Corporate News Structure and News Source Perceptions:
Another Test of the Editorial Vigor Hypothesis
By David Pearce Demers, Assistant Professor
Edward R. Murrow School of Communication
Washington State University
Pullman, Washington 99164-2520
(509) 335-5608 (office) / (509 ) 332-6507 (home)
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
The author is grateful to to the Edward R. Murrow School of Communication and
the
Washington State University College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, which
provided partial
funding for this project.
Abstract
Corporate News Structure and Source Perceptions:
Another Test of the Editorial Vigor Hypothesis
A recent content analysis of newspaper
editorial content has disputed the conventional
wisdom that newspapers become less virgorous editorially as they acquire the
characteristics
of the corporate form of organization. However, many scholars remain
skeptical. This study
tested the editorial vigor hypothesis using an alternative methodology a
national
probability survey of mainstream news sources (mayors and police chiefs). As
hypothesized,
the more a newspaper exhibits the characteristics of the corporate form of
organization, the
more these news sources perceive that paper as being critical of them and
their institutions.
Corporate newspapers are more critical, the author argues, because they are
more likely to be
located in pluralistic communities, which contain more social conflict and
criticism of
dominant groups and value systems, and because they are more insulated from
local political
pressures. From a broader perspective, the results may be interpreted as
supporting theories
which hold that the pace of social change quickens as social systems become
more
structurally pluralistic.
Corpoate News Structure and Source Perceptions:
Another Test of the Editorial Vigor Hypothesis
The notion that messages in the mainstream
news media generally support the goals of
established elites and dominant value systems, often to the detriment of
challenging groups,
is one of the most widely tested and supported propositions in the literature
on media effects
However, few studies have examined whether such support varies 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 one that is less likely to criticize established
authorities and ideas.
Critics contend that media become less vigorous editorially as they acquire
the
characteristics of the corporate form of organization because those are more
concerned about
profits than product quality or information diversity.
Although some research suggests that corporate newspapers are more profitable
than
entrepreneurial newspapers, several recent studies have challenged the notion
that corporate
newspapers place more emphasis on profits as an organizational goal and less
on product
quality. In addition, a comprehensive review of the literature by Demers
shows that chain
newspapers are, on balance, more vigorous editorially than independently owned
newspapers. He also found that corporate newspapers publish more editorials
and letters to
the editor critical of mainstream groups and ideas. One implication of these
findings, he
argues, is that corporate newspapers could 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.
Nevertheless, many scholars remain skeptical of the notion that corporate
news
organizations could be more critical of the status quo. They question whether
surveys of
journalists' opinions or content analyses of editorial content are sufficient
to test the
editorial-vigor hypothesis. And, 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.
The purpose of this paper is to begin filling this void. If the content of
corporate
newspapers is more critical of the status quo, then a reasonable deduction is
that this
criticism could manifest itself in the perceptions of established or
mainstream news sources
that are being criticized. 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. 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: Do
mainstream news
sources in communities served by newspapers that exhibit the characteristics
of the corporate
form of organization perceive their newspapers are being more critical of them
and their
policies than those served by entrepreneurial newspapers? Using Demers'
definition, a
corporate newspaper is defined as an organization that has (1) a clear-cut
division of labor,
(2) a hierarchy of authority, (3) lots of rules and regulations, (4)
formalistic impersonality,
(5) employment based on technical qualifications, (6) rationality, or a high
degree of
efficiency in decision-making, and (7) a complex ownership structure (e.g.,
chain ownership,
public corporation, public ownership). 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, Demers
argues, corporate newspaper structure should be conceptualized and
operationalized as a
continuous variable.
Previous Research
Although no studies could be located that 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 culled from the literature:
(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. A well-documented research finding is that newspapers in
homogenous
communities contain less conflict news and criticism of established
institutions and elites.
The amount of social conflict and criticism is low partly because the
community contains a
limited number of alternative or challenging groups and organizations. In
contrast, social
conflict is a much more common feature of large, pluralistic communities
where
newspapers that exhibit the characteristics of the corporate form of
organization are more
likely to located. There is more conflict in pluralistic communities because
they contain a
greater number and variety of special interest groups competing for limited
social, political
and economic resources. Decision-making in such communities 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.
(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. Drawing on empirical
research and a
social system model, he argues that chain newspapers are more critical because
their
publishers and journalists have fewer ties to the local power structure, which
in turn helps to
insulate the newpaper from local elites and parochial political pressures. He
also argues
and research data show 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 recent national probability content analysis of daily newspapers supports
this model.
