Reshaping our view of the world

The gatekeeping theory has interested me for a while. I’m curious about where information comes from, where it’s going, who passes it along, and how it changes along the way. Originally the theory applied to food; Kurt Lewin examined how goods and services flowed through certain channels to eventually arrive in the home. But he drew a comparison between what he examined and news items. A short time later, David White applied the theory to a copy editor, and eventually Gaye Tuchman concluded that journalists have their own routines.

And perhaps that was the hook. As a journalist, I had my own routine; occasionally I would switch things up when I was short on time due to deadlines. What they say about lightening striking in the same place rarely applies to crime, and there was a high probability that I would cover two or more stories at once. I created a routine based on how long it took me to go from place to place, thumb through arrest reports and chew the fat (the best stories sometimes appear THAT way), and get back to the newsroom. My routine fit within the larger operation of the newspaper; my behavior usually worked within what the organization demanded of me.

There’s a logic that operates in the news media, and that logic varies from medium to medium. It is this logic that plays into the gatekeeping role, helping journalists determine the appropriate sources, types of information needed, and what is included or excluded. In this way journalists act as gatekeepers, but there are layers of gatekeeping. Think about the structure of a newsroom. Reporters go out and make contact with people, gathering news. The sources with whom journalists speak are gatekeepers; the editors are gatekeepers; even the readers are gatekeepers, choosing what they decide to read or skip over.

Additionally, the logic becomes apparent in how the information is included, how it is organized, and where the story is placed. While placement and organization are important, understanding which information is used as well as its source are at the top of my list. We often do not know the milieu in which the information was gathered. Is the reporter quoting a press release? Other news sources? Press conferences? Interviews? Archival material? All indicate how the information was gathered and packaged – and by whom. Recycled news scares me; if the information is inaccurate or incomplete, it becomes difficult to rectify that inaccuracy. And then how do we track the mistake back to its root?

Reused information renders news less poignant, less useful. It is the interaction with people (and sometimes documents and other artifacts) that creates the news; without them, you have robbed the news of its humanity. Journalists interact with a number of different people, and in doing this, help create an understanding (or misunderstanding) of people, places, and events. Each of us brings meaning to our interaction with one another and actively engages in consensus or disagreement about the world. Journalists use organizational values to shape their news product, and then send it down the editorial chain, where other people interact with the copy. Realizing this, it becomes important to understand the nature of information that we receive and the nature in which we receive it.

I wondered about this as I perused Google news Monday night. Look at the Kosovo stories that initially appeared in the Google search, knowing full well there are algorithms and other “techie” complexities that decide which stories come up. Typically the major parts of a story include the headline, a deck if present, the byline, the dateline, the lead, the nutgraph, the sources, the style, and ultimately the information that makes its way into the story. The order of information is also important, as often it indicates level of importance. Determining that all of the stories derived from news agencies, I sought to know if these stories changed from their original form and how.

Gatekeeping and Symbolic Interaction
Lewin (1947) said in order to change people’s food habits, it is necessary to find the “key positions” along the channel that carries the food, as items travel through these channels, proceeding through “definitive steps” (144). Often, this key position would include a person in a household who determines the necessary items needed and then sends them along the channel to the table. In my house, I would ultimately be the key position at the end of the chain, a definitive step for goods and services. But Lewin contended this concept also applies to other goods and services, especially the diffusion of news. David Manning White took Lewin’s concept and applied it to a wire copy editor, affectionately known at Mr. Gates. He found Gates used the type of news, or category, as a factor in his decision to include wire copy; Gates also made decisions based on how well written the story was and how well the story matched his readership. Finally Tuchman (1973) studied the routinization in lieu of unexpected events. Because variability poses problems for journalists in processing raw material, they ultimately devise methods for efficiently sorting through and labeling types of stories and bits of information. Many researchers have examined gatekeeping throughout the years, and use of the word "gatekeeper" has become as ubiquitous as the use of the word "framing"; many people use the words but rarely understand their theoretical underpinnings.

I imagine these channels to be more of a matrix, with several different possible sources of information and several different gatekeepers. As the information flows through these channels, they flow from and through different gates. For example, news is ultimately guided by an organization’s “common understanding of news values and imperatives” (Meyers, 1997, p. 21). But here’s the question: what happens to the information when it flows through each gate? While we might not be in a position to know pre-press, we can figure it out post-press. The question of gatekeeping becomes clearer when you begin to realize the journalist and each source are interacting with one another, and in turn the reporter’s product and the audience are interacting. They are creating meaning by exchanging symbols, through which a view of the world emerges.

Conceptualizing communication as symbolic interaction has a history. Blumer (1972) and Schutz (1967) both talked about how human beings exchange meaning. Goffman (1974) also talks about this interaction, and how it plays into human understanding and the organization of human experience. Both framing and media formats grew out of Goffman’s theory. But no matter which way you head – framing or formats – what emerges is the idea that the media help shape our view of the world. Ultimately, if you hold a gatekeeping position, you are charged with a responsibility that involves shaping how people see the world, not only the arena in which action occurs but their place within that arena.

In building a research project to study crime coverage in Philadelphia – affectionately called Killadelphia – I came across interesting tidbits about crime coverage. For example, Doris Graber (1980) concluded that many crime stories would include stock information; they tend to be cookie cutter stories, consistently employing specific pieces of information. Name and age of the suspect, address, and type of crime committed are typical in crime stories. Erickson, Baranek, and Chan (1991) contended that these stories would use the same sources; more often than not, many of the sources are official sources. Journalists and these sources engage in a symbiotic relationship. The sources provide information, which is needed by the journalists, and the journalists assure the sources have a place in the media food chain, which is often needed by those who want to disseminate important information. I have wanted to examine how this would play out in stories that didn’t deal with crime; thus, the Kosovo situation and the precipitating online news stories granted me an opportunity.

Kosovo
Late Monday evening and early Tuesday morning, news of the meeting between Kosovar leaders and U.S. officials went out over the wire. Kosovo is a province in Serbia that has long sought independence, and Serbia is attached to Kosovo; it does not want to let go. A majority of those living in Kosovo are Albanian, with a minority of Serbs. Both the United Nations and NATO have controlled and protected the province since 1999, when NATO led an air war against the Serbian military that sought to control Albanian separatists. This area has been a hotbed of contention; you might remember that an assassination in Serbia helped precipitate the war to end all wars in 1914. Of the four stories that appeared in Google news search, three originated from Reuters. When I say originated, I mean that Reuters put the copy over the wire, and other news agencies picked it up. The final story was an Associated Press article that Fox chose to pick up.

Reuters and AP both disseminate news; Reuters is a British news agency, and Associated Press is an not-for-profit cooperative owned by its 1,500 American daily members. This means if a news organization doesn’t have the resources to send its own reporter but has a newshole and thinks the content fits its readership, it can use the story. I wanted to see how news agencies portrayed the situation and how that story changed from news organization to news organization. I looked at five things: headline, lead, the nutgraph, the sources, and the context. I realize there are many ways to write a news story, but I’m from the Missouri school of journalism, so I reverted back to my education. Placed at the top of the story, the headline gives you the whole story in one sentence or less; absent of visuals, the headline grabs the readers’ attention. The lead tells you the news. The nutgraph, or as George Kennedy affectionately called the “rat’s ass” graph, tells you why you should care. “Why should I give a rat’s ass?” The sources tell you where the information came from, and the context gives you an idea of why the news is occurring and what is expected in the future.

The story that ran on Stuff.co.nz was nearly identical to the original Reuters’s story, so I will skip it. Fox ran an Associated Press story, rather than a story from Reuters, so I went to find the original AP story. I was unsuccessful on the Internet; I turned to LexisNexis, a database for news/legal nerds. There were a number of other news agencies that filed stories on the same subject, but since I’m not conducting a full-fledged research project, I decided to take a much easier route. Below is what I found when I looked at four stories. The links are included for all but the original AP story, as I only offer a summation of the articles. I encourage you to examine the stories.

Original Reuters Story
Written by Sue Pleming, this story describes the meeting between Kosovar leaders and U.S. officials.

The Headline: “Kosovo tells U.S. it will not declare independence”

The lead: “Kosovo told Washington on Monday that it did not plan to unilaterally declare independence from Serbia in November, senior officials from the United States and Kosovo said.”

The nutgraph: A paraphrase of a spokesman from the Kosovo delegation Skender Hyseni explaining that Kosovo's leaders assured U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice no unilateral action would be taken, and U.S. officials confirmed cooperation, not unilateral action.

The story provides context throughout, explaining Serbia’s opposition to independence, U.S. officials’ fear that unilateral claim to independence could lead to violence, and discussions within the UN Contact Group. Also, it provides the reason for the meeting: the U.N. resolution for independence was pushed aside by Russia. The story also provides an explanation for the fear of unilateral action: “Kosovo’s Prime Minister Agim Ceku, who met with Rice along with other senior Kosovo officials, had suggested on Friday he could ask the province’s parliament to declare independence from Serbia on November 28.” One additional tidbit to mention is the use of the word guerillas in the explanation of the war with Serbians.

The sources include Hyseni as well as two unnamed U.S. officials.

ABC’s version
Again, Sue Pleming’s name appears in the byline.

The headline: “U.S. urges Kosovo leaders to be patient”

The lead: “Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice urged Kosovo’s leaders on Monday to be patient in their push for independence after the United Nations put aside a resolution that Russia had threatened to veto.”

Nutgraph: The nutgraph in this story is the reason some fear unilateral action: “Kosovo’s Prime Minister Agim Ceku, who met Rice...urged the parliament last week to declare independence from Russian ally Serbia on November 28.”

While some of the context is the same material, it appears differently. In addition, some new information is also provided about the U.N. Security Council as well as the draft resolution that was removed after Russia opposed. Another sentence, which is without attribution, appears as well. “Last week Rice said Kosovo would get its independence 'one way or another,' but the Kosovo delegation was expected to make clear to her that patience was running out over the pace of international diplomacy that will decide their future.”

The sources include State Department spokesman Sean McCormack, an unnamed official traveling with the Kosovo delegation, and Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Vitaly Churkin. The official traveling with the Kosovo delegation had no comment, but the non-statement included a tidbit about talks including National Security adviser Stephen Hadley. It is unclear in what context Churkin made his statements - are they archival? From an interview?

After seeing the differences in the two stories, it becomes apparent that if you read one and not the other, your view of the situation might be different. It should be noted that I recognize a need to know about the editorial processes of both these organizations; information that appears in one story and not the other comes from somewhere. I think it is common practice of many journalists to take information from archive stories to add context, but sometimes the readers might not realize this unless they have followed the story. So what about the Associated Press stories?

Original AP story (Retrieved from LexisNexis, July 25, 2007)
Desmond Butler wrote this story, and like Sue Pleming’s story, it describes the Washington meeting.

The headline: “Kosovo officials assure US they will consult allies before declaring independence”

The lead: “U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice reassured officials from Kosovo that the United States would push for recognition of the breakaway province’s independence from Serbia within months.”

Nutgraph: Both the Kosovar prime minister and president told Rice they would not declare negotiations unilaterally; any action would be coordinated with the United States.

The context of the story includes the same information as the Reuters story, with additional information. The story cites U.S. President Bush "hinting" that the United States “could recognize Kosovo without Security Council consent” during his trip to Albania in June. It also adds Martti Ahtisaari, the U.N.’s special envoy to Kosovo, recommended the province gain supervised independence in April. The story also includes that Kosovo’s population is majority ethnic Albanian, while the Fox story does not.

