ABSTRACT
This paper is a qualitative content analysis of footage available online of four separate events that contain violent extremism of hostage situations and “massacres” in Indian and Philippine news. These events are the Maguindanao massacre, The Phillipine Bus Hijacking, an Islamic terrorist attack in Mumbai and a Lashkar-e-Taiba hostage situation. Our qualitative approach is concerned with how the local media in the Philippines and India has chosen to portray these incidents (our unit of analysis) for broadcast. These four “incidents” serve as the sample for our research and categories are deciphered to discover patterns and themes that will elicit an answer to our research question. These categories are nature of footage, graphics, graphical nature of violence, demeanor of news anchors and characterization of attacks, which serve as our coding sheet. Our research question is if media channels worldwide should develop their own code of ethics or guidelines, according to their specific cultures, in order to regulate how local journalists provide news coverage of violence. Prior research uncovers that there is a strong correlation between media effects and violence and our theoretical underpinnings explore Bandura’s social cognitive theory, Gerbner’s cultivation theory, and perhaps a variation of Wood’s sponsor effect. The most surprising findings that we did not predict was how news anchors in India are much more passionate about their reporting than their Philippine counterpart, which can lead to a more fearful public. We thereby conclude that that there should be a universal guideline put in place in order to provide more accountability to news entities not just on a local but global level, particularly when media spectacles containing violent extremism is concerned.
\
INTRODUCTION
As the incidents of terrorist attacks have increased across the globe, the television news coverage of these events has also increased. These attacks often unfold on live television as evidenced by the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11. Given the deliberate violent nature of these acts and the bloody aftermath of destruction and death that they cause, the consequences of airing these events, often live and unfiltered, must be examined. At the same time, the manner in which the television stations provide their coverage must also be evaluated. Of particular concern are the media effects of violence, especially on children; the specific effects of the broadcast of terrorist attacks (including those effects intended by the terrorists); the media’s responsibility to the public in covering these events, and the theoretical framework to help understand the media effects.
Media Effects of Television Violence
A myriad of research has been conducted over the past 50 years concerning the effects of media violence. These studies have included experiments (laboratory, field, and natural) and surveys (both short-term and longitudinal surveys). For example, Andison (1977) examined the results of 153 laboratory experiments on the effects of violence in media. Of these 153 studies, he accumulated the results of 67 studies, which met his research criteria. He concluded that the results of these 67 studies demonstrated that there was a positive correlation, albeit weak, between watching violence on television and the proclivity to display aggression by the viewers of that violence. Paik and Comstock (1994) followed up with a meta-analysis of 217 studies on television violence, including field experiments, laboratory experiments, times series, and surveys. They concluded “the findings obtained in the last decade and a half strengthen the evidence that television violence increases aggressive and antisocial behavior” (538).
Joy, Kimball, and Zaback (1986) studied the effects of the introduction of broadcast television on an isolated Canadian town that previously had no access to television. They compared the aggressive behavior of 45 children in that town to two other comparable Canadian towns that had already prior access to broadcast television for a number of years. Although some of their findings were inconsistent, they did report that after two years, the amount of verbal and physical aggression increased at a greater rate in the town in which television had been recently introduced.
Centerwell (1989) performed his naturalistic study in South Africa, Canada, and the United States, where he studied the homicide rates in these three countries after television was introduced. He discovered that the homicide rates increased in the U.S. and Canada about 15 years after the introduction of television (long enough for a generation of children to grow up watching television), but did not show a corresponding increase in South Africa. He conceded that he could not establish a causal relationship between the introduction of television and the increase in violence, and that there were other confounding variables that could attribute to the rise in the North American countries. He did theorize that “exposure to television violence was the most important component leading to violent behavior” (651).
Additionally, longitudinal experiments conducted by Huesmann, Enron, Klein, Brice, and Fischer (1983) found that teaching children about the effects of media violence and encouraging them not to imitate the violence mitigated the effects of the television violence. This provided evidence that the context of the violence mattered and is also interesting when evaluating such incidents as the violent crime spree conducted by six teens in Long Island, New York, who were attempting to imitate the violent actions of the video game, “Grand Theft Auto IV” (Rouen).
