well, now that a study has been done, maybe some of us will have an
easier time, "seeing" reality??
fs...

fyi:



University of Washington
16-Aug-02


Newsmagazines Downplayed Opposition Voices After Sept.
11
Library: LIF-SOC
Keywords: MEDIA POLITICS COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY
NATIONALISM

Description: Journalists covering the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks and their aftermath were unwittingly
complicit to government and military communication
strategies to rally public support, according to
findings by University of Washington researchers.
(Meeting: Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication)

Newsmagazines Downplayed Opposition Voices After Sept.
11

Journalists covering the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks
and their aftermath were unwittingly complicit to
government and military communication strategy to
rally public support, according to findings by
University of Washington researchers.

A content analysis of news coverage in the five issues
of Newsweek and Time published immediately after the
attacks found that the newsmagazines minimized voices
of opposition and instead focused on American unity,
highlighted the importance of core American values,
shifted blame away from the U.S., emphasized the U.S.
role as the only superpower on the international
stage, and demonized the enemy. David Domke, an
assistant professor of communication, and the three
graduate students who conducted the analysis refer to
such language as national-identity rhetoric.

Further, they found that while government and military
officials used this nationalistic language more than
other segments of society, journalists' reports
closely mirrored those comments and, relatively
speaking, ignored the comments of non-government
opinion leaders --- interest group leaders, think-tank
researchers and university professors ---- who were
more apt to offer critical analysis.

"I would encourage journalists to seek out and pay
attention to non-government opinion leaders," Domke
said. "These individuals are still within the culture,
which I think makes them realistic sources, but they
have a range of viewpoints that won't be found in
government."

A total of 210 stories were analyzed and a significant
majority of the national-identity rhetoric could be
attributed to U.S. government and military sources.
For example, 94 percent of U.S. government and
military sources placed blame for the attacks squarely
on the terrorists compared to only 58 percent of
non-government opinion leaders and 80 percent of
average U.S. citizens. And of discourse that made
reference to American values, 81 percent of U.S.
government and military sources affirmed those values
whereas only 51 percent of non-government opinion
leaders referred to American values in a positive
manner, 29 percent were neutral and a full 20 percent
were critical. The pattern of more positive and
affirming statements by government and military
officials continued throughout each of the
national-identity topics Domke and the students
identified and analyzed.

The fact that journalists' language paralleled that of
the government and the military rather than the
critical analysis offered in other circles is
alarming, Domke says, given what we now know about
official communication practices during previous
conflicts like Vietnam and the Gulf War.

"When there's not anybody else in government who will
be a voice of opposition," Domke said, "our evidence
suggests that the press is essentially a conduit for
the government to say whatever it wants and get that
information to the public."

Journalists' language paralleled that of government
and military officials for at least three key reasons,
Domke says. First, most journalists at U.S. news
outlets are American citizens and likely to possess
many of the same cultural values and beliefs that
others in the nation possess. Any reporting they do is
filtered by this cultural perspective.

A second factor, Domke says, was that a high level of
political bi-partisanship for the American effort led
to a one-sided discourse among government elites,
offering the news media fewer than normal alternative
perspectives within government. And, finally, industry
economic pressures and the need to engage the public
likely encouraged the news media to echo nationalist
sentiment. Consider, for example, the number of news
outlets that incorporated the colors of red, white and
blue into their promotions during this period.

"You can't expect journalism to be in deep
contradiction with other democratic institutions,
particularly at a time of crisis. If it's not a time
of crisis you might expect a little more critical
evaluation."

Domke presented the findings at a recent Association
for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
conference in Miami. Co-authors were graduate students
John Hutcheson, Andre Billeaudeaux and Philip Garland.

###

For more information, contact Domke at (206) 685-1739
or [log in to unmask]