HME文献31 Testing Explanations for the Hostile Media Effect.pdfVIP

Testing Mechanisms for the Hostile Media Effect Consider, in a social setting, individuals or groups who have a difference of opinion. In the democratic process, progress toward a resolution of those differences is often a desirable goal. How that goal is achieved may depend on many social institutions, but prominent among them is mass media, and media’s capacity to convey a range of information, ideas and points of view. Theoretically, such media content can facilitate a sifting and winnowing process by which people of diverse viewpoints may arrive at better-informed and more compatible perspectives. However, this constructive function of mass media depends on a receptive audience. And, problematically, recent research suggests that people with differences of opinion, especially those who are highly partisan on one side or another of a controversial issue, systematically see mass media content in precisely the opposite way – as untrustworthy, as biased in favor of the other side. The result is that each side perceives a media bias unfavorable to its own viewpoint. This phenomenon, the so-called hostile media effect, has been demonstrated dramatically in many controversial contexts, including Middle east conflict (Vallone, Ross Lepper, 1985; Perloff, 1989), the 1997 UPS strike (Christen, Kannaovakun Gunther, 2002), the use of primates in research (Gunther, Christen, Liebhart Chia, 2001), genetically modified food (Gunther Schmitt, 2004), and even sporting events (Arpan Raney, 2003). In addition, evidence suggests that this bias is particular to mass media. People see media content as biased against their own positions, but the identical information presented in a non-media context, such as a student essay, is seen as neutral or even favorable (Gunther Schmitt, 2004). Thus, the hostile media phenomenon appears to be well supported. But is it well explained? Theoretical questions about this