|
Gatekeeping international news: an attitudinal profile of U.S. television journalists.
by Hun Shik Kim In the twenty-first century, peoples and cultures are being drawn closer together in a world of sophisticated communication networks. Yet, television news continues to emphasize local and national events, often at the expense of international news coverage. As noted by Gans (1979) and Chang and Lee (1992), most international news on U.S. television networks comes from areas characterized by American involvement, or where American political or economic interests are at stake. Tuchman (1978) maintains news is constructed social reality, and audience perception of news is dependent on how journalists frame it. It follows that Americans' understanding of other cultures and countries is significantly influenced by the way international news is framed. Although television news is the product of multi-layered decisions, journalists and their news organizations are responsible for the final news product. Despite the public service rhetoric, television news organizations are business environments composed of hierarchical systems within which news managers and journalists function (Tuggle & Huffman, 2000). Journalists select certain news stories while rejecting others based on many different levels of considerations--personal judgment, newsroom routines, restraints laid out by their news organizations, and socio-cultural influences. In this context, journalists are gatekeepers who cover and select news that flows along the communication channel, shaping what is finally presented as news to the audience. In television stations, gatekeepers are reporters, producers, anchors, and editors, depending on their specific roles and responsibilities. Often, news selection is made by senior editors and senior news producers, and sometimes by executives of news organizations. The purpose of this study, in the narrow sense, is to explore attitudinal patterns held by television journalists in the United States in selecting international news. It explores the individual subjectivity of gatekeepers' judgments. In the broader sense, the study examines the salience of gatekeeping factors such as individual differences, newsroom routines, organizational constraints, extra-organizational influences, and social-cultural differences as described by Shoemaker (1991, 1999) in the selection process of international news, and consequently, its content on U.S. television.
Literature Review Gatekeeping Theory The concept of "gatekeeper" was first introduced by Lewin (1947), who conceived of news as flowing in a channel containing several gates controlled by gatekeepers, each of whom decides whether a news item would proceed along the channel to eventually reach news audiences. White (1950) pioneered the first gatekeeping study in journalism and mass communication in his analysis of a newspaper wire editor's news selection patterns. Over the past 50 years, the main focus of the gatekeeping research has been the degree of subjective news judgment (Harmon, 1989; Snider, 1967; White, 1950). For example, White focused on the decisions of the lone journalist, emphasizing the personal and subjective aspects of that decision-making. However, subsequent studies by Gieber (1964), Epstein (1973), and Dimmick (1974) found gatekeepers are not single individuals making decisions independently. They are influenced heavily by other factors, such as the media owner's ideology, media routines, and official sources including government and corporate officials. Different Dimensions of Gatekeeping Shoemaker (1991) asserted that gatekeeping in a communication context can be studied on at least five levels--individual; routines of work; organizational; social and institutional (extra-media); and the social system. At the individual level, news selection is personal, influenced by the likes and dislikes of a journalist. At the routines of work level, gatekeeping decisions are based on a pre-established and generalized set of practices in judging newsworthiness, including accuracy, the right length, good visuals, human interest, novelty, negativity, conflict and violence, loss of lives, and the story's timeliness. Some television gatekeeper-journalists claim to select news mostly based on instinct and news judgment (Berkowitz, 1990, 1991). At the organizational level, television news is the result of a combination of decisions by journalists within news organizations and the influences from media owners, editorial policies, budget constraints, and the number of foreign news bureaus (Donohew, 1967; Epstein, 1973; Larson, 1984; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996). Extra-media influences include but are not limited to news sources, television audiences and corporate advertisers, media markets and economic forces, government, interest groups, public relations efforts, and competition with other news media (Donahue, Tichenor, & Olien, 1989; Gandy, 1982; Lee, 1997; Sigal, 1973). The broader socio-cultural influences affect gatekeeping as to the extent different parts of the world are represented in the news. According to Shoemaker (1999), U.S. news media provide more coverage of European events and issues than of those in Africa and South America. News judgment, according to the cultural perspective, is a product of differences in socio-cultural orientations. These structural attributes differentiate one society from another, and people with similar attributes tend to relate more with one another (Galtung & Ruge, 1965; Salwen & Garrison, 1989). Based on this gatekeeping perspective, television news items, including international items, are accepted or rejected based on various factors, such as journalists' perceptions of a news event, daily working norms, the written and unwritten rules of television news organizations, and extra-media pressures as well as societal and cultural influences. News Determinants Perspectives Another perspective in international news selection focuses on the characteristics of news values (Chang & Lee, 1992; Chang, Shoemaker, & Brendlinger, 1987; Gans, 1979; Hester, 1971, 1974). Shoemaker and Reese (1996) identified some of these news values as prominence or importance, human interest, conflict/controversy, novelty, timeliness, and proximity. Buckalew (1969), in his Q study of television news editor's decisions, identified three types of editors and found an overall preference for stories with high impact, proximity, timeliness, and visual availability. With regard to international news, Gans (1979) identified the seven most prevalent types of stories in American print and broadcast media: (a) U.S. actions abroad, including major wars and presidential visits; (b) foreign activity that affects America; (c) relations with totalitarian countries; (d) foreign elections and transfers of power; (e) major wars; (f) disasters with great loss of lives; and (g) oppression under foreign dictators. In his studies of news flow into the United States via the Associated Press, Hester (1971, 1974) ranked direct involvement of U.S. interests as a key criterion of newsworthiness for international news coverage. Chang, Shoemaker, and Brendlinger (1987) found that relevance to the United States and deviance of an event are the best predictors for U.S. media's coverage of international news. Chang and Lee (1992) noted that threat to the U.S. and world peace, anticipated reader interest, timeliness, and U.S. involvement are important factors. Journalists' individual backgrounds--foreign language training, professional education, political ideology, and availability of news slot and wire services--as well as organizational constraints were also salient. The economic, social, political, and geographic characteristics of a nation also determine the amount of coverage a country receives in the media of another (Galtung & Ruge, 1965; Hester, 1974; Ostgaard, 1965; Rosengren, 1974). These factors include GNP per capita, index of economic development, population or size of country, cultural and geographic proximity, former colonial ties, language, regionalism, elite status of a nation, and media infrastructure (Ahern, 1984; Chang, 1998; Galtung, 1971; Hachten, 1999; Larson, 1984; Ostgaard, 1965). Rosengren (1974, 1977) found four factors alone--GNP, trade data, population, and geographic