Stooges of the System or Holistic Observers?

T. Quandt, Svenja Boberg, Tim Schatto-Eckrodt, L. Frischlich
{"title":"Stooges of the System or Holistic Observers?","authors":"T. Quandt, Svenja Boberg, Tim Schatto-Eckrodt, L. Frischlich","doi":"10.4324/9781003170051-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Journalistic crisis responses have been object of critical research, based on the analyses of wartime and terror reporting, as well as the coverage of natural disasters. This research notes that news media consistently fail to adequately cover political action during such crises, focusing too much on a limited set of political elite actors. Following this line of thought, the current analysis is interested in identifying general patterns of political reporting in the first nine months of the coronavirus crisis. In a large-scale computational content analysis of news media’s Facebook messages in Germany, we apply named entity recognition and network analysis in order to identify political actors: how they were connected to specific topics in the coverage, and how this has changed during the various phases of the pandemic. The analysis reveals a focus on governmental elite actors and a limited set of experts, while the parliamentary opposition did not receive much attention. In contrast, conspiracy theorists and some foreign actors were covered prominently. However, this focus was not uniform throughout the year, and in a later phase of the pandemic, the analysis reveals a “normalization” with a less reduced set of individualized political actors.","PeriodicalId":222394,"journal":{"name":"Political Communication in the Time of Coronavirus","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Communication in the Time of Coronavirus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003170051-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Journalistic crisis responses have been object of critical research, based on the analyses of wartime and terror reporting, as well as the coverage of natural disasters. This research notes that news media consistently fail to adequately cover political action during such crises, focusing too much on a limited set of political elite actors. Following this line of thought, the current analysis is interested in identifying general patterns of political reporting in the first nine months of the coronavirus crisis. In a large-scale computational content analysis of news media’s Facebook messages in Germany, we apply named entity recognition and network analysis in order to identify political actors: how they were connected to specific topics in the coverage, and how this has changed during the various phases of the pandemic. The analysis reveals a focus on governmental elite actors and a limited set of experts, while the parliamentary opposition did not receive much attention. In contrast, conspiracy theorists and some foreign actors were covered prominently. However, this focus was not uniform throughout the year, and in a later phase of the pandemic, the analysis reveals a “normalization” with a less reduced set of individualized political actors.
系统的傀儡还是整体观察者?
基于对战时和恐怖报道的分析,以及对自然灾害的报道,新闻危机反应一直是批判性研究的对象。本研究指出,在此类危机期间,新闻媒体始终未能充分报道政治行动,过多地关注有限的政治精英行动者。按照这一思路,目前的分析感兴趣的是确定冠状病毒危机前9个月政治报道的一般模式。在对德国新闻媒体Facebook消息的大规模计算内容分析中,我们应用命名实体识别和网络分析来识别政治行为者:他们如何与报道中的特定主题联系在一起,以及这在大流行的各个阶段是如何变化的。分析显示,政府精英和有限的专家受到关注,而议会反对派没有受到太多关注。相比之下,阴谋论者和一些外国演员的报道占据了突出位置。然而,这一重点在全年并不统一,在大流行的后期阶段,分析显示出一种“正常化”,个别政治行为者的数量减少了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信