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
************************************************************************
National Interest and Source Use
In the Coverage of U.S.-China Relations:
A Content Analysis of The New York Times and People's Daily
1987-1996
Xigen Li
9050 Worth Ave
Baton Rouge, LA 70803
225-763-9836
Email: [log in to unmask]
A paper submitted to
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
for consideration for publication
Xigen Li is an assistant professor of Department of Journalism and Printing
at Arkansas State University
March 2004
Abstract
This study examined relationship between national interest and source use
in the coverage of U.S.-China relations in their respective elite
newspapers of record, The New York Times and People's Daily. The findings
provided support to source dependency in international news coverage and
impact of national interest on news content. The findings suggest the
relationship between national interest and source use was decided by what
was the central interest of the respective country in bilateral relations
and how the issues involving national interest was presented by the
newspapers. Both U.S. and Chinese officials were found to be the dominant
sources in the coverage of U.S.-China relations. However, dominant sources'
attitude towards U.S.-China relations was not found to be associated with
portrayal direction of the stories, nor with bias of the news coverage in
either newspaper.
National Interest and Source Use
National Interest and Source Use
2
Research on international news examines who controls the news , what
factors influence news selection , and the attributes that affect news
content. In the coverage of foreign policy and international relations, the
news content is primarily decided by who is the source and what kind of
information is provided by the source . Although studies show that
government sources, especially the presidential view on major issues in
international relations tend to have an impact on U.S. newspaper coverage ,
it is not so clear when national interest is clearly identified as a
dominant theme, to what degree news coverage of international relation is
affected by sources used in the national media of the countries involved.
U.S.-China relation has been an area that media of both countries devote
much attention to as there have always been issues perplexing the bilateral
relations. National interest was found to be a dominant theme in media
coverage since United States and China re-established foreign relation in
the late 1970s . Few studies have investigated the relationship between
national interest and sources use in the coverage of U.S.-China relations,
and to what degree the dominant sources affect news coverage. No studies
have looked at how the news coverage of U.S.-China relations were affected
by the sources used in the major newspapers of the countries involved. This
study examines source use in national media coverage of U.S.-China
relations in their respective elite newspapers of record, The New York
Times of the United States and People's Daily of China for the 1987-1996
period.
LITERATURE REVIEW
This study attempts to examine the relationship between national interest
referred in the news stories and source use in the coverage of U.S.-China
relations under the theoretical framework of source dependency and impact
of national interest on international news.
Source Dependency
Shoemaker and Reese defined sources as "external suppliers of raw
material, whether speeches, interviews, corporate reports, or government
hearings." Journalists depend on sources to report news events. They tend
to cultivate a stable of preferred sources who get interviewed frequently .
Reporters rely mainly on "routine channels of newsgathering," such as
official proceedings, press releases, press conferences and other staged
events. Gans found that official, government sources were among those most
frequently quoted by the American media. Content analyzing The New York
Times and Washington Post, Sigal found that U.S. (federal) government
officials, particularly at the executive branch, accounted for almost half
the news sources in his sampled front-page stories.
Scholars attributed source dependence to a variety of factors.
Gans suggested that successful access to journalists is shaped by at least
four factors: sources' incentives to be in the media, sources' power,
sources' ability to supply suitable information, and sources geographic and
social proximity to journalists. Sigal argued that the media's over
reliance on government officials was due to officials ' availability,
authority, and credibility. In a case study, Fico found that the reasons
most often given by reporters for relying on official sources included
accessibility of the source, the sources' ability to explain procedures and
proposals, and the ability of sources to supply reliable information.
Schudson argued the factors that shape the constitution of this preferred
source listing include the status/prestige of the source, perceived
expertise and articulateness of the source, and the past reliability of the
source.
Source's power and knowledge on the issues perceived by journalists were
found to be the most important factors that journalists rely heavily on
sources. Tuchman believed reporters consider official sources such as
committee chairpersons to be in positions to know more than other people in
that organization. Gans found not all sources are equally likely to be
contacted by journalists. Those with economic or political power are more
likely to influence news reports than those who lack power. In
Soloski's study, 14% of the sources were "unaffiliated," and only 4% in
the Brown et al. study.
The selection of news sources may also reflect whether or not reporters
like or agree with sources. Stocking and LaMarca suggest that journalists
fail to seek out and select sources which may refute their
ideas. Interviews with eleven newspaper reporters led the authors to
believe that reporters are subject to confirmation bias which influences
the sources used. Soloski also found that reporters' believed their
closeness with a source affected the way they wrote stories and their
treatment of that source in stories. The selection of news sources not only
divulges the media's institutional biases but also reflect particular
slants for or against issues or events .