Demers tested the editorial vigor hypothesis by content analyzing the
editorial pages of two
issues of nearly 200 newspapers. He found that the more a newspaper exhibits
the
characteristics of the corporate form of organization, the greater the number
and proportion
of editorials and letters to the editor that are critical of mainstream
organizations. The
correlations were moderately strong, ranging from .20 to .52. Positioning
these findings
within the context of a larger theory of social change, Demers concluded that
these findings
help
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, by-products of community and
organizational
growth, insulate journalists from political pressures. The increased level
of criticism
that emerges from these structural forces contributes to a public opinion
discourse that
places increased pressure on existing institutions to change.
A study by Akhavan-Majid, Rife and Gopinath also supports the argument that
chain
newspapers are more critical of the status quo. They found that Gannett
newspapers were far
more likely than a sample of non-Gannett newspapers to oppose positions taken
by theWhite
House and the Supreme Court on three major issues.
(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 which is a good proxy measure of corporate
structure
were more likely than those at small newspapers to rate "editorial courage"and
"editorial
independence" as primary indicators of newspaper excellence. 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. In another study, Lacy reported that
group-owned
newspapers allocated more space to editorials and op-ed material than their
independent
counterparts. 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.
Theoretical Perspective
Contrary to the conventional wisdom and drawing heavily on Demers' theory of
corporate structure, this study hypothesizes that newspapers become more
critical of
mainstream news sources and ideas as they acquire the characteristics of the
corporate form
of organization. Aside from the empirical research reported above, 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 pluralistic. This model 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). As noted in the introduction, research
provides strong
support for the notion that mass media are highly responsive to political and
economic
centers of power and promote values generally consistent with capitalist
ideals and elite
interests. 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.
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. News
media often criticize those in power, through news stories that cover social
conflict as well as
through institutionalized editorials, columns and letters to the editor. The
criticism generated
in mainstream media is viewed by some scholars as producing little or no
meaningful social
change. From an absolute standpoint, such critics may be right. However, in
relative terms,
the model here proposes that the historical transition from the
entrepreneurial to the
corporate form of organization under most conditions has produced and will
continue 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. Pluralistic environments contain a larger number
of groups and
organizations that compete for limited resources, which, from a structural
perspective,
generally means more criticism of established authorities. The second reason
corporate
newspapers would be expected to be more critical of the status quo is that
their publishers
and editorial staffs are more insulated from special interests and political
pressures. As
noted in the literature review, 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 to 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, in other words, inhibit 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
would be expected to 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,
should help to
insulate journalists from outside 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. Cultural values are also very difficult to change. 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 of history. Many structural
changes have
occurred within the system during the 20th century (e.g., affirmative action
standards, anti-discrimination laws, voting rights for women), and media have
played an important role in
promoting and, later, legitimizing such changes.
A key assumption underlying this model is that the increased level of
criticism that
allegedly emerges from these structural forces contributes to discourse that
places increasing
pressure on existing institutions to change. This is a proposition that still
needs to be
empirically verified; however, research on that proposition would be moot if
corporate media
are not more critical of the status quo.
In sum, if news messages become more critical of the status quo as newspapers
exhibit
the characteristics of the corporate form of organization, then one could
reasonably deduce
that mainstream news sources will perceive this criticism, at least some
occasions. Certainly
perceptions do not always mirror reality, and sources may often ignore the
criticism.
However, a theory of social change that does not posit that social actors
(e.g., news sources,
public policy makers) have at least some ability to perceive the criticism
reduces social
action to structural forces. The model being proposed here does not posit
that source
perceptions are necessary for social change, only that they are a sufficient
condition. More
formally, it may be hypothesized that:
The more a newspaper exhibits the characterists of the corporate form of
organization,
the greater the likelihood that mainstream news sources will perceive that
newspaper as
being critical of them, their policies and their institutions.
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%). There also was no significant correlation between the
type of
respondent (top manager, top editor, reporter) and newspaper circulation
(r=.01).
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, responded. They represented 206 of the 223
communities
served by the newspapers.
Although individuals responded to the questionnaires, it is important to
point out that
the community not the individual is the unit of analysis. To conduct such
an analysis,
the findings were aggregated when there was more than one respondents in
either of the
surveys. For continuous measures (i.e., ordinal, interval and ratio level
measures) and
dichotomous nominal measures, 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.
