckman, J. N. 2007. The polls—Review: Public opinion research and support for the Iraq War.”. Calabrese, 2005 Calabrese, A. 2005. Casus belli: U.S. Feldman et al., 2007 Feldman, S., Huddy, L. and Marcus, G. . Going to war: When citizens matter. Paper prepared for presentation at the fall session of the New York Area Political Psychology Meeting, Columbia University. Foyle, 2004 Foyle, D. C. 2004. Leading the public to war? The influence of American public opinion on the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq.

Free photo Building Congress Government Dome Capitol ...

Neuwirth, Fredeick & Mayo, 2007 Neuwirth, K., Frederick, E. and Mayo, C. 2007. The spiral of silence and fear of isolation. Rendall and Broughel, 2003 Rendall, S., & Broughel, T. (2003). Amplifying officials, squelching dissent. Robertson, 2004 Robertson, J. W. 2004. People’s watchdogs or government poodles? Scotland’s national broadsheets and the second Iraq War. But we found no studies employing systematic content analysis to document the overall tenor and thrust of U.S. Iraq in the critical pre-invasion period. 3. As Entman (2004 Entman, R. M. 2004. Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1982 nuclear freeze rally, which up to that point was the largest mass political demonstration in modern U.S. Central Park. The greater part of the article—replete with references to the frivolous and radical 1960s—focused on the logistics of moving the crowd and descriptions of the participants” (p. 4. In this connection, Hallin (1994 Hallin, D. C. 1994. “The media, the war in Vietnam, and political support: A critique of the thesis of an oppositional media”.

In We keep America on top of the world: Television journalism and the public sphere, Edited by: Hallin, D. C. 40-57. New York: Routledge. 5. For example, Entman (2004 Entman, R. M. 2004. Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Libya episode, critical assertions by non-U.S. Congress by ratios of approximately 28:1 on the CBS Evening News and 22:0 in the New York Times. 6. These survey results were retrieved from the Roper Center Public Opinion Archives iPoll Databank. 7. It is true that the French, in particular, were vilified in the media after the UN rejected military action against Iraq. The most memorable development was the editing of the menu in the congressional dining hall so that it served “freedom fries.” But this did not happen until March 11, just 9 days prior to the invasion. Before that, it appears that French and other foreign leaders continued to command respect from significant numbers of Americans.

8. We initially coded for a tertiary focus as well, but abandoned it after finding that few stories had three identifiable foci and that intercoder reliability ratings for the variable were low. 9. We coded both named and anonymous sources who were quoted directly and indirectly. 10. See Althaus (2003 Althaus, S. L. 2003. When news norms collide, follow the lead: New evidence for press independence. 11. Before beginning the coding, we conducted preliminary analyses to make sure our coding scheme could be reliably put into practice. In that process, we resolved any discrepancies or problems with the coding instructions. As the coding proceeded, we conducted two rounds of intercoder reliability tests, double-coding 5% of all stories. Our intercoder reliability ratings were generally within the accepted range for content analysis (Neuendorf, 2002 Neuendorf, K. A. 2002. The content analysis guidebook, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. In the table below, we present Cohen’s kappa, which adjusts for chance agreement, as a measure of reliability for each of our key variables.