Media Effects from the Broadcast of Terrorist Attacks
After the terrorist attacks on 9/11, Schuster et al. (2001) interviewed 768 adults in the U.S. by telephone to assess their reactions to the attacks and to probe their assessment of their children’s’ reactions. Forty-five percent of the adults who were interviewed “reported at least one of five substantial stress symptoms” (1509). On average, these adults watched 8.1 hours of television coverage of the terrorist attacks on the day of September 11, 2001. “Thirty-five percent of parents reported that their children had at least one of five stress symptoms; 47 percent reported that their children had been worrying about their own safety or the safety of loved ones” (1510).
Stone (2000) came to similar conclusions when she conducted experiments with 237 Israeli adults and exposed roughly half of the group (the experimental group) to television clips of terrorism and political violence. She found that these clips had “the power to increase personal levels of state anxiety among viewers” (520), but also noted that other variables, such as gender, religiosity, and dogmatism were important determinants to the extent of the effects.
Finally, Pfefferbaum et al. (2001), surveyed over 2,000 students from 11 middle schools in the Oklahoma City Public Schools seven weeks after the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building. They found that among children who had no physical or emotional exposure to the bombings, that is they did not see, hear, or feel the bomb blast, nor did they know anyone who had been killed or injured in the blast, television exposure to the news coverage of the bombings was significantly tied to post-traumatic stress. Due to the nature of the terrorist attacks, these three studies show that additional effects, other than an increase in aggressive or anti-social behavior, are inherent in viewing television coverage of terrorist acts. The audience develops stress and/or fear.
Of course stress and fear is the effect that the terrorists wanted to instill. As Stossel (2001) points out, “the object of a terrorist attack . . . is to sow instability and fear through its dramatic effect.” Since Palestinians took Israelis hostages at the Olympic Games in Munich in 1972, “as a worldwide TV audience estimated as high as 900 million followed the ordeal – terrorists have known that the surest route to a broad audience is through television.” He goes on to point out that when the two airplanes slammed into the World Trade Center, the most important message was being sent to the people who were not killed in the attack – be afraid, for you may be next. Bandura and Jordan (1978) were prescient during a talk at Stanford when they postulated that terrorist “acts, magnified by the media, will create widespread public fear.” Thus, the television news media plays a definitive role in aiding the terrorists in carrying out their mission.
The Media’s Responsibility in Covering Terrorist Attacks
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has been granted the authority by the U.S. Congress to issue and renew licenses for television and radio broadcasters to utilize the electromagnetic spectrum. Hundt (1996) outlines the case that the responsibility that television broadcasters bear for the privilege of being granted a license by the FCC is to serve the public interest, which is to serve the interests of audience in the best possible manner. Broadcasters have an obligation to cover the stories of terrorist attacks to inform the citizenry. But they have no obligation to show the actual, uncensored violent acts and indeed have a responsibility to shield the audience, especially children, from viewing such acts given the mounting evidence about the damage it may cause.
As Stossel (2001) points out, to serve the public interest, television broadcasters must cover terrorist acts, not just because of their political and social significance, but for basic safety purposes. The public needs to know if the water is safe, if they should evacuate a particular area, and when and for what reason they may need extra vigilance. This is the responsibility of television. However, in order to not play into the terrorists’ hands and cause even more panic, the broadcasters need “to practice careful and responsible reporting” (2001).
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework on which this qualitative content analysis is based falls under three main theories: Bandura’s social cognitive theory, Gerbner’s cultivation theory, and perhaps a variation of Wood’s sponsor effect. Bandura (1978 and 1983) established his theory that almost all learning from direct experience can also be acquired by observation, that is humans can experience learning vicariously through the experience of others. This theory can be used to help explain why there is increased aggressiveness or anti-social behavior after watching violence on television. Audience members, especially children, imitate what they see on television, especially if there is no negative consequence, or even a positive consequence, for the use of violence. This theory can also be applied to the visual and audio cues that audience members may receive from television broadcasters. Specifically, if television journalists who are covering a terrorist event display anxiety or even panic in their voices or demeanor, the audience members may experience a corresponding rise in their own panic, which may not be appropriate for any actual threat they may be under. They are simply experiencing an unnecessary elevation in their anxiety based on the actions of the television news broadcaster.
