Are Corporate Newspapers Less Critical of City Hall?
By David Pearce Demers, Visiting Professor
School of Journalism and Mass Communication
University of Minnesota
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
612/626-1514 (office) / 612/490-5829 (home)
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
This paper was prepared for presentation at the annual meeting
of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication in
Anaheim (August 1996). The research was supported in part by Grant
#1450-5-95 from the University of Wisconsin-River Falls
Institutional
Studies, Research and Grants Committee.
Abstract
Are Corporate Newspapers Less Critical of City Hall?
Contrary to conventional wisdom, this study hypothesized that
city hall news sources who live in communities served by corporate
newspapers would perceive those newspapers as being more critical
of them
and city hall than sources in communities with entrepreneurial
newspapers.
A national probability survey of mayors and police chiefs supports
the
hypothesis. These findings support content analyses which show
that
corporate newspapers are more vigorous editorially than
entrepreneurial
newspapers. From a broader perspective, these findings may be
interpreted
as supporting theories which hold that the pace of social change
quickens
as social systems become more structurally pluralistic.
Are Corporate Newspapers Less Critical of City Hall?
In their classic 1961 study of newspaper reporters and city
hall, Walter Gieber and Walter Johnson concluded that reporters
"express
... strong support for the programmatic goals of the city hall
sources."[1]
Although reporters profess to represent the interests of their
readers,
they have little contact with them and little knowledge of their
communication needs. In contrast, reporters' frequent contact with
city
hall sources and heavy dependence upon them for news usually leads
reporters to identify strongly with the interests and goals of city
hall.
In fact, Gieber and Johnson argue that "reporters' 'in-group'
loyalty and
other factors make them unwitting adjuncts to city hall."
Since 1961, many other studies have supported these findings
and the more general proposition that messages in the mainstream
mass media
support the interests and goals of established elites and dominant
value
systems, often to the detriment of challenging groups.[2] However,
few
studies have examined whether such support increases or decreases
with
changes in the structure of a news organization. Many researchers
have
assumed, for example, that increasing concentration of ownership
and
"corporatization" of media industries is producing a less vigorous
press D
one that is less likely to criticize established authorities and
ideas.[3]
Critics contend that corporate media D defined here as nearly
synonymous
with a bureaucracy[4] D are less vigorous editorially than their
entrepreneurial counterparts because they are more concerned about
profits
than product quality or information diversity.[5]
Although research suggests that corporate newspapers are much
more profitable than entrepreneurial newspapers,[6] several recent
studies
have found that corporate newspapers actually place less emphasis
on
profits as an organizational goal and more on product quality and
other
nonprofit goals.[7] In addition, the research shows that corporate
newspapers
publish more editorials and letters to the editor critical of
mainstream
groups and ideas.[8] One implication of these findings is that
corporate
newspapers have a greater capacity to promote social change, even
if they,
like all mainstream media, provide broad support for established
authorities and dominant value systems.[9] Nevertheless, many
scholars remain
skeptical of the notion that corporate news organizations are more
critical
of the status quo. They question whether surveys of journalists or
content
analyses of editorial content are sufficient to test the
editorial-vigor
hypothesis.[10] To the knowledge of this researcher, no studies
have attempted
to link news source evaluations of media content to changes in
organizational structure, even though this approach could prove
useful.[11]
The purpose of this paper is to begin filling this void. If
the content of corporate news organizations is more critical of the
status
quo, then a reasonable hypothesis is that this criticism might be
expected
to manifest itself in the perceptions of established or mainstream
news
sources. Although elite awareness is not a necessary condition for
social
change, a theory that excludes human agency or social action may be
faulted
for reifying social structure or for being too reductionistic.[12]
The
assumption here is that social change often takes place when elite
decision-makers are faced with crises or criticism, and theoretical
imagery
which describes the linkage between media content and public policy
outcomes is crucial for the advancement of such theories.
