A paper by Martin F. Nolan, fall 2004 fellow, explores President Nixon’s antagonistic relationship with the press. He argues that Nixon sought to disarm his critics by changing “the press,” a Constitutionally protected form of expression, into “the media,” a pejorative – and succeeded. Download the paper (PDF).
Orwell Meets Nixon: When and Why “The Press” Became “The Media” Read More »
A paper by Seth Mnookin, spring 2004 fellow, examines the making and results of The New York Times’ Jayson Blair Report. The report helped demonstrate The New York Times’ power to shape the national news agenda, argues Mnookin, and in doing so, helped codify the way in which newspapers were expected to respond to accusations
A paper by Jacqueline Jones, fall 2004 fellow, examines whether the reelection of President George W. Bush left the alliance between the U.S. and Europe stronger or shattered. There was a huge appetite in European newspapers for stories on the U.S. election, with the European press heavily favoring Kerry – and the significance of the
A paper by Narasimhan Ravi, spring 2004 fellow, argues that the Iraq war was an unequal conflict not just in terms of the overwhelming superiority of the American, British and other coalition forces, but also because much of the information was controlled by the coalition. This paper examines the press coverage of the Iraq war
A paper by Rebecca MacKinnon, spring 2004 fellow, explores how – and to what extent – the Internet and new interactive forms of online media might provide solutions to serious problems in the media, such as lack of international news in the mainstream media, lack of incentives for commercially-driven media outlets to provide international news,
The World-Wide Conversation: Online Participatory Media and International News Read More »
A paper by Ingrid A. Lehmann, spring 2004 fellow, explores the role of the media in the weakening bond between the United States and Western European countries in the wake of events in Iraq, and the divergence of public opinion about the war between the U.S. and Germany. Were the differing public perceptions of the
A paper by Regina G. Lawrence, fall 2003 fellow, assesses the framing of obesity in news coverage since 1985 to determine whether obesity is being reframed as a systemic problem, rather than a personal one. The data suggest that a vigorous frame contest is currently under way between arguments emphasizing personal responsibility for health and
Framing Obesity: The Evolution of News Discourse on a Public Health Issue Read More »
A paper by Tomáš P. Klvaňa, fall 2003 fellow, argues that the Czech Republic’s democracy is underperforming, and Czech media are a significant contributor to the problem. Formerly serious Czech journalism has moved into infotainment, and is influenced by the nostalgia for communist times, flattening public life and creating stale discourse. Klvaňa asserts that the
A paper by Ted Gup, fall 2003 fellow, examines how the U.S. press fared in covering the intelligence community before and after two catastrophic intelligence failures—9/11 and the yet-to-be-found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. It also explores the obstacles journalists now face and what the stakes are. At no time has covering the intelligence
Covering the CIA in Times of Crisis: Obstacles and Strategies Read More »
This pamphlet by Thomas Patterson, Bradlee Professor of Government and the Press at the Shorenstein Center, contains ideas for strengthening election night telecasts. The recommendations were developed in consultation with television executives and journalists, by examining the internal reviews that the networks themselves conducted after their election night broadcasts of 2000, and through a systematic
Eleven Recommendations for Improving Election Night Coverage Read More »
A report by Thomas Patterson, Bradlee Professor of Government and the Press at the Shorenstein Center, examines how the use of exit polling and projections of winners by major broadcast networks has changed over time. Patterson finds that although not “deeply flawed,” the potential of election night telecasts has not been fully realized. He provides
Diminishing Returns: A Comparison of the 1968 and 2000 Election Night Broadcasts Read More »
A paper by Michael Tomasky, spring 2003 fellow, examines the partisan intensity of the nation’s agenda-setting liberal and conservative editorial pages. This paper finds that while the pages are more or less equally partisan when it comes to supporting or opposing a given presidential administration’s policy pronouncements, the conservative pages are often far more partisan
Whispers and Screams: The Partisan Nature of Editorial Pages Read More »
The Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy is a Harvard Kennedy School research center dedicated to exploring and illuminating the intersection of press, politics and public policy in theory and practice. The Center strives to bridge the gap between journalists and scholars, and between them and the public.
Unless otherwise noted this site and its contents are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.