This leads to a variation of the sponsor effect described by Wood et al. (1991), wherein “viewers are likely to believe that the violent presentation is condoned by the media sponsor” (p. 373). In their study of Korean college students, Ryu, Kline, and Kim (2007) found a correlation between newscasters’ communication behavior and the extent to which the students identified with the newscaster. Their manner of presentation had an effect on their identification with the newscaster, which in turn had an affect on their behavior. Hence, if watching a violent, terrorist attack where the broadcaster makes continued references to the fact that no one is safe from terrorist, the audience may internalize the message that they are in danger when it is coming from someone with whom they have formed a strong identification.
The final relevant theory is Gerbner and Gross’ (1976) cultivation theory. In this case, the terrorists are relying on this theory without probably realizing it exists. The theory states that showing violence on television makes people believe that the crime rate in their area is higher than the actual crime rate and that the world is a more dangerous place than statistics and fact would bear out. By staging spectacular acts, the terrorists want their target audience to think that they could be next – that the terrorists are everywhere, when in fact it is extremely unlikely that the average person will be the victim of a terrorist attack. They are cultivating fear in the audience to make them change their lifestyle and believe their world is much more dangerous than reality demonstrates.
To examine how television news services cover terrorist acts, this study utilized a qualitative content analysis of news coverage of terrorist acts in India and the Philippines to evaluate their procedures for informing their citizenry.
Research Questions
Q 1: Should media channels worldwide develop their own code of ethics or guidelines, according to their specific cultures, in order to regulate how local journalists provide news coverage of violence?
Q2: Or should a universal guideline be put in place so as to provide more accountability to news entities on a global level?
METHODS
This paper seeks to explore how news entities chose to portray violent extremism in specific incidents ( our unit of analysis) on Philippine and Indian news. Our research group formulated our research question, from prior knowledge of the horrific accounts that had taken place in the Philippines and India. Being that all the members of this group are originally from Asia, an exploration of the differences of news footage in America compared to news footage from Asia was of special interest. Our research questions that prompted this qualitative content analysis are the following:
1. Should media channels worldwide develop their own code of ethics or guidelines, according to their specific cultures, in order to regulate how local journalists provide news coverage of violence?
2. Or should a universal guideline be put in place so as to provide more accountability to news entities on a global level?
Our qualitative research entails that we specify clear units of analysis. We have chosen to have specific incidents as our levels of analysis. These incidents are the following:
◦ Islamic Terrorist Attack- Mumbai India (2008) coded as Sample A
◦ Lashkar-e-Taiba hostage (2008) coded as Sample B
◦ Maguindanao Massacre (2010) coded as Sample C
◦ Philippine Bus Hijacking (2010) coded as Sample D
All the above-mentioned incidents contain violent extremism that can evoke fear and panic from viewers and thereby can be considered life-altering stimuli. We define violent extremism as a premeditated act of violence using physical force, intimidation and/or psychological means to harm, hold captive via hostage situations, annihilate or kill human lives with underlying motives, whether it be political, personal, religious or monetary gain in order to inflict fear to a nation and its people. After watching footage from various news agencies of our chosen samples, we agreed as a group on the kinds of categories that will lead our research. They are as follows:
Nature of footage - we choose two categories of how the footage is portrayed to viewers of the news program. These two categories are live raw footage versus edited footage. Live “raw” footage lends even more realism to the event, thus creating more fear because the cameras are rolling. Edited footage on the other hand is very standard within the news industry; it allows the news producers to squeeze all pertinent information within a certain time frame. Edited footage also allows for gruesome visuals to be either blurred or completely edited out, to protect the interests of children.
Graphics - The graphics used on all the data fell into several categories. These are flashing, bold colored overlays versus subtle, subdued colors, ticker news bites and parental guidance watermark graphics.
Graphical nature of violence - This category examined what kind of violence was portrayed with in the frame. This included blood, dead bodies, people actually getting shot or killed versus no portrayal of blood, cadavers or gun assault on a victim.
