<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>State of the Media &#187; 2006 Pages</title>
	<atom:link href="http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://stateofthemedia.org</link>
	<description>Just another Pew Research site</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 May 2013 21:35:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Front Page</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/front-page/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/front-page/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jan 2006 19:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Russell Heimlich</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/front-page/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Section IV: Values and the Press</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-iv-values-and-the-press/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-iv-values-and-the-press/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:36:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Section IV: Values and the Press Press Going Too Easy on Bush Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say Journalists by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press Overview Section I: Views on Performance Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom Section IV: Values and the Press [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<h1>Section IV: Values and the Press</h1>
<p>Press Going Too Easy on Bush<br />
<strong>Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say                      Journalists</strong></p>
<p><em>by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/">Overview</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2005-section-i-views-on-performance/"> Section I: Views on Performance</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2006-section-ii-covering-the-president-and-the-campaign/">Section II: Covering                      the President and the Campaign</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2006-section-iii-today%E2%80%99s-changing-newsroom/">Section III: Today’s                      Changing Newsroom</a><br />
Section IV: Values and the Press</p>
<p>NOTE: This report is also available on                      the Pew Research Center <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061002164429/http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=214" target="_blank">Web                      site</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Section IV: Values and the Press </strong></p>
<p>Journalists at national and local news organizations are                        notably different from the general public in their ideology                        and attitudes toward political and social issues.  Most  national                      and local journalists, as well as a   plurality of Americans                      (41%), describe themselves   as political moderates. But news                      people –   especially national journalists – are more liberal,                        and far less conservative, than the general public.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/41.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/41.jpg" alt="" width="267" height="231" /></a></p>
<p>About a third of national journalists (34%) and somewhat                        fewer local journalists (23%) describe themselves as liberals;                        that compares with 19% of the public in a May   survey conducted                      by the Pew Research Center.   Moreover, there is a relatively                      small number of   conservatives at national and local news organizations.                        Just 7% of national news people and 12% of local journalists                        describe themselves as conservatives, compared with a   third                      of all Americans.</p>
<p>In this regard, Internet journalists are similar ideologically                        to local journalists: 57% describe themselves as   moderates,                      while 27% say they are liberals and 13%   conservatives. Local                      TV and radio journalists   include the lowest percentage of                      liberals of any of   the journalist groups surveyed (15%). Even                      among   local TV and radio journalists, however, just 13% describe                        themselves as conservatives.</p>
<p><em>Major Differences: God and Morality, Homosexuality</em></p>
<p>The 1995 survey of journalists found particularly sharp                        differences between journalists and the public when it came                        to attitudes toward morality and homosexuality. A  solid  majority                      of Americans consistently have  expressed  the opinion that                      it is necessary to  believe in God  to be a moral person. Nearly                       six-in-ten (58%)  expressed that view in a 2002 Pew Research                       Center  survey, while 40% said that belief in God is not a                        prerequisite for morality. Journalists, regardless of  their                       organization and position, take a decidedly  different view.                       Fully 91% of those who work at  national news  organizations                      say it is not  necessary to believe in  God to be moral; 78%                      of  local journalists agree.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/42.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/42.jpg" alt="" width="293" height="279" /></a></p>
<p>As was the case in 1995, journalists are much more accepting                        of homosexuality than is the general public. Overwhelming                        majorities of national (88%) and local (74%) say   homosexuality                      should be accepted by society. Only   about half of the public                      agrees (51%).</p>
<p>Since the mid-1990s, however, public support has increased                        for societal acceptance of homosexuality, while journalists’                        attitudes have been more stable. In a 1993   Times-Mirror survey,                      most Americans (53%) said   homosexuality should be discouraged;                      today a narrow   majority (51%) believes homosexuality should                      be   accepted. National journalists also have become slightly                        more accepting of homosexuality since 1995 (83% then, 88%                        today), while local journalists’ views have been stable   (75%                      then, 74% today).</p>
<p><em>More Agreement on Safety Net </em></p>
<p>There is more common ground between news professionals and                        the public in attitudes toward individual freedom and   government                      assistance for needy people. Identical   majorities of local                      journalists (58%) and the   public (58%) say it is more important                      that   Americans be free to pursue their goals without government                        interference, than that government guarantee that no one is                        in need.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/43.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/43.jpg" alt="" width="304" height="250" /></a></p>
<p>National journalists are divided over this question – 49%                        place higher priority on freedom from government interference                        while 42% say it is more important that the   government play                      an active role to guarantee aid to   the needy. Opinion among                      Internet journalists   divides along similar lines: 51% believe                      freedom   from government interference is more important; 43%                        say a government guarantee of aid for the needy is more important.</p>
<p><em>Conservative Journalists Secular Too</em></p>
<p>There is a broad consensus among news professionals, regardless                        of their ideology, that it is not necessary to believe   in                      God to be moral. But other issues –   homosexuality and the                      government’s role in aiding   the needy – produce wider fissures                      along   ideological lines.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/44.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/44.jpg" alt="" width="302" height="333" /></a></p>
<p>Journalists who identify themselves as liberals are virtually                        unanimous in their view that homosexuality should be   accepted                      by society (95% agree). More than   eight-in-ten moderates (84%)                      agree. But only about   half of conservatives (49%) say homosexuality                        should be accepted.</p>
<p>The news people surveyed also are deeply divided over the                        question of whether individual freedom, or government aid                        to the needy, is more important. Liberals by a wide   margin                      (61%-33%) place greater priority on   government guarantees                      of aid for the needy. By   contrast, conservatives overwhelmingly                      say it is   more important that everyone be free to pursue life’s                        goals (88%); just 9% feel it is more important for government                        to guarantee that no one is in need.</p>
<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061002164429/http://www.stateofthemedia.org/journalist_survey_prc4.asp#">[top]</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-iv-values-and-the-press/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-iii-today%e2%80%99s-changing-newsroom/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-iii-today%e2%80%99s-changing-newsroom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:35:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom Press Going Too Easy on Bush Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say Journalists by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press Overview Section I: Views on Performance Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom Section IV: Values and the Press NOTE: [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<h1>Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom</h1>
<p>Press Going Too Easy on Bush<br />
<strong>Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say                      Journalists</strong></p>
<p><em>by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/">Overview</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2005-section-i-views-on-performance/"> Section I: Views on Performance</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2006-section-ii-covering-the-president-and-the-campaign/">Section II: Covering                      the President and the Campaign</a><br />
Section III: Today’s                      Changing Newsroom<br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2006-section-iv-values-and-the-press/"> Section IV: Values and the Press</a></p>
<p>NOTE: This report is also available on                      the Pew Research Center <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061002164402/http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=214" target="_blank">Web                      site</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom</strong></p>
<p>Newsroom staff cutbacks are hitting print journalism at                        both the national and local level. About half of respondents                        working at newspapers or magazines (48% nationally,   54% locally)                      say the size of their newsroom staff   has decreased in the                      past three years. Relatively   few in the print sector are seeing                      growth in the   number of staff.</p>
<p>The picture is more mixed in television and radio, with                        about equal numbers saying their newsrooms are growing as                        shrinking. About half (47%) of those in national   broadcast                      media say there has been no change in   staffing compared with                      three years ago.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/31.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/31.jpg" alt="" width="279" height="322" /></a></p>
<p>One significant change in the news business is growth in                        the practice of repackaging and repurposing news stories for                        multiple uses. About half of both national and  local  respondents                      (48% each) say they are doing  this more  now than in the past;                      print and  broadcast  journalists at each level are similar                      in  this  respect.</p>
<p>At the same time, relatively few voice unhappiness with                        this trend, with the notable exception of local broadcast                        reporters. Three-in-ten local TV reporters (29%) say  they                       are unhappy over repackaging stories for  multiple  purposes.                      That compares with only about  one-in-ten  national radio and                      TV news people, and  similar  percentages of national and local                      print   journalists.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/32.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/32.jpg" alt="" width="349" height="210" /></a></p>
<p>Most journalists today give good ratings to the quality                        of leadership in their own organizations, a view that has                        changed little since 1999. At the national level, 30%  of  news                      professionals say their management is  doing an  excellent job,                      and 41% say they are doing  a good  job. There is relatively                      little difference  between  national print and broadcast media                      in  leadership  ratings. But over half of executives at the                        national level say the quality of leadership is excellent                        (and 38% rate it as good). Senior newsroom staff and line                        journalists are less positive.</p>
<p>At the local level, 22% overall rate leadership as excellent,                        and nearly half (47%) say the quality is good. Ratings  are                       higher among local newspaper journalists than   among those                      in television and executives rate   leadership more positively                      than reporters and   producers.</p>
<p>Training and professional development programs are fairly                        common in newsrooms today. About half (47%) of national   journalists                      and 56% of local journalists say they   have participated in                      such activities provided by   their news organization in the                      past twelve months.   Among those who have taken part in training,                      close   to half say they participated in such a program for                        five days or more over the past year.</p>
<p>Executives and senior editors and producers are more likely                        than line staff to report having taken part in professional                        development activity. Respondents who have   participated in                      training rate their own news   organization’s management more                      highly than those   who have not participated, and this is especially                        true of reporters.</p>
<p>In a related area, large majorities of respondents (76%                        nationally and 77% locally) say there are ongoing management                        efforts to address ethical issues in their newsroom,   about                      the same as in 1999. As with training and   professional development,                      those who report that   their organizations are engaged in this                      activity   rate their management more favorably.</p>
<p><em>Internet’s Impact Mostly Positive</em></p>
<p>Most news professionals (60% at the national level, 51%                        locally) say the emergence of the Internet has made journalism                        better; very few say it has hurt journalism. These   views are                      fairly similar to those expressed by   journalists in 1999.                      More local journalists say the   Internet has had either a positive                      or negative   impact, with higher percentage today saying it                      has   made journalism worse (18% compared with 8% in 1999).                        Only local news executives are divided over the Internet’s                        impact: 31% say it has been good for journalism; 27% view                        it negatively.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/33.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/33.jpg" alt="" width="253" height="195" /></a></p>
<p>Not surprisingly, enthusiasm about the Internet is greatest                        among younger respondents in the survey. More than   seven-in-ten                      (72%) of those under 35 years of age   think the Internet has                      been good for the   profession; just 13% view it negatively.                        Journalists age 35 and older also have a generally positive                        view of the Internet’s impact, though by a much smaller margin                        (54% better, 15% worse).</p>
<p><em>Changes for the Better</em></p>
<p>Those who believe the Internet has helped journalism most                        frequently cite its power as a research tool. Nearly half                        of those who see a positive impact of the Internet   mention                      some aspect of the Internet as a convenient   place to find                      timely information, to get data at   any hour of the day, and                      to do fact-checking on   deadline. Those who work for local                      news   organizations are especially likely to mention this benefit                        of the Internet (61% of local vs. 47% of national and 16%                        of Internet journalists).</p>
<p>Another widely noted positive impact of the Internet is                        its ability to deliver information to the public more quickly                        and to promote greater competition among news   organizations.                      This view is much more prevalent   among print journalists than                      among those working in   TV and radio. A frequent comment within                      this  theme  is that print journalism now has the ability to                        compete with television and radio for breaking news. Also,                        the speed of the Internet in delivering information was  the                       single most cited benefit among journalists  who work  primarily                      on their organization’s  websites.</p>
<p>About one-in-five say the Internet has helped journalism                        by making far more information available to the public, and                        by helping to improve the accuracy of the  information.  A related                      notion, mentioned about as  often, is  that the Internet has                      broadened the  range of  outlets and voices available to the                       public. This  includes more points of view, deeper stories,                       and  coverage of topics and stories that otherwise would not                        have fit into existing time and space available.  These changes                       have forced journalism to be more  innovative and  responsive                      to the public; one  respondent said the  Internet has “democratized                      the  press.”</p>
<p>A less common argument for why the web has made journalism                        better is that the Internet has made journalism more   accountable                      by enabling the public – and other   journalists – to more easily                      verify the accuracy of   information and communicate these concerns                        directly to those who produced a report. Only around one-in-twenty                        who see the web as having had a positive influence make   this                      case.</p>
<p><em>Changes for the Worse</em></p>
<p>Those who think the Internet has been bad for journalism                        most often cite the fact that it promotes the spread of   unvetted                      and unfiltered information to the public;   nearly half (53%                      national, 45% local) cite this   concern. Others express a related                      concern about the   speed and pressure of the Internet leading                      to too   many factual errors in news coverage (17% national,                        29% local).</p>
<p>Another concern raised by some is that the Internet has                        promoted the rise of pseudo-journalism, “junk” sites,                        and low-brow news. One negative consequence cited by  several                       respondents is that “news” reported on  these sites                       force mainstream journalists to waste  time chasing  down baseless                      rumors and innuendo. In  a similar  vein, a smaller group refers                       specifically to the  Internet having damaged the credibility                       of  journalism in the mind of the public.</p>
<p>Around one-in-ten who see the Internet as having a bad influence                        on journalism say the web has made journalists lazy by   allowing                      them to do research at their desks  rather  than going out into                      the field, with some   specifically stating that the Internet                      has made   plagiarism too easy.</p>
<p><em>Internet’s Downside</em></p>
<p>The survey’s respondents were asked specifically about two                        issues related to the growth of the Internet: increased   deadline                      pressures, and the potential spread of   misinformation and                      rumors into the news. Majorities   of both print and broadcast                      journalists say that   the Internet has increased the amount                      of bad   information that finds its way into news stories. Overall,                        65% of national journalists and 57% of local journalists agree;                        smaller numbers think there has been no change  (31%  nationally,                      38% locally). Hardly anyone  thinks the  Internet has reduced                      the amount of  misinformation  in circulation, though only 38%                      of  those working  with websites think the problem is worse                       because of  the Internet.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/34.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/34.jpg" alt="" width="254" height="339" /></a></p>
<p>But there is a considerable difference of opinion on the                        Internet’s impact on deadline pressures. Majorities overall                        believe the Internet has neither increased nor   decreased such                      pressures (55% of national   respondents, 60% of local respondents                      feel this   way). Hardly anyone thinks deadline pressures have                        declined, and 42% at the national level and 35% at the local                        level say the pressure is greater.</p>
<p>Within these averages there is a great deal of variation                        by type of medium and by job title. At both the national and                        local level, print journalists are far more likely   than TV                      and radio journalists to say deadline   pressure has been increased                      by the Internet.   National media executives are more likely                      than   their editors or line journalists to feel this way. And,                        perhaps not surprisingly, those whose principal job  responsibility                       is Internet-based journalism are  the most likely  to feel greater                      deadline pressures  (78%).</p>
<p><em>Journalists in the Online Sector</em></p>
<p>The poll included a separate sample of 68 journalists whose                        job responsibilities include managing, editing, or writing                        for the online outlets of national and local news   organizations.                      Job titles for this group of   respondents included “online                      content manager,”   “online editor,” “website                      manager,” and the like.</p>
<p>For the most part, online journalists are not significantly                        different from others demographically with the exception of                        age. The average age of respondents in the  Internet  group                      is 42, compared with 46 among the  rest of  the sample. Similarly,                      those working in  online jobs  had an average of 18 years experience,                       compared  with 22 years for the rest of the respondents. More                        say they have undergone training or professional  development                       activities provided by their  organization (66% vs. 52%). And                       far more say the  Internet has increased their  deadline pressures.</p>
<p>Given the evolving nature of news organizations’ websites,                        it is no surprise that those in the online sector say they                        are doing more repackaging of stories than in the   past: 71%,                      versus 48% for other journalists. But   more are happy about                      the change than unhappy by a   margin of five-to-one (44% vs.                      9%).</p>
<p>In most cases, the opinions of online journalists track                        closely with non-Internet journalists regarding the state                        of the profession, the reasons for declining audiences,   the                      validity of criticisms about journalism, the   quality of their                      own news organization, and their   own personal and political</p>
<p>values. They are somewhat more likely than their counterparts                        who work in broadcasting to say journalists have become   out                      of touch with their audiences, and to offer   that a boring                      and static news product is one reason   some media are facing                      declining audiences, but   many print journalists share this                      concern. In that   vein, more online journalists than others                      in both   print and broadcasting see the changing media environment                        as the biggest problem facing journalism.</p>
<p>Not surprisingly, most of the key differences between the                        views of online journalists and others pertain to the role                        of the Internet itself. One of the biggest  differences  is                      that majorities (57%) of those  whose principal  job is not                      in online journalism  say the Internet  allows too much posting                      of links  to material that  is unfiltered or unvetted; just                       28% of those  working in the sector agree that this is a valid                        criticism. Similarly, far more of those who do not  primarily                       work on their news organization’s  website say the Internet                       has allowed more  misinformation to find its way into  news                      stories  (61%, compared with just 38% among  online journalists).                       And fewer Internet than  non-Internet journalists say the Internet                       has hurt  journalism (3% versus 16%).</p>
<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061002164402/http://www.stateofthemedia.org/journalist_survey_prc3.asp#">[top]</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-iii-today%e2%80%99s-changing-newsroom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-ii-covering-the-president-and-the-campaign/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-ii-covering-the-president-and-the-campaign/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign Press Going Too Easy on Bush Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say Journalists by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press Overview Section I: Views on Performance Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign Section III: Today’s Changing Newsroom Section IV: Values and [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>
<h1>Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign</h1>
<p>Press Going Too Easy on Bush<br />
<strong>Bottom-Line Pressures Now Hurting Coverage, Say                      Journalists</strong></p>
<p><em>by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press</em></p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/">Overview</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2005-section-i-views-on-performance/"> Section I: Views on Performance</a><br />
Section II: Covering                      the President and the Campaign<br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2006-section-iii-today%E2%80%99s-changing-newsroom/">Section III: Today’s                      Changing Newsroom</a><br />
<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-survey-findings/2006-section-iv-values-and-the-press/"> Section IV: Values and the Press</a></p>
<p>NOTE: This report is also available on                      the Pew Research Center <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061002164434/http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=214" target="_blank">Web                      site</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Section II: Covering the President and the Campaign</strong></p>
<p>Many journalists today feel that news media has lost its                        critical edge – especially when it comes to coverage of the                        Bush administration. Reporters and editors in  national  news                      organizations, in particular, feel  the press  has gone too                      easy on the Bush  administration.  Moreover, the perception                      that news  organizations  have gone soft is not confined to                       attitudes about  coverage of Bush. An increasing number of                       both  national and local journalists feel the traditional  criticism                       of the press as too cynical is no longer  valid. Indeed, on                       both the national and local  level, more fault the  press for                      being too timid  than too cynical.</p>
<p>The journalists surveyed give middling ratings to national                        news coverage of Bush’s presidency. A narrow majority of   national                      journalists (53%) give the coverage a   grade of A or B; local                      journalists are far less   generous in their grading of how                      their colleagues   in national news organizations have covered                      Bush   (43% A or B). In a similar survey in 1995, national journalists,                        in particular, offered more positive opinions of coverage                        of the Clinton administration (65% A or B).</p>
<p>The journalists are somewhat more positive in their assessments                        of the presidential campaign. A majority of national   journalists                      (56%) say coverage of the campaign has   been better than coverage                      of the 2000 campaign.   Local journalists are more divided:                      46% say   coverage of the current campaign is better than in                        2000, while 34% say it is worse.</p>
<p><em>Differences Over Bush Coverage</em></p>
<p>Solid majorities of national print and TV journalists, as                        well as Internet journalists, say the media has not been   critical                      enough in its coverage of the   administration. A smaller plurality                      of local print   journalists agree (46%).</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/21.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/21.jpg" alt="" width="290" height="235" /></a></p>
<p>But local television journalists, on balance, feel the coverage                        of the Bush administration has been fair. A plurality  of  this                      group (44%) believes the coverage has been   fair; moreover,                      nearly as many say coverage has   been too critical of the administration                      (25%) as   say it has been not critical enough (28%).</p>
<p><em> Ideological Divisions </em></p>
<p>Much has been made of the public’s ideological divisions                        in this election year, but journalists also are divided along                        ideological lines over several issues, including   press coverage                      of the Bush administration. Liberals   who work in national                      and local news organizations   overwhelmingly feel the press                      has not been  critical  enough of the Bush administration. Roughly                        two-thirds of liberal journalists (68%) express that view,                        compared with 28% who say coverage has been fair and 3% who                        believe the press has been too critical of the   administration.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/22.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/22.jpg" alt="" width="262" height="227" /></a></p>
<p>Self-described moderates offer a mixed judgment of the Bush                        coverage – about the same percentages say it has not been                        critical enough (44%) and fair (43%). But most   conservatives                      (53%) think the press has been too   critical of the administration,                      compared with 30%   who view it as fair and 17% who think it                      has been   too critical.</p>
<p><em>Beyond Bush: Cynicism Concerns Decline</em></p>
<p>In the 1999 survey, narrow majorities of both national (53%)                        and local (51%) journalists agreed that the statement,  “the                       press is too cynical,” represented a valid   criticism                      of news organizations.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/23.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/23.jpg" alt="" width="283" height="241" /></a></p>
<p>But there has been a dramatic decline in the percentage                        of national and local journalists who feel the press can be                        legitimately criticized for excessive cynicism. Just   37% of                      national journalists and only slightly more   local journalists                      (40%) view the press as too   cynical. This pattern is even                      more apparent among   Internet journalists: 24% view the press                      as too   cynical, compared with 48% five years ago.</p>
<p>Internet journalists, in particular, believe that the press                        can be faulted for being too timid rather than too cynical                        (56% too timid vs. 24% too cynical). Journalists   working at                      national news organizations agree (47%   vs. 37%). But local                      journalists are split: 42% view   the press as too timid, 40%                      too cynical.</p>
<p><em>Ideological Coverage – Valid Criticism? </em></p>
<p>Overall, news people are divided over whether journalists                        today too often let their own ideological views show in their                        reporting. Similar percentages of national (45%)   and local                      (43%) journalists view this as a valid   criticism.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/24.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/24.jpg" alt="" width="337" height="195" /></a></p>
<p>But local executives, in particular, approach this issue                        very differently. Roughly seven-in-ten local news executives                        (73%) say coverage too often reflects a  journalist’s  ideology;                      roughly six-in-ten national  news  executives (62%) agree that                      this is not a  valid  criticism of the press.</p>
<p>By comparison, there is broad agreement across the spectrum                        of reporters, managers and executives that is a bad thing                        if news organizations take a “decidedly”  ideological                       point of view in their coverage of the  news. Fully  72% of                      national journalists and 74%  of local  journalists have a negative                      view of news   organizations taking a strongly ideological stance                        in their coverage.</p>
<p><em>Fox’s Outsized Impact </em></p>
<p>Most national and local journalists do not believe any national                        daily news organization is “especially liberal”                        in its news coverage. Roughly six-in-ten in both groups   (62%                      national/59% local) say no national daily news   organization                      strikes them as particularly liberal   in its coverage. Among                      the minority that names a   specific news organization as being                      especially   liberal, the New York Times was mentioned most                        frequently (20% national/17% local).</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/25.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/25.jpg" alt="" width="227" height="473" /></a></p>
<p>By contrast, solid majorities of both national and local                        journalists say there is an organization that they think is                        especially conservative – and for most the   organization that                      comes to mind is Fox News   Channel. Fully 69% of national journalists                      cited   Fox News Channel as especially conservative in its coverage.                        Fewer local journalists (42%) mentioned Fox; still, a much                        higher percentage of local journalists named Fox  than  any                      other single news organization,  conservative or  liberal.</p>
<p><a href="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/26.jpg"><img src="../2005-journalist-survey-intro/2005-survey-findings/files/2011/01/26.jpg" alt="" width="236" height="178" /></a></p>
<p>Roughly two-thirds of self-described conservatives (68%)                        could identify a specific news organization that is especially                        liberal, and the same number (68%) could name a   news organization                      that is “especially   conservative.” But moderates                      and liberals could   identify conservative news organizations                      far more   often than liberal ones. Roughly three-quarters of                        liberals (74%) and a majority of moderates (56%) say they                        couldn’t think of any news organization that is especially                        liberal.</p>
<p><a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20061002164434/http://www.stateofthemedia.org/journalist_survey_prc2.asp#">[top]</a></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/survey-findings/section-ii-covering-the-president-and-the-campaign/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Source Bibliography</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/source-bibliography/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/source-bibliography/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:37:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Source Bibliography The following list comprises the sources used throughout this report. A &#124; B &#124; C &#124; D &#124; E &#124; F &#124; G &#124; H &#124; I &#124; J &#124; K &#124; L &#124; M &#124; N &#124; O &#124; P &#124; R &#124; S &#124; T &#124; U &#124; V &#124; W&#38;X [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1>Source Bibliography</h1>
<p>The following list comprises the sources used throughout                      this report.</p>
<p><a name="A"></a><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#A">A</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#B">B</a> |                      <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#C">C</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#D">D</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#E">E</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#F">F</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#G">G</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#H">H</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#I">I</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#J">J</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#K">K</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#L">L</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#M">M</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#N">N</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#O">O</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#P">P</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#R">R</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#S">S</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#T">T</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#U">U</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#V">V</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#W">W&amp;X</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#Y">Y</a> | <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#Z">Z</a></p>
<h1>A</h1>
<p>Advertising Age, “100 Leading Media Companies,”  AdAge.com. Companies are ranked by their total media revenues collected  in the U.S. in 2003. Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.adage.com/page.cms?pageId=1158">www.adage.com/page.cms?pageId=1158</a>.</p>
<p>Frank Ahrens, “Delays, Low Fines Weaken FCC Attack on Indecency,” Washington Post, November 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Alternative Weekly Network, “Alternative Weekly Reader Comparison 1995 – 2005”</p>
<p>Alternative Weekly Network demographic data.</p>
<p>American Journalism Review, “Journalism’s Backseat Drivers,” August/September 2005.</p>
<p>American Society of Newspaper Editors, “Newsroom Employment Survey,” Table A, published April 12, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=5646">http://www.asne.org/index.cfm?id=5646</a>.</p>
<p>Chris Anderson, “The New Boom,” Wired, February 2006.</p>
<p>Julia Angwin, Kevin J. Delaney and Peter Grant, “Google, Comcast Seek Piece of AOL,” the Wall Street Journal, October 13, 2005</p>
<p>Julia Angwin and Kevin J. Delaney, “Microsoft Pushes to Seal AOL Advertising Linkup,” the Wall Street Journal, December 7, 2005</p>
<p>Julia Angwin, “Fox quietly gears up its business channel to challenge CNBC,” Wall Street Journal, June 20, 2005 .</p>
<p>Arbitron, “Public Radio Today: How America Listens to Public Radio Stations,” June 13, 2005</p>
<p>Arbitron/Edison Media Research, “Internet and Multimedia 2005: The On-Demand Media Consumer,” March 23, 2005</p>
<p>Arbitron, “Radio Today: How America Listens to Radio, 2005 Edition,” December 22, 2004 .</p>
<p>Tom Ashbrook, “The Assault on NPR,” Boston Globe, May 26, 2006 .</p>
<p>Association of Alternative Newsweeklies member pages.</p>
<p>Association of Alternative Newsweeklies, unpublished circulation figures.</p>
<p>“Broadband Subscriber Growth Slows,” Associated Press, October 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Los Angeles Times suspends ‘Wikitorials,’ Associated Press, June 21, 2005 .</p>
<p>AP, “Viacom Details Split Plans,” CBS News Web site, August 5, 2005 .</p>
<p>“AP to launch online video network; Board approves  general assessment and licensing plan,” Associated Press press release,  July 21, 2005</p>
<p>Douglas Arthur, “Knight Ridder: A Scenario Analysis,” Morgan Stanley, November 29, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.poynterextra.org/KR/Research.pdf">http://www.poynterextra.org/KR/Research.pdf</a></p>
<p>“Google Localizes Online Maps Service,” The Associated Press, October 6, 2005 .</p>
<p>Agence France Presse, “Murdoch’s NewsCorp sees earnings jump,” August 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Atlanta Business Chronicle, “Cumulus grows with Susquehanna acquisition,” October 31, 2005 .</p>
<p>Eric Auchard, “Web Map Tracks Demand for Major News ,” Reuters, August 18, 2005 .</p>
<p>Audit Bureau of Circulations, publisher’s  statements and audit reports for Time, Newsweek, US News and World  Report, The New Yorker, The Economist, Jet, The Atlantic, The Week,  People, In Touch, The Star</p>
<p>Audit Bureau of Circulations, publisher’s statements for La Opinion, El Diario, El Nuevo Herald.</p>
<p>Ayala, Nancy , “ ‘Rumbo’ secures $18 Million for New Investors,” Marketing y Medios, June 13, 2005 .</p>
<p>Abigail Azote, “Post-Rather, CBS news really sinks,” <a href="http://www.medialifemagazine.com/">Media Life Magazine</a> online archives, April 25, 2005</p>
<p>Abigail Azote, “A winter&#8217;s chill descends on &#8216;Nightline,&#8217; ” Media Life, January 26, 2006 .</p>
<p><a name="B"></a><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to                      the top</a></p>
<h1>B</h1>
<p>Katy Bachman, “Fox Buffs Up Local News,” Media Week, October 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Katy Bachman, “Mixed News for Houston PPM,” Media Week.com, September 20, 2005 .</p>
<p>Katy Bachman, “Clear Channel Applauds Its ‘Less is More’ Initiative,” Billboard Radio Monitor, May 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Katy Bachman, “TVB: TV ad revenues grew by 12 percent in 2004”, Media Week, March 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Ben Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, (Beacon Press: 2000)</p>
<p>Ed Bark, “Alert the media: CNN back to hard news”, Dallas Morning News, June 25, 2005</p>
<p>Jason Bates, EU Broadcasting: Regional Populations Creating Demand, Via Satellite, September 1, 2005 <a href="http://www.telecomweb.com/cgi/pub/via/via09010503.html">http://www.telecomweb.com/cgi/pub/via/via09010503.html</a></p>
<p>Stephen Battaglio, “New boss in town,” TV Guide, November 30, 2005 .</p>
<p>John Battelle, The Search: How Google and Its  Rivals Rewrote the Rules of Business and Transformed Our Culture  (Portfolio Hardcover: 2005).</p>
<p>“$80bn Google takes top media spot,” BBC News, June 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Belo Corp. presentation to CFSB Media Week Investors Conference, December 2005.</p>
<p>Bendixen and Associates for New California Media,  The Ethnic Media in America : The Giant Hidden in Plain Sight, June 7,  2005 , p. 11.</p>
<p>Paul Berger, “Get it together: Blog collectives seek to draw ads,” Online Journalism Review, December 9, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jonathon Berr, “Ad spending growth slows; web, cable, Spanish media doing best,” Orlando Sun-Sentinel, September 5, 2005 .</p>
<p>Robert Bianco, “More is Much Less in Revamped &#8216;Nightline,&#8217; ” USA Today, November 30, 2005 .</p>
<p>BIAfn Press Release, “BIA Financial Network  Reports that Hispanic Television Stations Continue to Grow in Numbers  and in Shares”, BIA Web site, June 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>BIAfn Press Release, “BIA Financial Network  reports on revenue growth of top television station owners over the past  four years,” BIA Web site, May 12, 2005 .</p>
<p>BIA Subscription News Commentary, “Upheaval in the Lineup of Local Television Stations,” BIAfn, January 25, 2006</p>
<p>BIAfn TV Industry Overview, 2005.</p>
<p>AP, “Casper Television Stations cancels evening news broadcast,” Billings ( Mont. ) Gazette, January 5, 2006 .</p>
<p>HD Update, “Shut-Off Date Is (Finally) Official”, Broadcasting &amp; Cable, February 9, 2006 .</p>
<p>“NBC Quietly Marks End of an Era,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, January 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Google adds software designed to track success of customers’ ads,” Bloomberg News, November 15, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Microsoft and Associated Press to Join in New Video Distribution,” Bloomberg News, November 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Hal Bodeker, “Solar power: Local stations and  networks are tapping into the energy of the morning-news hours,” Orlando  Sentinel, September 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>“What Local Web Sites Earn: 2005 Survey,” Borrell Associates Inc., March 2005.</p>
<p>“N.Y. Times circulation plummets in Big Apple,” The Boston Herald, January 12, 2006 .</p>
<p>Broadcasting &amp; Cable, “PTC Drives Spike in Smut Gripes,” November 14, 2005 .</p>
<p>Merrill Brown, “I Webbed the news today – oh boy!” Seattle Times, September 11, 2005 .</p>
<p>Sandy Brown, “Google Does Web Another Favor,” TheStreet.com, December 20, 2005 .</p>
<p>Rick E. Bruner, “The Decade in Online Advertising, 1994-2004,” Doubleclick.com, April 2005.</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>C</h1>
<p>Pete Carey, “Knight Ridder said to urge cuts” Contra Costa Times, January 25, 2006 .</p>
<p>Carnegie Corporation of New York , “Use of Sources for News.” Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.carnegie.org/pdf/AbandoningTheNews.ppt#0">www.carnegie.org/pdf/AbandoningTheNews.ppt#0</a>.</p>
<p>Bill Carter, “Amid Rumors, ‘Today’ Marks 10 Years as Weekly Ratings King,” New York Times, December 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Bill Carter, ‘Ted Koppel and Crew to Join Discovery,” New York Times, Jan. 5, 2006 .</p>
<p>Steve Case, “It’s Time to Take It Apart,” the Washington Post, December 11, 2005 .</p>
<p>CBS Corporation Company Profile, online at: <a href="http://www.cbscorporation.com/our_company/index.php">http://www.cbscorporation.com/our_company/index.php</a></p>
<p>Center for Digital Democracy, “Broadcast Lobby’s  Indecent Posture: Asking for Big Public Hand-out,” Market Watch, April  26, 2004 . Online: <a href="http://www.democraticmedia.org/news/marketwatch/NABhandout.html">http://www.democraticmedia.org/news/marketwatch/NABhandout.html</a></p>
<p>Center for the Digital Future at the USC Annenberg  School , “Fifth Study by the Digital Future Project Finds Major New  Trends in Online Use for Political Campaigns,” December 7, 2005 .  Available online at: <a href="http://www.digitalcenter.org/pdf/Center-for-the-Digital-Future-2005-Highlights.pdf">http://www.digitalcenter.org/pdf/Center-for-the-Digital-Future-2005-Highlights.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>Center for the Digital Future at the USC Annenberg School , unpublished data, January 2006.</p>
<p>Center for the Media Research, “18-24 Year Olds Most Influenced by New Media,” July 11, 2005 .</p>
<p>Center For Media Research, “Critical Mass Podcasting Expected by 2010,” December 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Center for the Media Research, “Media Habits of Affluent Adults,” February 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>Renee Chen, Esther Thorson and Stephen Lacy, “The  Impact of Newsroom Investment on Newspaper Revenues and Profits at Small  and Medium Newspapers, 1998-2002,” Journalism and Mass Communications  Quarterly, Autumn 2005.</p>
<p>“ Cincinnati newspaper agreement will not be renewed after 2007,” Cincinnati Post, January 16, 2004 .</p>
<p>ClickZ, “Internet Penetration: Critical Mass, Then What?” July 6, 2005 . Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.clickz.com/experts/crm/actionable_analysis/article.php/3517561">www.clickz.com/experts/crm/actionable_analysis/article.php/3517561</a>.</p>
<p>CNN.com, “Poll: Most Americans unfamiliar with blogs,” March 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Online ad sales soaring, report says,” CNN/Money, November 16, 2005 . Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/money.cnn.com/2005/11/16/technology/web_ads/%20">money.cnn.com/2005/11/16/technology/web_ads/</a></p>
<p>GE Profile on the Columbia Journalism Review’s “Who Owns What” (<a href="http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/ge.asp">http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/ge.asp</a>),</p>
<p>comScore Networks, “ Advertisers Take Note: Internet Streaming Video Now Reaches More Mature Audiences,” December 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jim Conaghan, “Outlook 2006,” Presstime,” January 2006. Available online at: <a href="http://www.naa.org/Presstime/PTArtPage.cfm?AID=7378">http://www.naa.org/Presstime/PTArtPage.cfm?AID=7378</a>.</p>
<p>Consumer Reports WebWatch, “Leap of Faith: Using the Internet Despite the Dangers,” October 26, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.consumerWebwatch.org/pdfs/princeton.pdf">www.consumerWebwatch.org/pdfs/princeton.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Office of  Inspector General, “Report of Review: Review of Alleged Actions  Violating The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967, as Amended,” Report No.  EPB503-602, Pg. 6, November 15, 2005 .</p>
<p>Robert W. Crandall, Robert W. Hahn, Robert E.  Litan, and Scott Wallsten, (“Universal Broadband Access: Implementing  President Bush’s Vision,” AEI-Brookings Joint Center For Regulatory  Studies, May 2004. Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.aei-brookings.org/admin/authorpdfs/page.php?id=941">www.aei-brookings.org/admin/authorpdfs/page.php?id=941</a>.</p>
<p>CSFB Media Week presentations, December 2005.</p>
<p>Tim Cuprisin, “Channel 18’s 9 p.m. News Might Sign Off,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, January 16, 2006 .</p>
<p>Anthony Crupi, “CBS White House Correspondent Roberts Joins CNN,” Media Week, February 1, 2006 .</p>
<p>Anthony Crupi, “CNN Names Gallagher Faith and Values Corr,” Media Week, September 7, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>D</h1>
<p>Paul Davidson, “Martin Known as Consensus Builder,” USA Today, October 30, 2005 .</p>
<p>Wendy Davis, “Deutsche Bank: Online Ad Spending Up 11 % in Q2,” Media Post, July 18, 2005 .</p>
<p>Wendy Davis, “Marketers Shift Budget To Local Sites,” Media Post, October 19, 2005 .</p>
<p>Wendy Davis, “ OMMA Keynote: Online World Unprepared For Influx Of Marketing Dollars,” Online Media Daily, June 7, 2005</p>
<p>Wendy Davis, “Online Rivals Papers, Surpasses Yellow Pages Among Local Shoppers,” Media Daily News, March 23, 2005 .</p>
<p>Davies, Jennifer, Gluttons for Gossip, San Diego Union-Tribune, September 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Heidi Dawley, “Time-wise, Internet is now TV’s equal,” Media Life Magazine, February 1, 2006 .</p>
<p>Jay DeFoore, “More Than 2,000 Newspaper Jobs Lost  in 2005,” Editor &amp; Publisher November 17, 2005 . (The 2,000 total  includes jobs in all departments, not just news.)</p>
<p>Michael Deibert, “Newspaper Ad Spending Climbs, Albeit Mostly Online,” Media Post, August 23, 2005</p>
<p>John Dempsey, “The Fox ripple effect,” Variety, March 13, 2005 .</p>
<p>Stefano DellaVigna &amp; Ethan Kaplan, “Fox News  Effect: Media Bias and Voting,” U.C. Berkeley, August 15, 2005 .  Retrieved from http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/sdellavi/</p>
<p>“Free Fall for U.S. Newspapers’ Circulations,” Digital Deliverance, November 1, 2004 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.digitaldeliverance.com/MT/archives/000474.html">http://www.digitaldeliverance.com/MT/archives/000474.html.</a></p>
<p>Tom Dorsey, “CNN‘s fidgeting isn‘t helping in race to catch Fox News,” The Courier-Journal, July 23, 2005.</p>
<p>Geoff Dougherty, “Emmis Communications sells 9 TV stations for $ 681M,” The Chicago Tribune, August 23, 2005 .</p>
<p>Kevin Downey, “Payout: Clear Channel’s ratings are up,” Media Life Magazine (<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.com/2006/footnotes/www.medialifemagazine.com">www.medialifemagazine.com</a>), January 24, 2006 .</p>
<p>Kevin Downey, “For Nielsen, a Most Delicate Dilemma,” Media Life, November 18, 2005 .</p>
<p>“ U.S. Stocks End Slightly Lower; Oil at 5 1/2 Month Low,” Dow Jones, November 29, 2005 .</p>
<p>Duffy, Brian, memo as reprinted on the Poynter Online Forum <a href="http://poynter.org/forum/?id=32127">http://poynter.org/forum/?id=32127</a></p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>E</h1>
<p>“The battle of the portals,” The Economist, October 22-28,2005 .</p>
<p>“The online ad attack,” The Economist, April 27, 2005 .</p>
<p>“International Yearbook,” Editor &amp; Publisher, 2005.</p>
<p>“Listen Up! Oxford Dictionary Picks Its ‘Word of the Year,’ and It’s ‘Podcast,’ ” Editor and Publisher, December 8, 2005</p>
<p>“Scripps Closing Birmingham Post-Herald, Dissolving JOA,” Editor and Publisher online, September 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>“TimesSelect Draws About 135,000 Paid Users for Exclusive Online Offerings,” Editor and Publisher, November 9, 2005</p>
<p>“Top 20 Papers By Circulation, According to New FAS-FAX,” Editor &amp; Publisher, November 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>2004 Editor and Publisher Yearbook Online data, 1940-2003, <a href="http://www.editorandpublisher.com/">www.editorandpublisher.com</a></p>
<p>Rick Edmonds, “As Blogs and Citizen Journalism  Grow, Where’s the News?” Poynter Online, November 14, 2005 . Available  online at: <a href="http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=91391">http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=9139</a>.</p>
<p>Rick Edmonds, “A Bad Year for Newspaper Stocks – A  Worse Year for the Gray Lady,” Poynter Online, January 12, 2006.  Available online at: <a href="http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=94997">http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=94997</a></p>
<p>Rick Edmonds, “An Online Rescue for Newspapers?” Poynter Online, January 27, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=77603%5C">http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=77603\</a></p>
<p>Rick Edmonds, “Ignoring the Elephants in Newspaperland,” Poynter Online, December 3, 2004.</p>
<p>Rick Edmonds, “The Next Bad Thing for Newspapers? More Circulation Woes,” Poynter Online, November 3, 2005.</p>
<p>Rick Edmonds, “Trouble on the Top Line,” Poynter Online, June 27, 2005. Available online at: <a href="http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=84473">http://www.poynter.org/content/content_view.asp?id=84473</a>.</p>
<p>John Eggerton, “DTV Bill Signed into Law,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, February 8, 2006 .</p>
<p>John Eggerton, “Bill Bennett Joins CNN,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, January 25, 2006 .</p>
<p>John Eggerton, “Wolzien Exiting Sanford Bernstein”, Broadcasting &amp; Cable, July 15, 2005</p>
<p>Ben Elgin, “Gunning for Google,” Business Week, November 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Tobi Elkin, “AOL Eyes Web Video Sales Opportunities, Says “Upfront” Not Likely,” Media Post, March 14, 2005</p>
<p>Stuart Elliott, The New York Times, “With Fewer Paying Up, AOL.com Shifts to Free,” October 14, 2005.</p>
<p>Stuart Elliot, “To promote a cable network, a plan to inundate the Internet,” New York Times, December 12, 2005 .</p>
<p>“The Broadband Revolution: You Say You Want a Definition,” emarketer, March 30, 2001</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>F</h1>
<p>Ross Fadner, “Newspapers Brace for Google Free WiFi Plan,” Media Daily News, October 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>Fadner, Ross, Newsstand Sales Soar for Celebrity Magazines, November 15, 2005 , <a href="http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticleHomePage&amp;art_aid=36309">http://publications.mediapost.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.showArticleHomePage&amp;art_aid=36309</a></p>
<p>Financial Wire, “NBC, Time Reach Agreement,” October 25, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jon Fine, “Net to Newspapers: Drop Dead,” BusinessWeek online, July 4, 2005.</p>
<p>Lauren Rich Fine, “Newspaper Primer, 5th Edition,” Merrill Lynch, May 11, 2001 .</p>
<p>Lauren Rich Fine, “Tribune Co. – Is There a Way to  Surface Value: A Scenario Analysis,” analyst’s report for Merrill  Lynch, November 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Lauren Rich Fine, “2006: A Bifurcated Year or Before KRI, After KRI,” Merrill Lynch, January 9, 2006 .</p>
<p>Lauren Rich Fine, “Q4 Preview,” Merrill Lynch, January 17, 2006 .</p>
<p>Mark Fitzgerald, “Editor of the Year 2004: Being Julia, In Atlanta ,” Editor &amp; Publisher, February 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Mark Fitzgerald, “Shield Law Sponsor: Bloggers ‘Probably Not’ Considered Journos,” Editor and Publisher, October 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Toni Fitzgerald, “CNN Headline News topples MSNBC,” Media Life Magazine, March 31, 2005 .</p>
<p>Toni Fitzgerald, “CNN Headline News topples MSNBC,” Media Life Magazine, March 31, 2005 .</p>
<p>Lucinda Fleeson, “Bureau of Missing Bureaus,” American Journalism Review, October/November 2003.</p>
<p>Franklin Foer, “The Journal At Sea,” New York , September 12, 2005 .</p>
<p>David Folkenflik, Morning Edition, June 30, 2005 .</p>
<p>AP, “Laredo TV Station drops newscast, staff,” Fort Worth Star Telegram, January 4, 2006 .</p>
<p>Jon Freidman, “Happy Birthday CNN. Now form an identity,” Market Watch, June 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Wayne Friedman, “NBC Buys up More of MSNBC from Microsoft,” Media Post Magazine, December 27, 2005 .</p>
<p>Wayne Friedman, “NBC Buys Up More of MSNBC from Microsoft,” Media Post Magazine, December 27, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>G</h1>
<p>Gallup Poll, May 23-26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Gannett, “ Gannett completes acquisition of  HomeTown Communications Network’s assets; Richard Aginian named  consultant and president and publisher of Detroit suburban group,”  Gannett press release, March 31, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.gannett.com/go/press/pr033105.htm">http://www.gannett.com/go/press/pr033105.htm</a>.</p>
<p>Jill Geisler, “Morale, Motivation and Balance,” Poynter Online, March 7,2005. Available online at: <a href="http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=34&amp;aid=79346">http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=34&amp;aid=79346</a>.</p>
<p>Gary Gentile, “Five Tribune Papers to Seek Job  Cuts,” Chicago Tribune, November 17, 2005 . (The Hartford Courant  announced its cuts later).</p>
<p>Mark Glaser, “GrayLady.com: NY Times explodes wall between print, Web,” Online Journalism Review, August 8, 2005</p>
<p>Donald Graham presentation to CSFB Media Week Investors Conference, December 6, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://library.corporate-ir.net/library/62/624/62487/items/176243/CSFB_12.6.05.pdf">htt p://library.corporate-ir.net/library/62/624/62487/items/176243/CSFB_12.6.05.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>Clark Gilbert and Scott D. Anthony, “Newspapers in an Electronic Age,” the Wall Street Journal, November 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Paul Ginocchio, “Auto: Turning the Corner or Are the Wheels Coming Off,” Deutsche Bank Securities, January 17, 2006 .</p>
<p>Paul Ginocchio, “Circulation Declines Accelerate Again,” Deutsche Bank Securities, November 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Paul Ginocchio, “Newspaper Publishers Keeping Cash in Circulation,” Deutsche Bank Securities, August 11, 2003 .</p>
<p>Paul Ginocchio, “Newspaper Publishers: Private Company Outlook, ” Deutsche Bank Securities, December 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Mark Glaser, “GrayLady.com: NY Times explodes wall between print, Web,” Online Journalism Review, August 8, 2005</p>
<p>Mark Glaser, “Two Times One,” Media , October 2005.</p>
<p>Antone Gonsalves, “”Online Ad Spending Projected To Slow,” Tech Web News, May 6, 2005.</p>
<p>Matea Gold, “Koppel will do in-depth shows for  Discovery; Ex-Nightline anchor to focus on topics like international  affairs, race, religion,” Los Angeles Times, Jan. 5, 2006</p>
<p>Paul Gough, TV News Section, Hollywood Reporter, June 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>Michele Greppi, “Geraldo prepping new daily show,” Television Week, October 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Marisa Guthrie, “CBS’ Roberts jumps to CNN,” New York Daily news, February 2, 2006 .</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>H</h1>
<p>Hall’s Reports research. Unpublished data. <a href="http://www.hallsreports.com/index.html">www.hallsreports.com</a></p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “As Gadgets Get It Together, Media Makers Fall Behind,” the New York Times, January 25, 2006 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “Big Hitters Said to Want Piece of AOL,” the New York Times, October 13, 2005 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “An Ex-ABC Impresario Aims to Build the Studio of the Future,” the New York Times, September 24, 2005 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “Google wants to dominate Madison Avenue, too,” the New York Time s, October 30, 2005</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “It’s Not TV, It’s Yahoo,” the New York Times, September 24, 2005 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “More People Are Watching Their Programs on the Web, The New York Times, August 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “Yahoo Hires Journalist to Report on Wars,” the New York Times, September 12, 2005 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell, “Yahoo plans to connect services with TiVo,” the New York Times, November 7, 2005</p>
<p>Saul Hansell and Geraldine Fabrikant, “New Free  Site May Affect Time Warner Decision on Troubled Unit,” the New York  Times, June 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Saul Hansell and Geraldine Fabrikant, “Why Time  Warner Has Fallen in Love With AOL, Again,” the New York Times,  September 26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Harris Interactive/ Public Relations Society of  America , “Executive, Congressional and Consumer Attitudes Toward Media,  Marketing and the Public Relations Profession,” November 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Paul Heine, “Hollander: A Radio Shift is Underway,” Billboard Radio Monitor, September 27, 2005 .</p>
<p>Samantha Henig, “Larry Kramer on CBSNews.com,  Transparency, and Having 1,500 Employees for a Web Site,” CJR Daily,  July 29, 2005 .</p>
<p>Eric Herman, “Pressure Rises for Trib Chief,” Chicago Sun-Times, January 3, 2006 .</p>
<p>Neil Hickey, “TV on Steroids,” Columbia Journalism Review, March/April, 2004.</p>
<p>John M. Higgins, “CBS: In the Money,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, January 8, 2006 .</p>
<p>John M. Higgins, “The Battle for Fifth Place,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, February 27, 2006 .</p>
<p>John M. Higgins, “D’Alba keeps fighting for CNN”, Broadcasting &amp; Cable, October 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jonathan Higuera, Print Reorganizes, Hispanic Business.com, December 2005.</p>
<p>Hoovers.com, Univision Communications fact sheet.</p>
<p>“Media Consumption Study,” Hoy &amp; TNS Market Development, October 11, 2005 . Online at: <a href="http://www.hoyinternet.com/acerca/hoy-press092305eng,0,305692.story">http://www.hoyinternet.com/acerca/hoy-press092305eng,0,305692.story</a>.</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>I</h1>
<p>ImpreMedia press release, “ ImpreMedia Enters Florida Market with Purchase of La Prensa,” January 31 2006 .</p>
<p>“Internet Advertising Revenues Estimated To Exceed  $12.5 Billion For Full Year 2005,” Interactive Advertising Bureau,  March 1, 2006 .</p>
<p>Interactive Advertising Bureau, “Interactive  Advertising Revenues Grow Nearly 33% As 2004 Totals $9.6 Billion,” April  28, 2005 .</p>
<p>Interactive Advertising Bureau, “Q2 Reports Close to $3 Billion in Internet Advertising Revenues,” September 26, 2005 .</p>
<p>“CNBC girds for Fox Business threat,” www.investors.com, September 21, 2005 .</p>
<p>Impremedia. Newspapers page.</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>J</h1>
<p>Peter Johnson, “ABC News team makes formal debut tonight,” USA Today, January 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Peter Johnson, “Webcasts, blogs allow flexibility,” USA Today, January 3, 2006 .</p>
<p>Chris Jones and J.M. Kalil, “ Las Vegas Sun to rise with morning R-J,” Las Vegas Review Journal, June 15, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jupiter Media, “Jupiter Research Forecasts Online  Advertising Market To Reach $18.9 Billion By 2010; Search Advertising  Revenue to Surpass Display,” Jupiter Media press release, August 15,  2005 .</p>
<p>Mark Jurkowitz, “Amid cuts, Herald loses newsroom veterans,” Boston Globe, June 11, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>K</h1>
<p>KAET, Arizona State University ’s public television station Web site.</p>
<p>Kagan Research, “Economics of Basic Cable Networks 2006,” Kagan Research, LLC, June 2005.</p>
<p>The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, “Generation  M: Media in the Lives of 8-18 Year-olds,” March 2005. Available online  at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Generation-M-Media-in-the-Lives-of-8-18-Year-olds-Report.pdf">www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Generation-M-Media-in-the-Lives-of-8-18-Year-olds-Report.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>Ken Kerscbaumer, “CNN Opens Up Pipeline,” Broadcasting and Cable, December 5, 2005</p>
<p>Ken Kerschbaumer, “TV on the PC gets real: Time  Warner launches trial in San Diego ,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, August  8, 2005 .</p>
<p>David Kesmodel, “Papers Turn to ‘Podcasting’ In Bid to Draw More Readers,” the Wall Street Journal, May 13, 2005 .</p>
<p>Kirk Whisler &amp; Latino Print Network, “Hispanic Publications in 2004,” Carlsbad . California .</p>
<p>Kirk Whisler &amp; Latino Print Network, “Hispanic Publication Advertising Sales in 2004,” Carlsbad , California .</p>
<p>Kirk Whisler &amp; Latino Print Network, “Hispanic Publication Advertising Sales in 2003,” Carlsbad , California .</p>
<p>Abbey Klaasen, “CNN‘s Aaron Brown out; Anderson Cooper moved to 10 p.m.,” Ad Age, November 3, 2005.</p>
<p>Klaassen, Abbey, “Looking for a Grinch? Try Media Company CEOs,” Ad Age.com, December 16, 2005</p>
<p>Howard Kurtz, “Ted Koppel and Nightline Crew Turn Down HBO for Discovery Deal,” Washington Post, Jan. 5, 2006</p>
<p>Howard Kurtz, “ U.S. News Gives a Top Political Writer the Pink Slip,” Washington Post, October 5, 2005</p>
<p>Howard Kurtz, “ABC Mulls Changes to ‘Nightline’ With Or Without Koppel,” Washington Post, February 9, 2005 .</p>
<p>Howard Kurtz, “Firms Paid TV’s Tech Gurus To Promote Their Products,” Washington Post, April 20, 2005 .</p>
<p>Howard Kurtz and Frank Ahrens, “Sirius Lands a Big Dog: Howard Stern,” Washington Post, October 7, 2004 .</p>
<p><a name="L"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>L</h1>
<p>Stephen Labaton, “NPR Conflict With Overseer Is Growing,” New York Times, May 15, 2005.</p>
<p>Stephen Labaton, Lorne Manly &amp; Elizabeth  Jensen, “Chairman Exerts Pressure on PBS, Alleging Biases,” New York  Times, May 2, 2005 .</p>
<p>Paul R. La Monica, “Should GE cancel NBC Universal?” Media Biz on CNN Money, January 19, 2006 . Online at: <a href="http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/19/commentary/mediabiz/index.htm">http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/19/commentary/mediabiz/index.htm</a>.</p>
<p>J.D. Lasica, “Participatory Journalism Puts the Reader in the Driver’s Seat,” August 7, 2003</p>
<p>Robert P. Laurence, “Network news opts for style over substance,” The San Diego Union-Tribune, December 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>Charles Layton, “The Dallas Mourning News,” American Journalism Review, April/May 2005.</p>
<p>Charles Layton, “ Sherman ’s March,” American Journalism Review, February/March 2006.</p>
<p>Michael Learmonth, “Jolly Roger’s Grand Plan,” Variety, October 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>Michael Learmonth, “CNN Flops in February as Fox News Surges,” Daily Variety, March 2, 2005 .</p>
<p>Michael Learmonth, “Fox Nets Record Aud for Prexy  Speech: State of the Union address draws in 6.46 million viewers,” Daily  Variety, February 1, 2006 .</p>
<p>Jeff Leeds, “Director at XM Resigns as Costs Skyrocket,” New York Times, February 17, 2006 .</p>
<p>Scott Leith, “CNN enshrines fire and ice team of Cooper, Brown,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, September 30, 2005 .</p>
<p>Scott Leith, “CNN sets up permanent New Orleans  bureau to cover Katrina recovery,” Atlanta Journal and Constitution,  September 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>Scott Leith, “CNN starts live net video service,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, December 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Devin Leonard, “Big News at Dow Jones,” Fortune, January 20, 2006 .</p>
<p>Rob Lever, “Blogs take giant step towards mainstream,” AFP, October 19, 2005 .</p>
<p>Gary Levin, “Disney finds place for tweens,” USA Today, October 26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Steve Levingston, “A Trial Separation,” Washington Post, January 4, 2006 .</p>
<p>James L. Levre “The Fox News channel tops CNN’s  audience, and casts its eyes toward its advertising rates”, the New York  Times, January 30, 2002 .</p>
<p>David Lieberman, “$2.7B deal would put Disney radio unit in Citadel’s hands,” USA Today, February 6, 2006 .</p>
<p>Michael Liedtke, the Associated Press, “New Google Search Engine Boosts Blogging,” September 14, 2005</p>
<p>Robert E. Litan and Alice M. Rivlin, “Projecting the Economic Impact of the Internet,” American Economic Review, 91:2, 2001</p>
<p>Lowry, Tom, “Mighty Week,” Business Week, March 21, 2005</p>
<p>Joel Lunenfeld, “Online Video Advertising is Growing Up,” Media Post’s Online Video Insider, January 23, 2006 .</p>
<p><a name="M"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>M</h1>
<p>Robert MacMillan, “Tsunami Prompts Online Outpouring,” The Washington Post, January 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Towards a Critical Media Studies Approach to the Blogoshpere,” by Vincent Maher. Available online at: <a href="http://nml.ru.ac.za/menthol/?p=129">http://nml.ru.ac.za/menthol/?p=129</a>.</p>
<p>Scott Maier, “Accuracy Matters: A Cross-Market  Study of Newspaper Error and Credibility,” Journalism and Mass  Communications Quarterly, Autumn 2005.</p>
<p>Steven Mallas, “XM’s Foxy Deal,” The Motley Fool.com, October 21, 2005</p>
<p>Joe Mandese, “TV, Radio, Outdoor Ratings Poised  for Transformation, New Alliances,” Media Daily News, July 22, 2005 ,  posted 8:15am EST.</p>
<p>Carl Marcucci, “Buyers, sellers address the 2006  radio upfront — Part II,” Radio &amp; Television Business Report,  October 2005, Volume 22, Issue 10, pg. 14.</p>
<p>Kevin J. Martin, “Protecting Children from Violent  and Indecent Programming.” Written statement for the Commission on  Commerce, Science and Transportation, U.S. Senate, February 11, 2004 .</p>
<p>Sam Matthews, “BBC hints at launch of 24-hour US news station,” Brand Republic , October 11, 2005 .</p>
<p>Sarah McBride, “TV News Stars Move to NPR And Sound Off,” the Wall Street Journal, January 20, 2006 .</p>
<p>Robert McChesney and John Podesta ,“Let There Be Wi-Fi,” Washington Monthly, January/February 2006.</p>
<p>Mediabistro.com, “More on Atlantic Media’s New Superstar,” April 21, 2005 <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/magazines/more_on_atlantic_medias_new_superstar_20765.asp">http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlDC/magazines/more_on_atlantic_medias_new_superstar_20765.asp</a></p>
<p>“The latest upfront news is, well, news,” Media Daily News, June14, 2005.</p>
<p>Media Mark Research, Inc. (Prepared by NAA  Business Analysis and Research Department), “Newspaper Section  Readership 2005,” Spring 2004 study. Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.naa.org/marketscope/readership2005/section_readership_2005.pdf">www.naa.org/marketscope/readership2005/section_readership_2005.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>Mediamark Research, “Magazine Audience Estimates” 1997.</p>
<p>Mediamark Research, “Magazine Audience Estimates” 2005. <a href="http://www.mediamark.com/">www.mediamark.com</a></p>
<p>News Brief, “Kagan: cable has recovered, will grow at double-digit rates,” October 3, 2005 , Media Post Web site.</p>
<p>Don Melvin, “More Americans turn to BBC for news,” Cox News Service, August 26, 2004 .</p>
<p>Meredith Corporation press release, May 24, 2005</p>
<p>Davis Merritt, &#8220;Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How  the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism is Putting Democracy at Risk.&#8221; ( New  York , N.Y. : AMACOM Books, 2005)</p>
<p>Donica Mensing and Jackie Rejfek, “Prospects for  profit: The (un)evolving business model for online news,” Paper  presented to the International Symposium on Online Journalism,  University of Texas at Austin, April 9, 2005.</p>
<p>Joel Meyer, “Journal Editorial Report Jumps to Fox News,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, November 30, 2005 .</p>
<p>Philip Meyer, “The Vanishing Newspaper: Saving  Journalism in the Information Age” ( Columbia , University of Missouri  Press, 2004).</p>
<p>Mid-Year Media Review presentation. Available online at: <a href="http://www.gannett.com/go/press/mymr05/overview.htm">http://www.gannett.com/go/press/mymr05/overview.htm</a></p>
<p>Alex Mindlin, “Browsing the Site, Not Watching the Show,” New York Times, September 19, 2005</p>
<p>Arshad Mohammed, “Verizon Executive Calls for End to Google’s ‘Free Lunch,” the Washington Post, February 7, 2006 .</p>
<p>Monster 2004 annual report and presentation at CSFB Media Week Conference December 2005.</p>
<p>Linda Moss, “Viacom Split Becomes a Reality: Unwinding of Assets Targeted for Early ’06,” Multichannel News, June 20, 2005 .</p>
<p>Keith Moyer, et al. “10 Ways our new design will work for you,” startribune.com (flash presentation). Available online at: <a href="http://www.startribune.com/style/graphics/redesign_guide/">http://www.startribune.com/style/graphics/redesign_guide/</a></p>
<p>MSNBC.com, “Meet the Press No. 1 in November 2005 sweeps,” December 6, 2005 .</p>
<p>MSNBC Profile on the NBC Universal Web site (Company Overview, Television Networks). Online at: <a href="http://www.nbcuni.com/About_NBC_Universal/Company_Overview/overview03.shtml">http://www.nbcuni.com/About_NBC_Universal/Company_Overview/overview03.shtml</a></p>
<p>Museum of Broadcast Communications , “U.S. POLICY:  TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1996,” Museum of Broadcast Communications Web  site. Online: <a href="http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/U/htmlU/uspolicyt/uspolicyt.htm">http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/U/htmlU/uspolicyt/uspolicyt.htm</a></p>
<p><a name="N"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>N</h1>
<p>Andrew Nachison, the Media Center at the American Press Institute blog: Morph, June 22, 2005 , 4:53 p.m.</p>
<p>National Newspaper Association, “ America ’s Community Newspapers Grow; Thrive through Change,” December 2005.</p>
<p>National Public Radio Annual Report 2003, pg. 4.</p>
<p>New California Media Directory, National Ethnic Media, 2nd Edition.</p>
<p>News &amp; Technology, “Patriot tab meets end in Harrisburg , Pa. ”November 2005. Available online at: <a href="http://www.newsandtech.com/issues/2005/11-05/nt/11-05_patriot.htm">http://www.newsandtech.com/issues/2005/11-05/nt/11-05_patriot.htm</a></p>
<p>News Corp. Annual Report, June 2005</p>
<p>News Corporation press release, “Speech by Rupert  Murdoch to the American Society of Newspaper Editors,” April 13, 2005 .  Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.newscorp.com/news/news_247.html">www.newscorp.com/news/news_247.html</a>.</p>
<p>“2005 Newspaper M &amp; A Values Up 72%, Says Report,” News Inc. January 9, 2006 .</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America, “Daily &amp;  Sunday Newspaper Readers Per Copy Trend,” Simmons and Market Research  Bureau (1994-1997); MediaMark Research Inc. (1998-Present); SRDS  Circulation prepared by NAA Business Analysis and Research Department,  January 9, 2006.</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America, “Daily and  Sunday Newspapers 2005 Readers Per Copy,” prepared by NAA Business  Analysis and Research Department, August 27, 2005 .</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America, “Daily and Sunday  Newspapers 2005 Readers Per Copy,” prepared by NAA Business Analysis  and Research Dept., MRI Spring 2005; SRDS Circulation 2005.</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America , “NAA Releases ABC FAS-FAX Analysis,” November 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America , “New Newspaper  Audience Database (NADbase) Report Provides Advertisers With Expanded  Audience Measurement Data Across Media Platforms,” October 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America , “Over 47 Million  People Visited A Newspaper Web Site in September, Representing Nearly A  Third of All Internet Users,” November 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Newspaper Association of America , “Print And  Online Newspaper Advertising Up 2.4% In Q3; Up 2.9% In First Nine Months  of 2005,” November 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>Newspaper National Network, “Media Engagement Study,” June 15-21, 2005 .</p>
<p>“To Stop Drag, New Anchors,” New York Daily News, January 13, 2006 .</p>
<p>New York Times Company presentation at UBS Warburg Media Week Conference, December 2004.</p>
<p>Newsweek staff box, July 18, 2005</p>
<p>Nielsen Media Research Web site, Local People Meter Roll-Out Schedule, Online: <a href="http://www.nielsenmedia.com/lpm/rollout_sched.htm">http://www.nielsenmedia.com/lpm/rollout_sched.htm</a></p>
<p>Yuki Noguchi, “Lycos, Yahoo Pushing to Put Media Online, the Washington Post, October 4, 2005 .</p>
<p>Norris, Floyd, “As Primedia Falls, Preferred Stock Lives up to Its Name,” New York Times, October 26, 2005</p>
<p>Paul Nowell, “FCC Chairman Kevin Martin speaks at inaugural Helms Forum,” Miami Herald, October 11, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="O"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>O</h1>
<p>Gavin O’Malley, “Bypass Surgery: CBS Skips Cable, Uses Web For 24-Hour News Channel,” MediaPost, July 13, 2005</p>
<p>Gavin O’Malley, “MSNBC.com To Post Entire “NBC Nightly News,” Online Media Daily, November 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>On the Media, “Up from the Wreckage,” Oct 21, 2005 , taken from the program transcript, <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.com/2006/footnotes/www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_102105_wreckage.html">www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_102105_wreckage.html</a></p>
<p>Kris Oser, “Online Video Ad Spending To Triple By 2007,” AdAge.com, November 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Online Media Daily, “Media Execs Bullish On Ad Spending,” October 18, 2005 .</p>
<p>Online Publishers Association, “Drivers and Barriers To Online Video Viewing,” February 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Washingtonpost.com: News consumption growing online,” Online Publishers Association Intelligence Report, March 7, 2006 .</p>
<p>Online Publishers Association bi-weekly newsletter, August 22- September 2, 2005 .</p>
<p>“New Online Publishers Association Study  Identifies Key Experiences That Drive Web Usage,” Online Publishers  Association press release, June 1, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="P"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>P</h1>
<p>Bob Papper, “News Staffing and Probability Survey,” RTNDA Communicator, October 2005.</p>
<p>Bob Papper, “Salary Survey,” RTNDA Communicator, June 2005, pg. 26.</p>
<p>Bob Papper, “Running in Place,” RTNDA Communicator, July/August 2005, Vol. 59, No. 7, pg. 27.</p>
<p>Pamela Parker, “Classifieds Still King but Paid Search Looms Locally,” Clickz.com, September 22, 2005</p>
<p>Sacha Pfeiffer, “ Phoenix Buys into El Planeta,” Boston Globe, September 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Adam L. Penenberg, “Can Bloggers Strike It Rich?” Wired News, September 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>Pew Hispanic Center , “Changing Channels and Crisscrossing Cultures: A Survey of Latinos on the News Media,” April 2004</p>
<p>The Pew Internet and American Life Project, “Generations online,” December 2005. Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Generations_Memo.pdf">www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Generations_Memo.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>The Pew Internet and American Life Project, “Selling items online,” November 2005. Available online at: <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_SellingOnline_Nov05.pdf">http://www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_SellingOnline_Nov05.pdf</a></p>
<p>The Pew Internet and American Life Project, “The state of blogging,” January 2005. Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_blogging_data.pdf">www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_blogging_data.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>The Pew Internet and American Life Project, “Teen Content Creators and Consumers,” November 2, 2005 .</p>
<p>The Pew Internet and American Life Project, “Usage Over Time” spreadsheet. Available online at: <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/UsageOverTime.xls">http://www.pewInternet.org/trends/UsageOverTime.xls</a></p>
<p>Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, “Bush a Drag on Republican Midterm Prospects,” February 9, 2006 .</p>
<p>Pew Research Center for the People and the Press,  “Alito Viewed Positively, But Libby Takes a Toll,” November 8, 2005 .  Available online at: <a href="http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=262">http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=262</a>.</p>
<p>Survey by the Pew Research Center , conducted by  Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Survey conducted  September 6- 7, 2005.</p>
<p>Survey by the Pew Research Center , conducted by  Princeton Survey Research Associates International in association with  the Project for Excellence in Journalism. Survey conducted June 8- 12,  2005.</p>
<p>Pew Research Center for he People and the Press,  “News Audiences Increasingly Politicized,” June 8, 2004 . Available  online at: <a href="http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=215">http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=215</a>.</p>
<p>Pew Research Center for the People and the Press,  conducted in association with the Project for Excellence in Journalism,  “Public More Critical of Press, but Goodwill Persists,” June 26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Pew Research Center for the People and the Press,  “Two in three critical of Bush’s relief efforts,” Pew Research Center ,  September 8, 2005 . Online: <a href="http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=255">http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=255</a></p>
<p>The Pew Research Center for the People and the  Press, Part 1 – The 2005 Political Typology: Beyond Red vs. Blue in  “Mapping the Political Landscape, 2005,” Pew Research Center .</p>
<p>Jeremy Polofsky, “Clear Channel renews bid to ease ownership limits,” Reuters, October 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>James Poniewozik, “The Decency Police,” Time Magazine, volume 165, No. 13, March 28, 2005 .</p>
<p>“A midwestern newspaper recently made a surprising  declaration in big, brash Texas : Smaller is better,” PRESSTIME,  June/July 2005. Available online at: <a href="http://www.naa.org/Presstime/PTArtPage.cfm?AID=7063">http://www.naa.org/Presstime/PTArtPage.cfm?AID=7063</a></p>
<p>“Demand for Spanish language news content rising  rapidly; Hispanic journalists and news stations registered on the  NewsMarket jumps 250%,” PR News Wire, August 25, 2005 .</p>
<p>PRSA/Harris Interactive, “Executive, Congressional  and Consumer Attitudes Toward Media, Marketing and the Public Relations  Profession.” Study conducted June 7-12, 2005 .</p>
<p>Publisher’s Information Bureau data. January &#8211; December 1997 vs. 1996. Excluding data from newspaper magazines</p>
<p>Publisher’s Information Bureau data. January &#8211; December 2005 vs. 2004. Excluding data from newspaper magazines.</p>
<p><a name="R"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>R</h1>
<p>Radio Business Report, “Wachovia points its arrow further down,”, e-mail newsletter, September 21, 2005 .</p>
<p>Radio Business Report, “2005 the roll of the Dice; Tracking of a Soft Year,” August 29, 2005 .</p>
<p>Lee Rainie, “We Stand By Our Data,” Pew Internet &amp; The American Life Project, April 6, 2005 .</p>
<p>James Rainey, “Geffen Eyes Another Medium: The Times,” Los Angeles Times, September 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Antonio Regalado, “Video Blogs Break Out With Tsunami Scenes,” the Wall Street Journal, January 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>The Reporters’ Committee for Freedom of the Press Web site, last accessed February 10, 2006 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.rcfp.org/shields_and_subpoenas.html#shield">http://www.rcfp.org/shields_and_subpoenas.html#shield</a>.</p>
<p>Reuters , “TV, radio indecency complaints plunge 96pct-FCC,” September 28, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Mobile blogs give citizen journalism legs,” Reuters, May 21, 2005 .</p>
<p>Bill Richards, “JOA fight may have different twist in next stage,” Seattle Times, August 21, 2005 .</p>
<p>Lori Robertson, “Adding a Price Tag,” American Journalism Review, December/January 2006.</p>
<p>Lori Robertson, “The Chronicle Chronicles,” American Journalism Review, October/November 2005.</p>
<p>J. Max Robins, “Singin’ the News Blues,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, July 25, 2005 .</p>
<p>Kevin Roderick, interviewed on NPR’s “On the Media,” November 25, 2005 . Online at: <a href="http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_112505_la.htm.">http://www.onthemedia.org/transcripts/transcripts_112505_la.htm.</a></p>
<p>Allison Romano, “Special Report: Hispanic Television Summit ,” Multichannel News, October 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Allison Romano, “NBC U Takes Control of MSNBC,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, December 23, 2005 .</p>
<p>Allison Romano, “Nightly News boss sounds off,” Broadcasting &amp; Cable, December 5, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jay Rosen, “ Greensboro Goes Open Source: A Follow Up,” Pressthink, December 21, 2004 .</p>
<p>Jay Rosen, “The Net Knows More Than You: An Open Letter to the People of CBS News,” PressThink, September 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jack Rosenberry, “The Effect of Content Mix on  Circulation Penetration for U.S. Daily Newspapers,” Journalism and Mass  Communications Quarterly, Summer 2005.</p>
<p>Private conversation with Tom Rosenstiel,  director, Project for Excellence in Journalism, principal author of the  State of the News Media annual report.</p>
<p>Sean Ross, “What CC’s Spotload Initiative Means For You,” Edison Media Research, July 22, 2004 .</p>
<p>RTNDA News, Staffing and Profitability Survey, RTNDA Communicator, October 2005.</p>
<p>RTNDA Salary Survey, “Median TV News Salary Comparisons Over Time”, RTNDA Communicator, June 2005.</p>
<p><a name="S"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>S</h1>
<p>Lydia Saad, “Blogs Not Yet in the Media Big Leagues,” The Gallup Poll, March 11, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://poll.gallup.com/content/default.aspx?CI=15217">http://poll.gallup.com/con10t/default.aspx?CI=15217</a>.</p>
<p>Jennifer Saba, “Analysts Worry About Newsroom  Cuts, As Top Editors in Philly and San Jose Review Options,” Editor  &amp; Publisher online, September 28, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jennifer Saba, “Dispelling the Myth of Readership Decline, Editor&amp; Publisher, November 28, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jennifer Saba, “Online Growth Proving to Be Industry’s Life Raft,” Editor and Publisher, August 19, 2005</p>
<p>Jennifer Saba, “Onward ABC Soldiers,” Editor &amp; Publisher, April 2005.</p>
<p>Jennifer Saba, “Report Finds Drop in ‘Other Paid’  in FAS-FAX, Lists Gains and Losses,” Editor &amp; Publisher, November 8,  2005 .</p>
<p>Jennifer Saba and Joe Strupp, “What? You Gained Circ?” Editor &amp; Publisher, December 2004.</p>
<p>“12 Cities Still Have JOA’s,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, April 29, 2003 .</p>
<p>Seelye, Katharine, “Gruner &amp; Jahr Said to Sell 2 Business Magazines,” New York Times, June, 21, 2005</p>
<p>Seelye, Katharine, “Time Inc. to Cut 100 More Jobs as It Focuses on Web Business,” New York Times, January 31, 2006</p>
<p>Katherine Seelye, “At Newspapers, Some Clipping,” The New York Times, October 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Katharine Q. Seelye, “Can Papers End the Free Ride?” the New York Times, March 14, 2005 .</p>
<p>Dan Sewell, “Federated Merger Another Blow to Papers,” Associated Press, September 22, 2005 .</p>
<p>Letter from Bruce S. Sherman, CEO of Private Capital Management, L.P. Letter dated November 1, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/205520/000089722605000213/kri2.txt">http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/205520/000089722605000213/kri2.txt</a></p>
<p>Jay Sherman, “NBCU Puts up Four Stations for Sale ,” Television Week, January 9, 2006 .</p>
<p>Scott Sherman, “The Evolution of William Dean Singleton,” Columbia Journalism Review, March/April 2003.</p>
<p>Richard Siklos, “News Corporation, With IGN in Its  Stable, Backs Up Promise to Be Bigger Web Player,” the New York Times ,  September 9, 2005 .</p>
<p>Erika D. Smith, “Media Madness,” the Indianapolis Star, September 26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jay Smith, “‘Scorekeepers’ Understate Vibrancy Of Newspaper Readership,” The Tampa Tribune, November 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>Smith, Stephanie, Time Inc. Axes 105 Staffers, Mediaweek.com, December 13, 2005</p>
<p>Mike Shields, “Online Video Comes of Age,” MediaWeek, September 19, 2005 .</p>
<p>Mike Shields, “Rational Exuberance,” Media Outlook Report, AdWeek Magazines, September 26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Soriano, Cesar, “British Mag Makes Scene,” USA Today, August 2, 2005 .</p>
<p>Chase Squires, “News at the Speed of Light,” St. Petersburg Times, December 14, 2005 .</p>
<p>Joel Stein, “You Don’t Know Jack,” Time, Vol. 166, No. 7, August 15, 2005 .</p>
<p>Jacques Steinberg, “News Corp. starts to fill shoes of departed Murdoch,” New York Times, August 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>George Stephanopoulos, “Why is Judge Alito Smiling?,” <a href="http://www.abcnews.blogs.com/theworldnewser">The World Newser</a>, January 9, 2006 .</p>
<p>Michael Stoll, “Mercury News will shed 2 ethnic papers,” Grade the News, October 21, 2005 . Available online at: <a href="http://www.gradethenews.org/2005/nmclosure.htm">http://www.gradethenews.org/2005/nmclosure.htm</a></p>
<p>Louise Story, “As Corporate Ad Money Flows Their  Way, Bloggers Risk Their Rebel Reputation,” the New York Times, November  26, 2005 .</p>
<p>Joe Strupp, “Knight Ridder, Gannett, MediaNews Strike Blockbuster Deal,” Editor &amp; Publisher, August 3, 2005 .</p>
<p>Joe Strupp, “Post-Dispatch Cuts Nearly 12% of News Staff Through Buyouts,” Editor &amp; Publisher, November 1, 2005 .</p>
<p>Seth Sutel, “Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. Expands Its Online Strategy,” Associated Press, December 6, 2005</p>
<p>Georg Szalai, “Fox Interactive in Growth Spurt,” Hollywood Reporter, December 7, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="T"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>T</h1>
<p>The Tarrance Group,”Executive Summary to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting,” Pg. 6, October 8, 2003, pg. 3</p>
<p>Eric A. Taub, “With Stern on Board, Satellite Radio Is Approaching a Secure Orbit,” New York Times, December 19, 2005 .</p>
<p>Technorati Website, located at http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.technorati.com/">www.technorati.com/</a>, last accessed January 31, 2006 .</p>
<p>“ U.S. Broadband Use Tops 60%&#8211;Maybe,” TelecomWeb, October 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>Thomas, “Down to the Wire,” Foreign Affairs, May/June 2005 .</p>
<p>“New York Times Company Reports First-Quarter Results,” Times Company press release, April 14, 2005 .</p>
<p>Television Bureau of Advertising, “Broadcast TV’s Ad Revenues Up 1.0% in 1st Quarter,” TVB Web site, June 10, 2005 .</p>
<p>Time staff box, September 12, 2005</p>
<p>“Cable and VCR Households,” TV Basics: Online  Brochure, Media Trends Track, Research Central, Television Bureau of  Advertising (TVB) Web site; Online: <a href="http://www.tvb.org/nav/build_frameset.asp?url=/rcentral/index.asp">http://www.tvb.org/nav/build_frameset.asp?url=/rcentral/index.asp</a></p>
<p>“TVB Forecasts Spot TV to Grow 6.1-7.9% in 2006,” TVB Web site, September 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Television Bureau of Advertising, “Minus Political  Dollars, Local Broadcast TV Revenues Down 11.7% in 3rd Quarter,” TVB  Web site, January 6, 2006 . Online: <a href="http://www.tvb.org/nav/build_frameset.asp?url=/rcentral/adrevenuetrack/revenue/2005/ad_figures_1.asp">http://www.tvb.org/nav/build_frameset.asp?url=/rcentral/adrevenuetrack/revenue/2005/ad_figures_1.asp</a></p>
<p>Mike Tierney, “Fox now the big dog in cable news — and growing,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, September 9, 2005 .</p>
<p>Time Warner Annual Report, 2004</p>
<p>Turner Asia Website, “CNN Worldwide Corporate Profile – CNN bureaus,” May 2005. Online: <a href="http://www.cnnasiapacific.com/en/groups/corporate/cnn.bureaus.asp">http://www.cnnasiapacific.com/en/groups/corporate/cnn.bureaus.asp</a></p>
<p><a name="U"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>U</h1>
<p>R. Thomas Umstead, “Large Rate Hikes by Fox , USA ,” Multichannel News, October 31, 2005 .</p>
<p>Univision 2005 Third-Quarter Results press release.</p>
<p>University of Chicago , “Valuing New Goods in a  Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers,” Matthew Gentzkow,  January 24, 2006 . Available online at: http://<a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/footnotes/www.gsb.uchicago.edu/fac/matthew.gentzkow/research/PrintOnline.pdf">www.gsb.uchicago.edu/fac/matthew.gentzkow/research/PrintOnline.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>University of Connecticut , “National Polls of  Journalists and the American Public on First Amendment and the Media  Released,” May 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>U.S. Census, “2004 Community Survey Data Profile  Highlights,” “2004 Community Survey: Language Spoken at Home by Ability  to Speak English for the Population 5 Years and Over.”</p>
<p>U.S. Census, Foreign-Born Population by World Region of Birth, Age and Sex, March 1995.</p>
<p>U.S. Census, Foreign-Born Population in U.S. Regions, by Sex and World Region of Birth, 2004.</p>
<p>U.S. Census, “Mapping Census 2000: The Geography of U.S. Diversity, Hispanic or Latino Origin”</p>
<p>U.S. Census, “Mapping Census 2000: The Geography of U.S. Diversity, Asian”</p>
<p>U.S. Census, “Mapping Census 2000: The Geography of U.S. Diversity, Black or African American” p. 4.</p>
<p>U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Estimates of the  Population for Incorporated Places Over 100,000, Ranked by July 1, 2004 .  Population: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2004 , <a href="http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2004-01.xls">http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2004-01.xls</a></p>
<p>U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Estimates of the  Population for Incorporated Places Over 100,000, Ranked by July 1, 2004 .  Population: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2004, <a href="http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2004-01.xls">http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2004-01.xls</a></p>
<p>“A Nation Online: Entering the Broadband Age,” U.S. Department of Commerce, September 2004.</p>
<p><a name="V"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>V</h1>
<p>Aline Van Duyn, “Ailes takes chair at Fox TV, News Corp.,” Financial Times, August 16, 2005 .</p>
<p>Adrian Van Klaveren, “Newsgathering,” BBC News,  November 4, 2004 . Online:  http://news.bbc.co.uk/newswatch/ifs/hi/newsid_3960000/newsid_3964600/3964687.stm</p>
<p>Diego Vasquez, “It’s NBC’s Brian Williams by a length,” <a href="http://www.medialifemagazine.com/">Media Life Magazine</a> online archives, January 6, 2005 .</p>
<p>Veronis Suhler Stevenson, Communications Industry Forecast 2005-2009</p>
<p>David A. Vise, “AOL Rediscovers Success With Free Web Sites,” the Washington Post, October 19, 2005 .</p>
<p>David A. Vise, “AOL to Buy Blog Site in Bid to Expand Reach,” The Washington Post , October 7, 2005 .</p>
<p>David A. Vise, “Yahoo to Add 5 Gawker Media Blogs to Web Site,” the Washington Post, November 16, 2005.</p>
<p>Fred Vogelstein, “Yahoo’s Brilliant Solution,” Fortune, August 8, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="W"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>W &amp; X</h1>
<p>Andrew Wallenstein &amp; Kimberly Speight, “Syndie Biz Could Pop as Prime Slots Open,” Hollywood Reporter, January 25, 2006 .</p>
<p>Andrew Wallenstein, “Comcast Reworks AZN Plan, Cuts Staff,” Reuters, December 11, 2005 .</p>
<p>“Desperate No More? Networks See a Rebound in Viewers,” The Wall Street Journal, May 25, 2005 .</p>
<p>David Washburn, “A Lifeline Online,” San Diego Union-Tribune, November 27, 2005 .</p>
<p>Edward Wasserman, “Selling the blogosphere,” the Miami Herald, October 17, 2005 .</p>
<p>Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive press release,  “Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Partners with MSNBC on Single  Advertiser Day Across News Sites,” December 13, 2005</p>
<p>Webster, J., Phalen, P., &amp; Lichty, L., (2000)  Ratings Analysis: The Theory and Practice of Audience Research, Lawrence  Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey .</p>
<p>Joanna Weiss, “Cooper’s celebrity is part of the story in new CNN role,” Boston Globe, November 8, 2005 .</p>
<p>Brian Williams, “Jumping the Gun, and Counting the Dead,” The Daily Nightly, <a href="http://www.msnbc.com/">www.msnbc.com</a>, posted 5:05pm EDT , September 29, 2005 .</p>
<p>Pui-Wing and Kevin J. Delaney, “Google’s Growth  Helps Ignite Silicon Valley Frenzy,” the Wall Street Journal, November  23, 2005 .</p>
<p><a name="C"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<h1>Y</h1>
<p>Yahoo! Finance breakdown of major holders. Available online at: <a href="http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=KRI">http://finance.yahoo.com/q/mh?s=KRI</a>.</p>
<p>Emmis Communications Press Release, “Emmis  Completes Sale of Four Additional Television stations,” Yahoo Finance  Web site, January 27, 2006 .</p>
<p>Yahoo Finance &#8211; NBC Universal (<a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/138/138804.html">http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/138/138804.html</a>) and CNBC (<a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/115/115587.html">http://biz.yahoo.com/ic/115/115587.html</a>) Profiles</p>
<p>Yahoo Media Relations press release, 2004</p>
<p><a id="Y" name="Y"></a><a href="../2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/#">return to the                      top</a></p>
<p>Z</p>
<p>Peter Zollman, “Competing With Craig,” Classified Intelligence, December 2004.</p>