Max Weber's conceptual framework was used as a guide to create measures of
corporate structure. Respondents in the 1993 survey were asked to provide
information on
14 individual measures. The first set of measures was designed to measure the
division of
labor, or organizational complexity. The most frequently used measure here is
the number of
workers or employees. Three measures were employed: number of full-time
employees
(mean=205); number of full-time reporters and editors (mean=40); and number of
beats or
departments (mean=5.3). Hierarchy of authority was operationalized as the
number of
promotions needed for a reporter to become top editor (mean=3.1). Three
indicators of the
presence of rules and procedures were used: whether the newspaper has "its
own formal,
written code of ethics" (33%); whether the newspaper has "its own employee
handbook of
rules and procedures" (66%); and whether the newspaper has its own "style book
(in addition
to AP or UPI)" (51%). Staff expertise was measured by a question which asked
whether
"reporters normally need a bachelor's degree to be considered for employment
at your
newspaper" (73%). Rationality was operationalized as the amount of importance
top
management places on "finding the most efficient way to solve problems"
(mean=4.78 on 7-point scale). Five measures of ownership structure were
included: whether the newspaper
was owned by chain or group (67%); whether public ownership was possible
(31%);
whether their newspaper was a legally incorporated business (81%); whether the
newspaper
was not controlled by one family or individual (28%); and the number of daily
newspapers
in chain (mean=25).
The 14 items were factor-analyzed using principal components, oblique
rotation.
Oblique rotation was used because it was expected that corporate structure is
a
multidimensional concept whose dimensions are not orthogonal. In other words,
it was not
expected that the items for division of labor would load on the same factor as
the items for
rules and procedures; however, these two factors should be positively
correlated to some
extent. Many researchers also prefer oblique rotation to varimax, especially
in exploratory
analysis, because if all of the factors identified are orthogonal, the results
of the oblique
rotation will be very similar to a varimax rotation. A factor loading of .60
was used as a
rule of thumb for determining whether a measure should be included with a
particular factor,
and measures that had two or more loadings greater than .30 and less than .60
were
considered problematic.
Using an eigenvalue of 1.00 as a minimum for defining a factor, the analysis
initially
produced a four-factor solution. However, this solution produced multiple
factor loadings
for several variables. A five-factor solution was then extracted, and this
stabilized most of
the loadings. The results are presented in Table 1. As expected, the
division of labor items
loaded heavily together, on the first factor, but the hierarchy of authority
measure also
loaded strongly there. Conceptually one may be able to distinguish between
division of
labor and hierarchy of authority, but operationally they could not be
separated in this study.
---------------------------------
Insert Table 1 about here
---------------------------------
For purposes here, the first factor was defined
as "structural complexity." Newspapers
that score higher are more complex. The ownership items loaded heavily on the
second
factor, with one exception number of newspapers in chain which also loaded
moderately high on the third and fourth factors (rules and regulations and
staff expertise,
respectively). Because of these mixed loadings, this item was excluded from
the ownership
index. The third factor included two of the three rules and regulations
measures: whether the
newspaper has an employee handbook of rules and a formal, written code of
ethics. The
other measure, whether the newspaper has its own style book, loaded most
highly on the
fourth factor (staff expertise) and posted the lowest final communality
estimate (i.e., had the
lowest explained variance). As such, it also was excluded from subsequent
analysis. The
fifth factor consisted solely of the rationality measure.
In sum, the factor analysis produced five empirically distinct factors
composed of 12 of
the 14 original measures, which altogether explained 71 percent of the total
variance in those
variables. An overall corporate index variable was created after the values
for the individual
measures were standardized and summed (missing values reduced the total sample
size for
the index measure to 199). 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.
Zero-order correlations among the five factors or dimensions are shown in
Table 2.
Structural complexity is correlated with every dimension except ownership
structure. In fact,
none of the four individual ownership indicators was even moderately
correlated with the
structural complexity index (data not shown). These findings are consistent
with recent
research which has found little or no correlation between circulation (a proxy
measure for
complexity) and chain ownership in cross-sectional studies. Historically,
though, this has
not always been the case. Previous research has shown that chain ownership
and circulation
have been moderately correlated; that is, larger papers are more likely than
smaller ones to
be part of a chain. However, chain ownership has become so diffused in the
newspaper
industry (about 80 percent are now owned by chains) that it no longer appears
to be a
sensitive measure of corporate complexity in cross-sectional studies. This
analysis will
retain the ownership index, however, because it is still correlated with the
rules and
procedures and the rationality dimensions.
---------------------------------
Insert Table 2 about here
---------------------------------
Table 2 also shows that the dimension exhibiting the strongest
intercorrelations is rules
and procedures. All of the correlations between it and the other indices are
greater than .20.
This finding supports Mansfield's argument that rules may be at the heart of
the bureaucratic
structure it is the one element in this data that links all of the other
dimensions together.