Demeanor of news anchors (passionate versus dispassionate) - includes but not limited to vocal and facial expression. “[US] Television journalists try to minimize both inflection and expression which may carry “editorial” connotations (Fields 188). The demeanor of the news anchor has a big impact on the viewer as mentioned above in the introduction.
Characterization of attacks - This is the category in which the researchers determined if the samples used are of
1. attacks to a specific individual?
2. or are they classified as attacks on the entire country? Attacks categorized as against the entire country are more likely to engender fear than isolated incidents of violence.
SAMPLE
INDIAN FOOTAGE:
Sample A:
Two terrorist attacks from Indian television news were analyzed. The first was a series of coordinated Islamic terrorist attacks in the city of Mumbia that began on November 26, 2008. Live and recorded footage from Times Now (The Indian Times), Agence India Press Television (AIPTV), CNN-IBN, Headlines Today, and New Delhi Television Limited (NDTV) included the bombing and subsequent fire at the Taj Hotel; soldiers and police exchanging gunfire with suspected terrorists in the streets; reports on the killing of Hemant Karkare, the head of the Indian Anti-Terrorist Squad; blood soaked, dead bodies lying in the streets; terrorists shooting in Victoria Terminus; and the bodies of some of the terrorists who were killed. In these series of at least 10 coordinated attacks, over 175 people were killed, including nine terrorists.
Sample B:
The second terrorist attack in India that was reviewed was a hostage situation near Jammu that occurred on August 27, 2008. Two militants, who were later identified as members of the terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba, killed an army officer and while fleeing the scene, holed up in a private house, taking six people hostage. The footage showed Indian soldiers engaged in active machine gunfire with the militants inside the house. News coverage from Times Now and CNN-IBN included the dead body of one of the hostages being dragged out of a window by soldiers positioned on the roof of the house as well as the bullet-riddled bodies of the dead militants after the solider stormed the house.
PHILIPPINE FOOTAGE:
Sample C:
Maguindanao Massacre- The footage that was analyzed was of the massacre done in Maguindanao, Southern Philippines, also known as the Ampatuan Massacre. Fifty-eight people were kidnapped and brutally killed, including thirty-four journalists, due to political election violence. The news correspondents traveled from Manila, Northern Philippines to the actual site of the massacre to obtain video coverage for their own News network. The program begins with footage of bloody dead bodies; some of the female victims have their zippers down. The reporter, just a voice over, describes the gruesome scenery as still pictures of the victims flash every other second. The reporter then describes the background and history of the attack with the help of computer graphics to illustrate or “act-out” the situation according to facts and data gathered from police investigation. The program then continues on with interviews of law officials involved with the investigation of the case. Later, families of the victims were interviewed as well. The program concluded with critical questions about the case and how the law might respond to this gruesome activity.
Sample D:
“ Philippine Bus Hijacking”- On Aug 23, 2010, a disgruntled employee of the Manila Police Mobile Patrol Unit chief Senior Inspector Rolando Mendoza takes a tourist bus full of 25 people, majority of who are Hong Kong nationals and some Filipinos are taken hostage at ten in the morning at the Qurino grandstand in the countries capital of Manila. By 3:28 pm, Mendoza posts a message on the bus window: Media Now- Calling for press coverage. Various media entities kept their camera’s rolling all through out the hostage situation until towards 8;40 in the evening, when hostages that had been shot were being pulled out of the bus. There was no attempt to blur the faces of these hostages or edit the transition period when nothing was happening on screen. The media kept their camera’s rolling, even during inappropriate times. The handling of the Philippine National Police is now being investigated if their SWAT tactics could have been handled more professionally. Unbeknown at the time to everyone, the media was airing live footage of Mendoza’s brother nearby being interrogated by a slew of police, which apparently causes Mendoza to open fire on the hostages. The press did not know that there was a television monitor on the bus, which the anchors of the various news entities have claimed might have instigated Mendoza to kill the hostages. All leading news organizations were covering the same incident at the same time that created a media spectacle of the bus hijacking led by Mendoza. Even foreign news entities such as CNN was airing news simultaneously as local Philippine news coverage.