The goal of this study, then, is to answer the following
question: Are corporate newspapers less or more critical of city
hall than
their entrepreneurial counterparts? In contrast to the
conventional
wisdom, this study hypothesizes that public officials in cities
served by
corporate newspapers will perceive those newspapers as being more
critical
of them, their policies and city hall. This hypothesis is grounded
in a
macrosocial theory of organization which holds that the pace of
social
change quickens as an organization (and the community in which it
resides)
becomes more structurally complex. National probability surveys of
daily
newspapers and public officials are employed to test the
hypothesis.
Previous Research
Although no studies have specifically examined the
relationship between organizational structure and source
perceptions of
critical content, a number of studies have looked at the impact of
organizational or community structure on editorial-page content and
journalists' news values. In general, these studies support a
theory which
holds that corporate newspapers are more critical of the status
quo. More
specifically, three generalizations may be advanced:
(1) Newspapers located in large, pluralistic communities
contain more social conflict and criticism of dominant groups and
value
systems than newspapers in small, homogenous communities.[13] A
well-documented research finding is that newspapers in homogenous
communities contain less conflict news and criticism of established
institutions and elites.[14] The amount of social conflict and
criticism is
low in part because the community contains a limited number of
alternative
or challenging groups and organizations.[15] In contrast, social
conflict is a
much more common feature of large, pluralistic communities because
they
contain a much greater variety of special interest groups competing
for
limited social, political and economic resources.[16]
Decision-making in such
communities, which tend to have newspapers that exhibit the
characteristics
of the corporate form of organization, is expected to take into
account
diverse perspectives and views. And although stories and
editorials that
contain conflict or criticism are often viewed as threatening to
the social
order, such stories often play a significant role in contributing
to system
stability because they introduce alternative ideas or innovations
that
enable organizations and institutions to adapt to changing
conditions.[17]
(2) Editorial-page content in newspapers that exhibit the
characteristics of the corporate form of organization is more
critical of
mainstream sources. In a comprehensive review of the literature on
chain
ownership, Demers found that, contrary to the conventional wisdom,
the
weight of the evidence shows that chain newspapers are more, not
less,
vigorous editorially than independently owned newspapers.[18] He
argues that
this may be explained in part by the fact that publishers and
journalists
at chain newspapers have fewer ties to the local power structure,
which in
turn helps to insulate the newspaper from local elites and
parochial
political pressures. He also argues that professional managers,
including
editors, wield more power in corporate organizations, which helps
to
promote a greater emphasis on professionalism often at the expense
of
serving the interests and needs of local elites.
A study by Akhavan-Majid, Rife and Gopinath also supports
this conclusion. They found that Gannett newspapers were far more
likely
than a sample of non-Gannett newspapers to oppose positions taken
by the
White House and the Supreme Court on three major issues.[19]
Demers also
content analyzed a national sample of daily newspapers and found
that the
number and proportion of editorials and letters to the editor which
are
critical of mainstream groups and ideas increased the more a
newspaper
exhibited the characteristics of the corporate form of
organization.[20]
(3) Journalists from corporate newspapers are more likely to
emphasize an active, interpretive, investigative and critical role
for the
news media. Gladney reported that editors at large circulation
newspapers
D which is a good proxy measure of corporate structure[21] D were
more likely
than those at small newspapers to rate "editorial courage"and
"editorial
independence" as primary indicators of newspaper excellence.[22]
Lacy and
Bernstein found that larger newspapers devote a greater percentage
of their
editorial and op-ed space to city issues than did smaller
newspapers.[23] In
another study, Lacy reported that group-owned newspapers allocated
more
space to editorials and op-ed material than their independent
counterparts.[24]
And Akhavan-Majid and Boudreau concluded that editors of
chain-owned
newspapers were more likely than their independent counterparts to
emphasize an active, interpretive, investigative and critical role
for the
press, and support for these values increased as the size of the
chain
increased.[25]
Theoretical Perspective
The theoretical model generating the hypothesis to be tested
in this study assumes that corporate newspapers, like all
mainstream media,
are social institutions that play an important role in maintaining
a social
system (whether for good or bad reasons). Research shows, in fact,
that
mass media are highly responsive to political and economic centers
of power
and promote values generally consistent with capitalist ideals and
elite
interests.[26] The claims of challenging groups are circumscribed
to a large
extent by the opposing interests of those groups in power, and the
media
have little independent capacity to promote the interests of such
groups or
to promote radical social change.