Journalists' reliance on the powerful and knowledgeable sources is
reflected in the news content they produce . Sources representing
government bureaucracies and corporations have more impact on what becomes
news than ordinary citizens . Government views are considered a strong
extramedia factor influencing media content. Zeidenstein described the
government's influence on the media succinctly: "The White House can
influence - if not completely control - the content, timing, and methods of
publicizing the news." Powerful and resourceful interest groups tend to
directly influence or control media's content by ways of routine conduits .
Sigal concluded when journalists adhere to routine channels of
newsgathering, they leave news selection decisions largely up to official
news sources.
Government officials used as major sources were also evident in the
coverage of international news. When foreign policy issues are involved,
journalists tend to rely on government official sources . Graber found
that foreign news tends to emanate primarily from various beats in the
executive branch, especially the White House, the State Department, and the
Pentagon. The president's views tend to dominate whenever situations are
controversial.
Source use in international news may vary across media of different
countries. In a study on how Japanese and American international
correspondents choose their sources, Horvit found that the Japanese rely
on government sources significantly more than the Americans. In a direct
comparison of U.S. and Japanese news coverage, Atwood found that the
Japanese newspapers cited a wider variety of sources and used more
attributions. He also found that news reported on the trade issue reflected
the point of view of the country for whom the journalists were writing.
Atwood's findings indicated that source use and the point of view reflected
in the news were associated with the issues involved. Paletz and
Entman argued that international reporting tends to be monolithic and
consistent with U.S. foreign policy because reporters rely almost
exclusively on sources sympathetic to representing the American interest.
Few studies examine source use in international news coverage when major
issues of international relations are involved. While government officials
and executives are considered political powerful in influencing news
coverage, to what degree the major decision makers of a government, such as
the president of the United States and other government leaders, affect
news coverage on specific foreign relations issues involving national
interest remains a question largely unanswered.
Impact of National Interest on International News
National interest is a construct that synthesizes the gain and loss of a
country in the international relations. Allison used bureaucratic politics
model to explain and predict a nation's foreign policy. This model
essentially assumes that a nation is a rational, goal-seeking, and unitary
decision maker. It assumes that there is some shared goal or national
interest for the decision maker to obtain. The rational actor will develop
alternatives from which the most effective means will be selected to
maximize the goal.
The rational actor can be defined here as those key politicians and
bureaucrats in the executive branch, including the president, who, on the
whole, are more likely to form a national view as they respond to the
parochial concerns of either social groups or particular governmental
institutions. Krasner maintained that because high-level decision makers
perceive their roles as protecting and promoting national security
interest, they act upon their autonomous set of preferences.
The literature on national interest and U.S.-China relations asserts that
both United States and China pursue their respective national interest in
the bilateral relationship, and national interest shifts as their strategic
partnership changes. Tan observed that the United States would define
U.S.-China policies primarily according to shifting strategic balance of
power while maximizing other foreign policy interests. Gregor noted that
national interests of China are not often comparable with the national and
foreign policy interests of the United States, and many of the interests
China shares with the big powers are transient.
U.S.-China trade and human rights in China were the dominant issues in
U.S.-China relations during the last two decades. Zweig argued that for
many years, the strategic imperative has protected Sino-American relations.
The positive images of China after 1978 pushed human rights far down the
list of issues in Sino-American relations. Mower, Jr. also noted that Both
Carter and Reagan subordinated human rights to national security and
national interest. In the 1990s, the issues of the most favorite nation
prevailed the U.S.-China relations .
News coverage of international relations was found to be influenced by
national interest. Lee and Yang used national interest as a predictor of
coverage of the Chinese student movement by the U.S. and Japanese press
from April to June in 1989. They argued that the vital interest of the
United States was winning ideological victories in the Cold war, whereas
Japan's paramount concern was economic gain. These distinctive national
interests led to different treatments of the Chinese student movement in
the Japanese and U.S. press coverage. Kim's study of U.S. press coverage
of the Korean and Chinese Pro-democracy movements also found media were
considerably influenced by government's responses to the movements and its
foreign policy.
The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship between issues
involving national interest and source use in the coverage of U.S.-China
relations through a ten-year period. National Interest is defined as the
basis upon which a country makes its decision in international relations to
minimize the cost and maximize the benefit. As used by the policy-makers,
the phrase "national interest" implied a choice among values standing
behind these interests . National interest in the context of news coverage
refers to the verbal denotations of a concern or an assessment of a
nation's gain or loss in its relationship with the other country.
Hypotheses
Based on the literature and the theoretical framework on source dependency
and impact of national interest on media coverage in international
relations, four hypotheses were derived and tested. These hypotheses apply
to both The New York Times and People's Daily.
H1. Use of positive sources is associated with positive references to trade
interest.
H2. Use of negative sources is associated with references to interest in
non-trade political issues.
H1 and H2 attempt to test the relationship between source use and reference
to national interest in the news coverage. Source attitude changes as
different issues involving national interest surfaced. The issues regarding
trade could be covered in both positive and negative directions by the two
newspapers. It is likely that positive sources would be used when the trade
interest was positively referred to. The issues regarding non-trade
political issues such as human rights in China are more likely to be
treated as negative topics. When interest of non-trade political issues was
referred in the news coverage, it is expected to involve use of negative
sources.
H3. Dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations is associated
with portrayal direction of the news stories.
Journalists tend to select the sources that agree with their ideas. Those
who are selected as the dominant source have more impact on what becomes
news than others. Portrayal direction of the news stories reflects
reporters' take on the issues covered and is affected by who are the major
sources. The dominant sources' attitudes toward issues covered are likely
to align with reporters' standpoint. Source use is expected to be
associated with portrayal direction of U.S.-China relations in the news
stories. The dominant sources are likely to be an influential factor in
setting the tone of the news coverage.
H4. Dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations is associated
with bias of the stories.
Lee and Solomon suggested the selection of news sources not only divulges
the media's institutional biases but also reflect particular slants for or
against issues or events. H4 tests to what degree the dominant sources
affect the bias of the news coverage. It is expected that the dominant
sources play a crucial role in affecting news content, and the attitude of
the dominant sources toward U.S.-China relations is likely to affect the
bias of the stories.
METHOD
This study was conducted through a content analysis. A ten-year period
(1987-1996) U.S.-China relations coverage by The New York Times and
People's Daily was selected for analysis. The coverage of U.S.-China
relations was defined as hard news and feature stories reporting current
events, institutional and personal experience relating to U.S.-China
relations, such as government actions, business activities, and personal
adventures.
The study period was selected for the following reasons: U.S. and China
went through both a relatively stable relationship and turbulent
relationship in this period. On the U.S. side, 1) It covers three U.S.
presidencies, and their concerns relating to U.S.-China relations varied;
2) Some major issues concerning U.S.-China relations arose during the
period, such as Human Rights in China and annual renewal of the Most
Favorite Nation status. On the Chinese side, 1) Transition of government
leaders led to changes in China's U.S. policy; 2) The major events such as
Tiananmen Incident and Taiwanese President's visit to U.S. drastically
affected U.S.-China relations
The New York Times was chosen because of its extensive coverage of foreign
policy news, and its prominence and influence on decision making (Modern
Media Institute 1983). It was widely read by policy makers, journalists,
and diplomatic community in and out of Washington . People's Daily was
chosen for its eminent status in China and its role as a spokesperson for
China's foreign policies . Edelstein noted that there was a world system
of elite communication as expressed by an "elite" or "prestige" press that
speaks for these nations and to elites in other nations. The New York Times
and People's Daily were outstanding members of the world system of elite
communication.
To get a complete list of news stories on U.S.-China relations by The New
York Times and People's Daily during 1987 to 1996, the following sources
were consulted: Lexis-Nexis database, The New York Times Index, People's
Daily Index and People's Daily on microfilm.
Using "U.S. within 5 words China" and "U.S.-China" as the key words, a
total of 302 stories were identified through Lexis-Nexis search. From The
New York Times Index, 427 stories were identified with a clear theme of
U.S.-China relations. Combining the two lists of stories, a total of 512
stories were compiled.
About 900 items were identified from People's Daily under the category
"China-United States" during the ten-year period. The search results from
People's Daily were double checked against People's Daily on the microfilm
to determine whether the news items matched the study purpose. A complete
list of the coverage of U.S.-China relations by People's Daily consisted of
528 news stories.
Forty percent of the articles were selected for analysis manually from the
sampling frame, using systematic stratified sampling procedures. When
adjusted to include at least ten stories for each year, 225 stories were
selected from The New York Times, and 230 stories were chosen from People's
Daily for content analysis.
The coding of news content was conducted according to the prescribed
procedures by Daniel Riffe et al . The study unit is a news story. The key
variables coded included references to national interest, references to
trade and non-trade interest, portrayal of U.S.-China relations and bias of
coverage.
Reference to National Interest in the context of news coverage of
U.S.-China relations refers to the verbal denotations of a concern or an
assessment of a nation's gain or loss in its relationship with the other
country. During the period that this study examines, the key issues
involving national interest in U.S.-China relations were human rights in
China and U.S.-China trade. Reference to National Interest is further coded
into Trade interest and Non-Trade interest.
The identification of the source(s) of coverage of U.S.-China relations
answers the questions: who were the sources that reporters relied on in the
news coverage of U.S.-China relations during the ten-year period, and what
was sources' attitude towards U.S.-China relations? Eleven categories of
source were identified through an earlier study of The New York Times .
Sources' attitude towards U.S.-China relations identifies the tone of
individual, organization or documentation cited in s story. The attitude is
categorized as positive, negative, and neutral.
Portrayal of U.S.-China relations refers to positive, neutral and negative
tone of the coverage of U.S.-China relations reflected in the news stories
by each newspaper. For Example, the progress in solving a problem in
U.S.-China relations will be categorized as positive, and the disputes on
issues in U.S.-China relations will be categorized as negative. The
portrayal could also refer to positive or negative role of U.S. and China
in the bilateral relationship. Portrayal is categorized as positive,
negative and neutral.
Bias of coverage is defined as the degree to which the involved two parties
were given equal opportunity by a newspaper to present their stance and
point of view. It measures use of Pro and Con sources and assertions of
both sides of a controversial issue. A composite index was created
combining the indicators of coverage bias.
Three bilingual Chinese coders participated in the coding. Scott's Pi was
used to test the intercoder reliability for nominal variables; Pearson's
correlation coefficient was selected for ratio variables. An intercoder
reliability test result greater than .76 was deemed acceptable. For a 95
percent level of probability and an assumed 90 percent agreement between
the coders, 90 stories were selected for intercoder reliability testing .
Each coder in the two groups was assigned respectively a portion of The New
York Times and People's Daily items of the remaining news stories after
satisfactory intercoder reliability was established.[1]
FINDINGS
Source Dependency in the Coverage (Table 1 and Table 2)
In both The New York Times and People's Daily, the government officials
were the sources that journalists relied on in their coverage U.S.-China
relations during the ten-year period. In The New York Times, 48% of the
sources cited were U.S. officials. Plus U.S. government leader sources, the
total U.S. officials used as sources was 57%. Chinese officials comprised
13% of the sources used in The New York Times. Plus Chinese leader sources,
the total Chinese officials used as sources was 17%.
In People's Daily, 26% of the sources used were Chinese officials. Plus
Chinese government leaders used as sources, the total Chinese officials
used as sources comprised 47%. U.S. officials comprised 18% of the sources
used in People's Daily. Plus U.S. leader sources, the total U.S. officials
used as sources were 27%. The Chinese leaders cited as the sources were
more dominant in People's Daily (21%) than U.S. leaders (9%) in The New
York Times in the coverage of U.S.-China relations.
Source Attitude towards U.S.-China Relations (Table 3)
The New York Times
The result indicated that in The New York Times, both the U.S. (14% vs. 7%,
Z = 25.92, p < .01) and Chinese leaders (6% vs. 4%, Z = 10.53, p < .01)
were cited as positive sources more often than negative sources. More U.S.
leaders (14%) were cited as positive sources than the Chinese leaders
(6%). U.S. officials other than U.S. leaders were cited equally as
positive sources and negative sources, while the Chinese officials other
than the Chinese leaders were cited more as negative sources (15%) than
positive sources (12%).
People's Daily
The result indicated that in People's Daily, both the U.S. (13%) and
Chinese leaders (26%) were cited as positive sources more often than
negative sources, and more Chines leaders (26%) were cited as positive
sources than the U.S. leaders (13%). U.S. officials other than U.S.
leaders were cited more as negative sources (26%) than positive sources
(17%), while the Chinese officials other than Chinese leaders were cited
more as negative sources (45%) than positive sources (17%). The Chinese
officials were cited as negative sources more often than U.S. officials.
Hypotheses Test Results
The New York Times (Table 4)
H1a. The hypothesis that use of positive sources is associated with
positive references to trade interest is supported. The correlation
between use of positive sources and positive reference to trade interest is
.25, p < .05, which is statistically significant.
H2a. The hypothesis that use of negative sources is associated with
references to interest in non-trade political issues is not supported. The
correlation between reference to non-trade political issues and use of
negative sources is .05, p > .05, which is not statistically significant.
However, relationship is found between use of negative sources and
reference to trade interest (24, p < .05).
People's Daily (Table 4)
H1b. The hypothesis that use of positive sources is associated with
positive references to trade interest is weakly supported. The correlation
between use of positive sources and positive reference to trade interest is
.18, p < .01, which is statistically significant.
H2b. The hypothesis that use of negative sources is associated with
references to interest in non-trade political issues is supported. The
correlation between use of negative sources and reference to interest in
non-trade political issues is .48, p < .01, which is statistically significant.
H3. Dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations is associated
with portrayal direction of the news stories.