Coding reliability
"In order to assess coder reliability, all coders (Dana, April and Giselle) viewed past footage on the Internet of the available news coverage of events specified above that contained violent extremism in India and the Philippines. All coders agreed on 98% of the following categories determined our coding measures, which have to do with violent extremism on Philippine and Indian news are the nature of footage, graphics and visual violence, and the characterization of attacks, and all coders agreed on 95% of the coding measures having to do with the demeanor of the news anchors. "
Blank Coding Sheet attached in Appendices below.
RESULTS
Our findings clearly indicate that the footage of these events are particularly graphic and the need to censor certain media spectacles is highly recommended to protect the viewers from witnessing the morbid atrocities that these militant groups or agenda seeking individuals cause. All of the samples contained graphics that had “Breaking News” graphics. Both our Indian samples ( Sample A & B) had very “Westernized” sets and the graphics were quite similar to those of a CNN American Counterpart. The blood splatter graphics used for the Sample C was shown as the OBB ( Opening Bill Board) and CBB (Closing Bill Board). For Sample D- The graphics flew in from opposite ends of the screen to spell BUS ( flying in from the left side) HIJACKING ( flying in from right side), and when they met formed an outline of a bus, which slowly turned from white to blood red letters. All the samples contained gory graphic visual violence- blood, cadavers, people firing guns with heavy ammunition was in no way edited or blurred. The most interesting findings that we found was that the demeanor of the anchors in Sample A and B were very passionate and excited as opposed to the anchors from Philippine news.
Findings
| | Sample A | Sample B | Sample C | Sample D |
| Categories | INDIA Hotel Bombing | INDIA Hostage Situation | PHILIPPINE Maguindanao Massacre | PHILIPPINE Bus Hijacking |
| Nature of Footage | Live, unedited, cameras continuously rolling | Live, unedited, cameras continuously rolling | Edited on a news documentary program called “Correspondents” | Live, unedited, cameras continuously rolling |
| Graphics | Flashing “Breaking News” | Flashing “Breaking News” | info caption w/ blood splatter graphics | Flashing “Breaking News” |
| Visual Violence | Dead body of terrorist dragged to roof | Blood soaked dead bodies in street | cadavers, firearms, faded effect on blood and faces | Blood, cadavers, firearms |
| Demeanor of News Anchors | Passionate/ calm | Passionate/ excited | Monotone/ dispassionate | Monotone/ dispassionate Slight sense of urgency |
| Characterization of Attacks | Children taken hostage when terrorists cornered | 58 massacred incl. 34 journalists | 58 massacred incl. 34 journalists | Against 25 HK/ Phil. Nationals, 8 dead |
All our findings indicate that even when the footage shown on the following incidents above contain violent extremism, the media entities continue to provide extensive exposure of the samples, which leads to a media spectacle hence the reason for choosing the above samples. The question that arises is what drives the local journalists to release a particular story? These local networks air coverage that evokes emotional arousal from the audience, but for what purpose? Does ratings outweigh the objective to serve the publics interest?
DISCUSSION
The qualitative content analysis footage was chosen from prior knowledge of the said events above. Our predictions were already biased prior to extensive research because we have been primed by the knowledge of the horrific events of the “Philippine Bus Hijacking” and the “Maguindanao Massacre” in the Philippines and the “Islamic Terrorist Attack (Mumbai)” and “Lashkar-e-Taiba hostage” in India. Technological advances have made it possible for our researchers residing in Los Angeles to view the data used for this paper with relative ease, thanks to the Internet. Our data was readily available on the premium cable channel, TFC (The Filipino Channel) and the ubiquitous access to the world wide web made searching for footage simply a click away. The research question we initially wanted to explore is if media channels in specific Asian regions such as the Philippines and India should have their own code of ethics or guidelines, that pertains to their specific culture . The way in which these Asian news entities regulate how their local journalists provide coverage for acts of violence in the news is questionable, in the sense that the standards of what is acceptable for broadcast differs greatly from the standards and practices of American news entities that the researchers usually see on air. The showcasing of violent extremism in American journalism is muted compared to the data we researched. There are many reasons for why this is the case and perhaps the strict regulations that the FCC imposes on networks for showing violent extremism may be the biggest reason. Another reason may be that these specific acts of violent extremism occur less in American society in general as opposed to Philippine and Indian society. These questions are essentially what drove us to our main CONCLUSION that there should be a universal guideline put in place in order to provide more accountability to news entities on a global level. There are two reasons for this that we feel validates this statement. Because of the World Wide Web, news can now be accessed from any part of the globe, thereby the footage that news entities air, are not only for a local audience. Every news organization needs to develop a global standard of television policy when it pertains to gory and graphic situations such as violent extremism. Since similar footage documented by various entities gets redistributed to other media channels, a guideline should be upheld in order to protect the global viewing audience. Only one out of the four samples, sample D contained a “parental guidance” watermark on the top right corner of the screen.