Rationality is correlated with all of the dimensions except hiring college
graduates for
reporting positions, which in turn is correlated with structural complexity
and rules but not
ownership. Overall, then, ownership structure and hiring college graduates
are the two
weakest indicators of corporate structure.
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 3), which had a high degree of
internal
reliability (Alpha = .91). The responses for each item were registered on
five-point scales,
and for conceptual clarity the final index was divided by 14 to convert it
back into five-point
scale.
---------------------------------
Insert Table 3 about here
---------------------------------
Findings
The data support the editorial vigor hypothesis, which expected that public
officials in
cities served newspapers that exhibit the characteristics of the corporate
form of organization
would perceive their 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
negative 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.
---------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 about here
---------------------------------
Table 4 provides the zero-order correlations
between the five corporate index
dimensions and the individual measures of critical content. The single most
important
predictor of the critical index was structural complexity (r=.26, p<.01). In
other words, the
larger and more structurally complex (e.g., division of labor, hierarchy of
authority) the
newspaper organization, the more mayors and police chiefs see that newspaper
as being
critical of them and their policies. Also significantly related to the
critical index was
whether the newspaper requires reporters to have a college degree (r=.18,
p<.01). However,
none of the other three dimensions ownership structure, rules and
procedures, and
rationality was significantly related to the critical index.
Table 4 also shows that 12 of the 14 critical items are significantly related
to the
corporate index. The exceptions are whether the newspaper is perceived to be
"biased" in its
coverage and whether it is perceived to have a "have a good working
relationship" with the
sources. For the other measures, the correlations between the critical and
corporate indices
range from .11 to .25 (p<.05 or greater). The correlation between the two
indices themselves
is higher (.26) than any of the individual correlations, which suggests that
the multiple
indicator indices reduce measurement error.
---------------------------------
Insert Table 4 about here
---------------------------------
Summary and Discussion
Contrary to conventional wisdom, this study theorized that editorial content
becomes
more critical of mainstream news sources as a newspaper acquires the
characteristics of the
corporate form of organization. Corporate newspapers are more critical
because, it was
argued, they are more likely to be located in pluralistic communities, which
contain more
social conflict and criticism of dominant groups and value systems, and
because they are
more insulated from local political pressures. On the latter point, research
shows that 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. In addition, corporate newspapers would be
expected to
be more insulated because research shows that journalists at those
organizations play a
greater role in controlling news content and owners play less.
Previous research that content-analyzed daily newspapers supports this
theory. As a
newspaper becomes more "corporatized," it publishes a larger number and
proportion of
editorials and letters to the editor that contain criticism of mainstream
groups and ideas.
However, because many scholars remain skeptical of such analyses, this study
sought to test
the editorial vigor hypothesis using an alternative methodology; i.e., ask
mainstream news
sources to judge the content. More specifically, it was hypothesized that
mainstream news
sources in communities served by corporate newspapers would perceive news
coverage of
them and their policies to be more critical of them and their institutions. A
national
probability survey of mayors and police chiefs in more than 200 communities
supports this
hypothesis. These mainstream news sources are more likely to complain that
corporate
newspapers are more critical of them and their policies and are biased and
less fair in their
coverage.
Caution should be used in interpreting these findings. Perceptions may not
mirror
reality. In addition, one major assumption undergirding the theory and
conclusions in this
paper is that the increased level of criticism generated by corporate
newspapers promotes 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. However, the findings in this study do gain strength
from the
content analysis of editorial page content. An ideal goal in science is to
test a theory using
alternative methdologies and approaches, and that ideal has been partially met
here.
From a broader perspective, the most important implication of this study is
that it may
help to explain many of the social changes that have and continue to take
place in modern
society. Some theories of ideology hold that mass media are incapable of
promoting social
change benefits disadvantaged groups, especially the poor and minorities.
They believe
news content is becoming less diverse, less critical of established
authorities and ways of
doing things as newspapers become more corporatized. But if this is true,
then how does one
explain many of the social changes this century that have benefitted some
disadvantaged
groups (e.g., women's, civil rights, environmental movements)? To be sure,
the structural
model being presented here is not predicated upon the idea that mass media
have played the
key or even a prominent role in these social changes. However, positive media
coverage is
crucial for most social movements to reach their goals, and the media have a
great deal of
power to legitimize or de-legitimize such movements.
Future studies should strive to understand (1) the processes and methods that
elites or
mainstream groups and citizen or challenging groups use to enlist the media to
serve their
own interests or goals; (2) the impact that critical content has on these
groups and public
policy making; and (3) the impact, if any, that changes in policy, laws or
social structure
have 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 3. Descriptive Statistics for Dependent Variable
Measures
Mean
SD
Index of Perceived Critical Content Index (sum of items 1 through 14 divided
by 14)
3.1
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 or department helps me achieve
my goals.*
3.2
1.2
2. The local daily often writes editorials that criticze 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 or department / Does a poor job
covering my office
2.9
1.1
*These items were inverted before summing to create the index.
Table 1. Corporate Newspaper Measures Factor-Analyzeda
Factor Loadings
CEb
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
1. Structural Complexity
Number full-time reporters/editors
Number full-time employees
Number beats or departments
Number promotions needed for
reporter to become top editor
.98
.93
.91
.68
.02
-.01
-.05
-.00
-.04
-.08
.03
.15
-.13
-.11
.09
.23
.02
.00
.01
.04
.91
.81
.88
.65
2. Ownership Structure
Owned by chain or group
Public ownership possible
Legally incorporated business
Not owned/controlled by one
individual/family
Number of newspapers in chainc
-.16
.18
.00
.01
-.05
.78
.78
.73
.65
.56
.11
-.01
.15
-.07
-.39
-.05
.07
-.27
.17
.49
-.01
-.02
-.02
.39
-.18
.63
.67
.57
.65
.75
3. Rules & Regulations
Has employee handbook of rules
Has formal, written code of ethics
-.04
.06
-.03
.22
.88
.73
.06
.10
.05
.00
.78
.66
4. Hire College Graduates
Reporters need bachelor's degree
Has own style bookc
-.03
.21
-.16
.09
.12
.24
.78
.45
.14
-.16
.66
.43
5. Rational Decision-Making
Importance placed on finding most
efficient way to solve problems
.05
.04
.05
.02
.92
.87
EIGENVALUES
PERCENT OF VARIANCE
3.73
26%
2.64
19%
1.53
11%
1.08
8%
.95
7%
9.93
71%
aPrincipal components, oblique rotation (N=199).
bCommunality Estimates (i.e., total variance explained)
cMeasures excluded from indices because of low or mixed loadings.
Table 2. Zero-Order Correlations Between Corporate Measures
Corporate Indices/Measures
1
2
3
4
5
1. Structural Complexity
2. Ownership Structure
3. Rules & Procedures
4. Rational Decision Making
5. Hire College Graduates
1.00
.06
.26**
.11*
.18**
.06
1.00
.23**
.10*
.07
.26**
.23**
1.00
.26**
.22**
.11*
.10*
.26**
1.00
.05
.18**
.07
.22**
.05
1.00
*p<.05; **p<.01
Table 4. Zero-Order Correlations Between
Corporate Index Dimensions and Perception Measures
Rational
Hire
Corporate Structural Ownership Rules and Decision
College
Index Complexity Structure Procedures Making
Grads
Critical Index .26** .26** .10 .10 .02
.18**
(14 items listed below) (182) (198) (188) (200) (201)
(197)
Does not separate fact and .25** .20** .08 .09 .09
.21**
opinion in news stories (183) (199) (189) (201) (202)
(198)
Is not fair .25** .31** .04 .13* .05
.14*
(183) (199) (189) (201) (202)
(198)
Doesn't tell the whole .22** .22** .12* .12* .05
.05
story (183) (199) (189) (201) (202)
(198)
Is too critical .21** .27** .05 .05 .07
.07
(183) (199) (189) (201) (202)
(198)
Does not take my concerns .17** .13* .06 .03 .05
.19**
into account (183) (199) (189) (201) (202)
(198)
Have complained to editors .16* .27** .04 .07 -.04
.08
about news coverage (184) (200) (190) (202) (203)
(199)
Often writes editorials .15* .25** .14* .08 -.06
-.01
that criticize me (184) (200) (190) (202) (203)
(199)
Often writes editorials .13* .17** .05 .09 -.08
.12*
criticize city hall (184) (200) (190) (202) (203)
(199)
Is inaccurate .13* .06 .08 .03 -.05
.20**
(183) (199) (189) (201) (202)
(198)
News coverage helps my .11* .04 -.01 .07 .04
.15*
office reach its goals (184) (200) (190) (202) (203)
(199)
Is biased .07 .18** -.05 .02 -.06
.12*
(182) (198) (188) (200) (201)
(197)
Have good working rela- .02 .01 .01 -.05 -.02
.08
tionship with newspaper (184) (200) (190) (202) (203)
(199)
*p<.05; **p<.01
Sample sizes shown in parentheses
|
