journalism & mass communication quarterly 2004 wanta 364 77

Upload: anca-iuliana

Post on 03-Apr-2018




0 download

Embed Size (px)


  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77

    1/16 Quarterly

    Journalism & Mass online version of this article can be found at:

    DOI: 10.1177/107769900408100209

    2004 81: 364Journalism & Mass Communication QuarterlyWayne Wanta, Guy Golan and Cheolhan Lee

    Perceptions of Foreign NationsAgenda Setting and International News: Media Influence on Public

    Published by:

    On behalf of:

    Association for Education in Journalism & Mass Communication

    found at:can beJournalism & Mass Communication QuarterlyAdditional services and information for Alerts:

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    What is This?

    - Jun 1, 2004Version of Record>>

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77



    A nationalpoll and a content analysisof network newscasts examined ifcoverage of foreign nations had an agenda-setting influence. The moremedia coveragea nation received, the more likely respondents were tothink the nation was vitally important to U S. nterests, supporting theagenda-set ting hypothesis. The more negative coveragea nation received,the more likely respondents were to think negatively about the nation,supporting the second level of agenda setting. Positive coverage of anation had no influenceonpublic perceptions.Research examiningthe agenda-setting unction of the news mediahas undergone a dramatic reconceptualization n recent years. No longeris research based on the notion noted by Cohen' that "the press may notbe successful in telling us what to think but is stunningly successful n

    telling us what to think about." Indeed, researchers now argue that,under certain circumstances, the news media do tell people what to thinkby providing the public with an agenda of attributes-a list of character-istics of important newsmakers. Individuals mentally link these medi-ated attributes to the newsmakers to a similar degree in which theattributes are mentioned in the media.The present study attempts to examine agenda setting in a newcontext. The focus of the study will be foreign nations and not individu-als n the news, as previous studies have used? Data come from a surveyconducted by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, a nonprofit,nonpartisan organization that has conducted surveys every four yearssince1974.The media agendas come from a content analysis of networknewscasts.The analysis here, then, will first test whether coverage of foreignnations in the news influences how important these nations are viewedto be by individuals. Next, the analysis will test whether positive ornegative coverage of foreign nations influences ndividuals' evaluationsof countries-a second-level agenda-setting test.Second-levelagenda setting offers new challenges and opportuni-ties for mass communication researchers. It implies a deeper, morethorough processing of information in media content. While the firstWayne Wanta is a professor in the School of J ournalism and executive director of theCenter for the Digital Globe at the University of Missouri. Guy Golan isanassistantprofessor at the Manship School of Mass Communication at Louisiana State University.Cheolhan Lee received his doctorate in the Missouri School of J ournalism.

    J&MC QuarterlyVol.81, No.2Summer2004364-37702004AEJ MC364 JOURNAUSM&MnssCOMMUNICATIONWRLY

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    level examines the transmission of issue salience cues from mediacoverage of issues to public concern with issues, the second level inves-tigates the transmission of attributes of actors in the news from mediacoverage of these attributes to the publics recall of the same attributes-a much more subtle evel. By examining nternational news coverage, wehope to find insights into how public opinion is constructed in theincreasingly important area of foreign affairs.

    Television news programs serve as an important source of infor-mation for most Americans about events that occur around the worldevery day. Limited by time and space, news directors often have to selectonly a handful of stories, while leaving dozens of news stories off the air.News selection is at the heart of the agenda-setting process since theissues that fail to pass through the gatekeepersof the news also fail to givesalience cues regarding the relative importance of the issues. This isespecially true of international news events that happen beyond thedirect experience of most news consumers.Following the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, the worldentered an era of global economics that would make international eventsmore salient thanever before. n this new era of globalization, knowledgeabout events from around the world became a necessity.In addition to presenting new opportunities, globalization has alsocreatednew threats. The terrorist attacks of September 11,2001, evealeda web of terror that spun across many different nations of the world. Theemergence of the Al-Quaida terror organization in such countries asSudan,Afghanistan, the Philippines, and Yemen demonstrated to policy-makers, the mass media, and the public the need for a more globalperspective in coverage of international news.U.S. television news media, however, continue to focus theircoverage of internationalnews events on a limited number of nations andregion^^This ack of balance in coverage provides strong support for thenew world informationorder perspective4and is likely to impact Ameri-cans view of the saliency of international event ^