What we did not predict prior to our qualitative analysis research was how Indian anchors are more passionate when reporting on coverage that contains violent extremism as opposed to Philippine anchors that are calmer and more subdued. This may be because the anchors in the Philippines are in the studio, far away from the “incident” and have a field reporter on the actual location of where the violent extremism is taking place. This kind of inflections in an anchors speech patterns certainly makes the viewer feel a certain way. When an anchor has a higher pitch and more inflections on words that contain a violent association, such as “kill, guns, terrorist, dead,” etc, then the more likely a viewer will feel panicked than if an anchor is reporting in a matter-of-fact disposition. When these “words of terror” are given emphasis by the anchor, the specific “violent extremist” situations can be escalated by their speech patterns. Once again, the question we ponder upon is if journalists should be obliged to contain their inflections when reporting on such sensitive material for the sake of not alarming their viewers.
The limitations of this study that would have given more credibility to our research was the gathering of content analysis to support our predictions on the differences in news coverage here and abroad because we were unable to compare our Indian/Philippine news coverage with an actual American news counterpart that portrayed violent extremism. Lack of resources, time and researchers are primarily to blame for this lack of introspection. Nevertheless, our predictions were that we would certainly find differences from the footage that we regularly watch on American news, such as the amount and nature of graphic content being aired, but because we did not have a comparative content analysis for American news footage of a violent extremist event, beside from our prior personal knowledge of the attack of the World Trade Center on 9/11, this leads our research to be incomplete. Events such as the ‘9-11” attacks could have given this study a more concrete look at the actual differences between the kind of coverage portrayed when violent extremist events take place. Therefore, our recommendation for future studies are to take a specific event or incident that has had a worldwide global impact that illicit fear and gather enough data of the various media entities that have aired the same exact footage in their own news program. These incidents have very different contexts that require the researchers to take a qualitative instead of quantitative content analysis approach on the variations of violent extremism that has been broadcast to billions of homes worldwide, either through network television, premium cable or the world wide web.
REFERENCES
Andison, F.S. (1977). TV violence and viewer aggression: Accumulation of study results 1956-1976. Public Opinion Quarterly, 41(3), 314-331.
Bandura, A. (1978). Social learning theory of aggression. Werner-Reimers-Stiftung Conference. Human Ethology: Claims and Limits of a New Discipline. Bad Homburg, West Germany.
Bandura, A. (1983). Psychological mechanisms of aggression. In Geen, R.G. and Donnerstein, E.I. (Eds.), Aggression: Theoretical and empirical reviews, (pp. 1-40). New York: Academic Press.
Bandura, A. and Jordan, D. S. (1978). Terrorism. The Stanford Observer. Retrieved from http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/BanduraStanfordObserver78.pdf
Centerwell, B.S. (1989). Exposure to television as a risk factor for violence. American Journal of Epidemiology, 129(4), 643-652.
Felson, R.B. (1996). Mass media effects on violent behavior. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 103-128.
Fields, Echo E. "Qualitative Content Analysis of Television News: Systematic Techniques." Qualitative Sociology 11.3 (1988): 183-93. Print.Gerbner, G. and Gross, L. (1976). Living with television: The violence profile. Journal of Communication, 26(2), 173-199.
Huesmann, L.R., Enron, L.D., Klein, R., Brice, P., and Fischer, P. (1983). Mitigating the imitation of aggressive behaviors by changing children’s attitudes about media violence, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(5), 899-910.