distance--accounted for between one third and two thirds of the variance in foreign election coverage by three elite European newspapers. However, studies based on news-determinant perspectives have inherent limitations, as pointed out by Wu (1998). The use of varied media samples, media frameworks, key definitions, analysis methods, and operational definitions of variables invariably produced conflicting results. Other perspectives resulted from the political debates over the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) of the 1970s and 1980s, and the sociopolitical changes since the 1990s. Rosenblum (1979) and Hess (1996) assert that international news events covered by the Western media are predominantly concerned with conflict or violence. Hess, for example, contends that the actions of foreign governments, especially related to violence and conflicts, have the highest likelihood of being covered by the U.S. media. The end of the Cold War has impacted how U.S. and foreign television networks treat international news. Norris (1995, 1997), Hoge (1997), and Arnett (1998) found a decline in international news coverage in the U.S. media in the last decade. The post-Cold War world is viewed by news professionals as a safer place without formidable enemies, causing them to shift their eyes closer to home and to their own communities. The September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., and the subsequent war against terrorism in Afghanistan did bring a raised awareness in international news, albeit foreign news with domestic implications such as U.S. actions abroad and American lives at stake. The advent of new communication technologies such as communication satellites, electronic news gathering, and the World Wide Web has further contributed to the blurring of geographical and cultural borders that once hindered coverage and distribution of international news. One side effect of these technologies was the shutdown of a number of foreign news bureaus, escalating the number of "parachute journalists" who crisscrossed foreign news scenes armed with only a superficial knowledge of the events they cover (Arnett, 1998; Hachten, 1999; Heuvel, 1993; Norris, 1997). Based on these developments and changes in the news environment and in technology, a survey of international news gatekeepers is timely to explore and identify changing international news criteria as well as to verify and validate the selection criteria postulated by more than half a century of gatekeeping and news-determinant studies in the field of international news. Of interest in this study are television journalists. Although various studies have examined the characteristics of television journalist-gatekeepers (e.g., Berkowitz, 1990, 1991) and how they differ from their newspaper counterparts (Johnston, Slawski, & Bowman, 1972; Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996), there remains a vacuum in the study of television gatekeepers in relation to international news. Two research questions are postulated: | |
RQ1: What are U.S. television journalists' attitudes toward international
news?
RQ2: How do the five levels of gatekeeping--individual, routines of work,
organizational, extra-organizational, and socio-cultural--influence
international news selection by U.S. television journalists?
| | Methods This study uses the Q-methodological approach. Invented by British physicist-psychologist William Stephenson (1953), Q methodology is associated with factor analysis. Respondents sort a deck of cards called Q items, and their sorts are factor analyzed to draw out correlations among the respondents (Kerlinger, 1986). As such, Q methodology offers a means of identifying groups of people who share similar attitudes toward a phenomenon. A distinct advantage of Q methodology is its effectiveness with small samples. From a sample of respondents who represent diverse attitudes, Q methodology is able to discover broad patterns that can be found in the larger population. Since this study was limited to a small number of international news gatekeepers both at local and network television stations, Q methodology was appropriate. More importantly, the methodology is expected to overcome the limitations of previous studies that overlooked individual journalists' subjective, self-referent ranking of news gatekeeping factors and the typologies of their attitudes toward international news. Examples of media-related studies using Q are Buckalew (1969), who examined television editors' news selection, and Logan and Garrison (1985), who explored the attitudes of Caribbean journalists toward professional values. For this study, a Q sample of 197 statements was constructed from the literature of international news and gatekeeping theories as well as from personal interviews with broadcast journalists. After successive screenings, a final Q sample of 50 statements was formed to represent four themes: (1) five different levels of gatekeeping (e.g., Shoemaker, 1991, 1999); (2) various news determinant factors (e.g., Galtung & Ruge, 1965; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996); (3) attitudes toward international news gathering and flow (e.g., Hess, 1996; Hoge, 1997), and; (4) attitudes toward journalistic roles in society (e.g., Hachten, 1999; Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996). A Q survey was conducted with a purposive sample of 31 television journalists from three major national television networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC), 24-hour cable news network CNN, and network-affiliated television stations (KMBC, KCTV, KSHB, and WDAF) in the Kansas City area. Q sorting by individual journalists was conducted between August and September 2000 during the researcher's visits to each network and local station. The respondents included foreign editors and senior reporters or news producers in charge of international news at networks as well as local television news directors, reporters, and news producers to represent a diverse array of viewpoints. Respondents were asked to sort 50 statement cards on an 11-point, quasi-normal distribution ranging from "Strongly Disagree" (-5) to "Strongly Agree" (+5). They also provided brief explanations of their choice of Most Disagree and Most Agree statements. Next, they reported their demographic information and journalism experience in a brief questionnaire. The respondents' rankings of the 50 statements were factor-analyzed based on varimax rotation. Results Demographics of Respondents Given the small sample size, the demographic information was not generalized beyond the sample. However, distinct characteristics were found in the sample. First, the 31 respondents comprised 10 women and 21 men. Eighteen were network journalists (including CNN), while 13 were local journalists. They consisted of 8 senior reporters, 9 news producers, and 14 senior editors, including foreign editors and news directors. Respondents had an average of 14.8 years of journalism experience, with a mean of 7.3 years with their current news organizations. In their current positions, respondents had been working for an average of 4.9 years. About two thirds (21 respondents) were four-year college graduates, while one third (10) had post-graduate degrees. Twenty-three respondents reported receiving journalism-related education from various journalism schools in the country. Two-thirds of the respondents (21) spoke at least one foreign language. Among them, 12 spoke a foreign language, 8 spoke two foreign languages, and one journalist spoke three. Fourteen respondents (45.2%) have lived in foreign countries; six of them have lived overseas for more than 15 years. Comparing network and local television journalists, the mean age of local journalists was 32.8, while network journalists were older, with a mean age of 41.1. The average professional experience for the local television journalists was 10.6 years, but network journalists had more professional experience--17.9 years. The local journalists spoke an average of .7 foreign languages, indicating that many of them did not speak a foreign language, while network journalists spoke an average of 1.2 foreign languages. The mean period of residence in foreign countries for network journalists was 9.9 years, but the mean for local journalists was only .2 