This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism
and Mass Communication in Toronto, Canada, August 2004.
If you have questions about this paper, please contact the author
directly. If you have questions about the archives, email
[log in to unmask] For an explanation of the subject line, send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Oct 2004)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
************************************************************************
My news or your news?
CNN Interactive's regionalization policy
Paper submission to International Communication Division of AEJMC
Markham Competition
Margaretha Geertsema
University of Texas at Austin
200 E. 43rd Street
Austin, TX 78751
Tel.: 512-453-9719
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
My news or your news?
CNN Interactive's regionalization policy
Paper submission to International Communication Division of AEJMC
Markham Competition
Abstract:
Based on theories of globalization, a content analysis of CNN Interactive's
regional Web sites were conducted in 2002 and 2003 to determine whether CNN
is indeed targeting regional audiences with these sites. The study shows
not only that CNN successfully regionalizes its stories, but that it
refined its regionalization strategy over the last two years. However, CNN
lacks in original content on the pages for Africa, the Americas and the
Middle East, and these regions remain undercovered.
Introduction
The Cable News Network is often used as the prime example of a global news
service. With bureaus and correspondents all around the world, CNN indeed
crosses the traditional national boundaries of nation states. However, in
essence, CNN remains an American company through its ownership and its
Atlanta location. It also follows a news style that is typically Western.
Yet, CNN has had much success with both its international broadcasting
services and its online service, offered by CNN Interactive.
The aim of this paper is to take a closer look at CNN's presence on the
Internet. This project is theoretically informed by discourses of
globalization, cultural imperialism, regionalization and asymmetrical
interdependence. In addition, the issue of the global digital divide and
the potential of new media technologies will be discussed. A main question
that will be addressed is whether CNN contributes to homogenized news or to
a greater diversity of ideas.
Ultimately, the question is: My news or your news? Does CNN circulate the
same stories to all regions across the world, or does it succeed in
targeting audiences across the world?
Literature Review
Globalization and regionalization of news
This case study of CNN Interactive should be seen in the light of the
current system of globalization. Replacing the East-West system of the Cold
War, globalization is often seen as a positive force that connects and
integrates people across the world. Globalization, according to Tomlinson
(1999), is "the rapidly developing and ever-densening network of
interconnections and interdependences that characterize modern life" (p.
2). Similarly, Friedman (2000) emphasizes integration as the main feature
of globalization, especially through the World Wide Web. This focus on the
potential of new media technologies can be traced back to the work of
Canadian scholar Marshall McLuhan, who introduced the term of a global
village: a peaceful place where everyone is connected through technology.
From this perspective, globalization is often seen as leading to a new
pluralism and diversity of ideas in the marketplace. As such, Waters (2001)
argues that a new diverse global culture is developing through new
communication technologies.
On the other hand of the debate, critics argue that globalization is a
mask for continued cultural imperialism, or Americanization,
McDonaldization and CNNization. The cultural imperialism thesis, mainly
popular during the late 1960s and 1970s, posed that instead of physical
colonization, world powers were capturing third world countries through a
system of economic and cultural dependence (Tomlinson, 1991). One of the
strongest proponents of this thesis, Schiller (1991), later argued that
instead of dominant countries, transnational corporate cultural domination
through the cultural industries, including CNN, would lead to a homogenized
global culture. This fear is also expressed in the tensions between Jihad
and McWorld: tribalization, parochialism and an anti-modernity versus the
global world of economy, information, entertainment, technology,
communication and homogeneity (Barber, 1995). However, one must be cautious
here not to reduce the debate to a simplistic diversity versus homogeneity
issue. As pointed out by Kellner (2000), globalization is a phenomenon with
various sets of contradictions. One of these contradictions, according to
Kellner, is that globalization is a force of both homogenization and
heterogeneity. As such, globalization is more complex and conflictual than
one might suspect.
One complexity of the current international communication system is that
globalizing forces work simultaneously from above and from below, pushing
and pulling at the same time. As such, information is not simply flowing in
a one-way direction, as proposed by cultural imperialism scholars, but in a
multi-directional way. However, the simplistic notion of domination by
Western countries ignores the reciprocal nature of interaction and the
increasing hybridization of cultures (Canclini, 1995; Pieterse, 2004 &
Sreberny-Mohammadi, 1996), Indeed, instead of a single global television
program market dominated by the United States, multiple global and
expanding regional markets organized primarily around difference
language-based publics exist (Sinclair, Jacka & Cunningham, 1996). Working
from the same perspective, Straubhaar (1991) introduced the concept of
asymmetrical interdependence to illustrate how regional and national
industries outside the United States take part in the distribution of
cultural products. Straubhaar points to the growth of non-U.S. media
transnational corporations in Brazil, Argentina, Cuba, Egypt, Hong Kong,
India and Mexico. Instead of dependency, Straubhaar suggests relative
interdependency between cultural industries. For example, he shows how
corporations in Mexico export telenovelas, music programs and news to
countries within Latin America. Similarly, TV Global in Brazil exports
programs to Portugal and Italy. However, the flow of products from these
countries is not as high as the flow from the United States, and therefore
the relationship is asymmetrical and the United States remains in a
dominant position.
Key to the model of asymmetrical interdependence, and in contrast with the
view of audience members as victims of a cultural imperialist model,
audiences are perceived as active in their choices of programming options.
According to this perspective, the preferences of audiences lead the
television industry and advertisers to produce more programs nationally
because their programs need to have cultural relevance (Straubhaar, 1991).
Based on there preferences, the industry will try to import programs from
within the same region, language group and culture. This emphasis on the
active and discriminating audience led to the development of the concept of
cultural-linguistic regions hat prefer culturally proximate media products.
As a result, media producers, including CNN, started to develop products
that are suitable for specific regions (regionalization) and products
focused more on local aspects (localization). These processes create
hybridized cultures through the blurring of boundaries, genres and
languages. As such, international media organizations have also become more
aware of the tastes of consumers around the world. As an example of the
importance of regionalized news, Berfield (1997) noted that local networks
in every country in Asia had larger audiences than international operators.
Berfield quotes Amit Kahanna, the managing director of one of India's
biggest production companies: "International satellite operators were
supposed to change Asia. Instead, Asia has changed them. They have learned
-- at great expense -- that they have to compromise. The trend globally is
that TV is becoming more ethnocentric. International broadcasters have to
turn to local producers like me for programming."
New media technologies and the digital divide
As discussed above, new media technologies are one of the crucial features
of the current globalization system. However, similar to the debate over
the heterogenizing or homogenizing effects of globalization, much
controversy exists as to whether new technologies such as the Internet will
contribute to integration or division. While technological utopists (see
Negroponte, 1995) argue that the Internet offers a solution to world
problems, political economists (see Herman & McChesney, 1997) argue that
the concentration of ownership will minimize the egalitarian potential of
technology. Instead of connecting people, the Internet will enhance
communication inequality between as well as within nations (Herman &
McChesney). Indeed, a huge global digital divide exists. According to the
United Nations Human Development Report (2001), 54.3 percent of the U.S.
population used the Internet in 2000, while only 0.4 percent of the
population in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa used the Internet. In
total, only 6.7 percent of the world population used the Internet in 2000,
up from 2.4 percent in 1998. As such, one might indeed ask whether online
information could be called global at all.
The case of CNN.com
Several scholars have written about the history, development and
significance of CNN as the world's leader in global communications
(Flournoy, 1992; Flournoy & Steward, 1997; Johnston, 1995, and Volkmer,
1999). From the outset, it was clear the Ted Turner was interested in
developing an international service when he started the Cable News Network
in 1980. At the time, it was the world's first 24-hour news network. In
September 1985, CNN International was established with a live 24-hour
transmission to Europe. After its major international breakthrough with the
coverage of the 1991 Gulf War, CNN started facing competition after 1996.
At the time, it was basically exporting the same information to countries
all over the world (Waldman & Haley, 2000). In 1997, Chris Cramer,
president of CNNI Networks, joined CNN and introduced the strategy of
regionalization to the network. For Cramer, regionalization meant "global
reach, local touch" -- in other words, providing international news with a
regional perspective (Bosu, 1999). As a result, CNNI developed distinct
satellite feeds to serve Latin America, North America, Asia and
Europe/Africa/the Middle East. CNNI recently split the Asia feed in two,
creating a Southern Asia network to cover India and Pakistan, and
introduced a Japanese feed. It is also targeting several areas in their own
languages, for example through CNN Turk, CNN Plus in Spain and CNN Deutschland.
In 1995, CNN introduced its online service, CNN Interactive. Similar to
its broadcasting business, CNN made a commitment to regionalize its
Internet presence. Currently, CNN.com has 17 million unique users monthly.
CNN.com's International page offers news in English as well as in Spanish,
Korean, German, Japanese and Arabic. The Web site also features various
interactive links, varying from CNNRadio to personalized e-mail updates.
However, it is unclear as to exactly how CNN is shaping and adapting its
news for the various countries it is targeting. From a critical
perspective, one might assume that the same U.S. based news would be
circulated onto various pages. However, it the diversity thesis is
accepted, one would hope to see a bigger variety of stories on the regional
sites.
Based on this review of literature, the following hypotheses will be tested:
Hypothesis 1: The percentage of stories mentioning a specific region will
be the highest on the Web site designed specifically for that region.
Hypothesis 2: The percentage of North American stories on the North America
Web site will be higher than the percentage of stories mentioning a
specific region on the Web site designed specifically for that region.
Hypothesis 3: The percentage of stories originating from CNN will be lower
on the regional Web sites other than the North American site than on the
CNN U.S. site.
Hypothesis 4: Stories will mostly be used on one Web site only.
Method
A quantitative content analysis was conducted to test above-mentioned
hypotheses. Neuendorf (2002) defines content analysis as follows:
Content analysis is a summarizing, quantitative analysis of messages that
relies on the scientific method (including attention to
objectivity-intersubjectivity, a priori design, reliability, validity,
generalizability, replicability, and hypothesis testing) and is not limited
as to the types of variables that may be measured or the context in which
the messages are created or presented (p. 10).
The analysis of CNN Interactive's Web sites was conducted during two
seven-day periods over two years. The first analysis was completed from
October 16 to October 22, 2002, and the second analysis was completed with
some revisions of the first analysis from November 19 to November 25, 2003.
In each case, the content of the Web sites was analyzed at 10 every night.
A reliability test was conducted each time, with 13 percent of stories
coded and a 92 percent agreement in 2002. In 2003, 13 percent of stories
was coded and a 94 percent agreement was reached.
Directions for coding were set out in the codebook (see Appendix 1). The
first site analyzed was CNN.com, the main news site of CNN Interactive. All
stories "above the fold" were coded, excluding additional stories that can
be found when scrolling down the page. Only news stories were analyzed,
excluding any additional interactive, multimedia features such as video,
graphics and timelines "above the fold." Picture captions accompanying the
story were coded. News stories appearing as a box in the left column were
analyzed as they typically appear to be timely stories, whereas stories in
a box at the top of the right hand column were excluded, as they appeared
to be feature-like stories. Next, the content on the Asia and Europe sites
was analyzed by first clicking on the International Edition link at the top
of the main CNN.com Web site and the clicking through to the Asia News and
Europe News sites. In 2002, the layout of the CNN pages was somewhat
different and no separate pages for Africa, the Americas and Middle East
existed. However, in 2003 these separate pages were available and they were
coded by clicking on the "World" link in the left hand column and choosing
these sites.
As set out in the codebook, column 1 indicated the site of analysis,
whether Main (U.S.), Europe, Asia in 2002, and then also Africa, Americas
and Middle East in 2003. The next column indicated the quantity of stories
and the third column the date of analysis. In column 4, the headline of the
story was typed. Columns 5 to 13 were used to indicate whether a city,
country or region was mentioned in the story. For example, if Atlanta was
mentioned in the story, it was indicated under the North American column.
The search engine Google was used to determine under which category a city
or country falls. When typing the name of a city or country into Google, a
category indication appears at the top of the screen after the search has
been completed. In 2002, only six categories were used: North America,
Europe, Asia, Middle East, Africa and South America. However, when
replicating this study in 2003, it appeared that a finer distinction was
necessary. Three more categories were added: Oceania, the Caribbean and the
Polar region. It was possible for several regions to be represented in one
story, and the coding system allowed for this possibility.
To determine the origin of the story, sources were coded. The choices
allowed here were CNN, The Associated Press, Reuters, a combination of
services and "don't know/another source" if no indication was given where
the story came from or if another service was used, for example a sports
ticker service or Sports Illustrated. The news service was typically
indicated on the first line of the lead paragraph. The category for "a
combination of services" was used when the story was from CNN and when
mentioned at the bottom of the story that other news services contributed
to the story.
Finally, the number of pages a story appeared on was coded. For example, if
a story appeared on both the Main site and the Europe site, it was coded as
appearing twice.
Results
In 2002, a total of 260 stories were coded: 66 on the Main site, 87 on the
Europe site and 107 on the Asia site. In 2003, a total of 275 stories were
coded: 62 on the Main site, 79 on the Europe site and 71 on the Asia site.
The remaining 63 stories of 2003 were coded on the newly added Africa,
Americas and Middle Eastern Web sites.
In 2002 and in 2003, the percentage of stories mentioning a specific
region was the highest on the Web site designed specifically for that
region (see Table 1). That was also the case for the three regional Web
sites added since 2002. Therefore, hypothesis 1 was accepted.
The percentage of North American stories on the North America Web site was
higher than the percentage of stories mentioning a specific region on the
Web site designed for that specific region in 2002 (see Table 2). However,
in 2003, both the CNN Main site and the Africa site mentioned the
respective regions in every single story. Therefore, hypothesis 2 was only
partially accepted.
Both years, the percentage of stories originating from CNN was lower on
the regional Web sites other than the CNN Main site (see Table 3). In 2003,
there was only a difference of 1 between the CNN stories on CNN Main and
CNN Middle East. Hypothesis 3 was accepted.
For the final hypothesis, most stories were only used on one Web site in
2002 and 2003. Hypothesis 4 was accepted.
Discussion
As set out above, all four hypotheses were accepted, even though the
second hypothesis was only partially accepted. Overall, the results
indicate not only that CNN Interactive successfully regionalizes its
stories, but that it refined its regionalization strategy over the last two
years.
In all cases, the regional Web sites were clearly designed for the
specific regional audience in mind. This was indicated by the high
percentage of stories on each regional site that mentioned the target
region at least once. The story might not have been specifically about that
region, but the region was somehow involved with the topic of the story. A
qualitative analysis might shed more light on how the country or region was
related to the specific story. It is noteworthy that between 2002 and 2003
the percentage of stories dealing with a specific region on that region's
Web site all increased, so much so that 100 percent of stories on the CNN
Main site mentioned a country or region in North America. The addition of
the pages for Africa, the Americas and the Middle East also indicates an
increased sophistication on the part of CNN Interactive, as these pages
were not available in 2002. On all these three regional Web sites, most
stories mentioned a country in that region or the region. Regionalization
seems to be particularly successful with Africa, which had a 100 percent
agreement, the same percentage as North America on the CNN Main site. The
closest percentages were between stories dealing with the Middle East and
North America on the Middle East site. The percentage of stories dealing
with the Middle East on the Middle East Web site was also the lowest in
comparison with stories dealing with specific regions on those regions' Web
sites. This can be explained easily by the war between the United States
and Iraq that was going on at the time of the analysis.
Another area where one can see a sophistication in CNN Interactive's
regionalization is in the number of times a story is circulated to
different pages. In 2002, most stories appeared only once, but between 16.8
percent and 24.3 percent of stories appeared on the CNN Main, Europe and
Asia sites. In 2003, none of the stories were used more than twice. Also,
in all cases more stories were used only once. The only case where stories
were recycled was on the Middle East page, where 47.6 percent of stories
were used twice, mostly used also in the CNN Main site.
As indicated by the results, the percentage of stories from CNN was the
highest on the CNN Main site, with the Middle East at a close second place.
Once again, this can be explained by the fact that 47.2 percent of stories
on the Middle Eastern site was used twice, most of the time also on the CNN
Main site. Obviously, many stories dealt with the U.S.-led war in Iraq. In
all cases, though, the percentage of stories coming from CNN went down from
2002 to 2003. This might indicate a greater reliance on other news sources
by CNN. Especially the addition of the Africa and Americas sites shows a
dearth of stories originating from CNN. On the Africa site, 67 percent of
stories came from Reuters, and on the Americas site, 47 percent of stories
came from both The Associated Press and Reuters. On both the Africa and
Americas Web sites, CNN only contributed 5 percent of the stories. It is
clear from these results that CNN is lacking in original coverage of these
areas and depending heavily on both The Associated Press and Reuters. It is
unclear as to why CNN does not expand its services in Africa and the
Americas, however, a political economy argument might explain this
situation. Obviously, not many people in developing countries (many of them
in Africa and South America) have access to the Internet. It thus seems
natural that CNN would not pay a lot of attention to these regions. In
addition, income levels in these two regions are most likely lower than in
the lucrative European or Asian markets, further discouraging CNN to expand
its resources and costs in these regions. However, one can see how a
profit-driven policy excluded the have nots from fair news coverage. The
problem might perhaps be found not with CNN Interactive, but with the
organization as a whole, as the Web sites merely reflect the existing
resources of CNN.
In general, a continued lack of coverage of Africa, Oceania, South
America, the Caribbean and the Polar area was found. On the CNN Main site,
for example, coverage of South America accounted for only 3 percent,
coverage of Africa for only 2 percent and coverage of the Caribbean was
completely absent. This points to a problem with the increasing
personalization, specialization and targeting of news media, namely that
people will know more and more about less and less. People who only read
the CNN Main site will have virtually no knowledge of Africa or South America.
A point that might seem somewhat contradictory is that the results
indicate the integration of regions in the globalization system. For
example, on the Middle Eastern site, 85 percent of stories also dealt with
other regions than the Middle East. This figure was 81 percent for the
Europe site, 66 percent for both the Asia site and the Africa site, 40
percent for the CNN Main site and 48 percent for the South America site.
Taking everything into account, it is clear that CNN Interactive has
improved the regionalization of its service over the last two years. It
targets regions better and added three new sites. Empirically, these
findings point to an increase in the diversity of ideas in the marketplace,
as proponents of globalization would argue. However, it would be too
simplistic to accept these results as an indication of more diversity. As
argued by Kellner (2000), globalization is a contradictory process.
Clearly, the inequalities of the world system is replicated and re-enforced
through CNN's news coverage, and especially through the lack of covering
peripheral regions. Also, many stories originate from the other news
services, leading to a recycling of news wholesaler material. But
ultimately, a qualitative analysis might be needed to examine how issues
are framed in these stories to determine whether an American or Western
bias exists.
One limitation identified in this study is that the categorization of
regions based on the Google search might not coincide with how CNN assigns
categories. For example, according to Google, Turkey is located in the
Middle East, but CNN repeatedly publishes stories on Turkey on the Europe
site. Similarly, Google identifies Georgia as Asia, while CNN places
Georgia stories on the Europe site, and not the Asia site. The study might
have a higher validity if a category list might be obtained from CNN.
Another limitation is that Web sites were only analyzed once a day at 10
p.m., which makes it impossible to generalize findings to other times of
the day. A more thorough analysis could be conducted.
In conclusion, it appears as if this study might lend itself to further
studies in the future. As mentioned above, a qualitative analysis might
show whether CNN approaches world issues from an American perspective. A
more in-depth analysis of each regional site might also yield more thorough
results. For example, it is unclear at this point what the differences are
between the CNN Main site examined in this study, and the CNN International
site and the CNN World news site. Finally, another possible study might
compare the English language sites with those in the five other languages
that CNN offers. It is unclear at this point whether these sites are merely
translations of the English sites, or whether they offer any original content.
Bibliography
Barber, B. (1995). Jihad vs. McWorld: How globalism and tribalism are
reshaping the world. New York: Ballantine Books.
Berfield, S. (1997, February). Global TV: still local, after all. World
Press Review, 44, no. 2, p. 31.
Bosu, S. (1999, December 2). We're amid an aggressive regionalisation
drive: CNN boss. The Times of India.
Canclini, N.G. (1995). Hybrid Cultures: Strategies for Entering and Leaving
Modernity. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Flournoy, D.M. (1992). CNN World Report: Ted Turner's International News
Coup. London: Joyn Libbey and Company Ltd.
Flournoy, D.M. & Stewart, R.K. (1997). CNN: Making News in the Global
Market. Bedfordshire, UK: John Libbey Media.
Friedman, T.L. (2000). The Lexus and the Olive Tree. New York: Anchor Books.
Herman, E.S., & McChesney, R.W. (1997). The global media: the new
missionaries of global capitalism. London: Cassell.
Human Development Report 2001. Published by the United Nations. Available
online at http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2001/en/
Johnston, C.B. (1995). Winning the Global TV News Game. Boston: Focal Press.
Kellner, D. (2000). Theorizing Globalization Critically, in A. Suess (ed.),
Globalisierung. Ein wissenschaftlicher Diskurs? pp. 73-108. Manz, Wien:
Passagen Verlag
Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. New York: Vintage Books
Neuendorf, K.A. (2002). The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks,
Calif.: Sage.
Pieterse, J.N. (2004). Globalization & Culture: Global Melange. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.
Schiller, H.I. (1991). Not Yet the Post-Imperialist Era. Critical Studies
in Mass Communication, 8, 13-28.
Sinclair, J., Jacka, E. and Cunningham, S. (Eds.). (1996). New Patterns in
Global Television: Peripheral Vision. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sreberny-Mohammadi, A. (1996). Globalization, communication and
transnational civil society: introduction, in S. Braman and A.
Sreberny-Mohammadi (eds.), Globalization, Communication and Transnational
Civil Society. Creskill, NJ.: Hampton Press.
Straubhaar, J. (1991). Beyond Media Imperialism: Asymmetrical
Interdependence and Cultural Proximity. Critical Studies in Mass
Communication, 8, 1-11.
Tomlinson, J. (1991). Cultural Imperialism. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Volkmer, I. (1997). News in the Global Sphere: A study of CNN and its
impact on global communication. Bedfordshire: University of Luton Press.
Waldman, A. & Haley, K. (2000, June 19). A Global Perspective. Broadcasting
& Cable, 130, p. 14A.
Waters, M. (2001). Globalization. (2nd edition). London: Routledge.
Appendix A: Codebook (2003)
Start out by coding stories "above the fold" on CNN.com. Include all
stories "above the fold" and exclude additional multimedia features, for
example video, timelines and graphics. Include any boxes in the first
column but exclude boxes on the second column. Continue to click at the top
of the page on "International Edition," which will take you to a page with
the options of "World News," "Asia News" and "Europe News." This is where
you find the pages for Asia and Europe. When completed, click on "Africa,"
"Middle East" and "Americas" respectively to complete coding.
Column 1: Web site
CNN Main (U.S.)
CNN Europe
CNN Asia
CNN Africa
CNN South America
CNN Middle East
Column 2: Number
Indicates quantity of stories
Column 3: Date
Column 4: Headline
Type on the headline of the story
Columns 5 – 13: Indicate whether the name of a specific region or a country
within that region appears in the story. To find out what region a country
should be classified in, type the country into the Google search engine and
at the top of the results page a regional category indicator will appear.
(5. North America 6. Europe 7. Asia 8. Middle East 9. Africa 10. South
America 11. Oceania 12. Caribbean 13. Polar area)
1. Yes
2. No
Column 14: Source
The source is indicated on the first line of the story. If CNN is indicated
at the beginning of the story and at the end of the story there is an
indication that other services contributed to the story, code for a
combination of services. If there is no indication, code for "don't know."
1. CNN
2. Associated Press
3. Reuters
4. Combination of services
5. Don't know
Column 15: Number of pages a story appears
1. On one page only
2. On two pages
3. On three pages
4. On four pages
5. On five pages
6. On six pages
Example list of country categories as provided by Google search:
North America:
United States, Canada, Mexico
Europe:
Russia, Chechnia, Bosnia, Croatia, Serbia, Budapest, Macedonia
Middle East:
Turkey*, Iraq, Israel, Dubai, Yemen
Asia:
Afghanistan, Vietnam, Bali, Jakarta, Georgia*, Taiwan, China, Japan,
Pakistan, Nepal, India, Bangladesh, Kashmir, Laos, Armenia
Caribbean:
Cuba
Oceania:
Australia, New Zealand
Africa:
Mauritania, Morocco, Algeria, Chad
*Stories related to Turkey and Georgia typically appeared on the European
Web site, which indicates that CNN is using a different category system
than the one provided by Google.
Appendix B: Results tables
Table 1
CNN U.S.
Web site 2002 2003
North America 94 % 100 %
Europe 32 % 34 %
Asia 32 % 19 %
Middle East 20 % 23 %
Oceania no data 8 %
South America 18 % 3 %
Caribbean no data 3 %
Africa 3 % 2 %
Polar area no data 2 %
CNN Europe
Web site 2002 2003
Europe 67 % 97 %
North America 59 % 49 %
Asia 40 % 33 %
Middle East 25 % 52 %
Africa 8 % 9 %
Oceania no data 9 %
South America 10 % 3 %
Caribbean no data 3 %
Polar area no data 0 %
CNN Asia
Web site 2002 2003
Asia 82 % 89 %
North America 78 % 49 %
Europe 33 % 31 %
Oceania no data 24 %
Middle East 26 % 23 %
South America 12 % 3 %
Africa 5 % 1 %
Caribbean no data 1 %
Polar area no data 1 %
Table 1 (continuing)
Africa
Web site 2003
Africa 100 %
Europe 57 %
North America 33 %
Middle East 14 %
Asia 10 %
Caribbean 0 %
Polar area 0 %
Oceania 0 %
South America
Web site 2003
South America 81 %
North America 24 %
Europe 19 %
Caribbean 19 %
Middle East 14 %
Africa 10 %
Polar area 0 %
Oceania 0 %
Middle East
Web site 2003
Middle East 67 %
North America 62 %
Europe 38 %
Africa 29 %
Asia 0 %
Oceania 0 %
Caribbean 0 %
Polar area 0 %
Table 2
Category 2002 2003
% of North American stories on U.S. site 94 % 100 %
% of European stories on Europe site 67 % 97 %
% of Asian stories on Asia site 82 % 89 %
% of African stories on African site n/a 100 %
% of South American stories on S.A. site n/a 81 %
% of Middle Eastern stories on M.E. site n/a 67 %
Table 3
CNN U.S.: News service 2002 2003
1. CNN 62.1 % 58 %
2. AP 22.7 % 32 %
3. Reuters 1.5 % 10 %
4. Combination 9.1 % 0 %
5. Don't know 4.6 % 0 %
CNN Europe: News service 2002 2003
1. CNN 42.5 % 42 %
2. AP 6.9 % 13 %
3. Reuters 9.2 % 18 %
4. Combination 23.0 % 4 %
5. Don't know 18.4 % 24 %
CNN Asia: News service 2002 2003
1. CNN 55.1 % 30 %
2. AP 15.0 % 27 %
3. Reuters 6.5 % 32 %
4. Combination 17.8 % 3 %
5. Don't know 5.6 % 8 %
Africa: News service 2002 2003
1. CNN n/a 5 %
2. AP n/a 29 %
3. Reuters n/a 67 %
4. Combination n/a 0 %
5. Don't know n/a 0 %
S. America: News service 2002 2003
1. CNN n/a 5 %
2. AP n/a 48 %
3. Reuters n/a 48 %
4. Combination n/a 0 %
5. Don't know n/a 0 %
Middle East: News service 2002 2003
1. CNN n/a 57 %
2. AP n/a 24 %
3. Reuters n/a 19 %
4. Combination n/a 0 %
5. Don't know n/a 0 %
Table 4
CNN U.S.: Location of story 2002 2003
1. Stories only on U.S. site 56.0 % 72.6 %
2. Stories on two sites 19.7 % 27.4 %
3. Stories on three sites 24.3 % 0 %
CNN Europe: Location of story 2002 2003
1. Stories only on Europe site 50.6 % 81 %
2. Stories on two sites 29.9 % 19 %
3. Stories on three sites 19.5 % 0 %
CNN Asia: Location of story 2002 2003
1. Stories only on Asia site 60.7 % 91.5 %
2. Stories on two sites 22.4 % 8.5 %
3. Stories on three sites 16.8 % 0 %
Africa: Location of story 2002 2003
1. Stories only on Africa site n/a 100 %
2. Stories on two sites n/a 0 %
3. Stories on three sites n/a 0 %
S. America: Location of story 2002 2003
1. Stories only on S. American site n/a 95.2 %
2. Stories on two sites n/a 4.8 %
3. Stories on three sites n/a 0 %
Middle East Location of story 2002 2003
Stories only on Middle Eastern site n/a 52.4 %
Stories on two sites n/a 47.6 %
Stories on three sites n/a 0
|
