Agenda Setting and Issue Salience Online

Roberts, Marilyn; Wanta, Wayne; Dzwo, Tzong‐Horng

doi:10.1177/0093650202029004004

Cited by 225 publications

(151 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

129

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The classic agenda-setting theory posits that issues (and related regions) that receive more news coverage will be perceived as more salient by audience (McCombs & Shaw, 1972). Consequently, more intensive media coverage can correlate with a greater amount of online discussions (Roberts, Wanta, & Dzwo, 2002). Thus, RQ3 and RQ4 explore the potential correlation of the structure of international relations with news coverage and public attention.…”

Section: Rq2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring international relations in social media conversations

Barnett

Chu

et al. 2017

Government Information Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f oThis paper examines international relations as perceived by the public in their social media conversations. It examines over 1.8 billion Facebook postings in English and 51 million Chinese posts on Weibo, to reveal the relations among nations as expressed in social media conversations. It argues that social media represent a transnational electronic public sphere, in which public discussions reveal characteristics of international relations as perceived by a foreign public. The findings show that the international relations in social media postings match the core-peripheral structure proposed in the World Systems Theory. Additionally, the relations are associated with the amount of news coverage and public attention a country receives. Overall, the study demonstrates the value of webometric data in revealing how international relations are perceived by average citizens.

show abstract

Section: Rq2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring international relations in social media conversations

Barnett

Chu

et al. 2017

Government Information Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has become the new mass medium (Roberts, Wanta and Dzwo, 2002). According to Wallsten (2007), the public, through blogs and other social media, can shape the media agenda, but this is not self-evident and tends to be issue-related.…”

Section: Online Communication and Agenda Settingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human rights organizations and online agenda setting

Meriläinen

Vos

2011

Corporate Communications: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to better understand agenda setting by international human rights organizations in the online environment and at the same time contribute to agenda-setting theory. The role of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the area of human rights is clarified, and agenda-setting and related concepts are discussed.Design/Methodology/Approach -The study focuses on how attention is drawn to human rights issues in online communication by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International. A content analysis of online forums of HRW and Amnesty International was conducted by monitoring their web sites and Facebook and Twitter pages over a period of 3 months. In addition, two expert interviews with representatives of Amnesty Finland were conducted to better understand how the organization's online communication activities relate to its policies in drawing attention to human rights.Findings -Based on this study, drawing attention to human rights issues is a goal that leads to active online communication. NGOs aim at attracting attention to their issues online by initiating a dialogue via online forums and motivating the public to participate in activities that may influence the media and the political agenda. The existing agenda-setting research tends to emphasize the role of journalists in setting the public agenda, and mentions NGOs primarily as a source for journalists and as a political player. The online environment shows, however, that that these NGOs mostly aim at setting the public agenda to create social change, while the media and political agenda are also not forgotten. Research limitations/implications -This study suggests that the interdependence of the media, public and political agendas is more complex than has thus far been considered in agenda-setting theory, especially in the current online environment. It investigates online agenda-setting by two international NGOs, but does not discuss the role of the media or the public at large in their relationship with these NGOs. As this study has a limited time-frame, a content analysis over a longer period and interviews with representatives of a wider variety of NGOs could be a next step. Future research could also compare the online communication of NGOs with that of profit organisations.Practical implications -The findings show how agenda setting is supported by intricate multiplatform activities in the present-day online environment by the organizations studied in order to initiate a dialogue on societal issues. This suggests that in the online environment, the media, public and political agendas are becoming increasingly interrelated and within this triangle the public agenda seems to be gaining further in importance.Originality/value -The impact that NGOs have on today's society is growing, and hence studying their online agenda setting is valuable from the perspective of corporate communication. International NGOs early on recognised the value of online communication.

show abstract

“…Una de las preguntas que se han hecho los investigadores dentro del campo del periodismo es si la entrada de nuevos participantes al sistema de medios tradicionales ha generado una mayor diversidad de contenidos en la agenda temática de todos ellos (Althaus & Tewksbury, 2002;Roberts, Wanta & Dzwo 2002;Wang, 2000). Sin duda, la irrupción de nuevos proveedores de información, así como los cambios que ha sufrido una audiencia cada vez más empoderada, han puesto en tensión el rol y papel de los medios de comunicación (Arriagada & Navia, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified