Media Coverage and the Public Opinion on the Judiciary, and Their Relations to Judicial Independence

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-212
Author(s):  
Cheoljoon Chang
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
The Public

Coverage of Cultural Heritage in Mass Media Publications in Zimbabwe

2018 ◽  
pp. 428-442
Author(s):  
Marlvern Mabgwe ◽  
Petronella Katekwe
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Agenda Setting ◽  
Political Development ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Document Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Media Agenda ◽  
Working Hypothesis

This chapter evaluates the pattern and trend of mass media coverage of Zimbabwe's cultural heritage, with a focus on the newspaper publications produced between the years 2010 and 2015. The working hypothesis is that the level and nature of mass media coverage of cultural heritage is directly proportional to the nature of public opinion and attitude towards their own cultural heritage. As such, in order for cultural heritage to make a meaningful contribution to socio-economic and political developmental in Zimbabwe, there is a need for cultural heritage to be visible in all mass media productions. Using document analysis, questionnaires, and interviews, the research identified that the coverage of cultural heritage in mass media in Zimbabwe is alarmingly low. That jeopardizes the regard of cultural heritage as a driver for socio-economic and political development amongst the public. However, through reprioritization of media agenda-setting, media policy, and fostering of a closer collaboration between heritage managers and media professionals, the situation can be salvaged in Zimbabwe.

The evidence of compelling arguments in agenda building

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyejoon Rim ◽  
Jin Hong Ha ◽  
Spiro Kiousis
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Agenda Building ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Information Subsidies

Purpose – This paper aims to explore the links among health authorities’ public relations efforts, news media coverage, and public perceptions of risk during the H1N1 pandemic outbreak. Design/methodology/approach – This study used a triangulation of research methods by comparing public relations materials, media coverage, and public opinion. The data were collected from a federal government web site, national newspapers, and national polls. Findings – The data revealed a positive relationship between information subsidy attention and media attention to the H1N1 disease as well as the severity attribute. The salience of the severity attribute in information subsidies was linked with increased H1N1 salience in media coverage, extending the testing of the compelling-arguments hypothesis to an agenda-building context. However, there was no association between salience of the severity attribute and public risk perceptions. Research limitations/implications – The study provides evidence for public relations effectiveness. However, the limited influence of the severity frame on the public's risk perception suggests a gap between news coverage and the public's view. Framing that effectively empowers the public to engage in desired behavior should be further studied for the success of a public health campaign. The study is limited to examining the severity attribute. A future study should pay more attention to different issue attributes or other frames. The media sample was limited to newspapers and thus lacks generalizability. Originality/value – The study contributes to public relations scholarship by demonstrating how information subsidies influence media agendas and public opinion in a health communication context. The public health authorities’ role in influencing media agenda should be stressed.

scholarly journals Polish Mass Media Coverage and Public Opinion on E-democracy

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (23) ◽  
pp. 2-18
Author(s):  
Magdalena Musiał-Karg ◽  
Izabela Kapsa
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Mass Media ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Universal Access ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Media Content Analysis ◽  
Modern Democracy ◽  
The Public

The rapid development of new technologies and their impressive communication capacity has fundamentally changed modern democracy by providing easy and universal access to information, as well as increasing participation and accessibility of political involvement tools. One of the electoral participation tools is e-voting which has been used in only a few countries. The main aim of the paper is to explore whether and how e-voting has been presented in Polish mass media (1), as well as to investigate people’s opinions about e-voting against certain political factors (2). The research is based on a media content analysis (quantitative and qualitative), data collected via the Content Analysis System for Television (CAST) and a quantitative analysis of data from a survey conducted by the authors (2018, sample: 1717 Poles). The results of the analyses show that the debate on the implementation of e-voting is rather poor, but the support for e-voting among Poles remains considerable. The public media rhetoric is interlinked with attitudes towards political parties. To some extent, determinants are reflected in the public opinion on the implementation of e-voting since Poles declare both their support for the introduction of e-voting and willingness to vote online.

The Supreme Court’s (Surprising?) Indifference to Public Opinion

2020 ◽  
pp. 106591292095808
Author(s):  
Ben Johnson ◽  
Logan Strother
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Positive Relationship ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Significant Positive Relationship ◽  
The Public ◽  
Empirical Fact ◽  
The Supreme Court

Does the Supreme Court care what the public thinks? For decades, published articles have consistently reported a significant, positive relationship between public opinion and Supreme Court output. However, these studies posit mutually contradictory theories and report irreconcilable results. We advance this literature in two ways. First, we show that the empirical “fact” driving the search for a workable theory is actually illusory. Second, we defend a theory of judicial independence. To be clear, we do not attempt to prove the Court does not respond to the public’s opinions on policy. We argue that there is little reason the Court should respond and demonstrate that, contrary to twenty-five years of scholarship, there is no good empirical evidence suggesting it does.

scholarly journals ‘They are just children!’ The Symbol of Childhood in Political Mobilization of Modern Russia

2021 ◽  
pp. 188-197
Author(s):  
Tat'yana Ryabova ◽  
Lyudmila Kleschenko
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Political Rhetoric ◽  
Political Mobilization ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Media ◽  
The One

The first part of the paper describes the theoretical aspects of the issues regarding the politicization of childhood. The authors demonstrate that the representation of childhood in political rhetoric, on the one hand, reflects the ideas about it existing in society, and on the other hand, is its significant forming factor. The second part provides the analysis of the symbol of childhood along with the media coverage of 2017—2019 protest movement in Russia. The third part provides for the study of public opinion on the participation of minors in politics and the use of the symbol of childhood by political actors, based on interviews conducted by the authors. The authors conclude that according to the public opinion there is a need for minors to participate in political life. At the same time, in the course of using the image of childhood by political actors, the majority of informants is aware of its manipulative nature.

scholarly journals Why the backfire effect does not explain the durability of political misperceptions

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (15) ◽  
pp. e1912440117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brendan Nyhan
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Belief Systems ◽  
Scientific Communication ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Issue ◽  
Group Identities ◽  
The Media ◽  
Backfire Effect ◽  
Corrective Information

Previous research indicated that corrective information can sometimes provoke a so-called “backfire effect” in which respondents more strongly endorsed a misperception about a controversial political or scientific issue when their beliefs or predispositions were challenged. I show how subsequent research and media coverage seized on this finding, distorting its generality and exaggerating its role relative to other factors in explaining the durability of political misperceptions. To the contrary, an emerging research consensus finds that corrective information is typically at least somewhat effective at increasing belief accuracy when received by respondents. However, the research that I review suggests that the accuracy-increasing effects of corrective information like fact checks often do not last or accumulate; instead, they frequently seem to decay or be overwhelmed by cues from elites and the media promoting more congenial but less accurate claims. As a result, misperceptions typically persist in public opinion for years after they have been debunked. Given these realities, the primary challenge for scientific communication is not to prevent backfire effects but instead, to understand how to target corrective information better and to make it more effective. Ultimately, however, the best approach is to disrupt the formation of linkages between group identities and false claims and to reduce the flow of cues reinforcing those claims from elites and the media. Doing so will require a shift from a strategy focused on providing information to the public to one that considers the roles of intermediaries in forming and maintaining belief systems.

The Public Agenda

2019 ◽  
pp. 219-242
Author(s):  
Shaun Bevan ◽  
Will Jennings
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
The United States ◽  
Survey Question ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Public Agenda

This chapter considers the question of what shapes the public agenda and how, in turn, the public agenda influences public policy. It introduces the survey question about the most important problem as a measure of the public agenda—comparing evidence on the policy issues attended to by publics in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Spain, and also the degree to which public opinion itself is subject to “punctuations.” The analysis shows how the public agenda reflects both the problem status and level of media coverage of certain issues (specifically crime and the economy). Lastly, it presents evidence on the correspondence between the priorities of citizens and those of policymakers.

Media Coverage of International Negotiation: A Taxonomy of Levels and Effects

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 543-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
International Negotiation ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Media ◽  
Closed Door

AbstractThis article offers an analytical framework to investigate levels of media coverage and effective international negotiation. The framework includes three theoretical models based on the degree to which officials and negotiators allow diplomatic negotiations to be exposed to the media and public opinion. In the secret diplomacy model, the media and the public are totally excluded from negotiations, while in closed-door diplomacy they are partially excluded. In the open diplomacy model, negotiations are much more open to the media and coverage is more extensive. The framework helps to explore fundamental theoretical and professional implications of each model for government officials and negotiators, journalists and public opinion. This article demonstrates the analytical usefulness of the models through applications to various examples and case studies of significant contemporary diplomatic processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document