Аннотация
* W. Lance Bennett11W. Lance Bennett is professor of political science
and Ruddick C. Lawrence professor of communication at the University
of Washington.,
* Victor W. Pickard22Victor Pickard is a graduate student at the
Institute of Communications Research, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.,
* David P. Iozzi33David Iozzi is an undergraduate and Taso Lagos
is a graduate student in communication at the University of Washington.,
* Carl L. Schroeder44Carl Schroeder graduated in political science
from the University of Washington, and C. Evans Caswell is a graduate
student in the Department of Communication, Loyola University, New
Orleans,
* Taso Lagos33David Iozzi is an undergraduate and Taso Lagos is
a graduate student in communication at the University of Washington.,
and
* C. Evans Caswell44Carl Schroeder graduated in political science
from the University of Washington, and C. Evans Caswell is a graduate
student in the Department of Communication, Loyola University, New
Orleans
*
1W. Lance Bennett is professor of political science and Ruddick
C. Lawrence professor of communication at the University of Washington.
2Victor Pickard is a graduate student at the Institute of Communications
Research, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 3David Iozzi
is an undergraduate and Taso Lagos is a graduate student in communication
at the University of Washington. 4Carl Schroeder graduated in political
science from the University of Washington, and C. Evans Caswell is
a graduate student in the Department of Communication, Loyola University,
New Orleans
Correspondence should be addressed to W. Lance Bennett, Department
of Communication, Box 353740, University of Washington, Seattle,
WA 98195; lbennett@u.washington.edu
Abstract
There is little consensus on what constitutes open, deliberative media
discourse. We offer a simple, measurable, and comparative model based
on 3 aspects of source and issue construction in news accounts: access,
recognition, and responsiveness. The model is applied to coverage
of 2001–2003 World Economic Forum (WEF) meetings and protests against
the organization's role in global economic policies. Both demonstrators
and WEF participants were granted news access, but WEF actors were
recognized more formally and given greater input in news content,
including ownership claims to many activist issue positions. Journalistic
deference to the WEF communication agenda limited mutual responsiveness.
The journalistic process systematically managed the debate about
globalization on terms that favored elites over citizen-activists.
Пользователи данного ресурса
Пожалуйста,
войдите в систему, чтобы принять участие в дискуссии (добавить собственные рецензию, или комментарий)