<p>David Zurawik, “At CBS News, hopes for a resurgence,” Baltimore Sun, October 27, 2005 .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/source-bibliography/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Authors and Collaborators</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/authors-and-collaborators/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/authors-and-collaborators/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:36:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Authors and Collaborators Many partners contributed to this report. The content analysis was designed by the Project in collaboration with six of those partners, Steve Lacy and Fred Fico of The School of Journalism at Michigan State University, Esther Thorson and Ken Fleming of the University of Missouri School of Journalism, Andrew Tyndall of ADT [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Authors and Collaborators</p>
<p>Many partners contributed to this report.</p>
<p>The content analysis was designed by the Project in  collaboration with six of those partners, Steve Lacy and Fred Fico of  The School of Journalism at Michigan State University, Esther Thorson  and Ken Fleming of the University of Missouri School of Journalism,  Andrew Tyndall of ADT Research and Lee Ann Brady, formerly of Princeton  Survey Research Associates International. The coding of national print  media (web sites, newspapers and blogs) was executed by a team at  Missouri under the supervision of Fleming and Thorson. The coding of  network TV and cable was executed by ADT Research under the supervision  of Tyndall. The local news content (print, radio and television) was  coded by a team at Michigan under the supervision of Lacy and Fico. All  data was generated by the team at Michigan and by Paul Hitlin of the  Project. All conclusions and analysis were sent to the team at Michigan  for review.</p>
<p>Daniel Riffe, professor of journalism at Ohio University consulted on the design of the study.</p>
<p>The chapter on newspapers was co-authored by Rick  Edmonds of the Poynter Institute. The rest of the chapters were written  by the staff of the Project. Bill Kovach, the chairman of the Committee  of Concerned Journalists, served as a consultant to the Report.</p>
<p>Andrew Tyndall of ADT Research provided tapes, data  and gave particularly close reads and copious suggestions on the  chapters on network and cable TV.</p>
<p>From the Project: David Vaina conducted the data  aggregation for the newspaper and online chapters. Gauri Malhotra and  Atiba Pertilla conducted the data aggregation for the cable and local  television chapters. Tom Avila conducted the data aggregation for the  radio and network chapters. Dante Chinni conducted the data aggregation  for the ethnic, alternative and magazine chapters. Paul Hitlin served as  a final reader of all chapters. Jennifer Fimbres managed the budget and  distribution.</p>
<p>The firm of Carter Cosgrove designed the website.  David Vaina implemented the design and construction of the site with the  assistance of Chinni and Malhotra. Tom Avila aided in the visual design  of the website as well as the Executive Summary. Pamela Nabholz took  the photos that appear on the site. Wendy Kelly of WLK Design will  publish the executive summary.</p>
<p>Amy Mitchell, PEJ&#8217;s associate director and research director, supervised the project. Tom Rosenstiel is the Project&#8217;s director.</p>
<p>Evan Jenkins, a longtime New York Times editor who is  now a consulting editor of the Columbia Journalism Review,  was the  copy editor.</p>
<p>More than twenty-five people served as readers of the  chapters. Among them are: Charles Bierbauer, John Carroll, Sandy Close,  Wally Dean, Rick Edmonds, Paul Friedman, Ed Fouhy, Bob Giles, Dan  Gillmor, Lawrence Grossman, Mark Hanzlik, Samir Husni, Richard Karpel,  Katie King, Bill Kovach, Scott Libin, Dick Meyer, Phil Meyer, Victor  Navasky, George Niesen, Bob Papper, Jon Petrovich, Deborah Potter, Adam  Powell, Lee Rainie, Alan Seraita, Al Stavitsky, Roberto Suro,  Andrew  Tyndall and Dale Willman. Their thoughtful insights and suggestions  greatly improved the chapters, but the readers are in no way responsible  for the analysis or narrative accounts in this report. Moreover, the  readers were not sources for information, unless explicitly cited in  footnotes. In no case did a reader serve as an anonymous source for  anything in the report.</p>
<p>Finally, the project could not have been completed  without the extraordinary support, both financially and personally, of  the Pew Charitable Trusts, particularly Don Kimelman, our friend and  colleague, and Rebecca Rimel, whose idea this report was in the first  place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/authors-and-collaborators/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Methodology</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/methodology/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/methodology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:34:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Methodology The data for this study were collected in two parts. Much of the study is based on research conducted originally by other people or organizations. Other research, particularly the content analysis, is original work conducted specifically for this report. For the data aggregated from other researchers, the Project took several steps. First, we tried [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Methodology</p>
<p>The data for this study were collected in two parts.  Much of the study is based on research conducted originally by other  people or organizations. Other research, particularly the content  analysis, is original work conducted specifically for this report.</p>
<p>For the data aggregated from other researchers, the  Project took several steps. First, we tried to determine what data had  been collected and by whom for the eight media sectors studied. We  organized the data into the six primary areas of interest we wanted to  examine: content, audience, economics, ownership, newsroom investment  and public attitudes. For all data ultimately used, the Project sought  and gained permission for their use.</p>
<p>Next, the Project studied the data closely to  determine where elements reinforced each other and where there were  apparent contradictions or gaps. In doing so, the Project endeavored to  determine the value and validity of each data set. That in many cases  involved going back to the sources who collected the research in the  first place. Where data conflicted, we have included all relevant  sources and tried to explain their differences, either in footnotes or  in the narratives. For instance, the differences in online news use are  probably explained by how survey questions were phrased — different  answers emerge if the question is whether someone ever goes online for  news, has done so in the last month or has done so in the last week.</p>
<p>In analyzing the data for each media sector, we sought insight from <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-authors-and-collaborators/">experts</a> by having at least three outside readers for each sector chapter.  Those readers raised questions, offered arguments and questioned data  where they saw fit.</p>
<p>All sources are cited in footnotes or within the narrative, and listed alphabetically in a <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/">source bibliography. </a> The data used in the report are also available in more complete tabular  form online, where users can view the raw material, sort it on their  own and make their own <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-radio-intro/2006-charts-tables/">charts and graphs</a>.  Our goal was not only to organize the available material into a clear  narrative, but to also collect all the public data on journalism in one  usable place. In many cases, the Project paid for the use of the data.</p>
<p>For the original content analysis research conducted by the Project, the methodology follows.</p>
<p><strong> Content Analysis Methodology</strong></p>
<p>Three distinct categories of media were studied as a  part of the 2006 PEJ Day in the Life of the News study — national,  local, and Spanish-language media.</p>
<p>National media included national newspapers,  national Web sites, network and cable television, and blogs. Local media  included local television, local newspapers, local radio, local Web  sites and blogs. Spanish-language media included newspapers and  broadcast.</p>
<p>ADT Research conducted coding for national cable and  network television. The University of Missouri School of Journalism  Center for Advanced Social Research conducted coding for national  newspapers and Web sites and national and local blogs. The School of  Journalism at Michigan State University conducted coding of all local  media except for local blogs and Web sites. Spanish-language media —  first translated into English — was also coded by the team at Michigan .</p>
<p>Coding for all media except newspaper outlets was  for May 11, 2005 . For newspapers, local and national, the May 12  editions were coded. In all, the study examined some 2,125 stories ( not  including blogs): 102 in national newspapers, 100 online, 107 on  network television, and 312 on cable news. The local media included  538  local TV stories,  420 on local radio, 425 in local print and 43 local  online stories. Spanish-language media consisted of 78 (TV and  newspaper) stories. In addition to that main analysis, 112 different  postings — 104 national and 8 local — were coded under a different  coding scheme.</p>
<p>I. National News Media</p>
<p><strong> Sample, Story Procurement and Inclusion</strong></p>
<p>To present a meaningful assessment of the national  news content available to the public each day we studied a wide range of  media outlets and programs.</p>
<p><em>Newspapers </em>: the New York Times, the Los  Angeles Times, USA Today. Stories were procured via hard copies of the  publications, supplemented by the Nexis database.</p>
<p>All stories with distinct bylines that appeared on a  particular newspaper’s front page, on the first page of the local/Metro  section, and the first page of the business section were selected for  analysis.</p>
<p><em>Network News </em>:</p>
<p>ABC Today Show ( 7-8 a.m. )</p>
<p>CBS Early Show ( 7-8 a.m. )</p>
<p>NBC Good Morning America ( 7-8 a.m. )</p>
<p>ABC World News Tonight</p>
<p>CBS Evening News</p>
<p>NBC Nightly News</p>
<p>PBS NewsHour</p>
<p>The morning and evening broadcasts were procured  through videotape, supplemented by transcripts. Videotaped programs were  captured live in the Washington D.C. and New York markets. For evening  newscasts, that meant each day’s 6:30 p.m. East Coast feed. PBS supplied  the Project with the tape for the NewsHour.</p>
<p>In the mornings, the following content was analyzed:  stories read by the newscaster in the half-hourly news blocks; feature  and interview segments outside of the news blocks; banter between  members of the anchor team whose import was other than to tease coming  segments in that day&#8217;s program or to promote the network&#8217;s programming  at some later time. Excluded from the analysis were the content of the  weather blocks, local news inserts, commercials, and other content-free  editorial matter such as logos, studio shots, openings and closings.</p>
<p>In the evenings the same rules applied, but because  the content of those newscasts is less varied, concerns about news  blocks, banter, weather blocks and local news inserts were not  applicable.</p>
<p><em>Cable </em>: To assess the nature of the 24-hour  news on cable, CNN, Fox News and MSNBC were selected because they were  the three most heavily viewed cable news channels in 2005. For each we  selected a morning hour, a daytime hour, the closest thing to a  traditional newscast and the highest rated prime-time talk show. The  following programs were captured and analyzed:</p>
<p>7-8 a.m. on CNN, FOX and MSNBC</p>
<p>11 a.m. – Noon on CNN, FOX and MSNBC</p>
<p>Larry King Live (CNN)</p>
<p>NewsNight with Aaron Brown (CNN)</p>
<p>Special Report with Britt Hume (FOX)</p>
<p>The O’Reilly Factor (FOX)</p>
<p>Hardball with Chris Matthews (MSNBC)</p>
<p>Countdown with Keith Olbermann (MSNBC).</p>
<p>All cable programming was procured through videotapes  and supplemented in some cases with transcripts. Taped programs were  captured live in the Washington D.C. market, transcripts through the  Nexis database.</p>
<p><em>Web Sites </em>: We downloaded the top stories  for the following Web sites at four different times during the day — 9  a.m., 1 p.m. , 5 p.m. and 9 p.m. The national Web sites were:</p>
<p>CNN.com</p>
<p>CBSnews.com</p>
<p>NYTimes.com</p>
<p>Dailynews.Yahoo.com (since changed to news.yahoo.com)</p>
<p>News.google.com</p>
<p>To select the Internet news sites to be coded, the  Nielsen/NetRatings’ list of top 20 news sites was consulted to determine  the most prominent sites. The list contained four basic types: news  aggregators, newspaper sites, network news sites, and cable news sites.  One site was chosen for each of those categories. For aggregators, Yahoo  was selected as the highest aggregator in top 20. For newspapers,  NYTimes.com was selected, again, as the highest of this kind in  Nielsen’s list. For network news outlets, CBS was chosen because the  study in 2004 examined the Web sites of ABC and NBC but not CBS. For  cable, CNN was selected as the highest-ranked cable news site. In  addition, we added Google’s news page as one of the newest forms of news  content offered, with a unique method of aggregation.</p>
<p>Each site was visited four times on each day, at  9:00 a.m. ET, 1:00 p.m. ET, 5:00 p.m. ET, and 9:00 p.m. ET, to download  stories. The order in which the sites were visited was rotated for each  capture time. Each download took approximately 20 minutes.</p>
<p>Each time, the following method was used to determine which stories to capture:</p>
<p>On the news home page of each of the sites, we  identified featured stories. A story at the top of a page tied in to a  graphic element — commonly a picture of an event or person — was counted  as a featured story and captured for study. Multiple stories on the  page relating to the same graphic element were also captured as featured  stories. Pages with more than one graphic element were considered to  have more than one featured story, and all such stories were studied.</p>
<p>After the featured stories, we included the next  three most prominent stories without graphics starting from the top and  moving down. Those stories were recorded as non-featured.</p>
<p>The following rules were used in selecting stories:</p>
<ul>
<li> For the sample, we omitted from study video,  audio, charts, maps, background/archival information, news tickers, chat  and polls.</li>
<li> Any headline that linked to an outside Web site  was also omitted. (But stories attributed to other outlets but present  on the site being studied were counted.)</li>
<li> Links to secondary stories about the same topic were counted as unique stories for the non-featured-stories category.</li>
<li> A graphic attached to a non-story item (i.e.,  video, audio, charts, maps, background/archival information, &#8220;complete  coverage,&#8221; chat and polls) was not counted as a story.</li>
<li> If there were no stories associated with a  graphic, then only the top three stories were coded and none were  considered featured.</li>
<li> If there was no graphic present, then no story  was considered featured, and the top three stories were counted as  non-featured.</li>
</ul>
<p><em>Blogs</em> : We used the following criteria to select seven blogs:</p>
<p>First, we looked at the most popular blogs by average  daily traffic. Within that list, we started with the most popular blog  and then moved down the rankings, establishing a mix of political  ideology and geography. Finally, we added a seventh blog, a video blog,  or vlog, to see how those differed from more traditional, text-based  blogs. The blogs are as follows:</p>
<p>Daily Kos , Instapundit, Eschaton, Talking Points, Little Green Footballs, Power Line and Crooks and Liars as the vlog.</p>
<p>For each blog that day, we captured the entire  sequence of postings and all embedded links on the main page. The  postings were saved in Netscape and then copied and pasted into an MS  Word document.</p>
<p><strong>National Media Coding Procedures and Intercoder Reliability </strong></p>
<p><em>Text-based Media </em></p>
<p>The national newspapers, Web site stories (both  national and local), and blog postings (both national and local) were  content-analyzed by the Center for Advanced Social Research (CASR) of  Missouri ’s School of Journalism from July through September 2005. A  description of the study’s objectives and data collection procedures was  provided in a codebook to orient nine coders and two project managers  working on the content analysis (the codebook for blog postings was  modified to reflect the uniqueness of blogging in information-gathering  and posting determination). The codebook contained a dictionary of  coding variables, operational definitions, and measurement scales with  detailed instructions and examples. Before actual coding began,  extensive training was conducted to all coders, with additional  assistance provided by researchers of PEJ. Weekly meetings were held  between the coders and project managers to discuss problems and issues  identified during the coding process. Coding sheets were designed for  each of the media outlets and used consistently throughout the coding  process. Because the coding variables were similar across the media  outlets, reliability tests were conducted using a random selection of  national newspaper stories for all the coding variables. The overall  intercoder reliability was .892, calculated with Scott&#8217;s Pi (Riffe,  Lacy, &amp; Fico, 1998).</p>
<p><em>Video-based Media </em></p>
<p>The network television news and cable news  programming were content-analyzed by ADT Research, publisher of the  Tyndall Report. Since many of the findings are weighted by time spent on  each item, it was essential to ensure accurate measurement of the  duration of items. They were documented as rundowns with start times and  end times, allowing for the duration to be computed as the difference  between the two. All of the commercial network broadcasts were viewed  twice to derive an accurate inventory and item-length statistics. To  double-check the accuracy of all long-format items, coders not only  designated packages, interviews (external or in-house) and stand-ups,  but also documented a story summary in the form of headlines/slugs and  the identity of the reporter or interview subject involved. Those  headlines/slugs were also used to double-check topic and major story  coding. All coding was conducted via a standardized codebook provided to  ADT by PEJ. The codebook contained a dictionary of coding variables,  operational definitions, and measurement scales with detailed  instructions and examples. Again, before actual coding began, extensive  training was conducted, with additional assistance provided by  researchers of PEJ. ADT research reported strong reliability for all  coding variables.</p>
<p>II. Local News Media</p>
<p><strong>Sample, Story Procurement and Inclusion </strong></p>
<p>For the local sample we selected three markets, one  large, one medium-sized and one small. In selecting the three, the list  of 210 markets was first divided into thirds based on population. Each  group represented roughly one-third of the population, according to  Nielsen Media Research. While ensuring geographical diversity, one  market was then randomly selected from each group. The resulting markets  were Houston (large), Milwaukee (medium) and Bend, Ore., (small).</p>
<p>Within each market, we captured and examined a wide spectrum of local TV, radio, print and online media.</p>
<ul>
<li> Local television: We selected all stations with  local news, including all network affiliates (including Fox), and any  Spanish-language stations with local news.</li>
<li> Radio: We selected, where  possible, one all-news station, one news/talk station (looking for a  diversity of affiliation and ownership), and one local NPR station if it  carried local news programming beyond top-of-the hour wrap-ups. If  there was no all-news station, we selected a second news/talk station,  looking for a diversity of ownership. For the purposes of this overview,  the Project used unpublished data from BIAfn’s Media Access Pro 4.1  database. Station listings, which included primary format information,  were generated for three markets — Houston-Galveston, Milwaukee-Racine,  and Bend, Ore. Using the BIAfn data, station format histories were  verified and then cross-checked and updated by using information listed  on individual station Web sites and with Arbitron’s station information  listings. Still, when compared to other radio formats, news is perhaps  the most difficult to cleanly define. No precise formula and no real  guidelines exist for determining whether a station is a news station, a  news/talk station or a talk station. It is also difficult to precisely  determine issues like reception that may affect the radio station people  might listen to as their “hometown” station. It is wholly possible that  someone in Houston or Milwaukee is able to receive the signal of a  station from outside either city’s designated market area.</li>
<li> Print: We examined, where they existed, the  city’s largest daily newspaper, the largest suburban daily, two  alternative news weeklies (if more than two existed we selected two  based on circulation size, focus and ownership), and a Spanish-language  daily.</li>
<li> Blogs: We examined three local blogs, when  possible, selecting for a mix of those owned by the mainstream media  outlets (such as the local papers) and those owned and run by  independents.</li>
</ul>
<p>The content selected within each medium was as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li> Local TV: One hour of morning news, half an hour of evening, half an hour of late-night.</li>
<li> Local Radio: For each station we selected local  news programming. The timing of local news programs varies from stations  to station, but we strove to select a segment from the morning drive  time, mid-day and evening drive time.</li>
<li> Local Print: We examined the A (or front),  metro/city and business sections for broadsheets. We excluded style,  advertising and sports. Weekly tabloids often do not have sections. As a  result, for tabloids we examined everything except sports stories,  style stories, opinion sections (op-eds, editorials or letters),  obituaries, police-beat listings (the crime reports were coded),  calendar listings, and classifieds.</li>
<li> Local Blogs: We examined all postings for the selected day.</li>
</ul>
<p>The selection criteria led us to the following outlets and content within each market:</p>
<p><em>Houston </em></p>
<p><strong>3 local TV stations</strong> (CBS, ABC, NBC affiliate)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.khou.com/" target="_blank"> KHOU-TV Channel 11</a>, CBS affiliate.</p>
<p>6 &#8211; 7 a.m.: 11 News This Morning</p>
<p>6 – 6:30 p.m.: 11 News at 6</p>
<p>10 – 10:30 p.m.: 11 News at 10</p>
<p><a href="http://www.click2houston.com/" target="_blank">KPRC Channel 2, </a>NBC affiliate.</p>
<p>6 – 7 a.m. : Local 2 Today at 6</p>
<p>6 – 6:30 p.m. : Local 2 News at 6</p>
<p>10 &#8211; 10:35 p.m. : Local 2 News at 10</p>
<p><a href="http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/" target="_blank"> KTRK &#8211; Channel 13</a>, ABC Affiliate</p>
<p>6 -7 a.m.: 13 Eyewitness News at 6</p>
<p>6 &#8211; 6:30 p.m.: 13 Eyewitness News at 6 PM</p>
<p>10 &#8211; 10:35 p.m.: 13 Eyewitness News at 10</p>
<p><strong>2 local radio </strong> (2 news/talk)</p>
<p>News/Talk: <a href="http://www.ktrh.com/" target="_blank"> KTRH 740 AM</a></p>
<p>ABC Affiliate and a Clear Channel Station.</p>
<p>1 hour morning: 6 &#8211; 7 a.m.</p>
<p>1 hour mid-day: 1-2 p.m.</p>
<p>No local evening news program</p>
<p>News/Talk: KSEV</p>
<p>Owned by Lieberman broadcasting, No affiliation.</p>
<p>1 hour morning: 6-7 a.m.</p>
<p>1 hour evening: 5-6 p.m.</p>
<p>No mid-day news</p>
<p><strong>6 local newspapers</strong> (daily, suburban daily, alternative weekly, African-American weekly)</p>
<p><em> The Houston Chronicle: </em>Houston &#8216;s main daily paper</p>
<p><em> The Baytown Sun: </em>Houston ’s largest suburban daily; Baytown is west of Houston .</p>
<p><a href="http://www.houstonpress.com/" target="_blank"> Houston Press</a> (Alternative): Weekly publication with investigative reporting and coverage of the arts, food and clubs</p>
<p><em>Houston Forward Times</em> ( African-American weekly): The South&#8217;s largest and only independently owned and published African-American weekly newspaper</p>
<p><strong>Three Local Blogs</strong></p>
<p><a href="http://houston.metblogs.com/" target="_blank">houston.metblogs.com</a>:  This blog is owned by Metroblogging, founded by two Californians. As of  May 11, 2005 , they had blogs in 19 U.S. cities and said they would  start in any city where they have at least 10 people committed to making  postings. The one rule they stipulate is that all posts have to relate  to that city somehow, but otherwise it&#8217;s fairly open to however  individual bloggers see their own city. Subject matter varies.</p>
<p><a href="http://bloghouston.net/" target="_blank">BlogHouston.net</a>:  blogHOUSTON.net is a frequently updated weblog that produces regular  commentary on Houston politics and current events, a steady dose of  media criticism, and thoughts on Houston &#8216;s cultural and entertainment  options: “We are about Houston .”</p>
<p><a href="http://www.chron.com/memo" target="_blank">www.chron.com/memo</a> (a Houston Chronicle blog): This is the Houston Chronicle blog on pop  culture, which does not seem to be updated every day and is criticized  by other local bloggers.</p>
<p><em>Milwaukee </em></p>
<p><strong> 4 local TV stations</strong> (CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox):</p>
<p><a href="http://www.touchtmj4.com/" target="_blank">W TMJ4 &#8211; NBC Channel 4</a></p>
<p>6 -7 a.m. : Live at Daybreak</p>
<p>6 &#8211; 6:30 p.m. : Live at 6</p>
<p>10 &#8211; 10:35 p.m. : Live at 10</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cbs58.com/" target="_blank">WDJT CBS 58</a></p>
<p>6 -7 a.m. : CBS 58 Morning News Express</p>
<p>5-5:30 p.m. : CBS 58 News at 5</p>
<p>10 &#8211; 10:30 p.m. : CBS 58 News Ten</p>
<p><a href="http://www.themilwaukeechannel.com/" target="_blank"> WISN-TV</a> Channel 12; ABC affiliate</p>
<p>6 – 7 a.m.: 12 News This Morning</p>
<p>6 &#8211; 6:30 p.m.: 12 News at 6</p>
<p>10 &#8211; 10:35 p.m.: 12 News at 10</p>
<p><a href="http://www.fox6milwaukee.com/">WITI</a> Channel 6 ; Fox News Affiliate</p>
<p>6 AM – 7 AM Fox 6 Wake Up News</p>
<p>6-6:30PM : Fox 6 News at 6</p>
<p>10:00-10:30PM : Fox 6 News at 10</p>
<p><strong>3 local radio</strong> (2 News/talk, 1 NPR affiliate that does morning news):</p>
<p>News/Talk: <a href="http://www.620wtmj.com/" target="_blank"> 620 WTMJ Newsradio</a></p>
<p>CBS affiliated, highest rated</p>
<p>1 hour of local morning news: 5-6 a.m.</p>
<p>1 hour of local evening news: 5-6 p.m.</p>
<p>No mid-day local news</p>
<p>Local NPR Affiliate: WGTD FM News</p>
<p>NPR, WPR, AP</p>
<p>1 hour of local morning news: 8-9 a.m.</p>
<p>1/2 hour of local mid-day news: 12 – 12:30 p.m.</p>
<p>No local evening news program</p>
<p>News/Talk: WHBL AM News</p>
<p>ABC affiliate</p>
<p>-1 hour of local morning news: 6-7 a.m.</p>
<p>-1 hour of mid-day local news: 11a.m.- 12 p.m.</p>
<p><strong>4 local newspapers</strong> (daily, African-American weekly, alternative weekly)</p>
<p>Major Daily: <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/" target="_blank"> Milwaukee Journal Sentinel</a><br />
Alternative Weekly: <a href="http://www.dailyreporter.com/" target="_blank"> Daily Reporter</a> General Interest</p>
<p>Alternative Weekly: <a href="http://www.communityjournal.net/" target="_blank"> Milwaukee Community Journal</a> Alternative, “ Wisconsin ’s Largest African American Newspaper”</p>
<p>Suburban Daily: Waukesha Freeman, circulation 15,000</p>
<p><strong>Local Blogs:</strong></p>
<p>The two local blogs we found both come from the Journal Sentinel.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.jsonline.com/watch/?watch=1" target="_blank">DayWatch</a>:  A blog hosted by JSOnline of today’s developing local news.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.jsonline.com/news/site/weblogs.asp?id=56%20" target="_blank">JSOnline weblog on state politics</a></p>
<p>Both blogs were originally selected for study. But  there were no postings on either blog on May 11, 2005 so they are not a  part of the final sample.</p>
<p><em>Bend </em></p>
<p><strong> 1 local TV station</strong> (NBC)</p>
<p>KTVZ Channel 21, NBC Affiliate</p>
<p>6-7 a.m. : NewsChannel 21@Sunrise (not on the air on 5/11/2005 because of a power outage)</p>
<p>6-6:30 p.m. : NewsChannel 21@ Six</p>
<p>11-11:35 p.m. : NewsChannel 21@11</p>
<p><strong>1 local radio </strong></p>
<p>KBND AM News, ABC affiliate</p>
<p>-1 hour of local morning news programming: 6-7 a.m.</p>
<p>-1 hour of local evening news programming: 5-6 p.m.</p>
<p><strong> </strong><strong>1 newspaper</strong></p>
<p>The Bend Bulletin, <a href="http://www.bendbulletin.com/"> http://www.bendbulletin.com</a></p>
<p>There appear to be no local blogs in Bend .</p>
<p><strong>Local Media Coding Procedures and Intercoder Reliability </strong></p>
<p>Stories appearing in newspapers and on television  and radio for the three cities were coded for a specific day selected by  the State of the Media Project. That included local newspapers, radio  and local television in the communities of Bend, Ore., Houston, Tex.,  and Milwaukee, Wis. The tables appended to this memo report  coder-reliability assessments for each medium coded. Finally, an overall  summary of reliability is provided.</p>
<p><em>Personnel Involved in the Network News Coding </em></p>
<p>Faculty and graduate students in the School of  Journalism at Michigan State University conducted this part of the  project. The two faculty members who supervised the project have more  than 40 years of combined social science experience in conducting such  studies, and are two of the most published academic researchers in the  field.</p>
<p>Two doctoral students in the Mass Media Ph.D. program  at MSU, one a fourth-year student and the other a second-year student,  coded most of the stories, assisted by a master’s degree student of the  MSU School of Journalism.</p>
<p>The coding protocol was provided by personnel at the  Project. The protocol called for the coding of 23 variables for all  stories in each designated medium, and an additional 27 variables for  selected “big stories” from each medium.</p>
<p>The two School of Journalism faculty members  conducted extensive training sessions with the doctoral-student coders  during the summer of 2005 using news stories collected for other  studies. A decision was subsequently made to add the master’s degree  student, and that student was trained during the fall. The reliability  of this additional student was assessed against that of the doctoral  students using the same sample stories used to assess the reliability  achieved by the doctoral students. Comparability is therefore exact.</p>
<p><em> Procedure </em></p>
<p>The fourth-year doctoral student coordinated the  coding work of all the other students. Coding was done independently,  working from the protocol, without consultation among the coders.</p>
<p>Spanish-language media were also included in the  study. To code this material, translators were employed to produce text  in English. The translated copy was then coded by the regular coders in  the study.</p>
<p>Reliability was assessed for each medium, using  stories randomly sampled from the total to be coded. Reliability was  first assessed on the 23 variables coded for all stories. Once  acceptable reliability was achieved, all stories were coded for those  variables. Reliability then was assessed for the “big story” variables,  and once acceptable reliability was achieved on those variables, coding  was completed for relevant stories.</p>
<p>In all, about 5% of all stories were used in the  reliability assessments. The tables reporting reliability below are for  just those variables on which substantive disagreements could occur.  Percentages of agreement calculations were made to assess the coding for  each of these variables. Each coder (the two doctoral students and the  master’s student) were tested against each other on these variables. For  news-organization stories on which all three coders participated,  reliability assessments were made for all three coders and were then  averaged for a total agreement.</p>
<p><em>Reliability Standards </em></p>
<p>Project procedures followed in the past relied on  percentage of agreement for establishing intercoder reliability, and  this study follows that precedent. The following standards, based on  experience with past studies, should guide confidence in how reliably  the variables were coded, and therefore the confidence researchers  should have that findings represent real characteristics of the news  coverage rather than coder bias or error.</p>
<p>In general, variables whose percentages of agreement  exceeded 90% are highly reliable, and researchers can have high  confidence that characteristics in the data are real rather than the  result of coder bias or error. Variables whose reliabilities are below  85% but above 80 are accepted. The following chart summarizes these  judgments.</p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" width="100%" bgcolor="#ececec">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td height="21">
<div><strong>Percentage of Agreement </strong></div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div><strong>Confidence</strong></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>90% or more</td>
<td>Very high confidence</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>85% to 90%</td>
<td>Good confidence</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>80% to 85%</td>
<td>Acceptable confidence</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>70% to 80%</td>
<td>Very weak confidence</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Below 70%</td>
<td>No confidence</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Based on those standards, 7 of 11 variables coded for  all stories achieved very high confidence, with the remaining variables  achieving acceptable or good confidence. Another 25 variables were  coded for big stories only, and 24 of these achieved very high  confidence. The remaining variable achieved good confidence.</p>
<p>Individual media exhibited different confidence  results, however, and any analysis focusing on just one medium should  examine the reliability figures provided for that medium. Even so, just  one variable (Government Related stories) fell below acceptable  confidence for the radio stories.</p>
<p>Below are the tables reporting reliability for stories examined for each medium and for all stories combined.</p>
<p>Coder Reliability Assessments for <strong>All </strong>Local  Newspapers, Television and Radio News Stories (Figures are percent of  total stories in the reliability test for each medium and for all  stories combined.)</p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" width="100%" bgcolor="#ececec">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td height="21">
<div><strong>Variable </strong></div>
</td>
<td>
<div><strong>Newspaper Stories<br />
(N=31)</strong></div>
</td>
<td>
<div><strong>Television Stories (N=33)</strong></div>
</td>
<td>
<div><strong>Radio Stories (N=33) </strong></div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div><strong>All Stories (N=97) </strong></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Dateline</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>85</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>97</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Origin</td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>94</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Govt Relation</td>
<td>
<div>81</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>76</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>83</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Geog. Focus</td>
<td>
<div>84</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>85</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>87</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Topic</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>85</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>91</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Transparency</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>95</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Source Total</td>
<td>
<div>81</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>79</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>82</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>81</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Female Total</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>97</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Male Total</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>92</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Anonymous</td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>93</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Opinion</td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>97</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Coder Reliability Assessments for Only <strong>Big </strong>Local Newspapers, Television and Radio News Stories</p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="5" width="100%" bgcolor="#ececec">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td height="21">
<div><strong>Variable </strong></div>
</td>
<td>
<div><strong>Newspaper Stories<br />
(N=32)</strong></div>
</td>
<td>
<div><strong>Television Stories (N=34)</strong></div>
</td>
<td>
<div><strong>Radio Stories (N=33) </strong></div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div><strong>All Stories (N=99) </strong></div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Dominant Source</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>96</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Viewpoints</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>85</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>94</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Direct Sources</td>
<td>
<div>85</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>93</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Ordinary Sources</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>95</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">No Spl. Exp.</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>92</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Spl. Exp</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>95</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Local Relevance</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>100</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Background</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>96</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Implications</td>
<td>
<div>91</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>94</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Impact</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>88</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>96</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Human Face</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>96</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>96</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Fact/Conjecture</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>99</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Citizen Action</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>98</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Consumer Action</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>100</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Contact</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>98</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Principles</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>99</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Information</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>100</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">TV Newness</td>
<td></td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td></td>
<td height="21"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Video 1</td>
<td></td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td></td>
<td height="21"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Video 2</td>
<td></td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td></td>
<td height="21"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Video 3</td>
<td></td>
<td>
<div>94</div>
</td>
<td></td>
<td height="21"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Stills</td>
<td></td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td></td>
<td height="21"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Dup. Video</td>
<td></td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td></td>
<td height="21"></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Focus Type</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>100</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>100</div>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td height="21">Focus Tone</td>
<td>
<div>82</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>97</div>
</td>
<td>
<div>82</div>
</td>
<td height="21">
<div>87</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>III. Spanish-Language Media</p>
<p><em> Local Broadcast TV </em></p>
<p>KXLN-TV Channel 45 — 5 p.m. – 6 p.m. Noticias a las 5  (Univision Affiliate). Local news ran from 5 to &#8211;5:30 and Univision  Network News from 5:30 to 6</p>
<p>KTMD TV Channel 48 5 p.m.–6 p.m. Noticias a las 5  (Telemundo Affiliate). Local News ran from 5 to 5:30 and Telemundo  Network News from 5:30 to 6</p>
<p>Both TV stations are in the Houston metropolitan area.</p>
<p><em>Local Radio </em></p>
<p>Spanish-language radio stations broadcast in both  the Houston and Milwaukee markets, but offered no scheduled news program  to include in the study.</p>
<p><em>Daily Newspaper: </em></p>
<p>Rumbo de Houston: Rumbo de Houston is a daily  tabloid published Monday through Friday. It is part of a group that  publishes throughout Texas, including San Antonio, Houston, Austin and  the Rio Grande Valley.</p>
<p>Story inclusion and rules were the same as the  English-language process for each media type. Coding procedures differed  in that the Spanish-language material was first translated into English  and then coded under the same variables and rules as the  English-language media.</p>
<p><strong>Intercoder Reliability </strong></p>
<p><strong> </strong>Because the same coders coded the  translated Spanish-language content and the English-language media, no  separate intercoder reliability tests were conduced. The protocol and  coders were judged reliable on the basis of the intercoder reliability  discussed above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/methodology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>About The Story – Intro</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:33:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[About the Study The State of the News Media report was written by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, with the aid of many collaborators. Funding was provided by the Pew Charitable Trusts. Click here for information about printing pages from the report. Methodology Details on how we put together study together, including background on [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1>About the Study</h1>
<p>The State of the News Media report was written by the <a href="http://www.journalism.org/" target="_blank">Project                    for Excellence in Journalism</a>, with the aid of many <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-authors-and-collaborators/">collaborators.</a> Funding was provided by the Pew Charitable Trusts.</p>
<p>Click <a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/printingthereport.asp">here</a> for information                    about printing pages from the report.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-methodology/"><strong>Methodology</strong></a><br />
Details on how we put together study together, including background                    on the content analysis sections.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-authors-and-collaborators/"><strong>Authors and Collaborators</strong></a><br />
A list of people who worked on the report.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-about-the-story-intro/2006-source-bibliography/"><strong>Source Bibliography </strong></a><br />
An alphabetical listing of all the sources referenced in the                    report, including Web addresses.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/contact.asp">Contact Us</a></strong><br />
How to reach the Project for Excellence in Journalism.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/permissions.asp"><strong>Permissions</strong></a><br />
Details on using information found in the report.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/privacy.asp"><strong>Privacy Policy</strong></a><br />
Information about your privacy. We do not collect any user                    information.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006/sitemap.asp"><strong>Site Map</strong></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/about-the-story-intro/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Questionaire</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/questionaire/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/questionaire/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:32:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Download the questionnaire in pdf format.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/files/2011/01/214topline.pdf">Download the questionnaire in pdf format.</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/questionaire/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Methodology</title>
		<link>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/methodology/</link>
		<comments>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/methodology/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2006 19:31:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>sfamoyegun</dc:creator>
		
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://stateofthemedia.org/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Survey Methodology This survey is based on interviews with 547 journalists and news media executives by telephone and online. The same questionnaire was used for both modes. The interviews were completed from March 10, 2004 through April 20, 2004. Design of the Media Samples Three samples were drawn for this survey: a national news media [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h1>Survey Methodology</h1>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top">This survey is based on interviews with 547 journalists and                      news media executives by telephone and online. The same questionnaire                      was used for both modes. The interviews were completed from                      March 10, 2004 through April 20, 2004.</p>
<p><strong>Design of the Media Samples</strong></p>
<p>Three samples were drawn for this survey: a national news                      media sample, a local news media sample and an Internet news                      sample. Both the national and local samples were divided into                      two groups: print and broadcast (which includes television                      and radio).</p>
<p>For the national sample, the print category includes newspapers,                      magazines, wire services, and news services; the television                      category encompasses cable, television and radio networks.</p>
<p>For the local sample, the print category includes newspapers                      from a listing of the top 100 newspapers ranked by circulation,                      excluding those selected for the national sample. The television                      category includes local television stations from the top 100                      media markets.</p>
<p>Within each of these market/medium strata (national and local,                      print and television), specific organizational positions (i.e.,                      managing editor, correspondent) were selected.</p>
<p>The Internet sample was selected from online-only news outlets,                      as well as the online news outlets of traditional print and                      television news organizations. The specific sampling procedures                      are outlined below.</p>
<p>To obtain a sample that represented a cross-section of news                      organizations and of the people working at all levels of those                      organizations, the news media were divided into the following                      groupings:</p>
<p>(1) Importance of medium in terms of size of audience, market                      or influence.<br />
a) National audience<br />
b) Local audience<br />
c) Internet audience<br />
(2) Type of media<br />
a) Newspapers<br />
b) News magazines<br />
c) Wire services<br />
d) News services<br />
e) Television stations and networks<br />
f) Radio stations and networks<br />
(3) Organizational responsibility of the individual respondent<br />
a) Executive<br />
b) Senior editors and producers<br />
c) Working editors and journalists</p>
<p><strong>Identifying the Samples</strong></p>
<p>National newspapers were identified using 2002 circulation                      numbers in 2003 Editor &amp; Publisher International Year                      Book.</p>
<p>National television news organizations included the three                      national networks, major national cable networks, public television,                      and radio chains with Washington, D.C. bureaus. Particularly                      for the national sample, every attempt was made to replicate                      the selection of news organizations used for an earlier Center                      survey conducted in 1995.</p>
<p>The news media executives and journalists in each position                      within these organizations were drawn from the News Media                      Yellow Book database online, with the exception of national                      radio organizations, which were drawn from Bacon&#8217;s MediaSource,                      and national newspapers, which were drawn from Editor &amp;                      Publisher International Year Book. A complete listing of the                      selected national news organizations is below.</p>
<p>Local newspapers were also identified using 2002 circulation                      numbers in 2003 Editor &amp; Publisher International Year                      Book. They include the 84 (out of the top 100) papers that                      were not pulled for the national sample.</p>
<p>Local television stations were selected from the top 100                      media markets, as defined by Nielsen Media Research for 2003.                      After the local sample was selected, Bacon&#8217;s MediaSource was                      used to identify the news media executives and journalists                      in each organization.</p>
<p>Respondents were selected using a two-stage sampling procedure.                      In the first stage, news media organizations were selected                      and in the second stage individuals were chosen from those                      organizations. The criteria for selecting national and local                      news organizations are outlined below.</p>
<p><strong>Media Organizations Sampled</strong></p>
<p><strong>National Media</strong><br />
<em>Television Networks</em><br />
ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS,<br />
CNN, C-SPAN, CNBC,<br />
MSNBC, FOX Cable News,<br />
Telemundo, Univision<br />
<em>Chains with Washington, D.C. Bureaus</em><br />
Gannett, Cox, Hearst<br />
<em>Radio</em><br />
Associated Press Radio<br />
ABC Radio Networks<br />
CBS Radio Networks<br />
Westwood One<br />
Black Radio Network<br />
National Public Radio<br />
<em>Newspapers</em><br />
Arizona Republic<br />
Atlanta Journal-Constitution<br />
Boston Globe<br />
Chicago Tribune<br />
Detroit Free Press<br />
Houston Chronicle<br />
Long Island Newsday<br />
Los Angeles Times<br />
Miami Herald<br />
New York Daily News<br />
New York Times<br />
Philadelphia Inquirer<br />
San Francisco Chronicle<br />
USA TODAY<br />
Wall Street Journal<br />
Washington Post<br />
<em>Magazines</em><br />
Newsweek<br />
Time<br />
U.S. News &amp; World Report<br />
<em>Wire Services</em><br />
Associated Press<br />
Bloomberg News Service<br />
Reuters<br />
<em>News Services</em><br />
Copley<br />
Cox Newspapers<br />
Gannett<br />
Hearst<br />
Knight-Ridder<br />
Newhouse<br />
Scripps-Howard</p>
<p><strong>Local Media</strong></p>
<p><em>Television </em><br />
A random sample was selected from all stations listed in the                      top 100 media markets.</p>
<p><em>Print</em><br />
The top 100 newspapers ranked by circulation were selected,                      excluding those newspapers selected for the national sample.</p>
<p><strong>Respondents Selected at each Organization (By Title)</strong></p>
<p><strong>National Sample</strong></p>
<p><em>Executive Level</em></p>
<p>TV &amp; Radio: President/CEO, Vice President, General Manager,                      Station Manager</p>
<p>Print: Publisher, President/CEO, Vice President</p>
<p><em>Senior Editors and Producers</em></p>
<p>TV &amp; Radio: News Division Executive, Executive Producer</p>
<p>Print: Assistant Managing Editor, Managing Editor, Executive                      Editor, Section Editor</p>
<p><em><br />
Working Journalists and Editors</em></p>
<p>TV &amp; Radio: Bureau Chief, Senior Producer, Correspondent,                      Anchor</p>
<p>Print: Bureau Chief, Senior Editor, Columnist, Associate Editor,                      Reporter, Correspondent, Assignment editor</p>
<p><strong>Local Sample</strong></p>
<p><em>Executive Level</em></p>
<p>Television: President/CEO, Vice President, General Manager,                      Station Manager</p>
<p>Print: Publisher, President/CEO, Vice President</p>
<p><em>Senior Editors and Producers</em></p>
<p>Print: Assistant Managing Editor, Managing Editor, Executive                      Editor, Business, Metro and Editorial Section Editors</p>
<p>Television: News Director</p>
<p><em>Working Journalists and Editors</em></p>
<p>Television: Producer, Correspondent</p>
<p>Print: National Editor, Editor, Reporter, Senior Editor, National                      and Foreign Editors, Associate Editors, Columnist</p>
<p><strong><br />
Internet Sample</strong></p>
<p>Online Producer, Online Vice President, Online Content Manager,                      General Manager of Website, Online Editor</p>
<p>The national and local news media samples were each divided                      into subgroups, defined by the type of news organization and                      the respondent&#8217;s position within that organization. Each subgroup                      was randomly split into replicates. Quotas were set for the                      number of interviews to be completed in each subgroup. The                      Internet sample was also assigned a quota. These quotas were                      set to ensure adequate representation of the smaller subgroups                      in the final sample of completed interviews. The subgroups,                      quotas, and number of completed interviews for each are listed                      below.</p>
<table border="0" align="center">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><strong>Component</strong></td>
<td><strong>Quota </strong></td>
<td><strong>Completed</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><strong><em>National Print</em></strong></td>
<td><strong><em>110</em></strong></td>
<td><strong><em>130</em></strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>National Newspapers</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>12</td>
<td>12</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>21</td>
<td>28</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>34</td>
<td>40</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>National Magazines</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>12</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>National News Services</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>7</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>10</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>Wire Services</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>3</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>5</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em><strong>National Broadcast</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>110</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>117</strong></em></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>National TV and Radio</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>19</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>35</td>
<td>38</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>55</td>
<td>60</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em><strong>Local Print</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>115</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>118</strong></em></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>Local Newspapers</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>28</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>35</td>
<td>39</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>51</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em><strong>Local Broadcast</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>115</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>114</strong></em></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em>Local TV News</em></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Executives</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>27</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Senior Editors and Producers</td>
<td>35</td>
<td>33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Working Journalists and Editors</td>
<td>50</td>
<td>54</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><em><strong>Internet</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>50</strong></em></td>
<td><em><strong>68</strong></em></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>Each person sampled for this survey was mailed an advance                      letter. The letters were intended to introduce the survey                      to prospective respondents, describe the nature and purpose                      of the survey and encourage participation. The letter was                      sent from the Pew Research Center; the Project for Excellence                      in Journalism; and the Committee of Concerned Journalists                      was involved. It contained a URL and a password to complete                      the survey online as well as notification that interviewers                      would be calling as well.</p>
<p>As soon as the letters were mailed, a website was available                      for respondents to complete the interview online.</p>
<p>Approximately one week after the letter was mailed, trained                      interviewers began calling the sampled individuals to remind                      them of the letter, discuss doing the survey online or conducting                      the interview on the telephone. In all cases, a follow-up                      email was sent after three days of initial calls, repeating                      the substance of the letter and providing the URL again.</p>
<p>If a respondent refused an interview, in most cases an email                      appeal was sent, asking the individual to reconsider. This                      was followed approximately one week later by another telephone                      call.</p>
<p>If a member of the sample had not completed the interview                      online or by telephone within two weeks of mailing the first                      letter, follow-up telephone calls were made to complete the                      interview or to schedule an appointment to do so.</p>
<p>The interviewers were experienced, executive specialists                      trained to ensure their familiarity with the questionnaire                      and their professionalism in dealing with news media professionals.                      The interviews were completed from March 10, 2004 through                      April 20, 2004.</p>
<p>Interviews were completed with 67% of the selected news media                      respondents who still held their position; 12% could not be                      reached in order to complete an interview, despite repeated                      calls; and 21% refused to participate in the survey.</p>
<p><strong>Profile of News Professionals</strong></p>
<p>Journalists and managers in major national and local news                      organizations tend to be well- educated, middle-aged, with                      substantial experience in the field. The median age of those                      surveyed is 47 years, with nearly four-in-ten (38%) falling                      between 45 and 54 years of age. Only 13% are under the age                      of 35. The median experience of the respondents is 22 years.</p>
<p>Most of the journalists surveyed have a college degree; less                      than 10% have not completed college. Significant numbers have                      a graduate degree or at least some graduate school experience.                      About half of print journalists have a degree in journalism;                      communications degrees are more common among broadcast professionals                      at the local level.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2006-journalist-survey-intro/2006-methodology/#">[top]</a></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://stateofthemedia.org/2006/journalist-survey-intro/methodology/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