The New York Times
The dominant sources in The New York Times constitute 48% U.S. government
officials plus 9% U.S. leaders, a total of 57% of the sources cited in the
coverage. Hypothesis 3, dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China
relations is associated with the portrayal direction of the news stories,
is not supported. The attitude of the dominant sources was not found to be
associated with the portrayal direction of the news stories (X2 = 2.09, df
= 4, N = 225, p > .05). Although the stories with negative dominant sources
were likely to have a negative portrayal direction instead of positive
portrayal direction (39.6% vs. 9.9%), it was not the case with the stories
with positive dominant sources (9.8% vs. 29.3%). When dominant sources'
attitude is positive, only 9.8% of the stories had positive portrayal
direction while 29% of the stories had negative portrayal direction, which
means even though dominant sources' attitude was positive, the portrayal
direction of the story could still be negative.
People's Daily
The dominant sources in People's Daily constitute 26% Chinese officials,
plus 21% Chinese government leaders, a total of 47% of the sources cited in
the coverage. Hypothesis 3, dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China
relations is associated with the portrayal direction (tone) of the news
stories, is not supported. The attitude of the dominant sources was not
found to be associated with the portrayal direction of the news stories (X2
= 1.30, df = 4, N = 230, p > .05). Although the stories with positive
dominant sources were likely to have a positive portrayal direction instead
of negative portrayal direction (54.8% vs. 22.1%), it was not the case with
the stories with negative dominant sources (22.1% vs. 55.3%). When dominant
sources' attitude is negative, 22.1% of the stories had negative portrayal
direction while 55.3% of the stories had positive portrayal direction,
which means even though dominant sources' attitude was negative, the
portrayal direction of the story could still be positive.
H4. The dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations is
associated with bias of the stories.
The New York Times
The aggregate scores of bias in The New York Times' coverage of U.S.-China
relations ranged from plus 14 to minus 18. The higher the absolute value,
the more biased the coverage, with a score of zero as neutral, or no
bias. About 6% of the news items had a score of zero, 51.8% fell in the
range of _4, and 80.2% fell in the range of _8 (mean = -.40, median = .00,
skewness = -.15, and SD = 6.32). The plus side is identified as Pro, and
the minus side is classified as Con. The mean for Pro is 5.24, and the mean
for Con is 5.49 (t = .49, p > .05). The New York Times' coverage of
U.S.-China relations was relatively balanced.
Hypothesis 4, dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations is
associated with bias of the stories is not supported. A one-way ANOVA
indicated dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations was not
associated with bias of the stories (F = .17, df = 2/224, p > .05).
People's Daily
The aggregate scores of bias in People's Daily's coverage of U.S.-China
relations ranged from plus 16 to minus 2, with a score of zero as neutral,
or no bias. Less than 2% of the news items had a score of zero, 27.4% fell
in the range from plus 4 to minus 2, and 73.1% fell in the range from plus
8 to minus 2 (mean = 6.3, median = 6.00, skewness = .12, and SD = 3.34).
The plus side is identified as Pro, and the minus side is classified as
Con. The mean for Pro is 6.57, and the mean for Con is 1.40 (t = 16.09, p <
.05). People's Daily's coverage of U.S.-China relations was slanted on the
plus side.
Hypothesis 4, dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations is
associated with bias of the stories is not supported. A one-way ANOVA
indicated dominant source's attitude toward U.S.-China relations was not
associated with bias of the stories (F = 1.75, df = 2/229, p > .05).
DISCUSSION
Source Dependency
Neither The U.S. (9%) nor China's leaders (4%) were found to be the
dominant sources in the coverage in The New York Times, but the China's
leaders appeared to be the dominant sources (21%) in People's Daily. The
New York Times relied on U.S. leaders as well as U.S. officials as the
major sources, while The People's Daily gave more priority to the China's
leaders when they were quoted as sources in the coverage of U.S.-China
relations. Two factors make Chinese leaders as the dominant sources in
People's Daily: 1) People's Daily reflects any concerns of the government
leaders if they make their concerns public, including their comments on
U.S.-China relations; 2) The government departments other than those
involving foreign affairs are not authorized to comment on any issues on
U.S.-China relations without the permission from the government
leaders. The prevalence of China's leaders presented as sources in
People's Daily displayed its fundamental difference from The New York
Times. U.S. leaders were quoted as sources when they made themselves
available to the media or when The New York Times considered it
appropriate, while China's leaders were quoted as sources whenever they
made any public speech and whenever the leaders considered it appropriate.
The finding is consistent with the previous research that government
officials are the most active sources in the coverage of foreign policy and
international relations. Media reply on government officials to report the
major issues in the international relations. Government officials in the
U.S. and China alike were shaping the U.S.-China relations as dominant
sources in the news coverage by The New York Times and People's Daily. The
New York Times cited U.S. officials (48%) more than the government leaders
(9%), which reflects the relationship between the government and the media.
