2008
DOI: 10.1080/08838150802205876
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cultural Proximity and Audience Behavior: The Role of Language in Patterns of Polarization and Multicultural Fluency

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
40
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
40
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Language and cultural proximity are also powerful determinants of media use (Straubhaar, 2003). Within the United States, the growing availability of Spanish‐language programing has effectively segregated Hispanic and non‐Hispanic audiences (Ksiazek & Webster, 2008). Only a few with sufficient multicultural fluency seem to move between those environments.…”
Section: Emerging Patterns Of Public Attention In the Digital Environmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Language and cultural proximity are also powerful determinants of media use (Straubhaar, 2003). Within the United States, the growing availability of Spanish‐language programing has effectively segregated Hispanic and non‐Hispanic audiences (Ksiazek & Webster, 2008). Only a few with sufficient multicultural fluency seem to move between those environments.…”
Section: Emerging Patterns Of Public Attention In the Digital Environmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, contrary to cultural proximity postulations, domestically produced television content has not triumphed over foreign media content in many parts of Africa. Unlike in Europe and Latin-America where longitudinal studies in individual countries have revealed that audiences have strong affi nity to local and regional productions (Ksiazek & Webster 2008), the situation in Africa is diff erent. Media audience in Africa largely prefer foreign (Western) content and local producers are shaping media output according to audience preference (Endong, 2014;Haynes, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…Existing studies of audience duplication focused on measuring levels of overlapping audiences between pairs of channels or programs (Cooper, 1996;Ksiazek & Webster, 2008;Rust, 1986;Webster, 2006;Webster & Lin, 2002;Webster, Phalen & Lichty, 2006). Because the unit of analysis was limited to channel or program pairs, the researchers did not have the means to detect and examine audience duplication patterns that may exist across more than two channels.…”
Section: Other General Network Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%