    Since the early days of television news, communication research-ers have investigated the role of international news. The emphasis ontelevision is of particular importance due to its role as the key source ofnews in the United States6Foreign News on the Network Agenda. Research consistentlyindicates that internationalnews storiesaccount for a significant percent-age of broadcast news content. Larson and Hardys7content analysisofnews content from three network news programs revealed that interna-tional news accounted for 35% to 39% of news content. Larsons*contentanalysis of more than 1,000 television news stories from 1972 to 1981revealed that about40% of the content dealt with international news.Whitney, Fritzler, Jones, Mazzarella, and Rakow9 found that nearly34% of all network television news content between 1982 and 1984was composed of international news. Recently, Riffe and BudiantoOidentified a decrease in the proportion between international and do-mestic news. Despite the differences in findings, most studies point toAGENDAE ~ GN D ~ ~ E W A T I O N A LEWS 365

    TheoveticazF vumewovk

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    the importance of international news in network television newscontent.However, Changl' notes that not all countries in the world arecreated equal. While most powerful core nations consistently receivecoverage media, small peripheral nations remain largelyuncovered. Research on international news coverage byU.S. networktelevision news programs reveals a lack of balance in the coverage of theworld's different geographic regions.'*A content analysis by Larson13 eveals that between 1972 and 1981,coverage of Western Europe accounted for 23.8% of international newsreferences. The Middle East came in second at 22.7%, while Asia camein third with 21.8%. Latin America and Africa trailed far behind with8.6%and 5.6%. His study also ndicated that some nations received muchmore coverage than other nations. Stories about theUSSR,Israel, Britain,and South Vietnam dominated international news coverage on U.S.newscasts.A ten-year analysis of foreign news coverage on network televisionnews14 ndicated that the ABC, CBS, and NBC networks covered theworld in an unbalanced manner. Their results show that between 1972and 1981, the three networks focused 32.4% of their coverage on theMiddle East, 21.1% on Western Europe, 10.8% on Eastern Europe, 9.5%on Asia, 6.7% on Africa, and only 6.2% on Latin America.In a more recent study, Golan and Wanta15 examined how 138elections held between1 anuary 1998 and1May 2000 were covered byU.S. network television newscasts (ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN). Theyfound that of the 138 elections, only eight received coverage on all fournewscasts, ten received coverage on more than one newscast, eighteenreceived coverage on one newscast and 102 received no news coverage.The study indicated that the majority of elections that received substan-tial coverage from US. television networks occurred either in Europe,Asia, or the Middle East. Only one election that took place in LatinAmerica was covered by more than one network, and none of theelections in Africa was covered by more than one network.Understanding the nature of international news coverage by thenews media is of great importance when considering ts possible impli-cations. As suggested by previous studies, international news coveragehas a direct influence onUS. public opinion. For example, a study bySalwen and MateraI6 ound correlationsbetween foreign news coverageand public opinion that suggested that international news coverage doesindeed have an agenda-setting effect. Wanta and Hu17 examined theagenda-setting mpact of international news and found a strong effect onAmerican public opinion, especially for conflict-related stories andconcrete presentations. McNelly and IzcarayI8 ound that news expo-sure was significantly related to positive feelings towards countries andto perceptions of those countries as successful.Semetko,Brzinski,Weaver,and Willnat19 found that attention to foreign affairs news was a betterpredictor of positive perceptions of nations than simple exposure tonewspapers.The implications of international news coverage by the newsmedia are further highlighted when considering the possible impact of