years. However, these differences in foreign language knowledge and overseas experience were anticipated because three network journalists grew up in Britain, Canada, and Puerto Rico. Overall, the network journalists in the sample were older, more experienced professionally, and were likely to have been exposed more to diverse cultures than were the local television journalists. Q Factor Analysis The Q factor analysis of the 31 respondents yielded three factors or attitudinal typologies: Pragmatic Idealists (Factor 1), Global Diplomats (Factor 2), and Bottomline Realists (Factor 3). Labels are attached to the factors to facilitate visualization of these individual journalists' attitudes toward international news. Each factor represents a group of individuals who share similar attitudes, beliefs, and opinions on international news and its selection criteria. The arrays of z scores for the statements in the Q sample represent a hypothetical attitude. Z scores, which are generated in the factor analysis, represent the degree of agreement or disagreement with each statement. The absolute z score of more than 1 is considered significant. All three factors are highly correlated, between .56 and .66, indicating the U.S. television journalists in this study tend to share rather similar attitudes toward international news and comparable perceptions of gatekeeping forces in the newsroom. The three factors explained 51.1% of the variance in the sample. Attitudes of U.S. Television Journalists Toward International News The first research question, (RQ1: What are U.S. television journalists' attitudes toward international news?) is answered through the 24 consensus items that emerge from the 50 Q statements (see Table 1). The attitudes of journalists toward international news gathering and flow, and toward journalistic roles in society--two of the four themes reflected in the Q sample--are addressed in the following discussions of the consensus items and the three factors (see Table 1). Consensus items are statements that all three types of journalists most agreed and disagreed with. The z scores presented in the table and the parentheses are averages of each Q item's three z scores. Considering that the television journalists in the study share reasonably similar work routines and news judgment, regardless of their organizations' market size, the number of consensus items is unsurprising. First, respondents share a deep conviction about the usefulness of international news. As noted by Hoge (1997) and Arnett (1998), American television journalists are aware of the low status of international news. More specifically, international news is being overwhelmed by national and local news. There is also clear evidence of audience indifference to international news. Such an awareness of the harsh realities of the international news business is evident among the respondents of this study, but it has not eroded their confidence in the utility of international news. They believe international news is a means of providing their audiences with knowledge of world affairs (z = 1.63). One CNN editor says, "Serving the public is the top job of a journalist." Respondents, however, concede that important international stories often do not get covered due to the lack of a "local angle" of viewer interest (z = 1.28). As explained by a local television editor, "Some countries seem very far away to our viewers." For these journalists, domestic and local tie-ins are perhaps the best strategy to boost their audiences' interest in international news. Second, the respondents do not subscribe to an "objective" news judgment of international news. They believe there exist different news judgments held by journalists in different news organizations and in different cultures (z = 1.23). All the journalists in this study clearly acknowledge the impact and contributions of transnational news media such as the BBC and Star TV in widening the reach and diversity of international news (z = 1.13). "Without these agencies," one network television editor observed, "foreign news on domestic TV would be very difficult and expensive to cover." Third, in terms of news determinants, all respondents say that timeliness (z = 1.03) and U.S. involvement (z = 1.01) are the most important factors in international news selection. This finding concurs with what scholars have found (e.g., Chang & Lee, 1992; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996). Nevertheless, contrary to what previous studies have suggested about the importance of a country's political ties to the United States, the respondents are less inclined to limit their selection only to news about countries that maintain amicable political relations with the United States (z = -1.05). Fourth, all respondents are strongly opposed to government control of international news (z = -1.84, z = -1.09). The influences from big corporate advertisers (z = -1.78) or interest groups (z = -.94) over international news selection are also rejected by the journalists. Previous studies (e.g., Altschull, 1995; Shoemaker, 1991; Sigal, 1973) have indicated that these influences are apparent to the extent that they determine the ideology of the media content. In this study, the journalists' response reflects the low status of international news in newsrooms today. Neither a ratings booster nor profit-maker, it is more immune to these influences compared to national and local news. Finally, respondents disagree that journalists in general distort important perspectives of international news with their personal biases (z = -1.32). This firm upholding of objectivity and truthtelling supports what scholars (e.g., Lambeth, 1992; Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996) have documented as two of the more tangible journalistic values of American journalists. Worth noting are several other consensus items, notwithstanding their weaker intensity of agreement or disagreement. For example, the journalists do not believe their autonomy to select international news stories is curtailed by organizational hierarchy (z = -.75). They also reject the suggestion that they tend to toe the line of the U.S. government's foreign policy when reporting international news (z = -.62). Whether or not these responses reflect the realities of the newsroom, these journalists obviously believe in their own professional judgment and in press freedom. As noted by Larson (1984) and Arnett (1998), the existence of foreign news bureaus and the number of correspondents is an important determinant of the quality of international news. This study found a similar contention, although respondents' intensity of agreement is rather weak (z = .63). Although financial constraints play an important role in international news coverage (Epstein, 1973; Lacy, Chang, & Lau, 1989), the influence of financial constraints is not salient in this study (z = .59). The following discussion provides a more detailed interpretation of each factor and its arrays. Factor 1: Pragmatic Idealists Pragmatic Idealists not only pursue international news as a means to promote public knowledge and understanding of other cultures but also concede the limitations of international news in their news operations. Pragmatic Idealists view themselves as purveyors of information and public educators. This particular journalistic role conception guides their attitudes toward international news, which may appear idealistic and philanthropic, leading them to sometimes underestimate the harsher realities of international newsgathering and distribution. For example, Pragmatic Idealists believe the best and most responsible news media have always given high priority to international news (z = 1.78), providing the public with knowledge of world affairs (z = 1.70). This rather pedantic but self-assured stance is at the core of the Pragmatic Idealists' mindset. Of the 11 respondents in this factor, about two thirds (7) are network journalists from CBS and NBC. It is possible their outlook is shaped by their direct exposure to international news in their capacity as foreign news reporters and editors, motivating them to view international news as an essential diet in network news operations. The top three statements they most agreed with (12, 31, 13--see Table 2) pertain to the news media's role of providing the public with useful