Filtering revolution
Filtering revolution
复制标题
过滤革命
DOI：
10.1177/0022343314554791
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
3.6
通讯作者：
Y. Zhukov
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Baum;Y. Zhukov
报道偏见----媒体有系统地少报或多报某些类型事件的倾向----是武装冲突参与者和观察者的一个长期问题。我们认为，报道偏见的性质取决于新闻机构如何导航的政治背景下，他们的基础。在政府对媒体施加的压力有限的地方--在民主政权中--报道的范围应该反映传统媒体对新颖的、大规模的、戏剧性的发展的偏好，这些发展挑战传统智慧，突出现状的不可持续性。在非民主政权中，对报道的政治限制更为繁重，国家更保守的偏好将推动报道的范围，强调主流秩序的合法性和必然性。我们使用2011年利比亚起义期间抗议和政治暴力的新数据以及来自113个国家的阿拉伯之春日报报道来测试这些命题。我们发现的证据表明，在非民主国家的现状媒体的偏见，在民主国家的修正主义偏见。非民主国家的媒体报道低估了政权反对者的抗议和非暴力集体行动，在很大程度上忽视了政府的暴行，并高估了叛乱分子造成的暴行。我们在民主国家发现了相反的模式。
Reporting bias – the media’s tendency to systematically underreport or overreport certain types of events – is a persistent problem for participants and observers of armed conflict. We argue that the nature of reporting bias depends on how news organizations navigate the political context in which they are based. Where government pressure on the media is limited – in democratic regimes – the scope of reporting should reflect conventional media preferences toward novel, large-scale, dramatic developments that challenge the conventional wisdom and highlight the unsustainability of the status quo. Where political constraints on reporting are more onerous – in non-democratic regimes – the more conservative preferences of the state will drive the scope of coverage, emphasizing the legitimacy and inevitability of the prevailing order. We test these propositions using new data on protest and political violence during the 2011 Libyan uprising and daily newspaper coverage of the Arab Spring from 113 countries. We uncover evidence of a status-quo media bias in non-democratic states, and a revisionist bias in democratic states. Media coverage in non-democracies underreported protests and nonviolent collective action by regime opponents, largely ignored government atrocities, and overreported those caused by rebels. We find the opposite patterns in democratic states.