For example, system values, such as importance of the nuclear
family or responsible capitalism, represent a powerful constraint
on the
news production process. A challenge to widely accepted values or
norms
may generate a great deal of criticism from powerful groups and
organizations, as was the case when a college student newspaper
published a
parody issue that some religious leaders thought was
sacrilegious.[27] Media
are also constrained by the need to make a profit, and
historically, this
need was resolved in large part through the creation of the news
beat. By
linking to major institutions and political organizations, news
organizations were (and are today) able to gather news quickly and
efficiently. And news organizations are constrained by
professional norms,
such as the ethic of objectivity, which ritualizes the process of
gathering
the news and defines truth as "getting both sides of the story."
In all
three examples, one major consequence of these constraints is that
the news
tends to reflects the views of those in power.
Nevertheless, the fact that mainstream news organizations
generally support the status quo does not mean those organizations
are
simply lapdogs of the rich and powerful.[28] News media often
criticize those
in power, through news stories that report on social conflict and
through
editorials, columns and letters to the editor. This criticism is
viewed by
some neo-Marxist scholars as producing little or no meaning social
change.
From an absolute standpoint, such critics may be right. However,
in
relative terms, the model here proposes that the transition from
the
entrepreneurial to the corporate form of organization under most
conditions
would be expected to produce a more, not less, vigorous press, for
two
major reasons.
The first, as mentioned earlier, is that corporate newspapers
themselves are more likely to be located in communities that
contain more
social conflict and criticism of dominant groups and values
systems.
Corporate newspapers are a product of a pluralistic
environment,[29] and in
this environment a larger number of groups and organizations
compete for
limited resources, which from a structural perspective means more
criticism
of established authorities, ceteris paribus. The second reason
corporate
newspapers would be expected to be more critical of dominant
institutions
and values is that their publishers and editorial staffs are more
insulated
from special interests and political pressures. The owners and top
managers of corporate newspapers are less likely to grow up in the
community their newspaper serves. They also work at the newspaper
for a
shorter period of time, are oriented more to the larger corporation
than
the local community, and are more strongly committed to
professional norms
and values, which place a higher premium on truth and criticism at
the
expense of local boosterism. Strong ties to a local community
inhibits
criticism of local elites and powerful institutions.
In contrast to the conventional wisdom, the key strength of
the macrosocial model presented here is that it helps to account
for social
change and the role that mass media often play in promoting such
change.
As social systems become more pluralistic, news media generally
become more
critical of traditional ways and established institutions. Media
reflect
to some degree the diversity of the communities they serve, and
increasing
role specialization and professionalization, by-products of
community
growth, insulates journalists from outside pressures. The
increased level
of criticism that emerges from these structural forces contributes
to
discourse that places pressure on existing institutions to change.
Although corporate newspapers increase the probability that
editorial content will be critical of established or mainstream
groups, it
is important to emphasize that structural and cultural change comes
slowly.
The gains of the civil rights and women's movements of the 1960s,
for
example, have not eliminated economic, political and social
disparities
between the races and sexes. Nevertheless, it would be incorrect
to argue
that these movements have been ineffectual or that the mass media
played no
role in promoting their goals. Structural change has occurred
within the
system during the 20th century (e.g., affirmative action standards,
anti-discrimination laws), and media have played an important role
in
promoting and, later, legitimizing such changes.
In sum, the theoretical model outlined above leads to the
expectation that public officials in communities served by daily
newspapers
that exhibit the characteristics of the corporate form of
organization will
be more likely than their counterparts in communities served by
entrepreneurial newspapers to say their newspaper is critical of
them,
their policies and their institution.
Method and Measures
The data for this study are drawn from two national
probability surveys. The independent variable (corporate newspaper
structure) is taken from a 1993 mail survey of the highest ranking
manager
(usually the publisher), the top editor and a police reporter at
250 daily
newspapers randomly selected from Editor & Publisher International
Yearbook
. The mailings to the top managers and editors were personally
addressed,
whereas the mailing to the reporters was simply addressed "police
reporter"
because no list of such names could be found. Of the 750
questionnaires
mailed, responses were obtained from 409 journalists at 223
newspapers, for
a total response rate of 55 percent. There were no significant
differences
in response rates for the three groups (top manager, 52%; top
editor, 56%,
and police reporter, 55%).[30] There also was no significant
correlation
between the type of respondent (top manager, top editor, reporter)
and
newspaper circulation (r=.01).[31]
In 1995, a separate questionnaire was mailed to mayors and
police chiefs in the 223 cities who responded to the first mailing
(total
number mailed = 446). A follow-up mailing that included a 25-cent
incentive also was conducted to boost response rates. A total 341
public
officials, or 76 percent, from 206 of the 223 newspapers responded.
Although individuals responded to the questionnaires, it is
important to point out that the community D not the individual D is
the
unit of analysis. To conduct such an analysis, the findings were
aggregated for each newspaper and for each city that had more than
one
respondent. For continuous measures (i.e., ordinal, interval and
ratio
level measures) and dichotomous nominal measures,[32] the final
value used in
the analysis represented the mean of the ratings given. In cases
where the
values for one of the respondents was missing (e.g., failure to
answer a
question), the values of the other respondent(s) were substituted.
No
nominal variables containing more than three values were included
in this
analysis.
A corporate newspaper index composed of five dimensions and
12 measures was created from the 1993 data set. The index and
dimensions
were derived from a factor analysis of 14 items in a previous
study.[33] The
items included number of full-time employees; number of full-time
reporters
and editors; number of beats or departments;[34] number of
promotions needed
for reporter to become top editor;[35] whether the newspaper was
owned by chain
or group (no=0; yes=1); whether public ownership was possible
(no=0;
yes=1); whether the newspaper was a legally incorporated business
(no=0;
yes=1); whether the newspaper was controlled by one family or
individual
(no=1; yes=0); whether the newspaper has "its own formal, written
code of
ethics"; whether the newspaper has "its own employee handbook of
rules and
procedures"; amount of perceived importance top management places
on
"finding the most efficient way to solve problems"[36]; and whether
"reporters
normally need a bachelor's degree to be considered for employment
at your
newspaper (no=0; yes=1)." The items were standardized before
summing, and
the final index closely resembled a normal curve, with a mean of
"0" and a
standard deviation of "1." The minimum value was -1.4 and the
maximum
value 1.6.
The dependent variable was conceptually defined as news
sources' perceptions of how critical the local daily was of their
policies,
decisions or city hall in general. The operational measure
consisted of a
14-item index (see Table 1), which had a relatively high degree of
internal
reliability (Alpha = .91). The responses for each item were
registered on
five-point scales, and the final index was divided by 14 to convert
it back
into five-point scale for clarity.
---------------------------------
Insert Table 1 about here
---------------------------------
Findings
The data support the hypothesis, which expected that public
officials in cities served newspapers that exhibit the
characteristics of
the corporate form of organization would perceive that newspaper as
being
more critical of them, their policies and city hall. A scatterplot
graphically showing the relationship between perceptions of
critical
content and the corporate newspaper index is shown in Figure 1. As
expected, the relationship is positive and statistically
significant (r =
.26, p<.001). Mayors and police chiefs in cities served by
corporate
newspapers do see those newspapers as being more critical of them
and their
policies. This relationship also held up when controlling
separately or
jointly for job title (mayor, police chief, other), number of city
employees, gender, age, education and political orientation
(liberal vs.
conservative, 7-point scale). The only factor which diminished the
relationship somewhat (partial r = .16, p<.01) was whether the
public
official considered himself or herself a personal friend of the
publisher.
As might be expected, when such a friendship existed, the
evaluations of
the local paper were considerably higher. The corporate newspaper
index
was positively related to the friendship measure (r = .17, p<.01).
-------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 about here
--------------------------------
Summary and Discussion
Contrary to the conventional wisdom, this study hypothesized
that news coverage of city hall becomes more critical as those
newspapers
become more structurally complex, or "corporatized." Corporate
newspapers
are more critical because, it was argued, because they are more
likely to
be located in pluralistic communities, which contain more criticism
of
dominant groups and value systems, and because they are more
insulated from
local political pressures. On the latter point, the owners and
managers of
corporate newspapers have weaker ties to the communities in which
they
work. They are less likely to have grown up there and they are
oriented
more to the corporation than to the community. Corporate
newspapers also
place a premium on professional norms and values because
professionals
generally play a larger role in day-to-day management of those
organizations.