U.S. officials are more accessible than the U.S. leaders. People's Daily
cited Chinese officials (26%) almost as often as Chinese leaders (21%),
which reflects a different type of the relationship between the government
and the media. The Chinese government instructs the media what to report
on the issues concerning national interest in international relations. The
information released by either government leaders or Chinese officials
reflects the official stand of the Chinese government, and it only leaves
the government to decide who will speak on behalf of the nation, the
Chinese leaders or the Chinese officials.
The findings also reveal the different patterns in using the source by The
New York Times and People's Daily. While the use of government officials as
sources took up the similar proportion in The New York Times and People's
Daily, the actual number that the government officials were quoted as
sources in The New York Times far exceeded that in People's Daily, 519 vs.
159. The difference demonstrated different practice of journalism in the
two countries. U.S. reporters need to cite a source whenever he quotes
someone in his story. It is less often that Chinese journalists use quotes
with clearly identified sources. A Chinese reporter cites someone as a
source if the source is really important or authoritative, and if the
reporter considers that the cited source will add news value to the story,
or clarify the reliability of the quote.
Source Attitudes towards U.S.-China Relations
The finding about the source attitudes towards U.S.-China relations in The
New York Times partly is consistent with the previous findings that western
media tend to be negative. The means of positive vs. negative sources (.80
vs. 1.62) indicates a strong tendency of use of negative sources. However,
the attitudes of government officials towards U.S.-China relations were
relatively balanced, both those of U.S. officials and Chinese
officials. The proportion for the three categories, positive, negative and
neutral, of U.S. and Chinese officials were almost equal, except that U.S.
leaders were more positive than negative. The finding cautions for the
distinction between the attitude of sources in general and government
officials' attitudes toward U.S.-China relations, which are more important
in shaping U.S.-China relations. The finding also indicates that in The
New York Times, the coverage of the issues involving national interest was
not necessarily skewed with extreme attitudes from government officials
toward U.S.-China relations.
The finding about the source attitudes towards U.S.-China relations in
People's Daily partly supports the notion that media in the Communist world
tend to be positive. The means of positive vs. negative sources (1.07 vs.
0.34) indicates a strong tendency of use of positive sources. The tendency
was also seen from the government leaders used as sources. Both China's
and U.S. leaders were more positive than negative. While U.S. officials'
attitudes did not change from one extreme to the other dramatically, the
Chinese officials other than the China's leaders were noticeably negative
toward U.S.-China relations. The finding suggests that coverage of the
issues involving national interest could produce more extreme attitudes
from Chinese officials towards U.S.-China relations in People's Daily. The
Chinese leaders tended to be mild and constructive towards U.S.-China
relations as presented by People's Daily, while the Chinese officials had
more freedom in expressing their negative attitudes towards U.S.-China
relations.
Hypotheses Test Results
H1 and H2 explored the linkage between source use and reference to national
interest in the news coverage. Support was found for the notion that source
use was associated with references to trade and non-trade interest under
some circumstances in both The New York Times and People's Daily.
The New York Times
The support of H1a that use of positive sources was associated with
positive reference to trade interest endorses the notion that sources use
is related to references to national interest. The relationship is
mediated by source attitude and issues involved. The finding did not
support that the references to non-trade interest were likely to be
associated with negative sources. Non-trade interest normally involved
delicate issues such as human right in China. The coverage of the debates
on the issues could also introduce arguments from neutral and positive
sources.
The rejection of H2a further clarifies the relationship between source use
and reference to non-trade interest. The finding denies the notion that
interest regarding non-trade political issues are more likely to be treated
as negative topics involving use of more negative sources. The finding
suggests that when non-trade interest were negatively refereed, it was not
necessarily that negative sources were used in the coverage of U.S.-China
relations by The New York Times. The situation occurred when some U.S.
officials with neutral attitude discussed the issues that were negatively
referred by the Congress.
People's Daily
Although H1b that use of positive sources was associated with positive
reference to trade interest is supported, the relationship is weak. What
was found clearer is that when non-trade interest were negatively referred,
less positive sources would be used. Positive references to non-trade
interest were found not associated with use of positive sources. The
situation could occur when Chinese officials with a negative attitude
towards U.S. Congress actions positively refer to U.S.-China trade and
non-trade political issues involving China's interest.
The support of H2b that use of negative sources is associated with
negative reference to non-trade interest in People's Daily confirms that
the relationship between source use and non-trade interest is contingent
upon issues involved. The finding indicates that interest regarding
non-trade political issues is more likely to be treated as negative topics
in People's Daily. When non-trade interest is negatively referred in the
news coverage, more negative sources will be used. However, the negative
reference to trade interest was found not associated with use of negative
sources. When trade related interest was negatively referred, it was not
necessarily that negative sources were used in the coverage of U.S.-China
relations by People's Daily.
The findings indicate that the direction of the source attitude towards
U.S.-China relations had some predicting value of the directional
references to trade and non-trade interests both in The New York Times and
People's Daily. The relationship between source attitudes and direction of
reference depended on the issues involving national interest covered in the
news stories. For The New York Times, use of positive source had the
predicting value of positive reference to trade and non-trade interest,
while use of negative source had the predicting value of negative reference
to trade interest. In People's Daily, use of positive source is likely to
be associated with both positive reference to trade interest and negative
reference to non-trade interest, while use of negative source was only
associated with negative reference to non-trade interest.
Even though government officials were the sources that reporters relied
most in both The New York Times and People's Daily, their attitude toward
U.S.-China relations did not lead the portrayal direction of the news
stories. In The New York Times, the stories with negative dominant sources
were likely to have negative portrayal direction. But the stories with
positive dominant sources did not follow in portrayal direction. People's
Daily just behaved the opposite. Stories with positive dominant sources
were likely to have positive portrayal direction. But the stories with
negative dominant sources did not follow in portrayal direction. Failure in
support of H3 suggests limited impact of dominant source in portrayal
direction of news stories of U.S.-China relations. Even though U.S.
officials were found to be the dominant sources in the coverage, they were
neither unitary nor monolithic. Their attitudes toward U.S.-China relations
may vary across a wide range due to various considerations of national
interest. The diverse attitudes of U.S. officials may negate their power in
setting the portrayal direction of the news stories. In People's Daily, the
Chinese leaders and Chinese officials took different approaches addressing
issues involving national interest. Their mixed attitudes toward U.S.-China
relations could also be the reason for their limited impact on portrayal
direction.
There were other factors playing a role in the process. The portrayal
direction of the news stories may reflect reporters' take on the issues
covered. What to select and how to report a story formed the basis of the
portrayal direction of the story. Dominant sources could set the portrayal
direction of the stories in some way, but reporters' take in the stories
may drive the story in a direction deviated from the dominant sources'
attitude toward U.S.-China relations.
The rejection of H4 that dominant source attitude is associated with bias
of the coverage of U.S.-China relations in both newspapers offers a better
understanding of impact of source use on international news. This study
found bias was not associated with dominant sources. In New York Times, the
coverage of U.S.-China relations was relatively balanced. Both sides of the
dominant sources had relatively equal opportunities to present their point
of views. The dominant sources alone did not produce evident bias in the
coverage U.S.-China relations. In People's Daily, dominant sources'
attitude was slanted on the plus side and there was a clear skew in the
coverage. The rejection of H4 by People's Daily reconfirms that source
attitude alone may not contribute to bias of international news. There may
be other factors playing a more important role in generating bias of the
coverage. It could be true that selection of news sources reflects
particular slants for or against issues or events. But to what degree
selection of source affect bias of stories is another issue. Coverage of
U.S.-China relations went beyond what the dominant sources' attitude was
and what was quoted from the dominant sources. The bias of stories could be
attributed to how the sources were quoted, what issues concerning national
interest were involved and how the stories were presented.
The findings of this study suggest source use in international news affect
how issues involving national interest are referred. However, this study
only looked at two aspects of issues involving national interest, trade
interest and non-trade interest in U.S.-China relations. In news coverage
of international relations, issues concerning national interest could have
much broader spectrum. Further studies could extend the scope of national
interest with various issues and involving different countries. The
dominant sources that this study examined were not found to be associated
with portrayal direction of the stories and bias of the coverage. It could
be due to the diverse attitude of institutional and individual sources that
made up the dominant sources. Source dependency suggests U.S. official
sources dominate the coverage of foreign affaires and international
relations. This study revealed U.S. leaders and officials with diverse
considerations on issues involving national interest had different
attitudes toward U.S.-China relations. The Chinese officials behaved in a
similar way when they were quoted as sources. Future research could look
into the role of elements of the dominant sources and explore how
individual and institutional sources with different stances in
international relations contribute to portrayal direction of the story and
bias of the coverage.
CONCLUSIONS
This study examined relationship between national interest and source use
in the coverage of U.S.-China relations in The New York Times and People's
Daily. The findings of the study provided support to source dependency in
international news coverage and impact of national interest on news
content. The study found both The New York Times and People's Daily relied
on government officials as major source of information. Source use was
associated with reference to national interest with variations between the
two newspapers and between trade and non-trade interests. In The New York
Times, trade was presented as the central interest more than non-trade
issues. Reference to trade interest was found to be associated with use of
positive source. In People's Daily, non-trade issues were more evident on
China's political agenda in U.S.-China relations. Reference to non-trade
interest was found to be associated with negative sources. The findings
suggest the relationship between national interest and source use was
decided by what was the central interest of the respective country in
bilateral relations and how the issues involving national interest were
presented in the coverage. Both U.S. and Chinese officials were found to be
the dominant sources in the coverage of U.S.-China relations in the two
newspapers. However, dominant sources' attitude towards U.S.-China
relations was not found to be associated with portrayal direction of the
news stories, nor with bias of the news coverage in either newspaper. The
government and official sources that formed the dominant sources had
different stances in issues involving national interest. While source use
was found associated with references to trade and non-trade interests to
various degree in The New York Times and People's Daily, the diverse
attitudes of the dominant sources toward U.S.-China relations produced no
demonstrated impact on portrayal direction of the stories and bias of news
coverage.
REFERENCES
Table 1
Official Sources in the Coverage of U.S.-China Relations (1987-1996)
(NYT, N =225; PD, N =230)
Sources
New York Times
People's Daily
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
National Leaders Sources
U.S. Leaders
84
9%
37
9%
China's Leaders
41
4%
82
21%
Government Official Sources
U.S. Officials
435
48%
69
18%
China's Officials
118
13%
103
26%
Table 2
Source Use in the Coverage of U.S.-China Relations (1987-1996)
(NYT, N =225; PD, N =230)
Sources
New York Times
People's Daily
Frequency
Percentage
Frequency
Percentage
U.S. President
50
6%
24
6%
U.S. Secretary
30
3%
12
3%
U.S. Congress Leaders
4
0%
1
0%
White House
70
8%
3
1%
Congress
110
12%
20
5%
State Department
65
7%
6
2%
U.S. Officials
190
21%
40
10%
Chinese President
12
1%
34
9%
Chinese Premier
8
1%
23
6%
Chinese Foreign Minister
21
2%
25
6%
Chinese Officials
118
13%
103
26%
Others
228
25%
99
25%
Total
906
100%
390
100%
Table 3
Source Attitude toward U.S.-China Relations in the Coverage (1987-1996)
(NYT, N =225; PD, N =230)
Variables
New York Times
People's Daily
Positive
Negative
Neutral
Positive
Negative
Neutral
National Leaders
U.S. Leaders
14%*
7%*
8%
13%
3%
5%
Chinese Leaders
6%*
4%*
4%
26%
5%
25%
Government Officials
U.S. Officials
48%
48%
50%
17%*
26%*
13%
Chinese Officials
12%*
15%*
11%
17%
45%
42%
* Proportion Test result (Positive vs. Negative)
The New York Times, U.S. Leaders, Z=25.92, p <.01; Chinese Leaders,
Z=10.53, p <.01; Chinese Officials, Z=10.00, p <.01. People's Daily, U.S.
Officials, Z=25.00, p <.01.
Table 4
Correlations between Source Use and References to National Interest
In the Coverage of U.S.-China Relations (1987-1996)
(N=225)
Variables
Positive Sources
Negative Sources
New York Times
U.S. National Interest
.11
.01
U.S. Interest Trade
.14*
.06
U.S. Interest Non-Trade
-.01
-.06
Reference to Trade
.18**
.24**
Reference to Trade Negative
.07
.30**
Reference to Trade Positive
.25**
.04
Reference to Non-Trade Issues
.12
.05
Reference to Non-Trade Negative
.06
.08
Reference to Non-Trade positive
.18**
-.01
People's Daily
China National Interest
-.04
.09
China Interest Trade
-.01
-.03
China Interest Non-Trade
-.06
.12
Reference to Trade
.10
-.07
Reference to Trade Negative
-.08
.07
Reference to Trade Positive
.18**
-.13
Reference to Non-Trade Issues
-.21**
.48**
Reference to Non-Trade Negative
-.28**
.58**
Reference to Non-Trade positive
-.00
.07
** = p< 0.01 (2-tailed).
* = p< 0.05 (2-tailed).
[1] Intercoder reliability for nominal variables at assumed 90 percent
agreement (using Lacy and Riffe's formula and Scott's Pi), P _ .05,
dateline, 1.0; newspot, 1.0; newspeg, .87; topic, .82; Ratio variables
(using Pearson's correlation coefficient), P _ .01, reference to government
concern (trade), .83 _ .02, reference to non-trade interest, .81 _ .02,
reference to trade, .79 _ .02, reference to non-trade issues, .77 _ .02,
source, .79 ~ .84 _ .02, fairness and balance, .76 ~ .88 _ .02.
|
