26.07.2013 Views

The Jeremiad Over Journalism

The Jeremiad Over Journalism

The Jeremiad Over Journalism

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

77<br />

30<br />

Table 7 – <strong>The</strong> number of newspaper articles sampled between 1968 and 2008 divided by news outlet.<br />

<strong>The</strong> newspaper N reported in Table 7 is also the N that the following graphs are based on. To take<br />

two examples, this means that the percentages of <strong>The</strong> New York Times articles reported for 1968 are<br />

based on 77 articles while the percentages for Politiken in 2001 are based on 42 articles as will be<br />

apparent in the analysis that follows.<br />

5.3 H1: Commercializaton<br />

55<br />

49<br />

27<br />

25<br />

2<br />

49<br />

44<br />

32<br />

23 20<br />

1<br />

51<br />

47<br />

42<br />

22<br />

20<br />

1<br />

42 45<br />

38<br />

29<br />

22<br />

3<br />

5<br />

9<br />

2<br />

0<br />

H1: From 1968 and forward a ―commercial deluge‖ has enveloped Danish print media<br />

leading to changes in newspaper content with greater focus on ―form‖ instead of<br />

―substance.‖<br />

H1a: From 1968 and forward news stories increasingly utilize soft news leads<br />

H1b: From 1968 and forward news stories increasingly utilize an interpretative style of<br />

reporting<br />

Article sample size (N)<br />

1968 1971 1980 1981 1988 1990 2000 2001 2008<br />

H1c: From 1968 and forward news stories focus more on personalities and strategy than<br />

political issues, especially in media companies which are publicly traded.<br />

174<br />

New York Times<br />

Los Angeles Times<br />

USA Today<br />

Politiken<br />

Berlingske Tidende<br />

Ekstra Bladet

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!