The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage

This contribution focuses on the credibility evaluation of media reports during the third Gulf War, concentrating on both the evaluations and the reasons why media recipients consider a particular contribution to be more or less credible. In this context credibility evaluation is conceptualized as i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Margrit Schreier, Özen Odag, Norbert Groeben
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: FQS 2004-05-01
Series:Forum: Qualitative Social Research
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/604
id doaj-89e0ca1a57ae45f4a8ef8208679a56c7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-89e0ca1a57ae45f4a8ef8208679a56c72020-11-25T00:33:01ZdeuFQS Forum: Qualitative Social Research1438-56272004-05-0152591The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media CoverageMargrit Schreier0Özen Odag1Norbert Groeben2Jacobs University Bremen gGmbHJacobs University Bremen gGmbHUniversität zu KölnThis contribution focuses on the credibility evaluation of media reports during the third Gulf War, concentrating on both the evaluations and the reasons why media recipients consider a particular contribution to be more or less credible. In this context credibility evaluation is conceptualized as involving several perspectives and taking into consideration aspects of both media content and form. Data were collected via media diaries that the participants sent the researchers by e-mail. The participants were asked to record the source and the content of the respective media report as well as their evaluation of this report as credible or not and the reasons for this evaluation. The sample consisted of a selective group of colleagues from a number of different universities in Germany and Austria (N=13). Content analysis of the entries shows that the participants regard 40% of the media reports they refer to as credible. Concerning the remaining reports, they are mostly ambivalent. Content analysis further shows that in evaluating a media report as credible, recipients most frequently draw upon their media knowledge and on plausibility considerations. When they regard a media report as dubious, the participants also draw on their media knowledge; in addition, formal characteristics such as lack of clarity and lack of detail also play an important role in such negative evaluations. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0402214http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/604political psychologymedia psychologyreception studiescredibilitywar coveragegulf war
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Margrit Schreier
Özen Odag
Norbert Groeben
spellingShingle Margrit Schreier
Özen Odag
Norbert Groeben
The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage
Forum: Qualitative Social Research
political psychology
media psychology
reception studies
credibility
war coverage
gulf war
author_facet Margrit Schreier
Özen Odag
Norbert Groeben
author_sort Margrit Schreier
title The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage
title_short The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage
title_full The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage
title_fullStr The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage
title_full_unstemmed The Third Gulf War: Perceived Credibility of the Media Coverage
title_sort third gulf war: perceived credibility of the media coverage
publisher FQS
series Forum: Qualitative Social Research
issn 1438-5627
publishDate 2004-05-01
description This contribution focuses on the credibility evaluation of media reports during the third Gulf War, concentrating on both the evaluations and the reasons why media recipients consider a particular contribution to be more or less credible. In this context credibility evaluation is conceptualized as involving several perspectives and taking into consideration aspects of both media content and form. Data were collected via media diaries that the participants sent the researchers by e-mail. The participants were asked to record the source and the content of the respective media report as well as their evaluation of this report as credible or not and the reasons for this evaluation. The sample consisted of a selective group of colleagues from a number of different universities in Germany and Austria (N=13). Content analysis of the entries shows that the participants regard 40% of the media reports they refer to as credible. Concerning the remaining reports, they are mostly ambivalent. Content analysis further shows that in evaluating a media report as credible, recipients most frequently draw upon their media knowledge and on plausibility considerations. When they regard a media report as dubious, the participants also draw on their media knowledge; in addition, formal characteristics such as lack of clarity and lack of detail also play an important role in such negative evaluations. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0402214
topic political psychology
media psychology
reception studies
credibility
war coverage
gulf war
url http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/604
work_keys_str_mv AT margritschreier thethirdgulfwarperceivedcredibilityofthemediacoverage
AT ozenodag thethirdgulfwarperceivedcredibilityofthemediacoverage
AT norbertgroeben thethirdgulfwarperceivedcredibilityofthemediacoverage
AT margritschreier thirdgulfwarperceivedcredibilityofthemediacoverage
AT ozenodag thirdgulfwarperceivedcredibilityofthemediacoverage
AT norbertgroeben thirdgulfwarperceivedcredibilityofthemediacoverage
_version_ 1725317798488440832