Shaping the Northern Media's Human Rights Coverage, 1986—2000

Abstract

What influences the Northern media's coverage of events and abuses in explicit human rights terms? Do international NGOs have an impact, and, if so, when are they most effective? This article addresses these questions with regression analysis of human rights reporting by The Economist and Newsweek from 1986 to 2000, covering 145 countries. First, it finds that these two media sources cover abuses in human rights terms more frequently when they occur in countries with higher levels of state repression, economic development, population, and Amnesty International attention. There is also some evidence that political openness, number of battle-deaths, and civil societies affect coverage, although these effects were not robust. Second, it finds that Amnesty International's press releases appear to have less impact on media coverage when discussing abuses in countries that are central to the media's zone of concern. Indeed, Amnesty's press advocacy may be more effective when addressing violations in lesser-noticed countries. The article attributes this to the saturation of coverage of abuses in highly mediatized countries. Cumulative attention by multiple journalists and others raises a country's media profile but also makes it more difficult for any one voice to be heard. The authors conclude that Amnesty's press advocacy may have greater media impact when focusing on abuses in countries located away from the media's core areas of concern. Overall, the authors are encouraged by the Northern media's sensitivity to actual patterns of repression and to Amnesty's lobbying, since both indicate that the media is potentially a useful ally in efforts to combat abuses worldwide. Yet, the discouraging effects of poverty on the media's human rights coverage are cause for concern.

Diffusion in Referendum Campaigns: The Case of EU Constitutional Referendums

“…An important question is whether there is an element of size as well (e.g. Linos, 2011;Ramos et al, 2007). Would Luxembourg be able to serve as the source campaign?…”

When Is the Pen Truly Mighty? Regime Type and the Efficacy of Naming and Shaming in Curbing Human Rights Abuses

“…19 States are the main targets of INGO advocacy, but INGOs might also influence the way human rights violations are reported, especially in states that are not central to Western media agendas. 20 It may be that the external influences of INGOs, like the influence of international treaties, require receptive domestic audiences with which to build coalitions or an existent strong civil society in order for advocacy to have effect. 21 The positive effect that some posit merely from the presence of civil society actors such as INGOs in democratizing international politics 22 is (F'note continued) increasingly met with gloomier perspectives that blame INGOs for wrongheadedness in their policy directives.…”

Sticks and Stones: Naming and Shaming the Human Rights Enforcement Problem

“…already+ 41 For the political terror model, I use a measure of the number of military personnel, logged, 40+ The estimates are not shown here to economize space+ 41+ SeeRon, Ramos, and Rodgers 2005;Ramos, Ron, and Thoms 2007; and Hafner-Burton and Ron 2008a+ Summary statistics, 1975-2000 Notes: CAT ϭ Convention Against Torture+ CCPR ϭ Covenant on Civil and Political Rights+…”