    366 JOURNAUSM&hf~ssOMMLINICATIONUARTERLYat University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    coverage on US. foreign policy. BemetPo notes that the nature ofinternational news coverage by news media is often consistent with theforeign policy of the nation. The potential agenda-setting effect oftelevision programming on audiences was recognized by TheodoreWhite:Nomajor act of the American Congress, no foreign adventure,no act of diplomacy, no great social reform, can succeed in the UnitedStates unless the press prepares the public mind.21CohenZ2dentifiedthree major roles of the press in the field of foreign policy: role of observerof foreign policy news, role of participant in the foreign policy process(along with policymakers), and the role of catalyst of foreign news. Thisfinal role might perhaps be the most central to the press and its agenda-setting influence over the public agenda.AgendaSetting. The original agenda-setting hypothesis proposeda moderate media nfluenceon social cognition-how individuals earnedabout the important issues of the day. Extensive media coverage sup-plied media consumers with salience cues regarding the relative impor-tance of these issues.Few individuals have direct experience with news events in for-eign countries. For many, the sole source of information about worldevents is the press. Media coverage of international news then shouldplay an important agenda-setting function.Agenda setting has been the focus of hundreds of systematicstudies, the vast majority of which have found support for the idea thatthe public learns the relative importance of issues from the amount ofcoverage given to the issues n the news media. Recent studies, however,have looked at the influence of media coverage at a more detailed leveLZ3These second-level agenda-setting studies, which merge traditionalagenda-settingwith framing research, suggest that the attributes linkedto newsmakers nfluence the attributes members of the public link to thenewsmakers. Thus, the agenda of attributes covered in the media setsthe agenda of attributes for the public.The dependent variable in first-level agenda setting is object sa-lience. As Ghanemz4notes, object salience typically involves issues.Media coverage of an object increases the importance of that objectamong members of the public. Thus, the public learns the importance ofissues based on the amount of coverage that those issues receive.Since the seminal work by McCombs and Sha~,2~undreds ofstudies have examined this media effect on the public. The vast majorityhas found support for the notion that media coverage influences theperceived importance of issues. In other words, media coverage ofobjects influences the perceived importance of those objects.The second level, however, implies a more subtle form of mediaeffect. The focus has shifted from coverage of objects to coverage ofattributes of those objects. While coverage of the object continues toinfluence the perceived importance of that object-as first-level agendasetting argues-second-level agenda setting implies that the attributeslinked to the object in the news media are mentally inked to the object bythe public. Thus, while first-level agenda setting suggests media cover-age influences what we think about, second-level agenda setting sug-gests media coverage influences how we think.AGENDAETTING AND NTERNATIONALNEWS 367

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    McCombs, Llamas, Escobar-Lopez, and Rey26 ound support for asecond level of agenda setting during the 1996 Spanish general electionon two attribute dimensions-substantive and affective descriptions.Substantive attributes dealt with information about qualities of thecandidates: experience with foreign affairs, for example. Affectiveattributes dealt with positive, neutral, or negative comments aboutcandidates: good leader, for instance.Golan and Wanta27conducted a similar study during the2000Republican presidential primary in New Hampshire. Results show thatJohn McCain was covered much more positively than George W. Bush.The findings also show that respondents linked four of six cognitiveattributes-akin to the substantive attributes of the McCombs et al.studyz8-to candidates in direct proportion to media coverage. Theresults show less support for media influence on the affective (positive)attributes individuals linked to candidates.Several other recent studies have found support for the secondlevel of agenda setting. Tedesc0,2~or example, content analyzed 1,479candidate press releases and 756 network news stories using key wordsin context frames during the2000presidential primaries.Candidates andmedia issue agendas were positively correlated, especially for the Re-publican candidates. Tedesco further examined the direction of influ-ence by examining autocorrelations, which suggested the relationshipbetween candidates and media is reciprocal. However, the processframes were significantly correlated only for Republican candidate ohnMcCain and the networks, which Tedesco explains may demonstratethat McCain and the media had a love-affair during the primaries.Kiousis, Bantimaroudis, and Ban30examined the second level ofagenda setting through two experiments that manipulated media por-trayals of candidate personality and qualification traits. They foundsubjects impressions of candidate personality traits mirrored mediaportrayals of those traits. However, media portrayals of personalitytraits did not affect a candidates overall salience. Results also indicatethat candidate qualifications influenced affective perceptions of politi-cians.

    Rhee31 examined how news frames in campaign coverage affectindividuals nterpretation of campaigns. Results suggest that both strat-egy-framedand issue-framedprint news stories are effective n influenc-ing interpretation.Shah, Domke, and Wa~kman~~xamined the relationships amongmedia frames, individual interpretations of issues, and voter decision-making. They found media frames and issue interpretations substan-tially influence the type of decision-making strategy that voters use.Finally, Takeshita and Mikami33examined first- and second-levelagenda setting simultaneously. They found significant evidence for thetransfer from the media to the public of both issue salience and attributesalience.Previous studies, however, have limited their analyses tonewsmakers as the objectinmedia coverage. Our present study focuseson nations as the objects under investigation. Thus, the hypotheses forthe study are:368 JOURNAUSM&MnssCOMMUNICATIONLIARTERLY

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    H1: The more overall media coverage a nation re-ceives, the more individuals will think it is of vital impor-tance to U.S. interests.This modification of the original hypothesis first proposed by

    McCombs and ShawM as some notable differences. Instead of coverageof issues leading to issue salience among members of the public, ourstudy proposes the coverage of nations will lead to the nation becomingmore salient among the public. As Ghanem35argues, coverage of anobject will lead to more concern with an object. Here, coverage of a nationwill lead to more concern with the nation. Second, the public variableis not concern with an issue, but respondents perceptions of how vital acountry is to the United States. Thus, the dependent variable is notpersonal issue salience but a perception of importance related to thecountry as a whole-in other words, an affectiveevaluation of countries.The ndependent variable-coverage of an object (country)-is similar tofirst-levelagenda setting, while the dependent variable-perceptions ofthe vital importanceto the United States-is akin to second-level agendasetting.H2: The more negative media coverage a nation re-ceives, the more individuals will think negatively about thatnation. The more positive media coverage a nation receives,the more individuals will think positively about the nation.

    These hypotheses address the affective attribute agenda noted byG ha~~em.~~f a nation receives negative coverage, the negative attributesmentioned in the news reports will cause individuals to mentally linkthese negative attributes to the nation. Thus, when asked how they feelabout this nation, respondents will recall the negativenews coverage andrespond that they think negatively about the nation. The reverse shouldbe true about positive coverage.

    The analysis of the present study compared responses to a publicopinion survey and media coverage in the period leading up to thesurvey period. Both looked at countries as objectsand whether mediacoverage of the individual countries set the agenda for public percep-tions of those countries.Public Agenda. The public agenda came from data collectedduring a survey in 1998 by the Chicago Council for Foreign Relations.The Council s a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that has conductedsimilar surveys every four years since 1974. The 1998 survey is the mostrecent data available. The surveys examine the extent that the Americanpublic supports an active role for the United States overseas and ad-dresses which nations the public believes are most important to theUnited States and which nations are threats to the United States. TheCouncilcommissioned the Gallup organization to conduct the polls. Thesurvey was conducted between 15 October and 10 November 1998, andincluded 1,507 completed surveys.AGENDAETIING AND INTERNATIONALEWS


    369at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    Two series of questions were used for the present study. First,respondents were read a list of 26countries and asked if the United Stateshad a vital interest n each. The percentage of the respondents answeringyes determined the score each country received on the public agenda.For example,87%of the respondents believed the United States had avital interest in Japan-the largest total in the survey-while 27%be-lieved the United States had a vital interest in the Baltic countries ofLatvia, Lithuania, and Estonia-the lowest in the survey. Thus, theforeign nation agenda for the public ranged from87for Japanto27for theBaltic countries.Next, a series of questions dealing with a feeling thermometerfor countries was used in the analysis. Respondents were asked to rate21 countries on a scale ranging from0 to 100.The more positive anindividual felt toward a country, the higher the temperature thatcountry would receive. Thus, the responses to these questionnaire temsshowed the publics affectiveattribute agenda. Scores ranged from72forCanada to25for Iraq.M edia Agenda. Four network newscasts were content analyzedfor the period of 1January to 15 October 1998. Previous time-lagsemployed in agenda-setting research have ranged from one week37 onine months?* Watt, Mazza, and Snyder39 ound that issue saliencememory can decay as slowly as 300 days. Previous research, how-ever, has mainly focused on issues rather than countries. Given thenature of international news coverage, we wanted to ensure that coun-tries in our analysis would have ample opportunities to appear in themedia agenda. Thus, we extended the content analysis period to includemedia coverage from the beginning of the year to the starting date of thesurvey. With the extended time period, the number of news stories pernation ranged from342for Russia to two for Haiti. However, because thetime lag employed here was longer than that used in most previousresearch, we ran additional tests with shorter time lags of three monthsand six months.All coverage of foreign nations on ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN wasincluded in the analysis. Stories were downloaded from the VanderbiltUniversity television News Archive.40The unit of analysis was the individual news story. Stories werecoded first for the nation or nations involved in the story. Stories fromthe United States involving domestic issues were not coded. Thefrequency for individual nations mentioned in news stories determinedthe score they received for the content analysis.Each country was also coded for valence-whether the countrywas covered in a predominantly positive, neutral, or negative manner. Ifan international newscast reported that a foreign country is involvedwith activities that threaten the interest of United States (eg, terrorism)or values that the United States wants to protect (e.g., human rights ordemocracy), the story was coded as negative. If a foreign country wasinvolved with activities that are consistent with U.S. interests or valuesthat the United States wants to promote, t was coded as positive. Neutralstories or stories that demonstrated a balance of both positive andnegative information were coded as neutral.

    370 J OURNAUSMba s sCOMMUNKATIONunrcnm~at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    TABLE 2Media Coverageo 26 Nations and Public Viewson theUS. Vital Interests in NationsCountry Media Stories Public View as Vital U.S. InterestJapan 208 87Russia 342 77Saudi Arabia 36 77China 282 74Canada 134 69IsraelKuwaitMexicoUnited KingdomGermanyIranSouth KoreaSouth AfricaBosniaTaiwanCubaFranceAfghanistanIndiaEgypt






    Baltic countries 18 27All media data: Pearsons correlation:r=,568,p=,002Six-month media time lag: Pearsons correlation: r =,629,p

  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    Both correlations using media coverage in the three months before thepoll (r=.559,p =.003) and six months before the poll (r=.629,p

  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    TABLE 2Media Coverageof21 Nations and Public Feelings toward CountriesCountry Media Stories Public View:Pos. Neut. Neg. Nation TemperatureCanada 4 130 0United Kingdom 40 256 0Italy 0 146 0Mexico 0 73 22Brazil 0 49 0GermanyFranceIsraelSouth AfricaPoland

    0 106 01 128 35 185 54 76 50 12 0

    South Korea 4 53 6Russia 1 336 5China 0 245 37India 3 85 85Saudi Arabia 1 22 13TurkeyPakistanCubaNorth KoreaIran

    2 22 17 41 838 138 60 36 250 71 28


    Iraq 4 169 329 25Pearson correlations:Positive coverage/public view: r=.328,p =,146Neutral coverage/public view: r=,210,p =,360Negative coverage/public view: r=.578,p =,006

    Indonesia and India, meanwhile, ranked very low on the publicagenda but in the upper half of the media agenda. Both of the countriesfaced serious political conflicts during the time frame of the contentanalysis. In India, violence marked the election of Prime Minister AtalBihanVajpayeeand hevoteby thecongress Party tomakeSoniaGandhiits president. In Indonesia, demonstrations against the government ofPresident Suharto turned violent. Suharto eventually stepped down.The main stories from these countries, therefore, dealt with politicalchangesin the countries, which showed very few links to the UnitedStates. While political changes are important events for the news media,perhaps the lack of a significant tie to the United States limited thecountries appeal to the US. public.Most of the other nations, however, followed clear trends. Japanand Russia, the toptwocountries on the public agenda, were among thenations receiving the highest amount of media coverage. The Balticcountries (Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania), Poland, and Haiti were at thebottom of the public agenda. They were also at the bottom of the mediaagenda.AGENDAETING AND I NT E ~W ~~ON A LEWS 3 73

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    These same trends also were consistent across different time lags.The shortest time lag examined here (three months of media coveragebefore the poll period) produced a slightly smaller correlation and themid-range time lag (six months of media coverage before the poll period)produced a slightly larger correlation. Further research is needed todetermine the optimal time lag for future studies.The affectiveattribute agenda also showed a clear trend. Only oneof the six "warmest" nations on the thermometer (Mexico)received anynegative coverage. Iraq, the coldest nation on the public agenda at 25,received the most negative media coverage, 329 stories.As with the earlier tests, not all nations correlated perfectly.Mexico did receive 22negative stories, yet was the fourth warmest nationat57. Turkey received just one negative story, but was relatively cool at45. Mexico, as a neighboring country, could have been viewed warmly

    because of geographical proximity. It also could have been viewedwarmly because of the relatively high number of Mexican immigrants nthe United States.Geographical location also may have been at the heart of whyTurkey was viewed as a cold nation. Because of its proximity to Iraq andIran, the two nations at the bottom of the nation thermometer, Turkeymay have been linked mentally to these other cold nations.While the negative affective attributes showed a clear agenda-setting trend between media and respondents, the positive and neutralaffective attributes did not. The finding on the neutral attributes islogical. More neutral stories should not have influenced how positive ornegative the public views a nation. Neutral coverage would implyneutral reactions from the public. Moreover, the vast majority of storiesaired on the four networks were neutral stories,which demonstrates thebalanced style of reporting that has been the goal of American journal-ism. The lack of an influence of positive affectiveattributes, however, ismore puzzling. Since the more negative news stories a nation receivedthe more negatively it would be viewed, it is logical to assume that theopposite relationship would be found with positive attributes:The morepositive news stories a nation received, the more positively it would beviewed. This was not the case.This ack of a significant correlationcan be attributed to the fact thatseveral "warm" countries received no positive coverage. Among thesecountries are Italy, Mexico, Brazil, and Germany. Of these four countries,only Mexico received any negative coverage. Thus, many of the nationsviewed most positively by the public actually received nothing butneutral coveragein the media. This may have given individuals theimpression that while these nations are not overly positive in theirrelations with the United States, neither are they negative threats to theUnited States.In addition, Iraq and Pakistan, two countries low on the publicagenda, received some positive coverage. This may have been anattempt by the news media to show some balance toward these countries,since both received extensive negative coverage.

    374 [OURNALlSMb M A S SCOMMUNICATIONUAKERLYat University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    It also should be noted that the analysis here involved only twoagendas: the media agenda as determined by coverage on four networksnewscasts and the public agenda as determined by responses to anational poll. The analysis did not include any potential influence on themedia agenda by outside sources, such asUS.public officials. The US.president, for example, could have been the source of the media agenda,influencing coverage through his policy statements. In his role as thenations number-one newsmaker, the president is an important sourcefor foreign affairs stories and could raise or lower nations on the mediaagenda by publicly announcinghispolicy priorities. This would appearto be a fruitful area for future research.Future research also may more closely examine stories that have amix of positive and negative information, since the majority of storieshere were either balanced or neutral. Were these stories balancedbecause of journalists objectivity or because of the type of events thatwere deemed worthy of coverage?Overall, then, the results here show that media coverage of coun-tries may have an impact on how those nations are perceived by thepublic. In other words, the news media can show the public both howvitally important countries are to the United States and how negativelythe countries should be viewed.

    NOTES1.Bernard Cohen, The Press and Foreign Policy (Princeton, NJ :Princeton University Press, 1963).2. Guy Golan and Wayne Wanta, Second-levelAgenda Setting inthe New Hampshire Primary: A Comparison of Coverage in ThreeNewspaper and Public Perceptions of Candidates, J ournalism6MassCommunication Quarterly78 (summer 2001): 247-59.3. Guy Golan and Wayne Wanta, International Elections on theU.S. Network News: An Examination of Factors AffectingNewsworthiness,Gazette65 (spring 2003): 25-39; Denis W. Wu, Inves-tigating the Determinants of International News Flow: A Meta-analysis,The lnternational J ournal for Communication Studies 60 (June4. Mustapha Masmoudi, The New World Information Order,J ournalo Communication29 (spring 1979): 172-79.5. Wayne Wanta and Yu-Wei Hu, The Agenda-Setting Effects ofInternational News Coverage: An Examination of Differing NewsFrames, nternationalJ ournalofPublic Opinion Research5 (summer 1993):6. JamesF.Larson, InternationalAffairs Coverage onUS.EveningNews Networks News inTelevision Coverage of International Affairs,ed.William C. Adams (Norwood, NJ: Ablex Pub Co., 1982), 15-39.7. JamesF. Larson and Andy Hardy, International Affairs Cover-age on Network Television News: A Study of News Flow Gazette23(winter 1977): 136-47.

    1998): 493-512.


    8. Larson, International Affairs.AGENDA~ M GND I~TERNATIONAL EWS 375

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    9. Charles D. Whitney, Marilyn Fritzler, Steven Jones, SharonMazzarella, and Lana Rakow, "Geographic and Source Biases in Net-work Television News, 1982-1984," J ournalo Broadcasting& ElectronicMedia33 (spring 1989): 159-74.10. Daniel Riffe and Arianne Budianto, "The Shrinking World ofNetwork News," lnternational Communication Bulletin 36 (spring 2001):11.Tsan-Kuo Chang, "All Countries Not Created Equal To BeNews:World System and International Communication," Communication Re-search25 (October 1998):528-66.


    12. Wu, "Investigating the Determinants."13. Larson, "International Affairs."14. JamesB. Weaver, Christopher J . Porter, and MargaretE. Evans,"Patterns of Foreign News Coverage onU.S. Network TV: A 10-YearAnalysis," J ournalism Quarterly61 (summer 1984): 356-63.15. Golan and Wanta, "International Elections on theU.S.NetworkNews."16. Michael B. Salwen and Frances Matera, "Public Salience of For-eign Nations," J ournalism Quarterly69 (spring 1989):623-32.17. Wanta and Hu, "The Agenda-Setting Effects of International."18. John T. McNelly and Fausto Izcaray, "International News Expo-sure and Images of Nations,"Journalisrn&Mass Communication Quarterly63 (autumn 1992): 546-53.19. Holly A. Semetko, Joanne Brzinski, David Weaver, and LarsWillnat, "TV News andUS. Public Opinion About Foreign Countries:The Impact of Exposure and Attention," lnternational J ournalo PublicOpinion Research4 (winter 1992):18-36.20. Lance W. Bennett, "Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations intheU.S.," J ournalo Communication40 (spring 1990): 103-25.21. Theodore White, The Making o the President 1972 (New YorkBantam, 1973).22. Cohen,The Pressand Foreign Policy.23. Maxwell McCombs, uan P. Liamas, Esteban Lopez-Escobar, andFederico Rey, "Candidate Images in Spanish Elections: Second-Level

    Agenda-Setting Effects" J ournalism&Mass Communication Quarterly74(winter 1977):703-17; Golan and Wanta, "Second-level Agenda Setting."24. Salma Ghanem, "Filling in the Tapestry: The Second Level ofAgenda-Setting," inCommunication and Democracy: Exploring the lntellec-tual F rontiers in Agenda-Setting Theory,ed. Maxwell McCombs, DonaldL.Shaw, and David Weaver (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.,25. MaxwellE.McCombs and DonaldL.Shaw, "The Agenda-SettingFunction of Mass Media," Public Opinion Quarterly36 (summer 1972):

    1997), 3-14.

    176-87.26. McCombs et al., "Candidate Images."27. Golan and Wanta, "Second-level Agenda Setting."28. McCombs et al., "Candidate Images."29. John C. Tedesco, "Issue and Strategy Agenda-Setting in the 2000Presidential Primaries,"American Behavioral Scientist44 (August 2001):2048-67.376 IOURNALISMMASS OMMUN~WI ONWRTERLY

    at University of Bucharest on December 4, 2012jmq.sagepub.comDownloaded from
  • 7/29/2019 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2004 Wanta 364 77


    30. Spiro Kiousis, Philemon Bantimaroudis, and Hyun Ban, Candi-date Image Attributes: Experiments on the Substantive DimensionofSecond Level Agenda Setting,CommunicationResearch26(August1999):31. June W. Rhee, Strategy and Issue Frames in Election CampaignCoverage:A Social Cognitive AccountofFraming, ournal ofCommuni-cation47(summer1997):26-48.32. Dhavan Shah, David Domke, and DanielB.Wackman, To ThineOwn Self BeTrue: Values, Framing, and Voter Decision Making Strate-gies,Communication Research23(October1996): 509-60.33. Toshio Takeshita and Shunji Mikami, How Did the Mass MediaMuence the Voters Choice in the1993General Election in Japan?: AStudy of Agenda-Setting,Keio Communication Review (17,1995): 27-41.


    34. McCombs and Shaw, The Agenda-Setting Function.35. Ghanem, Filling in the Tapestry.36. Ghanem, Filling n the Tapestry.37. Wanta andHu, The Agenda-Setting Effects of International.38. Erwin L. Atwood, Ardyth B. Sohn, and Harold Sohn, DailyNewspaper Contributions to Communication Discussion,J ournalismQuarterly55(autumn1978): 570-76.39. JamesH. Watt, Marry Mazza, and Leslie Snyder, Agenda-SettingEffectsof Television News Coverage and the Memory Decay Curve,Communication Research 20(June1993):408-35.40. VanderbiltTelevision News Archive,Vanderbilt University Col-

    lection. Retrieved 6 January 2003 at http:/ / OleR.Holsti,Content Analysisfor the Social Sciences and Humanities(Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley,1969), 135-42.

    AGENDAEITINGANDNEQNATIONAL NEWS 377at University of Bucharest on December 4 2012jmq sagepub comDownloaded from