Data collected from national probability surveys of
newspapers and city hall sources supports the hypothesis. Mayors
and
police chiefs in communities served by newspapers that score high
on the
corporate newspaper index report that those newspapers are more
critical of
them, their policies and city hall. This finding supports previous
research which shows corporate newspapers publish a larger number
and
proportion of editorials and letters to the editor that contain
criticism
of mainstream groups and ideas.[37]
A major strength of the structural model presented here is
that it helps to account for social change and the role that mass
media
often play in promoting such change. As social systems become more
pluralistic, news media within those systems become more critical
of
traditional ways and established institutions. Media reflect to
some
degree the diversity of the communities they serve, and increasing
role
specialization and professionalization D by-products of community
and
organizational growth D help to insulate journalists from political
pressures. To be sure, the mass media are agents of social
control, and
social change does not come quickly. Elites resist giving up power
and
resources. However, the criticism that corporate newspapers cannot
publish
news that changes the distribution of power in a social system does
not fit
well with a long term view (e.g., women's, civil rights, and
environmental
movements).
One major assumption undergirding the theory presented in
this paper is that the increased level of criticism generated by
corporate
newspapers is translated into a public discourse that places
increased
pressure on existing institutions to change. To be sure,
additional
research is necessary to establish an empirical linkage between
content and
actual public policy decisions. Future studies should strive to
understand
(1) the processes and methods that elites or mainstream groups and
citizen
or challenging groups use to get the media to serve their own
interests or
goals; (2) the impact that critical content has on these groups and
public
policy;[38] and (3) the impact (if any) that changes in policy,
laws or social
structure has on these groups as well as the media (feedback
effects). The
goal of such research should, ideally, be focused on finding ways
to make
media more responsive to the needs of disadvantaged groups and
those who
have been denied access to status and power.
ENDNOTES
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Dependent Variable
Measures
Mean
SD
Index of Perceived Critical Content Index (Items 1 through 14)
2.9
0.7
How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements?
(5-point scale from strongly disagree [1] to strongly agree [5]
where "3" is neutral)
1. Local daily newspaper coverage of my office/department helps
me achieve my goals.*
3.2
1.2
2. The local daily often writes editorials that criticize city
hall.
3.1
1.1
3. I have a good working relationship with the local daily.*
4.1
0.9
4. The local daily newspaper often writes editorials that
criticize me or my policies.
2.4
1.1
5. During the last year, I have complained to editors about its
coverage of me or my office.
2.7
1.2
How would you rate the local daily in terms of how it covers your
office or department?
(5-point scale with bi-polar adjectives)
6. Is unfair/Is fair*
3.5
1.1
7. Is unbiased/Is biased
3.1
1.0
8. Doesn't tell the whole story / Tells the whole story*
2.7
1.1
9. Is accurate / Is inaccurate
3.1
1.0
10. Is too critical / Is too supportive*
2.7
0.7
11. Takes my concerns into account / Does not take my concerns
into account
3.1
1.0
12. Separates fact and opinion in news stories / Does not
separate fact and opinion
3.3
1.1
13. Reporters can be trusted / Reporters cannot be trusted
3.0
1.2
14. Does a good job covering my office/department / Does a poor
job covering my office
2.9
1.1
*These items were inverted before creating the Critical Index.
Sample size for each measure is 182.
Figure 1. Plot of Critical Index with Corporate
Index
++----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
|
|
| ~ ~
|
4.75+ ~ ~
+
| ~
|
| ~
|
| ~
|
| ~
|
4.275+ ~
+
| ~ ~
|
| ~ ~
|
|
|
| ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~
|
C 3.8+ ~ ~ ~ ~
+
R | ~ ~ ~
|
I | ~~ ~ ~ ~
|
T | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
|
I | ~ ~ ~ ~
|
C 3.325+ ~~y ~ ~
+
A | ~ y
|
L | ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
|
| ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y y y~ ~ ~
~ |
I | ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~
|
N 2.85+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~y ~ y~ ~ ~~
+
D | ~ ~y ~yy ~ ~~ ~
|
E | ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~y~ ~
|
X | ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
|
| ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~
|
2.375+ ~ y ~~
+
| ~ ~~ ~ ~~
|
| ~ ~ ~~ ~
|
| ~ ~~
|
| ~ ~ ~
|
1.9+ ~ y ~ y ~ ~
+
| ~ ~
|
| ~ ~
|
| ~ ~ ~
|
| ~
|
1.425+ ~
+
| ~
|
|
|
| ~
|
++----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+----+
-1.25 -.75 -.25 .25 .75 1.25
-1.5 -1 -.5 0 .5 1
1.5
CORPORATE INDEX
182 cases plotted Zero-Order Correlation
=.26
~ = 1 case Slope=.33, SE=.09, t=3.6
y = 2 cases
[1] Walter Gieber and Walter Johnson, "The City Hall 'Beat': A
Study of Reporter and Source Roles," Journalism Quarterly 38 (1961): 295.
[2] See, e.g., George A. Donohue, Phillip J. Tichenor and Clarice
N. Olien, "Media Evaluations and Group Power," in The News Media in National and
International Conflict, eds. Andrew Arno and Wimal Dissanayake (Boulder:
Westview Press, 1984), 203-215; Herbert J. Gans, Deciding What's News (New York:
Vintage, 1979); Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky, Manufacturing Consent: The
Political Economy of the Mass Media (NY: Pantheon, 1988); David L. Paletz, Peggy
Reichert and Barbara McIntyre, "How the Media Support Local Government
Authority," Public Opinion Quarterly 35 (1971): 80-92; Leon Sigal, Reporters and
Officials (Lexington, MA: Heath, 1973); Harvey Molotch and Marilyn Lester, "News
as Purposive Behavior," American Sociological Review 81 (1974): 235-260; David
L. Paletz and Robert N. Entman, Media Power Politics (NY: Macmillan, 1981), and
Phillip J. Tichenor, George A. Donohue and Clarice N. Olien, Community Conflict
and the Press (Beverly Hills: Sage, 1980).
[3] For a more thorough treatment of this criticism, see David
Pearce Demers, The Menace of the Corporate Newspaper: Fact or Fiction? (Ames:
Iowa State University Press, 1996).
[4] Corporate newspaper structure is conceptually defined as an
organization that has (1) a clear-cut division of labor, (2) a hierarchy of
authority, (3) rules and regulations, (4) formalistic impersonality, (5)
employment based on technical qualifications, (6) rationality, or a high degree
of efficiency, and (7) a complex ownership structure (e.g., chain ownership,
public corporation). For heuristic purposes, the corporate newspaper may be
contrasted with the entrepreneurial newspaper, an ideal type that is
structurally simple and is owned and managed by the same individual or family.
But, ideally, corporate newspaper structure should be measured as a continuous
variable. The first six characteristics listed above are adapted from Peter M.
Blau and Marshall W. Meyer, Bureaucracy in Modern Society, 3rd ed. (NY: Random
House, 1987), 19-22; Max Weber, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization
(NY: The Free Press, 1964); and H. H. Gerth and C. Wright Mills, eds. From Max
Weber (NY: Oxford University Press, 1946). The seventh is taken from David
Pearce Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure and Organizational Goals" (paper
presented at the annual meeting of AEJMC, Atlanta, August 1994).
[5] David Pearce Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure and
Editorial-Page Vigor" (paper presented at the annual meeting of AEJMC,
Washington, D.C., August 1995).
[6] Corporate newspapers are more profitable because they benefit
from economies of scale. For a comprehensive review of studies on this topic
and other studies of organizational structure, see Demers, The Menace of the
Corporate Newspaper.
[7] David Pearce Demers, "Corporate Structure and Emphasis on
Profits and Product Quality at U.S. Daily Newspapers," Journalism Quarterly 68
(1991): 15-26 and David Pearce Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure, Profits
and Organizational Goals," The Journal of Media Economics (in press).
[8] Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure and Editorial-Page
Vigor."
[9] See endnote #2.
[10] Ben H. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, 4th ed. (Boston: Beacon
Press, 1992); James Fallows, Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine American
Democracy (NY: Pantheon Books, 1996); Douglas Kellner, Television and the Crisis
of Democracy (Boulder: Westview Press, 1990); Andrew Kreig, Spiked: How Chain
Management Corrupted America's Oldest Newspaper (Old Saybrook, CT: Peregrine
Press, 1987); John H. McManus, Market-Driven Journalism: Let the Citizen Beware?
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1994); James D. Squires, Read All About It! The
Corporate Takeover of America's Newspapers (NY: Times Books, 1994); and Doug
Underwood, When MBAs Rule the Newsroom: How the Marketers and Managers Are
Reshaping Today's Media (NY: Columbia University Press, 1985).
[11] Surveying sources to test the corporate-vigor hypothesis is
not necessarily superior to surveys of journalists' values or content analyses
of editorial-page content, nor does the source-survey eliminate measurement
error. However, the assumption here is that the strength of a theory is
enhanced when multiple methods, measures and samples are used to test its
propositions. This approach, which has been called constructive replication, is
widely encouraged in the communication and social sciences. See, e.g., C. W.
Kelly, L. J. Chase and R. K. Tucker, "Replication in Experimental Communication
Research: An Analysis," Human Communication Research 5 (1979): 338-342; D. T.
Lykken, "Statistical Significance in Psychological Research," Psychological
Bulletin 21 (1968): 151-159; Roger D. Wimmer and Joseph R. Dominick, Mass Media
Research: An Introduction, 2nd ed. (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1987), pp. 39-40 and
Roger D. Wimmer and L. N. Reid, "Willingness of Communication Researchers to
Respond to Replication Requests," Journalism Quarterly 59 (1982): 317-319.
[12] The assumption here is that those in power are more likely to
be moved to instituting social change when criticized by other mainstream
institutions. A pure structuralist might argue that source awareness is not a
necessary factor for social change to occur, but a model that does not
incorporate social action has a more difficult time specifying the linkage
between organizational structure and social change.
[13] Structural pluralism may be defined as the number and variety
of groups and organizations in a social system. See Phillip J. Tichenor, George
A. Donohue and Clarice N. Olien, Community Conflict and the Press (Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage, 1980), 16.
[14] Warren Breed, "Mass Communication and Sociocultural
Integration," Social Forces 37 (1958): 109-116; George A. Donohue, Clarice N.
Olien and Phillip J. Tichenor, "Reporting Conflict by Pluralism, Newspaper Type
and Ownership," Journalism Quarterly 62 (Autumn 1985): 489-499, 507; Morris
Janowitz, The Community Press in an Urban Setting (New York: Free Press, 1952);
and Arthur J. Vidich and Joseph Bensman, Small Town in Mass Society (Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press, 1968).
[15] Wilson has shown that as population increases, heterogeneity
increases, partly because the probability that there will be enough people
(i.e., critical mass) to form a group that exhibits alternative views increases.
Thomas C. Wilson, "Community Population Size and Social Heterogeneity: An
Empirical Test," American Journal of Sociology 91 (March 1986): 1154-1169.
[16] See, e.g., Wilson, "Community Population Size and Social
Heterogeneity: An Empirical Test."
[17] As Donohue, Tichenor and Olien point out: "Conflict control
may include the generation of conflict situations as well as the direct
dissipation of tension. This principle is widely recognized in the political
realm ... . Media reporting of a clash between scientific opinion on supersonic
transports and governmental policies regarding such technology represents a
generating of conflict. From a systems perspective, such reporting is
functional for maintenance of the total system... . See George A. Donohue,
Phillip J. Tichenor and Clarice N. Olien, "Mass Media Functions, Knowledge and
Social Control," Journalism Quarterly 50 (Winter 1973): 653-654. Also see Lewis
Coser, The Functions of Social Conflict (New York: Free Press, 1956) for a
discussion how conflict may contribute to social stability.
[18] Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure and Editorial-Page
Vigor."
[19] Roya Akhavan-Majid, Anita Rife, and Sheila Gopinath, "Chain
Ownership and Editorial Independence: A Case Study of Gannett Newspapers,"
Journalism Quarterly 68 (spring/summer 1991): 59-66.
[20] Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure and Editorial-Page
Vigor."
[21] Demers, The Menace of the Corporate Newspaper.
[22] George Gladney, "Newspaper Excellence: How Editors of Small
and Large Papers Judge Quality," Newspaper Research Journal 11 (spring 1990):
59-71.
[23] Stephen Lacy and James Berstein, "Daily Newspaper's
Relationship to Publication Cycle and Newspaper Size," Newspaper Research
Journal 9 (spring 1988): 49-58.
[24] Stephen Lacy, "Effects of Groups Ownership on Daily Newspaper
Content," Journal of Media Economics 4 (spring 1991): 35-47.
[25] Roya Akhavan-Majid and Timothy Boudreau, "Chain Ownership,
Organizational Size, and Editorial Role Perceptions," Journalism Quarterly 72
(winter 1995): 863-873.
[26] See, e.g., J. Herbert Altschull, Agents of Power: The Role of
the News Media in Human Affairs (New York: Longman, 1984); W. Lance Bennett,
News: The Politics of Illusion, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, 1988); Stuart Ewen,
Captains of Consciousness: Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer
Culture (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976); Mark Fishman, Manufacturing the News
(Austin: University of Texas Press, 1980); Herbert J. Gans, Deciding What's News
(New York: Vintage, 1979); Todd Gitlin, The Whole World Is Watching: Mass Media
in the Making and Unmaking of the New Left (Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1980); Morris Janowitz, The Community Press in an Urban Setting
(Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1952); David L. Paletz and Robert M. Entman, Media
Power Politics (New York: The Free Press, 1981); Tichenor, Donohue and Olien,
Community Conflict and the Press; Gaye Tuchman, Making News (New York: Free
Press, 1978); Gaye Tuchman, "Mass Media Institutions," in Neil Smelser, ed.
Handbook of Sociology (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1988).
[27] The incident occurred at the University of Minnesota in the
late 1970s and early 1980s.
[28] George A. Donohue, Phillip J. Tichenor and Clarice N. Olien,
"A Guard Dog Perspective on the Role of the Media," Journal of Communication
45(2) (1995): 115-132.
[29] David Pearce Demers, "Structural Pluralism, Intermedia
Competition and the Growth of the Corporate Newspaper in the United States,"
Journalism Monographs 145 (June 1994).
[30] The author of this paper thought the response rate for the
police reporter group would have been the lowest because the mailings were not
personally addressed. This was not the case.
[31] A respondent's position in the organizational hierarchy may
have a substantial effect on perceptions of organizational goals, etc. Had
there been a correlation between role and circulation, it would have been
necessary to control for role when examining the effects of corporate structure.
[32] For dichotomous measures, the proportion is just a special
case of the mean when the values are zero and one.
[33] For more detailed information about the factor analysis, see
Demers, The Menace of the Corporate Newspaper.
[34] "In which of the following beats or areas does your newspaper
employ at least one full-time reporter? (Please check all that apply):
business, sports, book reviews, arts, real estate, health, national, state,
food, home, science, technology, metro, international, lifestyles, travel,
fashion and education."
[35] "For a general assignment reporter to become the top editor of
the newspaper, how many promotions typically would he or she have to receive?
(For example, if a newspaper employs assistant city editors, a city editor and
an editor-in-chief, the total number of promotions needed to become the top
editor is three.)"
[36] Respondents were asked to rate 22 items in terms of the amount
of importance top management places on them. Responses were recorded on a
7-point scale ranging from "not very important" to "extremely important."
[37] Demers, "Corporate Newspaper Structure and Editorial-Page
Vigor."
[38] A plethora of research exists on individual effects, but
communication researchers have sorely neglected group and social processes. One
exception is David L. Protess, Fay Lomax Cook, Jack C. Doppelt, James S. Ettema,
Margaret T. Gordon, Donna R. Leff, and Peter Miller, The Journalism of Outrage:
Investigative Reporting and Agenda-Building in America (NY: Guilford Press,
1991).
|
