How do different market-oriented news organizations portray news coverage about the CARES act?

Abstract

Drawing from CARES Act news coverage, this study investigated how different market-oriented news organizations modulated the debate on the most expansive stimulus bill in modern U.S. history, released in 2020, during the coronavirus pandemic. A comparative approach was used, between news articles produced by a strongly market-oriented and a weakly market-oriented news outlet, both national news outlets, based in the United States. Using market theory as a guide to explore published news content, this study focuses on showing the range of debate, news sources and journalistic role performances employed in coverage of the same topic, coming from differently funded newsrooms. Some of the findings of this research demonstrate differences in the assessment of objectivity as a journalistic norm, and similarities as the indirect use of government official sources. To conclude, some implications for the field of journalism are discussed, including a revision of objectivity as a journalistic norm.