Search results

This study utilized a PEW media consumption survey to gauge specific links between socioeconomic status, online news use, traditional news use, and knowledge of public affairs. The analysis examined whether technological change could add to knowledge differences between social segments. A SEM procedure was conducted to test the assumptions of the knowledge-gap hypothesis. According to the findings, disparities exist between social classes in knowledge of public affairs. Socioeconomic standing strongly influences the choice that different segments of the population make in using traditional and online sources for information. Traditional news consumption mediates the gap-widening effect. Meanwhile, the findings indicated that online news use does not seem to contribute to political knowledge.

In an effort to advance agenda-setting theory in the web environment, this study examined shifts in newswire coverage and search interest among Internet users in President Obama during the first two years of his administration (2009-2010). Both the volume and valence of media coverage influenced search attention, with volume exerting a stronger effect. Coverage volume was also driven by search trends. The impact of coverage volume on search was relatively stronger than the reverse, though it moved at a slower pace. These findings suggest a reciprocal, more complex process of salience transmission online.

"This is a philosophical study by a group of Vietnamese scholars along with some scholars from other countries discussing issues related to values, value education in Vietnam and the world. Authors in the volume discuss such issues as Vietnamese traditional values, social responsibilities, ethics and moral education, impact of globalization on cultural values, conflicts between traditional and contemporary values, value systems and human development, etc"--

Existing research has demonstrated how media elites influence journalistic practices, but much less has been done to help explain why journalists grant such a high status to select peers in the first place. This study explores rank allocation within a news ecosystem through the theoretical framework of social hierarchy. Survey data from a representative sample of U.S.-based financial journalists indicate that peer perceptions of prestige (i.e., deference earned by expertise, knowledge, or success) significantly and consistently drive group consensus on the most influential members within a news beat. The theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of the study findings are discussed.