The sources include Kosovo’s president Fatmir Sejdiu from an interview with AP on Monday. The story also includes information from senior U.S. officials “speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak for attribution.”

Fox’s version
Again, Desmond Butler has the byline.

The headline: “Kosovo head assures Rice on independence”

The lead: “Kosovo’s leaders told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice Monday that the breakaway province would not declare independence from Serbia without coordinating the move with the United States.”

Nutgraph: Rice gave Kosovo’s officials assurance of the U.S.’s commitment to recognition of Kosovo’s independence within months, “even without a United Nations Security Council resolution.”

The information provided for context is the same as the previous story, though the order of information is different. Some of the information has also been reworked: “The meetings in Washington come days after the Security Council set aside a resolution that Russia called a hidden route to independence.”

The sources include Kosovo’s president, Fatmir Sejdiu, as well as State Department spokesman Sean McCormack.

What did I learn from this?
The point here is not to criticize these news organizations but explore how these stories might morph as they travel through different gates, and as they change, to understand the meaning presented to readers about these events. Of course news organizations will organize stories in a manner that fits their styles, their readers, and their organizational missions. But the perspective of the stories from organization to organization seems dramatically different, which warrants a closer look.

Obviously ABC completely revamped the Reuters story, changing the perspective from the Kosovar leaders to the perspective of U.S. officials. The change in perspective is evident in the headline and the lead. The ABC story also includes information that was not included in the original story; where did it come from? Fox, on the other hand, stayed more true to the original AP story, rearranging some of the information. Both its lead and nutgraph are different, but not quite as much as th ABC story. The sources also varied, but this seems indicative of news organizations making the content their own. To me, as long as I understand the context in which the interview took place or the information was gathered, I'm happy.

What is not mentioned in these stories? The Serbian reaction. The Serbian parliament passed a resolution, stating the government would act if Kosovo declared its independence; it also warned those who aided Kosovo. What is worrisome is that each of these stories provide only a two-dimensional view of this situation, where there seems to be many dimensions. While this does not surprise me, splitting the larger picture into separate stories skews the brevity of the situation and provides reality piecemeal. I also noticed none of these online stories provides a link to stories about the Serbian reaction, though a couple of them provide online forums for readers.

While it might not be possible to read every story, it is possible to be more mindful of where information comes from, keeping tabs not only on news organizations but on sources, as well. Technology has helped create a more open society, but it has also galvanized competition within the news media. One evil produced by the current media environment is news recycling; it is difficult to tell the difference between fresh information and recycled information used for context. It is also increasingly difficult to understand the context in which information is gathered. Given these reasons, examining the news media is more important than ever, especially when the world presented might fit into the narrow perspective of one news organization or another. Even from within this narrow perspective, we as active participants have the ability to break free and search for a more complete picture, understanding that while the news media might shape our initial comprehension, we have the ability to reshape our view of the world.

References
Blumer, H. (1972). Symbolic interaction: An approach to human communication. In R. W. Budd and B. D. Ruben (Eds.), Approaches to Human Communication. New York: Spartan. pp. 401-419.

Erickson, R. V., Baranek, P. M., & Chan, J. B. L. (1991). Representing Order: Crime, Law, and Justice in the News Media. University of Toronto Press.

Graber, D. A. (1980). Crime News and The Public. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. London: Harper Colophon Books.

Myers, M. (1997). News Coverage of Violence Against Women: Engendering Blame. London: Sage.

Schutz, A. (1967). Some basic problems of interpretive sociology. In The Phenomenology of the Social world, (Original work published in 1932). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. pp. 215-220.

Tuchman, G. (1973). Making News by Doing Work: Routinizing the Unexpected. American Journal of Sociology. 79(1). pp. 110-131.

White, D. M. (1950). The Gatekeeper: A Case Study in the Selection of News. Journalism Quarterly. (27). Reprinted In Social Meanings of News (1997), Dan Berkowitz, (Ed.). California: Sage.