Search for: All records

Focusing on a polarized issue—U.S. gun violence—this study examines agenda setting as an antecedent of political expression on social media. A state-of-the-art machine-learning model was used to analyze news coverage from 25 media outlets—mainstream and partisan. Those results were paired with a two-wave panel survey conducted during the 2018 U.S. midterm elections. Findings show mainstream media shape public opinion about gun violence, which then stimulates expression about the issue on social media. The study also reveals that partisan media’s gun violence coverage has significant cross-cutting effects. Notably, exposure to conservative media will decrease public salience of gun violence, pivot opinion in a more conservative direction, and discourage social media expression; and all of these effects are stronger among liberals.

 

Different news articles about the same topic often offer a variety of perspectives: an article written about gun violence might emphasize gun control, while another might promote 2nd Amendment rights, and yet a third might focus on mental health issues. In communication research, these different perspectives are known as “frames”, which, when used in news media will influence the opinion of their readers in multiple ways. In this paper, we present a method for effectively detecting frames in news headlines. Our training and performance evaluation is based on a new dataset of news headlines related to the issue of gun violence in the United States. This Gun Violence Frame Corpus (GVFC) was curated and annotated by journalism and communication experts. Our proposed approach sets a new state-of-the-art performance for multiclass news frame detection, significantly outperforming a recent baseline by 35.9% absolute difference in accuracy. We apply our frame detection approach in a large scale study of 88k news headlines about the coverage of gun violence in the U.S. between 2016 and 2018. 

Crowdcoding, a method that outsources “coding” tasks to numerous people on the internet, has emerged as a popular approach for annotating texts and visuals. However, the performance of this approach for analyzing social media data in the context of journalism and mass communication research has not been systematically assessed. This study evaluated the validity and efficiency of crowdcoding based on the analysis of 4,000 tweets about the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The results show that compared with the traditional quantitative content analysis, crowdcoding yielded comparably valid results and was superior in efficiency, but was more expensive under most circumstances.