Revising the indexing hypothesis: Officials, media, and the Libya crisis

Scott Althaus, Jill A. Edy, Robert M. Entman, Patricia Phalen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

This study revises the indexing hypothesis by specifying its predictions and testing them on a single event, the U.S-Libya crisis of 1985–1986. We consider not only whether journalists use “official debate” to guide their coverage of important policy issues, but also how they might construct and interpret this debate. Detailed content analysis of the New York Times demonstrates that, while indexing is a valuable theory in assessing media treatment of foreign policy, it needs further refinement. Different interpretations of indexing, particularly a proportional versus a parametric standard, predict very different results. Journalism norms such as objectivity and event-centered reporting may support or counteract indexing. Journalists appear to seek out foreign sources to provide opinions contrary to the dominant policy position, and they marginalize some U.S elite voices while overemphasizing others. This may be a sign of media autonomy, or of the relative power of sources over both policy outcomes and public debate. The ability of some elites to introduce policy options and shape debate needs to be considered, as does the effect of the physical placement of arguments in the news text. These findings also suggest the need to reconsider what features constitute an independent press and effective public debate.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)407-421
Number of pages15
JournalPolitical Communication
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1996

Fingerprint

Libya
indexing
Testing
journalist
elite
event
objectivity
journalism
foreign policy
content analysis
news
autonomy
coverage
interpretation
ability

Keywords

  • Foreign policy
  • Indexing
  • Journalism norms
  • Libya bombing, 1986
  • News bias
  • News sources
  • Press-government relations
  • Role of media

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Revising the indexing hypothesis : Officials, media, and the Libya crisis. / Althaus, Scott; Edy, Jill A.; Entman, Robert M.; Phalen, Patricia.

In: Political Communication, Vol. 13, No. 4, 01.01.1996, p. 407-421.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Althaus, Scott ; Edy, Jill A. ; Entman, Robert M. ; Phalen, Patricia. / Revising the indexing hypothesis : Officials, media, and the Libya crisis. In: Political Communication. 1996 ; Vol. 13, No. 4. pp. 407-421.
@article{64658654a068488a93dbc3d0df64a6c8,
title = "Revising the indexing hypothesis: Officials, media, and the Libya crisis",
abstract = "This study revises the indexing hypothesis by specifying its predictions and testing them on a single event, the U.S-Libya crisis of 1985–1986. We consider not only whether journalists use “official debate” to guide their coverage of important policy issues, but also how they might construct and interpret this debate. Detailed content analysis of the New York Times demonstrates that, while indexing is a valuable theory in assessing media treatment of foreign policy, it needs further refinement. Different interpretations of indexing, particularly a proportional versus a parametric standard, predict very different results. Journalism norms such as objectivity and event-centered reporting may support or counteract indexing. Journalists appear to seek out foreign sources to provide opinions contrary to the dominant policy position, and they marginalize some U.S elite voices while overemphasizing others. This may be a sign of media autonomy, or of the relative power of sources over both policy outcomes and public debate. The ability of some elites to introduce policy options and shape debate needs to be considered, as does the effect of the physical placement of arguments in the news text. These findings also suggest the need to reconsider what features constitute an independent press and effective public debate.",
keywords = "Foreign policy, Indexing, Journalism norms, Libya bombing, 1986, News bias, News sources, Press-government relations, Role of media",
author = "Scott Althaus and Edy, {Jill A.} and Entman, {Robert M.} and Patricia Phalen",
year = "1996",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/10584609.1996.9963128",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "407--421",
journal = "Political Communication",
issn = "1058-4609",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Revising the indexing hypothesis

T2 - Officials, media, and the Libya crisis

AU - Althaus, Scott

AU - Edy, Jill A.

AU - Entman, Robert M.

AU - Phalen, Patricia

PY - 1996/1/1

Y1 - 1996/1/1

N2 - This study revises the indexing hypothesis by specifying its predictions and testing them on a single event, the U.S-Libya crisis of 1985–1986. We consider not only whether journalists use “official debate” to guide their coverage of important policy issues, but also how they might construct and interpret this debate. Detailed content analysis of the New York Times demonstrates that, while indexing is a valuable theory in assessing media treatment of foreign policy, it needs further refinement. Different interpretations of indexing, particularly a proportional versus a parametric standard, predict very different results. Journalism norms such as objectivity and event-centered reporting may support or counteract indexing. Journalists appear to seek out foreign sources to provide opinions contrary to the dominant policy position, and they marginalize some U.S elite voices while overemphasizing others. This may be a sign of media autonomy, or of the relative power of sources over both policy outcomes and public debate. The ability of some elites to introduce policy options and shape debate needs to be considered, as does the effect of the physical placement of arguments in the news text. These findings also suggest the need to reconsider what features constitute an independent press and effective public debate.

AB - This study revises the indexing hypothesis by specifying its predictions and testing them on a single event, the U.S-Libya crisis of 1985–1986. We consider not only whether journalists use “official debate” to guide their coverage of important policy issues, but also how they might construct and interpret this debate. Detailed content analysis of the New York Times demonstrates that, while indexing is a valuable theory in assessing media treatment of foreign policy, it needs further refinement. Different interpretations of indexing, particularly a proportional versus a parametric standard, predict very different results. Journalism norms such as objectivity and event-centered reporting may support or counteract indexing. Journalists appear to seek out foreign sources to provide opinions contrary to the dominant policy position, and they marginalize some U.S elite voices while overemphasizing others. This may be a sign of media autonomy, or of the relative power of sources over both policy outcomes and public debate. The ability of some elites to introduce policy options and shape debate needs to be considered, as does the effect of the physical placement of arguments in the news text. These findings also suggest the need to reconsider what features constitute an independent press and effective public debate.

KW - Foreign policy

KW - Indexing

KW - Journalism norms

KW - Libya bombing, 1986

KW - News bias

KW - News sources

KW - Press-government relations

KW - Role of media

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030251013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030251013&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/10584609.1996.9963128

DO - 10.1080/10584609.1996.9963128

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0030251013

VL - 13

SP - 407

EP - 421

JO - Political Communication

JF - Political Communication

SN - 1058-4609

IS - 4

ER -