knowledge of the outside world. The top three statements most disagreed with (39, 32, 21) reveal their opposition to influences from political elites, corporate advertisers, and interest groups. Pragmatic Idealists value the contributions of multinational news organizations such as the BBC and Star TV in widening the reach and diversity of international news (z = 1.56). Interestingly, the effectiveness of foreign news bureaus and correspondents is questioned by this group, which claims major news agencies such as AP and Reuters are more important players in the coverage of international news (z = 1.06). Pragmatic Idealists agree that news organizations in other cultures, due to differences in news judgments and criteria, could develop and present international news with different perspectives (z = 1.44). These journalists, however, indicate the time constraint inherent in the evening news format is the primary reason not all available international news could be aired (z = 1.40). Pragmatic Idealists' most salient news criterion is good visuals (z = 1.30). The U.S. interests factor is also an important consideration in selecting international news (z = 1.20). Pressures and influences from public relations officers, corporate advertisers, and interest groups are minimal, according to Pragmatic Idealists (z = -2.05). Similarly, the media owner's philosophy and policy are not perceived to be influential (z = - 1.39). Pragmatic Idealists, like the two other factors, express a strong resistance to government control of international news, whether the control is designed to protect social norms and cultural identity from deviant and immoral foreign news content (z = -1.94) or to ensure national security and public welfare (z = -1.13). Western news media, these journalists believe, are more trustworthy and credible than other news media (z = 1.31). However, they perceive their coverage of international news to be sufficient because it meets audience demand--regardless of the level of demand. As one network foreign editor remarked: "Let's face it. Foreign news is not as prominent as domestic news. That's the reality. But given the level of consumption of foreign news in this country, we are adequately covering the world." The attitude of Pragmatic Idealists toward the threat to American lives as a news determinant is complex. On one hand, they disagree with the view that international news should embody domestic implications (such as a U.S. hostage crisis in a foreign country) to be newsworthy (z = -1.43). On the other hand, they admit the fate of two Americans arrested in Iraq is a more important story than a bomb explosion killing a number of foreign nationals (z = .97). Influences from government officials and politicians are not highly visible to Pragmatic Idealists (z = -1.24). They have faith in their colleagues and their news judgments, rejecting the notion that journalists often distort important perspectives of news with their biases (z = -1.14). Hence, it is also natural for Pragmatic Idealists to reject the idea that journalists tend to associate with each other to produce similar perspectives (z = - 1.02). Factor 2: Global Diplomats Global Diplomats believe international news is for everyone; the content and perspectives in international news reflect global values regardless of political and geographical divisions. This group of journalists tends to uphold the idea of a Global Village where citizens of every country freely partake in shared news and information. In their journalistic role conception, Global Diplomats view themselves as neutral observers rather than as reflecting an American perspective in their selection and presentation of international news; they are not keen to take sides. As a CNN foreign assignment editor explained, "We represent global perspectives, not U.S. perspectives only." Interestingly, all six CNN journalists in the sample fall into this category of 10 Global Diplomats. The other four journalists are from ABC, CBS, NBC, and the KMBC local station. Incidentally, two of the network journalists have extensive journalism experience outside the United States. The ABC reporter had 19 years of overseas reporting experience as a foreign correspondent and bureau chief while the NBC editor had 20 years of journalism experience covering both domestic and foreign assignments. For Global Diplomats, considerations of global audiences and markets beyond American television audiences are a driving force, as seen in their strong affirmation of a global and non-partisan philosophy of international news. The Most Agree statements (31, 1, 47--see Table 2) reveal these journalists' willingness to embrace more diverse contents of international news. As for their daily work routines, Global Diplomats believe editors should consult with reporters and producers to select a diverse and balanced diet of international news (z = 1.78). One CNN international news assignment editor remarked that such consultation is important because, "Editors in the United States must rely on reporters and producers in bureaus abroad for input on story assignments." Considering CNN's broad reach and its extensive stable of foreign bureaus and correspondents, it is essential for the 24-hour-news network's editors to communicate with their overseas staffs more frequently than for the other networks or local television stations. Global Diplomats believe international news can serve as public knowledge (z = 2.05). They also deem international news to be important because the images depicted impact many people in different countries (z = 1.50). Hence, it is natural for Global Diplomats to demonstrate a favorable attitude toward multinational, global television networks such as the BBC and Star TV (z = 1.22). They also acknowledge differences in news judgment and selection practices shaped by different social and cultural attributes (z = 1.22). Some Global Diplomats readily claim that their experiences of having lived in foreign countries are useful in helping them decide which international news story is more important than others (z = 1.07). "Living overseas has made me aware of many news topics that aren't prominently reported in the United States," said an assignment editor at CNN. In news selection criteria, Global Diplomats tend to select stories about disasters--earthquakes, floods and famines--that affect a large population as important international news (z = 1.35). However, they also disagree that television's international news must include ingredients of crisis, conflict, and violence (z = -1.57). To Global Diplomats, a story's timeliness is an important consideration (z = 1.08); this can be attributed to their work routines covering worldwide breaking news events that require speedy follow-ups and interpretations. The Most Disagree statements (32, 2, 21) reflect Global Diplomats' strong opposition to restraints laid out by corporate advertisers, news organizations, and governments. Global Diplomats, like Pragmatic Idealists, are opposed to government control of international news at any cost. One CNN assignment editor asserted, "A free press is the best protection of a society's cultural values." Global Diplomats also reject the notion that news about countries with amicable political relations with the U.S. should be selected as important stories (z = -1.17). They also disagree with statement 14, "The fate of two Americans arrested in Iraq is a bigger story than a bomb explosion killing 100 Pakistanis in Karachi." Global Diplomats further disagree with the suggestion that news about geographically closer countries is more likely to be covered as important international news (z = -1.1 5). One network reporter provided this example: "In the U.S. media, news about Britain and China abound, but news about Canada and Mexico is scarce." It would appear that the principle of geographic proximity suggested by Galtung (1971), Ahern (1984), and Larson (1984) may no longer be an important criterion in international news selection. Considering the ubiquitous nature of CNN and the array of contemporary communication technologies now available to major U.S. television networks, it is unsurprising that Global Diplomats believe geographical barriers to international news is a story of the past. Factor 3: Bottom-Line Realists Bottom-line Realists comprise 10 