Hundt, R.E. (1996). The public’s airwaves: What does the public interest require of television broadcasters? Duke Law Journal, 45(6), 1089-1129.
Joy, L.A., Kimball, M.M., and Zaback, M.L. (1986). Television and children’s aggressive behavior. In Williams, T.M. (Ed.), The Impact of Television: A Natural Experiment in Three Communities, (pp. 303-360). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Paik, H. and Comstock, G. (1994). The effects of television violence on anti-social behavior: A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 2(4), 516-546.
Pfefferbaum, B., Nixon, S.J., Tivis, R.D., Doughty, D.F., Pynoos, R.S., Gurwitch, R.H., and Foy, D.W. (2001). Terrorist exposure in children after a terrorist incident. Psychiatry, 64(3), 202-211.
Rouen, E. (2008, June 27). Six long island teens busted in ‘grand theft’-style spree. New York Daily News. Retrieved from http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/06/26/2008-06-26_six_long_island_teens_busted_in_grand_th-1.html
Ryu, S., Kline, S., and Kim, J. (2007). Identification with television newscasters and Korean college students’ voting intentions and political activities. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 188-197.
Schuster, M.A., Stein, B.D., Jaycox, L.H., Collins, R.L., Marshall, G.N., Elliott, M.N., Zhou, A.J., Kanouse, D.E., Morrison, J.L., and Berry, S.H. (2001). A national survey of stress reactions after the september 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. New England Journal of Medicine, 345(20), 1507-1512.
Stone, M. (2000). Responses to media coverage of terrorism. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 44(4), 508-522.
Stossel, S. (2001, October 21). Terror tv. The American Prospect. Retrieved from http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=terror_tv
Wood, W., Wong, F.Y., and Chachere, J.G. (1991). Effects of media violence on viewers’ aggression in unconstrained social interaction. Psychology Bulletin, 109(3), 371-383.
APPENDICES
| | Sample A | Sample B | Sample C | Sample D |
| Categories | INDIA Hotel Bombing | INDIA Hostage Situation | PHILIPPINE Maguindanao Massacre | PHILIPPINE Bus Hijacking |
| Nature of Footage- Live vs. edited | | | | |
| Graphics- What kind of graphics? | | | | |
| Visual Violence What kinds of atrocities are visible? | | | | |
| Demeanor of News Anchors- Passionate/ excited/ monotone/ calm | | | | |
| Characterization of Attacks- Who are the victims? | | | | |
SAMPLE A
“Series of Coordinated Attacks in Mumbia, India Qualitative Content Anaylsis”
· Times Now (The India Times): Broadcast Nov 26 and Nov 27, 2008 (YouTube)
· Agence Indian Press Television (AIPTV): Broadcast Nov 26 and Nov 27, 2008 (YouTube)
· CNN-IBN: Broadcast Nov 27, 2008 (YouTube)
· Headlines Today: Broadcast Nov 26 and Nov 27, 2008 (YouTube)
· New Delhi Television Limited (NDTV): Broadcast Nov 26 and Nov 27, 2008 (YouTube)
SAMPLE B “Hostage Situation Near Jammu, India Qualitative Content Anaylsis”
· Times Now (The India Times): Broadcast Aug 27, 2008 (YouTube)
· CNN-IBN: Broadcast Aug 27, 2008 and Aug 28, 2008 (YouTube)
SAMPLE C “Maguindanao Qualitative Content Analysis”
· News - The Correspondents: Broadcasted Dec 1, 2009 TFC (Premium Cable)
· News on Q. Live Unedited. Broadcasted Nov 25, 2009 (YouTube)
SAMPLE D“Philippine Bus Hijacking Qualitative Content Analysis”
· ABS-CBN News- Channel 2, Philippine local network station, News Show titled “TV PATROL ( YouTube)
· GMA 7 News- Channel 7, Philippine local network station (www.gmatv.com)
· RPN 9 News- Channel 9, Philippine local network station (YouTube)
· ANC News ( The ABS- CBN News Channel)- a cable channel owned and operated by Philippine media giant ABS- CBN that operates 24 hours a day.
( www. ancalerts.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment