Getting the News: How International Correspondents Choose Sources
Getting the News: How International Correspondents Choose Sources
Getting the News: How Japanese and American
International Correspondents Choose Their Sources
Beverly Horvit, doctoral candidate
University of Missouri-Columbia
1303 Jean Rae
Columbia, MO 65203
(573) 874-0949
[log in to unmask]
April 1997
A paper submitted to the international division of the Association for Education
in Journalism and Mass Communication.
Getting the News: How Japanese and American
International Correspondents Choose Their Sources
Abstract: A questionnaire was used to compare the source dependency of Japanese
correspondents in Washington and American correspondents in Tokyo. The study was
to help answer the question of who sets the media agenda. It found that the
Japanese rely on government sources significantly more than the Americans.
Although the American and Japanese journalists shared professional concerns such
as having credible, accessible sources, the Japanese were more likely to choose
a source for partisan reasons.
Beverly Horvit, doctoral candidate
University of Missouri-Columbia
(573) 874-0949
[log in to unmask]
A paper submitted to the International Communication Division of the Association
for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, April 1997.
Getting the News: How International Correspondents Choose Sources
Introduction and Literature Review
No one can have direct knowledge of the full range of international affairs, so
that information generally reaches individuals through the media.[1] As a
result, Bernard C. Cohen argues, "the world looks different to different people,
depending not only on their personal interests, but also on the map that is
drawn for them by the writers, editors, and publishers of the papers they
read."[2] When the nations involved are the United States and Japan -- two
economic powerhouses with strained trade relations and a security alliance that
provides the "foundation of peace, security and stability in the Asian Pacific
region"[3] -- the work of international correspondents becomes that much more
important.
A major factor influencing the images and information imparted by the media is
the journalists' sources. This paper examines the sourcing practices of American
and Japanese correspondents to augment the literature on how source dependency
influences media content. This examination also relates to agenda-setting theory
as it has evolved to include the question of who sets the media agenda.
Shoemaker and Reese define sources as "external suppliers of raw material,
whether speeches, interviews, corporate reports, or government hearings."[4]
Journalists are dependent on sources because, without them, reporters would have
little to report.
Gans and Sigal found that official, government sources were among those most
frequently quoted by the American media they studied.[5] Sigal concluded that
reporters rely mainly on "routine channels of newsgathering," such as official
proceedings, press releases, press conferences and other staged events.[6]
Several researchers have found that accessibility, power and proximity are key
issues in source dependency. "Organizations' regular office hours and full-time
staff members make it easy for journalists to access information."[7] In
addition, Gans finds that the "economically and politically powerful can obtain
easy access to, and are sought out by, journalists; those who lack power are
harder to reach by journalists and are generally not sought out until their
activities produce social or moral disorder news."[8] Proximity also affects
sourcing practices. Martin found that the newspaper closest to the issue at hand
"not only carried a wider variety or greater range of sources, but inversely,
the news organization farthest from the event community tended to cite only high
level and official sources."[9]
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
attribution.[10] He also found that news reported on the trade issue reflected
the point of view of the country for whom the journalists were writing.[11] In
their study, Budner and Krauss found that Americans are more likely to cite
sources[12] and that "those Japanese news stories that cited substantive
arguments are far more likely to be one-sided ..."[13] In a study of
international correspondents in Washington, Ghorpade found that other media
were rated among the most regularly used sources, primarily because of staff and
budgetary restraints.[14]
Examining journalists' use of sources is key to understanding media content and
the media's agenda. The basic agenda-setting hypothesis stated that the pattern
of news coverage influences public perceptions of what are the important issues
of the day.[15] By the 1980s, agenda-setting research had evolved to include
questions about who sets the media's agenda. McCombs likens exploring the issue
to peeling an onion: "The outermost layer is the array of sources routinely used
by journalists to obtain news."[16]
Some scholars believe pressure groups and special interest groups sometimes
push an issue on the media agenda.[17] In addition, the elite media appear to
be able to set the agenda for others.[18] In their work, Shoemaker and Reese
identified several major influences on media content: individual media workers,
media routines, the news organization, external forces and ideology.[19] Who
journalists choose as sources may be influenced by all of the above.
Some research on sourcing practices has been explicitly linked to
agenda-setting theory. One study found that "a prominent news source can have a
major influence on the subsequent media agenda, but the selective processes and
news judgments of journalists also play a significant part ..."[20] In another
study, VanSlyke Turk and Franklin found that U.K. journalists were more likely
to use second-hand information from government than were Americans. [21] They
suggested newspaper staffs in the United Kingdom were more dependent because
they had fewer resources and that American journalists are more prejudiced
against relying on others.[22]
To examine the source dependency of American and Japanese international
correspondents, we must first know who they are and how they do their jobs. At
this point, more research is available about the Americans than the Japanese. In
neither case is the information definitive.
In 1995, U.S. media organizations had 303 accredited correspondents (not all
full time) covering Japan, of whom 166 were American.[23] Neilan says the "new"
correspondent "travels more in Japan, less in the regions than predecessors and
is probably a bilingual university graduate, a specialist in economics or
technology...[24] He estimates the median age is the early 30s.[25] Of the
American journalists working in Japan whom Hess surveyed, 49 percent said they
had no Japanese-language proficiency, while 28 percent said they were able to
conduct a serious interview in Japanese.[26] As for how the correspondents do
their jobs, most reports have focused on how non-Japanese are often excluded
from the Japanese kisha kurabu, or press clubs, but do not explain how the
journalists find other sources or how the language barrier affects their work.
Even less information is available about Japanese journalists working in
Washington. However, some research indicates Japanese journalists overall are
more likely to subscribe to self-censorship. The Japanese live in a Confucian
culture that places great value on the group over the individual and on harmony
over conflict. In such a culture, the "Japanese media attempt to preserve
harmony in society by refraining from disturbing the status quo"[27] and
"senior Japanese newspaper editors view themselves as public guardians,
entrusted to help maintain a disciplined society with a maximum of order and a
minimum of conflict."[28]
Socialization can especially be seen in the hiring and training process, where
systematic early recruitment allows for a long period of common
socialization.[29] Kim says loyalty to one's organization and its norms is also
reinforced by "the virtual absence of lateral entry into or mobility between
news organizations; the practice of permanent employment with a single employer;
and the traditional norms concerning 'group orientation' and 'conformity.' "[30]
From this literature review, it is clear that little systematic research has
been conducted on international correspondents, their sourcing practices and
how the media agenda is set abroad. In this paper, the following research
questions will be addressed:
Research Question No. 1: Whom do the American and Japanese correspondents
perceive to be their most important, or most often used, sources and how do
those sources differ? Research Question No. 2: Is the Japanese correspondents'
use of official, government sources significantly greater than that of the
American correspondents? Research Question No. 3: How much do Japanese and
American correspondents use other media as news sources, and is there a
significant difference in their usage? Research Question No. 4: How do Japanese
and American foreign correspondents compare in their use of Japanese vs.
American news sources? Is there balance in their use of sources from both
countries? Research Question No. 5: Does a source's ideology or a
correspondent's perceived duty to country influence the Japanese correspondents'
decisions about which sources to use more than the Americans' decisions?
Research Question No. 6: What do Japanese and American correspondents perceive
to be the most important influences on their decisions to use news sources, and
how do their perceptions differ? Research Question No. 7: Is there a correlation
between American journalists' Japanese-language proficiency and the types of
sources they use? Research Question No. 8: To what extent do correspondents'
news organizations influence the journalists' use of sources?
Methodology
The majority of studies testing the concept of source dependency appear to be
content analyses, which can provide hard, empirical data about the types of
sources journalists quote and the frequency with which those sources are quoted.
However, a content analysis can say nothing about why journalists use the
sources they do. For a deeper understanding, a questionnaire supported by
structured interviews was chosen as the methodology for this research.
The questionnaire was designed to highlight attitudinal and other differences
in how full-time Japanese and American international correspondents approach and
conduct their jobs when working in the capitals of Washington and Tokyo. The
questionnaire was modeled primarily after a 1992 survey conducted by Powers and
Fico, who examined the influences on reporters' use of sources at elite U.S.
newspapers.[31] Although many of the same questions were used, others were
added to make a distinction between the use of Japanese and American sources
and to examine the influence of nationality and language.
The journalists were asked in the first section of the questionnaire to
indicate on a five-point, interval scale how often 27 different sources were
used in their news stories. [32] In the second part of the questionnaire,
closed-ended questions asked the journalists to indicate on a five-point,
interval scale how often 24 various influences affected their decision to use
particular sources.[33] The questionnaire was administered only in English.
However, Japanese journalists must pass rigorous entrance examinations, which
include tests of English proficiency, to even be considered for employment at
Japanese newspapers, so this was not expected to affect participation.
Using information in the USIA Directory of Foreign Correspondents,
questionnaires were mailed to all 76 Japanese news correspondents based in
Washington. Unlike the United States Information Agency, however, Japan's
Foreign Press Center declined to supply a list of American correspondents in
Japan. Instead, a list of American correspondents was provided by Professor
Kliesch at Ohio University, who conducted a 1990 census of American journalists
abroad,[34] and updated with phone calls. Seventy-seven full-time correspondents
were identified and mailed questionnaires.
The first mailing of the questionnaires was in June 1996, a postcard reminder
was sent a month later, and a second mailing was conducted in August 1996. Of
the 76 questionnaires mailed to Washington, 25, nearly 33 percent, were
returned. One survey was not usable, however, because the correspondent listed
his nationality as non-Japanese. Of the questionnaires sent to Japan, 32 were
returned, for a response rate of nearly 42 percent. Of the 32 questionnaires
returned, three were not included in the quantitative analysis, however, because
they were completed by either non-Americans or correspondents who were not full
time.
The primary statistical tool for this research was the t-test, which was used
to compare the mean scores of the Japanese and Americans. In all the statistical
tests used, missing data were excluded from the analysis.
Results
Questionnaires were received from correspondents from four of Japan's five
national newspapers, the Asahi Shimbun, Mainichi Shimbun, Nihon Keizai Shimbun
and Yomiuri
Table 1
Demographics
American correspondents
Japanese correspondents
Gender
23 men, 6 women
22 men, 2 women
Age (mean)
39.071
39.958
Education level
11 with bachelor's degrees,
18 with master's degrees
16 with bachelor's degrees,
8 with master's degrees
Years as reporter (mean)
14.259
16.037
Number with politics beat
12
18
Number with economics beat
19
10
Number with science/technology beat
12
2
Number with diplomacy beat
9
15
Number with other beats
14
4
Number of years on current beat (mean)
4.434
8.208
How many years with current news organization (mean)
9.060
15.750
How many years covered Tokyo/Washington (mean, median)
5.460, 3.500
2.266, 2
Language ability (mean) 0= no language skills, 1=able to order a meal, 2=able to
understand TV news, 3=able to conduct an interview
2.131
2.913
Shimbun, as well as several other Japanese news organizations. The Americans who
completed the questionnaire worked for such organizations as the Associated
Press, Bloomberg Business News, Business Week, CBS News, the Christian Science
Monitor, Forbes, Knight-Ridder Newspapers, the Los Angeles Times, the New York
Times and the Washington Post. Questionnaires were also completed by journalists
with more specialized news organizations. For more demographic information, see
Table 1 above.
Research Question No. 1: Whom do the American and Japanese correspondents
perceive to be their most important, or most often used, sources and how do
those sources differ?
The correspondents were asked, "How often do you use the following sources,"
and given a list of 27 different types of sources in Part 1 of the
questionnaire. Of the sources listed, the American correspondents gave their
news organization's morgue, library or reference file the highest rating, a mean
score of 4.241 on a scale of 5=always use such sources and 1=never use such
sources. For the Japanese correspondents, the top-rated source was news
conferences called
Table 2
Ranking the Use of News Sources
American Correspondents
Japanese Correspondents
Source
Mean
Source
Mean
1. Your news organization's morgue, library or reference file
4.241
1. News conferences called by governmental authorities
4.458
2. Japanese academic, scientific or other experts in specific fields
3.931
2. English-speaking sources
4.250
3. Japanese-speaking sources
3.914
3. News releases issued by groups or organizations
4.167
4. English-speaking sources
3.879
4. American academic, scientific or other experts in specific fields
4.125
5. Stories from other reporters/news organizations
3.793
5. Material issued by governmental bodies or agencies
4.083
6. Online databases
3.621
6. American elected or appointed governmental officials, their staffs
3.958
6. Japanese business leaders, their staffs, public relations officials
3.621
7. Formal meetings of governmental bodies or organizations
3.792
8. Material issued by governmental bodies or agencies
3.534
8. Japanese-speaking sources
3.750
9. American academic, scientific or other experts in specific fields
3.448
9. Documented sources such as census reports or academic studies
3.625
10. Documented sources such as census reports or academic studies
3.414
10. Stories from other reporters/news organizations
3.583
11. Ordinary Japanese citizens
3.321
11. Online databases
3.542
12. Japanese elected or appointed governmental officials, their staffs
3.310
12. Material issued by governmental bodies or agencies
3.500
12. Material issued by governmental bodies or agencies
3.310
12. News releases issued by nongovernmental groups
3.500
14. American business leaders, their staffs or public relations officials
2.931
14. Japanese elected or appointed governmental officials, their staffs
3.435
15. News conferences called by governmental authorities
2.862
15. Your news organization's morgue, library or reference file
3.292
16. News releases issued by governmental groups
2.793
16. American interest groups
3.087
17. News releases issued by nongovernmental groups
2.759
17. News conferences called by American interest groups
3.042
18. Formal meetings of governmental bodies
2.655
18. Japanese academic, scientific or other experts in specific fields
3.000
19. Japanese interest groups
2.643
19. Official law enforcement activities
2.917
20. American elected or appointed governmental officials, their staffs
2.621
20. Anonymous sources
2.833
21. Anonymous sources
2.584
21. American business leaders, their staffs or public relations officials
2.792
22. Official law enforcement activities
2.296
22. Japanese business leaders, their staffs or public relations officials
2.750
23. News conferences called by Japanese interest groups
2.241
23. News conferences called by Japanese interest groups
2.583
24. Marches, protests or other events staged by activists
2.214
24. Ordinary American citizens
2.542
25. American interest groups
2.069
25. Japanese interest groups
2.304
26. News conferences called by American interest groups
2.034
26. Marches, protests or other events staged by activists
2.208
27. Ordinary American citizens
1.636
27. Ordinary Japanese citizens
2.087
by governmental authorities, which had a mean score of 4.458. For the complete
rankings, see Table 2 on previous page.
What is immediately striking about the rank ordering is the Japanese
correspondents' greater use of government sources. Although the Americans cited
only one government source among their top 10 most-used sources, the Japanese
correspondents included four -- government news conferences, government-issued
material, American elected or appointed governmental officials, and formal
meetings of governmental bodies or organizations. The correspondents' use of
government sources will be examined further in the next section, but these
results already suggest the potential the American government has for shaping
the Japanese correspondents' agenda.
Correspondents from both countries also indicate they frequently use text,
rather than individuals, as sources. Five of the Americans' top 10
most-frequently used sources involve databases, stories in other media and other
documents. Four of the Japanese correspondents' most-often used sources include
news releases, stories in other media and other documents. Whether the
correspondents choose these sources based on their perceived credibility and/or
their accessibility is an issue to consider.
Finally, it is interesting to note that the Japanese and Americans rate nearly
identical sources as the least frequently used. Neither apparently puts much
stock in marches, protests or other events staged by activists; Japanese
interest groups; or citizens of their own country. Of course, the journalists
may not cover marches and other protests that frequently because many of those
protests are directed at a domestic audience.
Table 3
The use of government sources
T-tests for independent samples (A = American, J = Japanese)
Variable
Number of Cases
Mean
Standard Error
t value
Degrees of Freedom
2-tailed Probability
1-a American gov't officials, staff
A - 29
J - 24
2.6207
3.9583
.152
.195
-5.49
51
.000*
1-b Japanese gov't officials, staff
A - 29
J - 23
3.3103
3.4348
.186
.207
-.45
50
.657
1-k Formal meetings of gov't. organizations
A - 29
J - 24
2.6552
3.7917
.194
.147
-4.51
51
.000*
1-m News conferences called by government authorities
A - 29
J - 24
2.8621
4.4583
.203
.134
-6.27
51
.000*
1-r Material
issued by government bodies or agencies
A - 29
J - 24
3.5345
4.0833
.140
.158
-2.60
51
.012*
1-t Government news releases
A - 29
J - 24
2.7931
4.1667
.182
.177
-5.35
51
.000*
Research Question No. 2: Is the Japanese correspondents' use of official,
government sources significantly greater than that of the American
correspondents?
T-tests were conducted to compare the American and Japanese mean scores on six
variables, all of which mentioned the word government. The correspondents were
asked, "How often do you use the following sources?" on a scale on which 1=never
and 5=always. On each of the variables tested, the Japanese correspondents rated
their use of government sources higher than the American correspondents did. On
all but one of the variables -- Japanese government officials (1-b) -- the
differences in the correspondents' scores were statistically significant.
Overall, the hypothesis that Japanese correspondents would use official,
governmental sources more often than the Americans was supported. (See Table 3
above.)
The hypothesis also was supported in interviews. The Japanese journalists said
they considered using government sources a key part of their jobs. "Of course,
it's encouraged," said Kohei Murayama, who covers economics and diplomacy for
the Kyodo News Service.[35] "I don't know any organization in Japan that
discourages it (using government sources)," said Eiji Toshi, a correspondent for
the Jiji Press news service.[36] Toshiro Ikemura, a correspondent for the
Yomiuri Shimbun, said he considers it "very, very important" to go to news
conferences.[37] He said he encourages the younger correspondents to attend the
daily briefings so the correspondents will "know how American diplomacy works."
Although he encourages attendance at government news conferences, "That does not
mean we write a story every time," Ikemura said. Yasuhiko Ota, a correspondent
for the business newspaper Nihon Keizai Shimbun, called government "the primary
source of news."[38]
To the American correspondents interviewed, on the other hand, using government
sources was considered much less important. Only one of the eight journalists
interviewed said his news organization encouraged the use of government sources.
Most said their news organizations had no policy. "Being so far from the office,
I don't get a lot of direction, and certainly no one is telling me or guiding me
to use certain sources or avoid others," said Michael Lev, the Chicago Tribune's
Tokyo bureau chief and lone correspondent there.[39] Said Michael Zielenziger,
Knight-Ridder's correspondent in Tokyo: "My office does not issue 'rules' on how
one reports. Obviously, the views of any government are not irrelevant, but they
are not the Bible either."[40] Of the American correspondents interviewed, only
Dennis Normile of Electronic Business Asia said his news organization encourages
the use of government sources. "Government policy is very important," said
Normile, who reported that he has had no problems arranging interviews with
mid-ranking officials at various government agencies.[41]
Lev said he uses government sources, including news releases and news
conferences, but his coverage is "rarely dictated by them." Said Barry Petersen
of CBS News: "As for government sources, we use them extensively when it's
appropriate to the story. Sometimes, an outside expert (Japanese or American)
may be better and we seek that person out. Each story is different, so -- alas
-- it always seems to vary."[42]
The differences in the American and Japanese journalists' reported use of
government sources likely stems partly from how journalism is practiced in their
home countries and partly from the practices of government.
The Japanese are accustomed to the press club system in Japan in which every
major governmental agency or business group has its own press clubs, or kisha
kurabu. The clubs "function as almost exclusive channels of information
regarding the pertinent institutions and it is within the confines of the club
walls that much of the reporter/official interaction takes place."[43] The kisha
kurabu tend to encourage uniformity in reporting and discourage critical
reporting. Under this system, the Japanese journalists have come to depend on
the Japanese government as a news source. Given this reliance on government at
home, it is not surprising that Japanese correspondents depend heavily on
government sources abroad as well.
Unlike their Japanese counterparts, the Americans have not worked under an
extensive press club system in the United States. Although there has been plenty
of research that indicates American journalists are reliant on official
sources,[44] they also have been found to be more independent (than British
journalists, at least) and more prejudiced against relying on others for help
with news gathering.[45] How might those two different traits apply to
Americans working in Tokyo? Access to government officials is likely to be a
factor, as is the type of stories the correspondents cover.
In their interviews, the American correspondents generally said they had less
access to Japanese government sources because they are not members of the kisha
clubs. Lev said the American correspondents are invited to two English-language
briefings a week at the Foreign Ministry but are not encouraged to attend the
Japanese briefings. Knight-Ridder's Zielenziger described the difference between
access to government officials in Tokyo and access in the United States as
"night and day." Zielenziger said:
Japanese officials are usually not available to foreign reporters, and often
only
available to the ... press club that covers that ministry. Sometimes, with
sufficient
yelling and screaming, foreigners get access to top officials, but it is quite
rare. On
the other hand, powerful but invisible bureaucrats are sometimes helpful in
explaining ministry policies, etc. ... but the notion of picking up the phone
and
doing a telephone interview with a Japanese bureaucrat ... that is almost
impossible.
He said American journalists are often actively kept away from news conferences
held for the domestic media.
Other journalists report some improvement in access to Japanese government
officials. Petersen of CBS said access to government officials in Japan seems no
better or worse than access in the United States and reported some "minor
loosening" in American journalists' access to the press clubs. But, he said,
"It's still uphill. When a high American official (secretary of defense or such)
visits the prime minister ... the U.S. Embassy battles to get us in for the
photo op and is usually successful. For the other, Japanese-only events, forget
it." If, overall, American correspondents find access to Japanese government
officials difficult to obtain, it is little wonder they report using those
sources less often than do the Japanese correspondents and it is less likely the
Japanese government influences the correspondents' agenda.
Research Question No. 3: How much do Japanese and American correspondents use
other media as news sources, and is there a significant difference in their
usage?
On a scale of 1=never (use the source) to 5=always (use the source), the
American correspondents' mean score for how often they used stories from other
reporters/news organizations was 3.7931, compared with the Japanese
correspondents' mean score of 3.5833. The mean scores fell between 3=about as
always as not (use the source) and 4=very often (use the sources). A t-test
found that the difference between the Japanese and American mean scores was not
statistically significant. Nevertheless, stories from other reporters/news
organizations were among the top 10 most frequently used sources for both the
Japanese and American correspondents.
Weinberg said reading the local Japanese newspapers and magazines helps him
"find some stories before they percolate into the foreign press." Lev said his
Japanese editorial assistants helps him read the Japanese newspapers and
magazines, and Normile said a part-time Japanese staffer in his office searches
Japanese-language databases. Shinichiro Sakikawa of Hokkaido Shimbun said, "We
are always cross-checking the sources, such as Reuters, AP, Washington Post, New
York Times and L.A. Times, CNN, ABC, NBC News in order to be objective."
Table 5
T-tests for paired samples -- The American Correspondents
Variable
Number of Cases
Mean
Difference in mean
Standard Error
t value
Degrees of Freedom
2-tailed Probability
1-a American gov't officials, staff
1-b Japanese gov't officials, staff
29
2.6207
3.3103
-.6897
.165
-4.17
28
.000*
1-c Japanese business leaders, staffs
1-d American business leaders, staffs
29
3.6207
2.9310
.6897
.141
4.88
28
.000*
1-e Japanese interest groups
1-f American interest groups
28
2.6429
2.0714
.5714
.149
3.83
27
.001*
1-g Japanese citizens
1-h American citizens
22
3.0455
1.6364
1.4091
.225
6.27
21
.000*
1-i American academic, scientific experts
1-j Japanese academic, scientific experts
29
3.4483
3.9310
-.4828
.162
-2.98
28
.006*
1-n News conferences called by Japanese interest groups
1-o News conferences called by American interest groups
29
2.2414
2.0345
.2069
.135
1.53
28
.136
Research Question No. 4: How do Japanese and American foreign correspondents
compare in their use of Japanese vs. American news sources? Is there balance in
their use of sources from both countries?
To examine this issue, two series of t-tests were conducted. The first examined
whether there was a statistically significant difference in the American
correspondents' reported use of Japanese vs. American sources. The second series
looked for significant differences in how the Japanese correspondents rated
their use of Japanese and American sources. For each variable tested, the
correspondents were asked "How often do you use the following sources?"
Table 6
T-tests for paired samples -- Japanese correspondents
Variable
N
Mean
(Difference) mean
Standard error
t value
D.F.
2-tailed probability
1-a American gov't officials, staff
1-b Japanese gov't officials, staff
23
3.9565
3.4348
.5217
.250
2.08
22
.049*
1-c Japanese business leaders, staff
1-d American business leaders, staff
24
2.7500
2.7917
-.0417
.153
-.27
23
.788
1-e Japanese interest groups
1-f American interest groups
23
2.3043
3.0870
-.7826
.177
-4.41
22
.000*
1-g Japanese citizens
1-h American citizens
23
2.0870
2.4783
-.3913
.137
-2.86
22
.009*
1-i American academic, scientific experts
1-j Japanese academic, scientific experts
24
4.1250
3.000
1.1250
.211
5.33
23
.000*
1-n Japan. interest groups' news conferences
1-o American interest groups' news conferences
24
2.5833
3.0417
-.4583
.225
-2.04
23
.053 *for one-tailed test
In the first series of t-tests, the correspondents' responses to questions
about six American sources were compared to their responses on six equivalent
Japanese sources. In each pair of questions, the American correspondents
indicated they used the Japanese source more often than the American source.
(See Table 5 on previous page.) Intuitively, this makes sense. For
correspondents working in Tokyo, there should be more available Japanese sources
than American sources. When the difference between the mean scores was tested
for statistical significance with a t-test, the differences proved significant
in all but one case -- news conferences called by Japanese interest groups vs.
conferences called by American interest groups.
In the second series of t-tests, the Japanese correspondents' responses to the
same pairs of questions were analyzed. (See Table 6 on previous page.) For each
pair of questions, the Japanese correspondents indicated they were more likely
to use the American source than the equivalent Japanese source. Again, this
makes sense. These correspondents are working in Washington, so it's logical
that they would be more likely to use American sources than Japanese sources,
who are less likely to be available. The differences in the mean scores were
statistically significant for all but one pairing, that comparing the use of
American vs. Japanese business sources.
Although the results suggest the correspondents' use of Japanese vs. American
sources is not balanced, the research method is too limited to make judgments
about the significance of that finding. Numbers alone cannot tell the story. Ken
Belson of Bloomberg Business News, for example, made an interesting point on his
questionnaire: "It's a tough case for me because I cover macroeconomic news. I
depend on government bureaucrats for stats, economists for opinions, business
leaders for both. Because I'm on deadline, the quickest, wittiest and most
accurate gets quoted. Often these are NOT Japanese." In addition, from a
journalistic standpoint, not every story written by an American or Japanese
correspondent needs to include both American and Japanese sources.
Unfortunately, the questionnaire design did not allow correspondents to
distinguish between the types of sources they use for various types of stories.
Said Lev: "My choice of source depends on the story -- sometimes heavily
academic or government, sometimes heavily business or man on the street. My
guidelines: seek out the experts, use Americans/foreigners only for perspective,
not as a lazy substitute for the Japanese, be honest and objective, serve the
reader and the truth."
Table 7
Sources and ideology
T-tests for independent samples (A = American, J = Japanese)
Variable
Number of Cases
Mean
Standard Error
t value
Degrees of Freedom
2-tailed Probability
2-3 Agree with source's position
A -29
J- 24
2.0345
2.9167
.161
.169
-3.76
51
.000*
2-6 Nationality of source
A- 29
J - 24
2.3793
1.1967
.224
.190
1.54
51
.121
2-16 Political stance of source
A- 28
J-24
1.8214
2.5000
.171
.170
-2.79
50
.007*
2-20 Responsibility to country
A - 27
J - 24
1.7778
2.5417
.202
.225
-2.53
49
.015*
Research Question No. 5: Does a source's ideology or a correspondent's perceived
duty to country influence the Japanese correspondents' decisions about which
sources to use more than the Americans' decisions?
Perhaps more important than whether the correspondents balance the use of
American and Japanese sources is whether there is balance in the viewpoints of
the sources tested. To examine this issue, t-tests were used to compare the
Japanese and American correspondents' responses on how often the following items
influence their use of sources: agree with the source's position, nationality of
the source, political stance of the source and responsibility to country. (See
Table 7 above.)
On all but one of the four variables -- nationality of the source -- the
Japanese correspondents' mean scores were significantly higher with p < .01. The
difference between the American and Japanese correspondents' responses on the
nationality of the source was not statistically significant. The comments of
Peter Landers, an Associated Press correspondent in Tokyo, illustrate how some
correspondents may have interpreted the question. He said the nationality of the
source never influences a decision whether to use a source, "unless, of course,
the subject is one on which a certain nationality is in a better position to
speak."
In an interview, Forbes' Weinberg said: "In selecting a story, its relevance to
our readers is a top priority. Beyond that, I try to tell the story the way I
see it regardless of who it might offend or hurt. I definitely would not change
my approach because of some negative impact in the U.S." Similarly, Rob Magee of
CONUS Communications said, "Whether the impact will be positive or negative for
one side or the other does not enter into the decision-making process as much as
1) Is it news our viewers will care about; 2) Is there video? That's about
it."[46] Petersen said, "Whether stories have a positive or negative impact is
something, I must confess, I gave up wondering a long time ago."
As for the Japanese, Toshi, for example, said he worries about the effect of
his reporting on financial markets and tries to be careful not to distort
officials' comments. But Ota said readers, including some Japanese officials,
think his stories in the Nihon Keizai Shimbun are too biased toward the American
side. Why? "I understand my role is to carry the voice of the United States to
Japan," Ota said. Murayama's response was more like what one would expect from
an American: "Do I write a story if it hurts Japan? I don't care about that. I
just write the facts."
Despite the fact that their comments varied, the hypothesis that the Japanese
would be more influenced by such factors as the source's political stance,
whether they agree with the source and responsibility to country was supported
by the statistical tests. Although those results support the findings by Budner
and Krauss that "Japanese news stories that cited substantive arguments are far
more likely to be one-sided than equivalent American reports,"[47] one must be
careful not to draw overly broad conclusions. One cannot conclude that the
Japanese journalists are quick to choose sources based on whether they agree
with the source, the source's political stance and their feeling of
responsibility to country. They may be more quick to do so than American
journalists, but, on average, the Japanese journalists did not say those factors
"always influence" or "very often influence" their sourcing decisions. Instead,
the mean score for their responses fell between "rarely influences" and
"influences about as often or not." In addition, not all journalists, whether
they are Japanese or American, are alike.
Another reason to be wary of drawing too broad a conclusion from the results is
that correspondents may have interpreted the questions differently. "If you're
doing a political story and need to talk to the opposition party, obviously the
political stand is important," one American correspondent said. "But my answer
does not mean I have my own personal political agenda."
Research Question No. 6: What do Japanese and American correspondents perceive
to be the most important influences on their decisions to use news sources, and
how do their perceptions differ?
The correspondents were asked, "How often do the following items influence your
use of sources" and given a list of 24 items on Part II of the questionnaire.
The responses could range from 1=Never influences to 5=Always influences. (See
Table 8 on following page.)
For both the Japanese and American correspondents, credibility was ranked as
the most important influence on their decisions to use news sources. The
Americans' mean score was 4.586, compared with 4.708 for the Japanese. Their
mean scores fell between 4=Very often influences and 5=Always influences. In
addition to credibility, both the Japanese and Americans also ranked the
following factors among the top 10: responsibility to yourself, accessibility of
source, responsibility to your news organization, cooperativeness of source,
articulateness of the source, the prominence of the source and time pressure.
The commonality of the Japanese and American responses indicates that they share
some of the same professional values and concerns.
Table 8
Ranking the influences on correspondents' use of sources
American Correspondents
Japanese Correspondents
Influence
Mean score
Influence
Mean score
1. Credibility of source
4.586
1. Credibility of source
4.708
2. Responsibility to yourself
4.375
2. Articulateness of source
4.250
3. Accessibility of source
3.931
3. Responsibility to yourself
4.083
4. Responsibility to your news organization
3.920
4. Personal connection with source
3.609
5. Cooperativeness of source
3.862
5. Time pressure
3.542
6. Articulateness of source
3.759
6. Accessibility of source
3.500
7. Prominence of source
3.655
7. Cooperativeness of source
3.333
8. Time pressure
3.586
8. Prominence of source
3.042
9. The source speaks English
3.052
9. Responsibility to your news organization
2.958
10. The source speaks Japanese
2.768
10. You agree with source's position
2.917
11. Personal ambition to succeed
2.760
11. Personal ambition to succeed
2.667
12. Personal connection with the source
2.759
12. You like the source
2.583
13. You like the source
2.621
13. Responsibility to your country
2.542
14. Nationality of the source
2.379
14. Political stance of source
2.500
15. You agree with source's position
2.034
14. Readers' response to the source
2.500
16. Readers' response to the source
1.926
16. Fear of lawsuits
2.250
17. Political stance of source
1.821
17. The source speaks English
2.042
18. Responsibility to your country
1.778
17. The source speaks Japanese
2.042
19. Fear of lawsuits
1.690
19. Nationality of the source
1.917
20. Pressure from managers/editors
1.655
20. Pressure from managers/editors
1.833
21. Gender of the source
1.414
21. Pressure from peers/colleagues
1.792
22. Pressure because of news organization's politics/policy
1.310
22. Pressure because of news organization's politics/policy
1.583
23. Pressure because of news organization's financial interest
1.241
23. Gender of the source
1.458
24. Pressure from peers/colleagues
1.172
24. Pressure because of news organization's financial interest
1.333
Among the Americans' top 10 influences also were whether the source speaks
English and whether the source speaks Japanese. Included in the Japanese
correspondents' ranking of top 10 influences were personal connection with the
source and agreeing with the source's position.
The five least influential factors in determining which sources to use were the
same for the Japanese and American correspondents, although they were ranked in
a slightly different order. The least influential factors were pressure from
managers/editors, gender of the source, pressure because of the news
organization's politics/policy, pressure because of the news organization's
financial interest and pressure from peers/colleagues.
Research Question No. 8: Is there a relationship between American journalists'
Japanese-language proficiency and the types of sources -- Japanese vs. American,
Japanese-speaking vs. English-speaking -- that they use? Because most Japanese
correspondents are expected to be fluent in English, it is unlikely this
research question applies to them.
As expected, the Americans were less fluent in Japanese than their Japanese
counterparts were in English. Using Hess' scale of 0=no language skills, 1=able
to order a meal, 2=able to understand TV news and 3=able to conduct an
interview, the American correspondents' mean score on their Japanese-language
ability was 2.131. The Japanese correspondents' mean score for their
English-language ability was significantly higher at 2.913. Twelve of the
American correspondents, fewer than half, indicated they can conduct an
interview in Japanese, while 20 of the 24 Japanese correspondents said they
could do an interview in English.
To answer the research question, two hypotheses were tested. H1: There is a
positive correlation between American correspondents' Japanese-language skills
and their use of Japanese sources and Japanese-speaking sources. H2: There is a
negative correlation between correspondents' Japanese-language ability and their
use of American sources and English-speaking sources.
Tests showed a positive correlation between the American correspondents'
Japanese-language skills and their use of four of the seven types of Japanese
sources tested. (See Table 9 above.) However, the positive correlation was
significant only in the case of Japanese-speaking sources, which had a
correlation coefficient of .4973, and Japanese business leaders/staff, which
Table 9
Language vs. use of sources
Correlation coefficients for American correspondents
1-a American gov't officials/ staff
1-d American business leaders/ staff
1-f American interest groups
1-h
American citizens
1-i American academic, other experts
1-o American interest groups' news confs.
1-z English-speaking sources
3-o
Language skills
-.2533
-.0873
-.0279
-.1862
-.2890
-.2554
.0798
1-b Japanese gov't officials/ staff
1-c Japanese business leaders/ staff
1-e Japanese interest groups
1-g Japanese citizens
1-j Japanese academic, other experts
1-n Japanese interest groups news confs.
1-aa Japanese speaking sources
3-o Language skills
.1436
.4583*
-.0438
-.1242
-.1115
.1307
.4973**
* significant at LE .05 ** significant LE .01 (2-tailed)
had a correlation coefficient of .4583. The correlation between
Japanese-language skills and the use of Japanese-speaking sources provides
support for the hypothesis, but the other results do not. Perhaps there are
enough Japanese sources who speak English that correspondents need not speak
Japanese well to have access to at least some Japanese nationals as sources. In
addition, several correspondents said they use Japanese editorial assistants to
help them overcome the language barrier.
For Hypothesis 2, none of the correlations between the journalists'
Japanese-language ability and their use of American or English-speaking sources
was statistically significant. Hypothesis 2 was not supported.
Research Question No. 7: To what extent do the correspondents' news
organizations influence their use of sources? The Japanese correspondents are
expected to consider themselves to be more influenced by organizational
pressures.
The journalists were asked, "How often do the following items influence your
use of sources?" on a scale of 1=never and 5=always. T-tests were conducted to
compare the American
Table 10
Organizational pressures
T-tests for independent samples (A = American, J = Japanese)
Variable
Number of Cases
Mean
Standard Error
t value
D. F.
2-tailed Probability
2-9 Pressure from peers, colleagues
A - 29
J - 24
1.1724
1.7917
.071
.180
-3.41
51
.001*
2-10 Pressure from managers/editors
A - 29
J - 24
1.6552
1.8333
.167
.177
-.73
51
.469
2-11 Pressure because of news organization's policy/politics
A - 29
J - 24
1.3103
1.5833
.141
.133
-1.38
51
.172
2-12 Pressure because of news organization's financial interest
A - 29
J - 24
1.2414
1.3333
.128
.115
-.52
51
.603
2-21 Responsibility to news organization
A - 25
J - 24
3.9200
2.9583
.244
.259
2.87
47
.006*
and Japanese correspondents' mean scores on five variables designed to measure
organizational pressure: pressure from peers, colleagues; pressure from
managers/editors; pressure because of the news organization's policy/politics;
pressure because of news organization's financial interest; and responsibility
to news organization.
With the exception of the last variable tested -- responsibility to your news
organization -- the Japanese correspondents had a higher mean score than the
Americans. However, on only one of those variables -- pressure from
peers/colleagues -- was the difference in mean scores statistically significant.
(See Table 10 above.) The mean score for the Japanese correspondents was 1.792,
between 1=Never influences and 2=Rarely influences. The Americans' mean score on
pressure from peers/colleagues was 1.172. Contrary to the hypothesis, the
Japanese reported that responsibility to their news organizations influenced
their use of sources to a lesser degree than the Americans reported. The
Americans' mean score was 3.920, close to 4=Very often influences, compared with
a mean score of 2.958 for the Japanese, close to 3=Influences about as often or
not. A t-test found that the difference between the mean scores was
statistically significant. Overall, the hypothesis that the Japanese would
indicate they were more influenced by organizational pressures was not
supported.
The results here were surprising. Perhaps the Japanese journalists do not
realize the extent to which they have been socialized within their news
organizations. Perhaps the American journalists have been socialized more than
they acknowledge. At any rate, the issue is worth further study. The relatively
high importance the Americans placed on their responsibility to their news
organization in making decisions about sources also was somewhat surprising.
Rather than indicating great loyalty to one's news organization, however, it may
just reflect professionalism -- wanting to do the best job possible for one's
employer.
Discussion
The methodology used for this research brought with it some fundamental
limitations, including the scope of the data gathered and the small population
size. The strength of the survey method -- that it provides an overview of a
population -- is also a weakness. A questionnaire that asked journalists which
sources they used for which stories and for what reasons at what times would be
too unwieldy. The manageable survey, on the other hand, does not allow for as
much nuance in the respondents' answers. Making distinctions between the types
of sources used for various types of stories would put this research in better
perspective. A content analysis of the journalists' quoted sources could also be
used to test the validity of the self-reporting here.
Of course, the survey results can only be taken as a snapshot in time of 53
full-time correspondents' attitudes toward sources and use of sources. The
results do not address the sourcing practices of free-lancers, part-time
employees or editorial assistants. Also, although many news organizations were
represented in the survey, the relatively low response rate, 32 percent for the
Japanese and 42 percent for the Americans, must be kept in mind before making
any broad generalizations. On the other hand, the low sample size may have made
finding statistical significance more difficult to detect even if it existed.
Some unresolved questions include the role of language skills and, partly as a
result of the Americans' overall poor Japanese-language ability, the role of
editorial assistants. Even though fewer than half of the American correspondents
said they can conduct an interview in Japanese, the relationship between a
journalist's language proficiency and the sources he or she uses was not
clarified with this quantitative research. In interviews, the correspondents
acknowledged that at the least, not knowing the language slows them down. Not
knowing the language also appears to force them to depend somewhat on the news
judgments of others -- their editorial assistants. The roles those individuals
play, both in the United States and in Japan, must be understood better to truly
understand how the media agenda is set.
Another issue that deserves more attention is the importance of nationality and
culture in influencing the journalists' practices. In examining the data after
the fact, P factor analysis was conducted to determine how the correspondents
grouped together. Four factors were identified, and they broke down almost
perfectly by nationality, with two "American" factors and two "Japanese"
factors. The two Japanese factors placed a great deal of importance on
government sources and were highly correlated at .747, the highest correlation
among the four factors. The second highest correlation, a coefficient of .610,
was between the two factors on which most American correspondents were located.
Nationality, and the way in which journalists in various countries are
socialized, appears to be a good predictor of how the journalists approach their
jobs.
The fact that four factors were identified -- not just one American and one
Japanese -- also serve as a reminder that correspondents are not alike. For the
two "American" factors, there was a real split on how the journalists rated the
influence of responsibility to self and responsibility to their news
organizations, for example. For one factor, those responsibilities were highly
influential; it seems the journalists on the other factor were asking
themselves, "What responsibility?" A more in-depth analysis of the journalists'
values and motivations would prove fascinating -- and shed light on how the
media's agenda is set. Remember McCombs' onion metaphor for media
agenda-setting. He says the innermost layer "consists of the professional core
of journalism itself, those practices, values and traditions into which every
journalist is socialized, beginning with his or her college days and continuing
through daily experiences on the job. These attitudes and behaviours are the
ultimate filters shaping the nature of the
news agenda."[48]
This research -- the first to systematically compare and contrast Japanese and
American correspondents' approaches to getting the news -- starts to examine
those innermost layers. The correspondents were found to share many professional
values, but there are shades of important differences in what influences their
decisions about using a particular news source. A source's ideology and whether
they agree with a source's position, for example, were more important to the
Japanese. The journalists also indicated they turned to different sources most
frequently, with the Japanese correspondents relying more heavily on government
sources. Examining these differences in sourcing patterns and values allows for
deeper understanding of how the media agenda is set in both countries.
Bibliography
Akhavan-Majid, Roya. "The Press as an Elite Power Group in Japan." Journalism
Quarterly Vol. 67, No. 4, Winter 1992, pp. 813-818.
Atwood, L. Erwin. "News of U.S. and Japan in each other's papers." Gazette
39:73-89
(1987).
Budner, Stanley and Ellis S. Krauss. "Newspaper Coverage of U.S.-Japan
Frictions,
Balance and Objectivity." Asian Survey, Vol. XXXV, No. 4, April 1995, pp.
336-356.
Cohen, Bernard C. The Press and Foreign Policy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
University
Press, 1963.
Federal News Service. "Remarks by Secretary of Defense William Perry, the Hudson
Institute
Forum, the National Press Club, Washington, D.C.." December 5, 1996, via
Lexis-Nexis.
Gans, Herbert J. Deciding What's News, A Study of the CBS Evening News, NBC
Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. New York: Pantheon Books, 1979.
Ghorpade, Shailendra. "Sources and Access: How Foreign Correspondents Rate
Washington, D.C." Journal of Communication, 1984, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 32-40.
Hess, Stephen. "Speaking in Tongues, More Foreign Correspondents Know Language
of the
Country They Cover." Nieman Reports, Fall 1994, pp. 30-32.
Ishikawa, Masahiko. "Journalism Education in a Japanese Newspaper: A Case Study
of
the Asahi Shimbun," a thesis presented to the faculty of the graduate school at
the
University of Missouri-Columbia, May 1995.
Kim, Young C. Japanese Journalists and Their World. Virginia: University Press
of Virginia, 1981.
Kliesch, Ralph E. "The U.S. Press Corps Abroad Rebounds, a 7th world survey of
foreign
correspondents." Newspaper Research Journal, Winter 1991, pp. 24-33.
Martin, Shannon Rossi. "Proximity of Event as Factor in Selection of News
Sources."
Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 65, 1988, pp. 986-989, 1043.
McCombs, Maxwell E. "Explorers and Surveyors: Expanding Strategies for Agenda-
Setting Research." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 69, No. 4, Winter 1992, pp.
813-824.
Neilan, Edward. "The New Foreign Correspondent in Japan." Japan Quarterly,
July-
September 1995, pp. 307-316.
Powers, Angela and Frederick Fico. "Influences on Reporters' Use of Sources at
High
Circulation U.S. Newspapers." A paper presented to the Association of Education
in Mass Communication and Journalism, 1994.
Severin, Werner J. and James W. Tankard Jr. Communication Theories: Origins,
Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media. New York: Longman, 1992.
Shoemaker, Pamela J. and Stephen D. Reese. Mediating the Message, Theories of
Influences on Mass Media Content. New York: Longman, 1991.
Sigal, Leon. Reporters and Officials, The Organization and Politics of
Newsmaking
Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath and Co., 1973.
United States Information Agency. Foreign Press Centers, Directory of Foreign
Correspondents in the United States. Washington: USIA, January 1995.
Van Wolferen, Karel. "Japan's Non-Revolution." Foreign Affairs,
September-October
1993, p. 54.
VanSlyke Turk, Judy and Bob Franklin, "Information Subsidies: Agenda-Setting
Traditions." Public Relations Review, Vol. 13, No. 4, Winter 1987, pp. 29-41.
Weaver, David and Swanzy Nimley Elliott. "Who Sets the Agenda for the Media?
A Study of Local Agenda-Building." Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 62, No. 1, Spring
1985, pp. 87-94.
Telephone interviews
Ikemura, Toshiro, Washington correspondent for the Yomiuri Shimbun. Week of Oct.
14,
1996.
Murayama, Kohei, Washington correspondent for the Jiji Press. Week of Oct. 14,
1996.
Ota, Yasuhiko, Washington correspondent for the Nihon Keizai Shimbun. Week of
Oct.
14, 1996.
Toshi, Eiji, Washington correspondent for the Jiji Press. Week of Oct. 14, 1996.
Email interviews
Lev, Michael, Tokyo bureau chief for the Chicago Tribune. Oct. 17, 1996.
Magee, Rob, Tokyo correspondent for CONUS Communications. Oct. 19, 1996.
Normile, Dennis, Tokyo correspondent for Electronic Business Asia. Oct. 12,
1996.
Petersen, Barry, Tokyo correspondent for CBS News. Oct. 12, 1996.
Zielenziger, Michael, Tokyo correspondent for Knight-Ridder Newspapers. Oct. 13,
1996.
[1] Bernard C. Cohen, The Press and Foreign Policy, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1963,
pp. 12-13.
[2] Ibid., p. 13.
[3] Federal News Service, "Remarks by Secretary of Defense William Perry, the
Hudson Institute Forum, the National Press Club, Washington, D.C.," December 5,
1996, via Lexis-Nexis.
[4] Pamela J. Shoemaker and Stephen D. Reese, Mediating the Message, Theories
of Influences on Mass Media Content, New York: Longman, 1991, p. 105.
[5] Herbert Gans, Deciding What's News, A Study of the CBS Evening News, NBC
Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time, New York: Pantheon Books, 1979, p. 9., and
Leon Sigal, Reporters and Officials, The Organization and Politics of
Newsmaking, Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath and Co., 1973, pp. 123-124.
[6] Sigal, p. 125.
[7] Shoemaker and Reese, p. 152.
[8] Gans, p. 81.
[9] Shannon Rossi Martin, "Proximity of Event as Factor in Selection of News
Sources," Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 65, 1988, p. 989.
[10] L. Erwin Atwood, "News of U.S. and Japan in each other's papers," Gazette
39 (1987), p. 79.
[11] Ibid., p. 86.
[12] Stanley Budner and Ellis S. Krauss, "Newspaper Coverage of U.S.-Japan
Frictions, Balance and Objectivity," Asian Survey, Vol. XXXV, No. 4, April 1995,
pp. 340-341.
[13] Ibid., p. 342.
[14] Shailendra Ghorpade, "Sources and Access: How Foreign Correspondents Rate
Washington, D.C.", Journal of Communication, 1984, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 35, 39.
[15] Maxwell E. McCombs, "Explorers and Surveyors: Expanding Strategies for
Agenda-Setting Research," Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 69, No. 4, Winter 1992, p.
813.
[16] Ibid., p. 816.
[17] Werner J. Severin and James W. Tankard Jr., Communication Theories:
Origins, Methods, and Uses in the Mass Media, New York: Longman, 1992, p. 223.
[18] McCombs, pp. 816-817.
[19] Shoemaker and Reese.
[20] David Weaver and Swanzy Nimley Elliott, "Who Sets the Agenda for the
Media? A Study of Local Agenda-Building," Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 62, No. 1,
p. 94.
[21] Judy VanSlyke Turk and Bob Franklin, "Information Subsidies:
Agenda-Setting Traditions," Public Relations Review, Vol. 13, No. 4, Winter
1987, p. 29.
[22] Ibid., p. 38.
[23] Edward Neilan, "The New Foreign Correspondent in Japan," Japan Quarterly,
July-September 1995, p. 308.
[24] Ibid., p. 307.
[25] Ibid., p. 309.
[26] Stephen Hess, "Speaking in Tongues, More Foreign Correspondents Know
Language of the Country They Cover," Nieman Reports, Fall 1994, pp. 30, 32.
[27] Masahiko Ishikawa, "Journalism Education in a Japanese Newspaper: A Case
Study of the Asahi Shimbun," a thesis presented to the faculty of the graduate
school at the University of Missouri-Columbia, May 1995, p. 101.
[28] Karel van Wolferen, "Japan's Non-Revolution," Foreign Affairs,
September-October 1993, p. 54.
[29] Young C. Kim, Japanese Journalists and Their World, Charlottesville, Va.:
University Press of Virginia, 1981, p. 209.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Angela Powers and Frederick Fico. "Influences on Reporters' Use of
Sources at High Circulation U.S. Newspapers." A paper presented to the
Association of Education in Mass Communication and Journalism, 1994.
[32] These questions have been adopted from Part II of the Powers and Fico
"Sources of News" survey.
[33] Powers and Fico, p. 7.
[34] Ralph E. Kliesch, "The U.S. Press Corps Abroad Rebounds, a 7th world
survey of foreign correspondents." Newspaper Research Journal, Winter 1991, pp.
24-33.
[35] Telephone interview with Kohei Murayama, correspondent for the Jiji Press,
week of Oct. 14, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information attributed
to Mr. Murayama is from the telephone interview.
[36] Telephone interview with Eiji Toshi, correspondent for the Jiji Press,
week of Oct. 14, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information attributed
to Mr. Toshi is from the telephone interview.
[37] Telephone interview with Toshiro Ikemura, correspondent for the Yomiuri
Shimbun, week of Oct. 14, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information
attributed to Mr. Ikemura is from the telephone interview.
[38] Telephone interview with Yasuhiko Ota, correspondent for the Nihon Keizai
Shimbun, week of Oct. 14, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information
attributed to Mr. Ota is from the telephone interview
[39] Email response from Michael Lev, Tokyo bureau chief for the Chicago
Tribune, on Oct. 17, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information
attributed to Mr. Lev is from his email response.
[40] Email response from Michael Zielenziger, Tokyo correspondent for
Knight-Ridder Newspapers, on Oct. 13, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other
information attributed to Mr. Zielenziger is from his email response.
[41] Email response from Dennis Normile, correspondent for Electronic Business
Asia, on Oct. 12, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information attributed
to Mr. Normile is from his email response.
[42] Email response from Barry Petersen, Tokyo correspondent for CBS News, on
Oct. 12, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information attributed to Mr.
Petersen is from his e-mail response.
[43] Roya Akhavan-Majid, "The Press as an Elite Power Group in Japan,"
Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 67, No. 4, Winter 1992, p. 1010.
[44] Sigal, pp. 123-124.
[45] VanSlyke Turk and Franklin, p. 38.
[46] E-mail response from Rob Magee, Tokyo correspondent for CONUS
Communications, on Oct. 19, 1996. Unless otherwise noted, any other information
attributed to Mr. Magee is from his email response.
[47] Budner and Krauss, p. 342.
[48] McCombs, pp. 816-817.
|