journalists, eight of whom are from network-affiliated local television stations in Kansas City, Missouri. The purely local characteristics--community-based, market-driven, and more competitive than network news operations--of this group of journalists suggest they share considerable ground in their selection of international news, not only in newsgathering patterns but also in a common audience in their television market. Bottom-line Realists, befitting their name, demonstrate conspicuous market-driven, audience-oriented characteristics. Their journalistic role conception is simple: Give the viewers what they want. They are convinced they understand the needs and demands of their local audiences and are resigned to the limited status of international news in their local television market (see Table 2). They strongly agree that important international stories occasionally do not get covered because they lack the "local angle" of viewer interest (z = 1.87). This logic is best captured by a local television editor who said, "We rely on network for coverage of international news due to budget constraints. If we send our correspondents to cover international stories, it is usually a local angle on an international story." Among the three groups in this study, Bottom-line Realists exhibit the strongest agreement with the notion that news about geographically closer countries has a better likelihood of being selected as important news than stories about distant countries (z = .93). The criterion of geographic proximity (Adams, 1986; Galtung, 1971; Rosengren, 1974) applies only to Bottom-line Realists, not to the other two groups of journalists. Bottom-line Realists also believe the time constraint inherent in the evening news format is the primary reason not all available and important international news stories could be aired (z = 1.86). Among the three types of journalists, this group articulates the strongest support for international stories involving U.S. interests (z = 1.82). They say they select international news only if the United States gets itself directly involved in the news event as a concerned party (z = 1.53). As pointed out by a local television editor, "U.S. involvement helps tie in reasons to attract viewers to stay with us." Although Bottom-line Realists concede international news is important as public knowledge, their intensity of agreement is the weakest among the three groups (z = 1.13). The distant horizons of foreign countries that appeal to the Bottom-line Realists are also rather limited. For example, Bottom-line Realists tend not to select news about small countries if they do not have significant relations with the United States (z = -1.36). Their business orientation and perceived air-time and budget constraints, not to mention a lack of audience interest, may have driven them to limit their interest in international news and, consequently, the size of their international news operations. To Bottom-line Realists, traditional news values, such as good visuals (z = 1.38), timeliness (z = 1.27), and unusual or deviant events (z = 1.16), are the most observable criteria in international news selection. One local television news producer explained that "good video," together with "unusual and deviant items capture viewer attention no matter where they take place." The news determinants identified by previous studies (e.g., Chang, Shoemaker, & Brendlinger, 1987; Galtung & Ruge, 1965; Rosengren, 1974, 1977; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996) are thus best reflected in the responses of Bottom-line Realists, more than the other two groups. Confident of their professional judgment, Bottom-line Realists believe that their own news judgment and decisions are the most important tools in selecting international news (z = 1.11). This finding supports Berkowitz's work (1990, 1991) that suggests instinct and news judgment to be the primary criteria for television gatekeepers' decision making. Among the three groups of journalists in this study, Bottom-line Realists are the strongest supporters of journalism education (z = .965). Bottom-line Realists, perhaps due to their relatively smaller news operations compared to network television, perceive few, if any, self-restraints set by the news organization in reporting controversial international issues (z = -1.98). Similarly, Bottom-line Realists are not aware of pressures from their organizations or the influence of the media owner's philosophy and policies over the selection of international news (z = -1.58). This response perhaps reflects local television stations' prevalent disregard for international news in their operations. With a limited international news operation, it is easy for the local journalists to report negligible restraints on their international news content. After all, many local television journalists argue that international news coverage falls under the purview of the networks, not local television stations. It is apparent that Bottom-line Realists' attitudes toward international news are closely correlated with their audiences' lack of interest. One local television news director admitted, "The local audience should be more interested in international news but they aren't. Viewers' desire for international news has a direct impact on the amount we air. We are a business, after all, and viewers translate into money." As with the other two groups, Bottom-line Realists are strongly opposed to government control of news content (z = -1.65). They claim they do not experience significant influences from corporate advertisers (z = -1.77) and public relations efforts (z = -1.23) in the selection of international news. The discussion of the three factors above addressed the second research question: How do the five levels of gatekeeping--individual, routines of work, organizational, extra-organizational, and socio-cultural--influence international news selection by U.S. television journalists? The three typologies--Pragmatic Idealists, Global Diplomats, and Bottom-line Realists--exhibit distinctive traits that reveal the varying influences of gatekeeping factors (Shoemaker, 1991, 1999). The five gatekeeping dimensions--one of the four themes represented by the Q sample--are not of equal salience. The interplay of these dimensions in international news selection is discussed next. Discussion Market Dispersion The three factors--with their defining composition--reveal distinctive differences between network and local television journalists. Pragmatic Idealists (Factor 1) include seven network television journalists and four journalists from local television stations. Global Diplomats (Factor 2) consist of six CNN journalists, three network journalists, and a local television journalist. Bottom-line Realists (Factor 3), on the other hand, are composed of eight local television journalists in the Kansas City area and two NBC journalists. These patterns suggest a relationship between the attitudes of television journalists toward international news and the dispersion of television markets in which they operate. This reasoning is consistent with the findings from a Q study by Chang (1975) that suggested movie critics showed distinctive perspectives based on their association with different types of news organizations and, consequently, differences in market size and dispersion. As discussed in the Q interpretations, network television stations and local television stations are driven by different goals and perspectives shaped by different audiences, markets, and the economic constraints journalists encounter in their day-to-day news operations. The journalists at CNN, for example, display distinctive traits as a result of the 24-hour cable network's transnational operations and global marketing strategies. International News: An Endangered Species Despite the three groups' differences, they voice; a common theme: The state of international news on American television today is not encouraging. Pragmatic Idealists, who are predominantly network journalists, embrace international news as an important component of their news operations but are cognizant of organizational constraints such as budget and airtime limitations. This group articulates a public service ideology of international news, identifying it as a means to promote public knowledge and understanding of other peoples and cultures. However, they also perceive their coverage of international news to be adequate as long as it meets audience demand--regardless of demand level. Simply put, blame it on the audience. International news lacks attraction for many Americans, concede these journalists, but there is a consolation: They are producing coverage that meets the demand. However, tailoring supply to demand may result in a spiral effect (Graber, 1997) because presumed lack of interest leads to less coverage, which further diminishes audience interest in international news. Like Pragmatic Idealists, Global Diplomats, who are mainly CNN and network journalists, are willing to consider international news as an essential component to their news operations and to accept a broader scope and more variety, regardless of datelines and topics. They are aware of the low status of international news, but they believe they are providing adequate coverage given the circumstances. International news coverage is not a priority to Bottom-line Realists, who are predominantly local television journalists. They assert international news fits into news programming only when it provides local angles and connections. Budget restraints, as one local television editor explained, is the major reason for relying on the networks for international news coverage. Local television journalists are assigned to cover international news only if there is a local angle to pursue. Geographical Barrier a Story of the Past? Previous studies have suggested geographical proximity, U.S. interests, and national involvement as key determinants of international news (e.g., Chang & Lee, 1992; Rosengren, 1974, 1977; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996). This study, however, revealed mixed findings; the criteria vary according to groups, as noted in the discussion of the three factors. More significantly, the salience of news determinants (a theme reflected in the Q sample)--such as geographical proximity, U.S. interests, and national involvement--is highlighted or downplayed according to television market dispersion. For example, traditional news determinants--geographical distance, elite status of nations, and U.S. interests--are less salient to Global Diplomats compared to the other two groups. As noted by a CNN editor, "Our audience is all over the world. The most important consideration in selecting news is our customers' interests and time zone considerations of regional audiences, whether they are in Asia, Europe, or in North and South America." In contrast, geographical distance and local relevance are more salient to Bottom-line Realists, who operate in a local, smaller news market. Organization Rules As stated earlier, the most noticeable characteristic of each factor is its composition; each is predominantly composed of journalists from the same news organizations or from similar-sized news operations. For example, all six CNN journalists belong to one factor, a majority of network journalists another, and most of the local journalists constitute the third factor. Thus, the researcher suggests cautiously that the attitudes of U.S. television journalists in the study toward international news are delineated according to transnational, national, or local journalists. The three factors--Pragmatic Idealists, Global Diplomats, and Bottom-line Realists--reflect market dispersion and organizational differences. The American television journalist is an organizational creature who subscribes to business objectives; his or her mindset operates in tandem with organizational structure and goals--a finding in line with that of Breed (1955) and Dimmick (1974). Journalists, notes Breed, absorb the goals and policies of their news organizations by observation and experience. According to Dimmick, organization is perhaps the single most important determinant of which events are defined as news. Consistent with previous studies, the attitudinal types of television journalists in this study are largely formulated and reinforced within their own news organizations. Different attitudinal types emerge from organizational characteristics--local, national, and transnational--as a function of their organizations' business objectives, supporting previous studies (Bailey & Lichty, 1972; Breed, 1955; Dimmick, 1974; Donohew, 1967; Epstein, 1973; Shoemaker, 1999) that found the news organization to be the most important determinant in defining and sustaining journalists' attitudes, beliefs, and values. Implicitly linked to organizational influence is the market factor. The organization and its characteristics are a direct result of the market it operates in. Indeed, market dispersion is perhaps the most salient factor influencing U.S. television journalists' attitudes toward international news as a result of business constraints under a for-profit, commercial television system. For instance, Bottom-line Realists (local television journalists) declare international news to be beyond the scope of their audience interest and say that it does not fit into their market condition. On the other hand, Global Diplomats, which comprise all six CNN journalists, maintain that global and nonpartisan perspectives are necessary for embracing their worldwide audiences. Audience and market considerations dearly drive international news among the U.S. journalists in this study. Considerably less salient but worth mentioning is the public service role conception: The U.S. television journalists in the study share similar professional values and role conception as purveyors of public knowledge and educators. They also believe in press freedom and professional autonomy, and hold similar news values, for example the importance of national involvement in the selection of international news. Journalists, it would appear, are more similar than dissimilar. Unfortunately, international news, with its distinct make-up and lack of direct relevance to Americans, is the first casualty of business pressures (Arnett, 1998; Hoge, 1997). As a result, market demand requires international news--though global in perspective--to be locally repackaged for different markets, to the extent that the decisions of journalists at a global news network such as CNN are, in fact, dictated by considerations of the market--albeit a larger, global market. As such, international news, in essence, is perhaps less global than envisaged--even in this age of twenty-first century interconnectedness. As Larson (1984) aptly described it nearly two decades ago, in America, international news is merely U.S. news with a foreign dateline. The main focus of this study was to explore television journalists' attitudes toward international news and gatekeeping criteria. Future studies with more diversified samples--print journalists and online journalists as well as news audiences--could prove useful in probing how journalists and the general public perceive international news. Also, attitudinal studies based on Q methodology focusing on the comparisons of U.S. television journalists with broadcasters in other countries could contribute to the understanding of the dynamics of international news selection. | |
Table 1
Most Agree and Most Disagree Statements by All Factors
(Consensus Items)
Item Description z Score
31. The selection of international news should be made with a 1.63
consideration of providing the public with knowledge of
world affairs.
22. Occasionally important international stories do not get 1.28
covered because they lack the "local angle" of high
reader interest.
23. Just like social and cultural attributes differentiate 1.23
one society from another news judgments on international
news stories vary between and among different news
organizations in different cultures.
13. Multinational, global television networks such as BBC and 1.13
Star TV contribute to widen the reach and diversity of
international news around the world.
26. The more recent the time frame of occurrence, the 1.03
international news receive more important coverage and
treatment.
07. International news in which the United States gets itself 1.01
directly involved as a concerned party should be
selected.
50. The existence of overseas news bureaus and the number of .63
foreign correspondents are important criteria in deciding
both quality and quantity of international news.
18. International news is expensive to gather and thus is .59
subject to more economic constraints than other types
of news.
10. The widening gap of international news between the rich .23
and the poor debt-ridden countries will continue.
29. News about countries with close economic ties with my .19
country should be selected as important international
news.
44. News about the four powerful countries such as the United .19
States, Japan, China and Russia should be selected as
important international news.
35. American international news reporters are specialized and .06
knowledgeable.
24. International news that contains excellent audio elements .00
has a better chance of being selected as important items.
11. After the end of the Cold War, international news deal -.28
with more global economy and environmental issues rather
than military conflicts and wars.
37. Current newsroom routines that put most international -.44
news items except for major crises, at the end of an
evening news program should be changed.
20. Consciously or unconsciously, journalists tend to toe -.62
the line with their government's foreign policy concerns
when they report international news.
41. Gossip or scandals that appeal to audience's human -.64
interest tend to be important international news.
16. Due to my news organization's hierarchical structure, I -.75
do not have enough latitude in deciding which
international news items should be selected and rejected.
27. Various interest groups influence the selection of -.94
international news.
45. News about countries that maintain amicable political -1.05
relations with my country should be selected as important
international news.
03. It is inevitable for a government to control the content -1.09
of international news because it often influences over
the course of national security and public welfare.
33. Journalists often distort some important perspectives of -1.32
international news by shaping, displaying, withholding or
repeating specific items.
21. The selection of international news is influenced by the -1.78
interest of big corporate advertisers.
32. It is necessary for a government to regulate -1.84
international news to protect its social norm and
cultural identity from deviant and morally unjustifiable
foreign contents.
Table 2
Most Agree and Most Disagree Statements for Each Factor
Item Description Type 1 Type 2 Type 3
01. It is necessary for editors to consult .41 1.78 -.09
with individual reporters and producers
in order to select diverse and balanced
diet of international news.
02. Self-restraints set by my news -.66 -1.83 -1.98
organization in reporting highly
controversial social and political
issues make selection of international
news difficult.
03. It is inevitable for a government to -1.13 -1.37 -.76
control the content of international
news because it often influences the
course of national security and public
welfare.
05. I will select news from other countries 1.30 .37 1.38
when it has good visuals.
06. Television's international news must -.02 -1.57 -.38
include ingredients such as crisis,
conflict and violence.
07. International news in which the United .82 .69 1.53
States gets itself directly involved as
a concerned party should be selected.
08. News about small countries with no -.35 .99 -1.36
significant relations to the United
States also has to be selected to
maintain balanced presentation of
international news.
12. The best and most responsible news 1.78 .88 -.94
media have always given high priority to
international news.
13. Multinational, global television 1.56 1.22 .62
networks such as BBC and Star TV
contribute to widen the reach and
diversity of international news around
the world.
14. The fate of two Americans arrested in .97 -1.21 .65
Iraq is a bigger story than a bomb
explosion killing 100 Pakistanis in
Karachi.
15. My own news judgment and decision are -.05 .49 1.11
the most important tools in selecting
international news.
16. Due to my news organization's -.45 -.46 -1.34
hierarchical structure, I do not have
enough latitude in deciding which
international news items should be
selected and rejected.
17. Journalists tend to socialize with other -1.02 -.11 .10
journalists and thus reflect similar
views in selecting international news.
19. The media owner's philosophy and policy -1.39 -.07 -1.58
are important considerations in the
selection of international news.
21. The selection of international news is -1.86 -1.72 -1.77
influenced by the interest of big
corporate advertisers.
22. Occasionally important international .92 1.06 1.87
stories do not get covered because they
lack the "local angle" of high reader
interest.
23. Just like social and cultural attributes 1.44 1.22 1.02
differentiate one society from another,
news judgments on international news
stories vary between and among different
news organizations in different
cultures.
25. Unusual or deviant events are likely to .03 .77 1.16
be reported in international news.
26. The more recent the time frame of .73 1.08 1.27
occurrence, the international news
receives more important coverage and
treatment.
27. Various interest groups influence the -1.39 -.52 -.90
selection of international news.
28. News about geographically closer -.59 -1.15 .93
countries has better chance of being
selected as important international news
than the news about distant countries.
30. The news media of Western nations have 1.31 -.13 .45
more freedom and independence to report
world news, and hence more credibility,
than media of other countries.
31. The selection of international news 1.70 2.05 1.13
should be made with a consideration of
providing the public with knowledge of
world affairs.
32. It is necessary for a government to -1.94 -1.94 -1.65
regulate international news to protect
its social norm and cultural identity
from deviant and morally unjustifiable
foreign contents.
33. Journalists often distort some important -1.14 -1.47 -1.35
perspectives of international news by
shaping, displaying, withholding or
repeating specific items.
34. My experience of having lived in foreign -.04 1.07 -.61
countries helps me to decide which
international news items are more
important than others.
36. Major international news agencies (AP, 1.06 -.63 -.20
Reuters, etc.) play more important roles
by providing stories from other
countries than do our correspondents in
foreign news bureaus.
38. Politicians and government officials in -1.24 .37 -.26
my country attempt to manage or
manipulate the news so that it favors
their causes, their programs, and their
image.
39. Press releases from public relations -2.05 -1.05 -1.23
officers in various corporations,
organizations and foreign governments
are important sources of international
news.
40. International news becomes important -1.43 -1.08 -.21
when it is really domestic news in a
foreign setting, such as a U.S. hostage
crisis in a foreign country.
42. News about earthquakes, floods and .59 1.35 .25
famines are important international
news.
43. International news that involves U.S. 1.20 .58 1.82
interest should be viewed as important.
45. News about countries that maintain -.96 -1.17 -1.02
amicable political relations with my
country should be selected as important
international news.
47. International news is important because -.02 1.50 .55
the images depicted in the news stories
affect millions of people in this
country as well as people in other
countries.
49. Time constraints of an evening news 1.40 .12 1.86
format are primary reasons for not being
able to air some important international
news stories.
Note: The above are statements that have at least one
interpretable z score (+/- 1.0).
| | References Adams, W. C. (1986). Whose lives count? TV coverage of natural disasters. Journal of Communication, 36(2), 113-122. Ahern, T. (1984). Determinants of foreign coverage in U.S. newspapers. In R. Stevenson & D. Shaw (Eds.), The politics of foreign news (pp. 217-236). Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Altschull, J. H. (1995). Agents of power: The role of the media in human affairs (2nd ed.). New York: Longman. Arnett, P. (1998). The state of the American newspaper: Goodbye, world. American Journalism Review, 11, 50-67. Bailey, G. A., & Lichty, L. W. (1972). Rough justice on a Saigon street: A gatekeeper study of NBC's Tet execution film. Journalism Quarterly, 49, 221-229. Berkowitz, D. (1990). Refining the gatekeeping metaphor for local television news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 34, 55-68. Berkowitz, D. (1991). Assessing forces in the selection of local television news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 35, 245-251. Breed, W. (1955). Social control in the newsroom. Social Forces, 33, 326-335. Buckalew, J. K. (1969). A Q-analysis of television news editors' decisions. Journalism Quarterly, 46, 135-137. Chang, T. K. (1998). All countries not created equal to be news, Communication Research, 25, 528-563. Chang, T. K., & Lee, J. W. (1992). Factors affecting gatekeepers' selection of foreign news; A national survey of newspaper editors. Journalism Quarterly, 69, 554-561. Chang, T. K., Shoemaker, P. J., & Brendlinger, N. (1987). Determinants of international news coverage in the U.S. media. Communication Research, 14, 396-414. Chang, W. H. (1975). A typology study of movie critics. Journalism Quarterly, 52, 721-725. Dimmick, J. (1974). The gatekeeper: An uncertainty theory. Journalism Monographs, 37, 1-39. Donahue, G., Tichenor, P., & Olien, C. (1989). Structure and constraints on community newspaper gatekeepers, Journalism Quarterly, 66, 807-812, 845. Donohew, L. (1967). Newspaper gatekeepers and forces in the news channel, Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 61-68. Epstein, E. J. (1973). News from nowhere: Television and the news. New York: Random House. Galtung, J. (1971). A structural theory of imperialism. Journal of Peace Research, 8, 81-118. Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. H. (1965). The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research, 2, 64-91. Gandy, O. H., Jr. (1982). Beyond agenda setting: Information subsidies and public policy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what's news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. New York: Pantheon. Gieber, W. (1964). News is what newspapermen make it. In L. A. Dexter & D. M. White (Eds.), People, society and mass communication (pp. 173-182). New York, NY: Free Press. Graber, D. (1997). Mass media and American politics. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press. Hachten, W. A. (1999). The world news prism. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Harmon, M. D. (1989). Mr. Gates goes electronic: The what and why questions in local TV news. Journalism Quarterly, 66, 857-863. Hess, S. (1996). International news and foreign correspondents. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Hester, A. L. (1971). An analysis of news flow from developed and developing nations. Gazette, 17, 29-43. Hester, A. L. (1974). The news from Latin America via a world news agency. Gazette, 20, 82-91. Heuvel, J. V. (1993). For the media, a brave (and scary) new world. Media Studies Journal, 7, 11-20. Hoge, J. F., Jr. (1997). Foreign news: Who gives a damn? Columbia Journalism Review, 11/12, 48-52. Johnston, J., Slawski, E. J., & Bowman, W. (1972). The professional values of American newsmen. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 522-540. Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Q methodology in behavioral research. In S. R. Brown & D. J. Brenner (Eds.), Science, psychology, and communication: Essays honoring William Stephenson (pp. 3-38). New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University. Lacy, S., Chang, T. K., & Lau, T. Y. (1989). Impact of allocation decisions and market factors on foreign news coverage. Newspaper Research Journal, 10, 23-32. Lambeth, E. (1992). Committed journalism: An ethic for the profession. (2nd ed.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Larson, J. F. (1984). Television's window on the world: international affairs coverage on the U.S. networks. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Lee, J. K. (1997). Press freedom and democratization: South Korea's experiment and some lessons. Gazette, 59, 135-149. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: II. Channels of group life; social planning and action research. Human Relations, 1, 143-153. Logan, R. A., & Garrison, B. (1985). Evolving mass and news media concepts: A Q study of Caribbean communicators. Mass Comm Review, 12, 2-10. Norris, P. (1995). The restless searchlight: Network news framing of the post-Cold War world. Political Communication, 12, 35-370. Norris, P. (1997). News of the world. In P. Norris (Ed.), Politics and the press (pp. 275-290). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner. Ostgaard, E. (1965). Factors influencing the flow of news. Journal of Peace Research, 2, 39-63. Rosenblum, M. (1979). Coups and earthquakes: Reporting the Third World for America. New York: Harper and Row. Rosengren, K. E. (1974). International news: Methods, data and theory. Journal of Peace Research, 11, 145-156. Rosengren, K. E. (1977). Four types of tables. Journal of Communication, 27(1), 67-75. Salwen, M. B., & Garrison, B. (1989). Press freedom and development: U.S. and Latin American view, Journalism Quarterly, 66, 87-92. Shoemaker, P. J. (1991). Communication concepts 3: Gatekeeping. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Shoemaker, P. J. (1999). Media gatekeeping. In M. B. Salwen & D. W. Stacks (Eds.), An integrated approach to communication theory and research (pp. 79-91). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. White Plains, NY: Longman. Sigal, L. V. (1973). Reporters and officials: The organization and politics of newsmaking. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath. Snider, P. B. (1967). Mr. Gates revisited: A 1966 version of the 1949 case study, Journalism Quarterly, 44, 419-427. Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behavior: Q technique and its methodology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press. Tuggle, C. A., & Huffman, S. (2000). Live news reporting: Professional judgment or technological pressure? A national survey of television news directors and senior reporters. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43, 492-505. Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1996). The American journalist in the 7990s: U.S. news people at the end of an era. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. White, D. M. (1950). The gatekeeper: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27, 383-390. Wu, H. D. (1998). Investigating the determinants of international news flow. Gazette, 60, 493-512. Hun Shik Kim (Ph.D., University of Missouri) is a broadcast journalist with the Korean Broadcasting System in Seoul, Korea. His research interests include broadcast journalism, international news, and communication technologies. |
|
