Search

In this study, we investigated whether corrections can combat climate disinformation. Using a preregistered quota-based online experiment in Germany (N = 1401), we tested how the effectiveness of disinformation correction in reducing climate misperceptions was influenced by correction placement (prebunking or debunking) and correction type (focused on facts, logic, or the combination of both). We investigated how populist radical-right (PRR) attitudes moderate the effect of disinformation correction and whether correction alleviates the negative effects of disinformation on efficacy beliefs to mitigate climate change (EBMCC) through reduced misperceptions. All debunking conditions and the logic-focused prebunking condition significantly reduced climate misperceptions. Prebunking was only effective under the logic-focused correction condition. We found no moderating effect of PRR attitudes on climate misperceptions, suggesting that corrections similarly benefitted all participants. In addition, a significant indirect effect of corrections was observed on EBMCC via climate misperceptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been growing interest in research on news-related user comments. Here we conduct the first systematic review of this literature--quantitatively and qualitatively (248 studies)--that covers the entire communication process (content analyses, surveys, experiments). Results indicate a focus on online news articles (vs videos) and little consideration for major social media platforms (Instagram, TikTok). Research often assesses incivility in comments but offers conflicting conclusions on the actual level of incivility in comment threads-- and seldom considers how to effectively combat any incivility. We propose four priorities for future work: more comparative and longitudinal approaches; exploring social media and video content; examining platform design, content moderation and artificial intelligence; and implementing measures to reduce incivility and protect the integrity of journalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Antisemitism is on the rise. Recently, discussions have considered so-called "no-go zones for Jews" (city areas Jews should avoid to reduce the likelihood of being attacked). In this context and drawing from attribution theory, we examined if news consumers perceive a Jewish hate crime victim as partly responsible for being attacked when news coverage explicitly emphasizes that the victim displayed religious symbols (kippah) in a certain inner-city location. We conducted a quota-based survey experiment (N = 392) in Germany (4 groups, between-subjects design) and randomly exposed participants to news coverage about an anti-Semitic attack. The article either emphasized that the Jewish victim displayed religious symbols (kippah) or not, and highlighted the specific location of the attack (Berlin synagogue vs. deprived inner-city district of Berlin). Moderated mediation analysis suggested that participants perceived the victim's behavior to be more provocative when the news article highlighted that the victim displayed religious symbols and when the attack occurred in a deprived Berlin district. Yet, effects were only detected for individuals with low (vs. high) levels of education. Perceived provocativeness in turn increased victim blaming indicating that some individuals indirectly regarded the Jewish victim to be partly responsible for being attacked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The media is increasingly blamed for inflaming political animosity, but it may also bridge partisan divides—with the right strategies. Past research highlights the outgroup‐experience effect: Sharing personal experiences (and not facts) helps to reduce partisan animosity. However, sharing facts is a pillar of good journalism and is essential for mediated political communication. Across four studies in two countries, we show that journalists, and citizens on social media sites, can share facts about contentious political issues (gun and climate policy), while simultaneously increasing tolerance and reducing dehumanization of political opponents. We extend the outgroup‐experience effect by introducing factual content alongside personal experiences of political adversaries (i.e., a combination approach). These effects are replicated in both the United States and Germany although in Germany the personal experience intervention is only beneficial for people with more extreme attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The hostile media phenomenon (HMP) refers to a process in which supporters and opponents of an issue perceive the identical coverage to be biased against their own views. Despite the relevance of visual communication in our field, scholars have treated hostile media perceptions as a text-based phenomenon ignoring the unique role of visuals. This paper makes the case for a visual hostile media phenomenon (VHMP). The VHMP posits that completely balanced pictures are perceived as biased both by opponents and supporters of an issue. Two experimental studies on the Israel–Palestine conflict provide clear evidence for this reasoning. Study 1 shows that Palestine (Israel) supporters perceived a balanced photo series as biased toward Israel (Palestine) irrespective of the series' reach. This effect was also visible for clearly slanted pro-Israel and pro-Palestine pictures (i.e., relative VHMP). Study 2 replicates these findings and sheds some first light on the underlying mechanism. Theoretical and methodological implications are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Islamist terrorist attacks have become a salient threat to Western countries, and news coverage about such crimes is a key predictor of public emotional reactions and policy support. We examine the effects of two key characteristics of terrorism news coverage: (1) the victim's religion and (2) first-person narratives that facilitate perspective taking. A quota-based experiment (N = 354) revealed that irrespective of the narrative type, news reports that mention the victims' Muslim religion induce less anger and compassion, but more joy among non-Muslim news consumers. However, fear was equally induced by all news articles. As a consequence, fear, anger, and joy predicted support for more restrictive terrorism policies, while anger and compassion were related to more support for victim compensation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Children's movies and animated cartoons today increasingly include homosexual characters, which can be welcomed from an equal-rights perspective. Yet, an intensive public debate has been initiated regarding the (age) appropriateness of such depictions. So far, it is unclear how heterosexual adults react to the presence of gay characters in children's animated cartoons. Drawing from social identity theory, we conducted an experiment in Germany. Using the Powtoon animation software, we created two versions of a trailer of a fictitious animated cartoon based on two almost identical storylines – one involving a heterosexual couple and the other a lesbian couple. Participants were exposed to only one version. Results of the experiment revealed that adults gave higher age ratings to the version that featured the lesbian couple. Yet, this effect was moderated, with only center- to right-leaning persons being affected. No effects were detected for left-leaning individuals. An exploratory analysis further revealed a moderation effect for individuals who believed in protection myths (i. e., protecting children from exposure to homosexuality), resulting in them giving higher age ratings compared to people who did not believe in protection myths. Implications are discussed, and age-rating measures are proposed for examining reactions to gay characters in communication research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this introduction to the Special Section, we examine the complex relationship between media and political polarization--especially affective polarization. We consider differences in measurement and interdisciplinary perspectives. To fully understand the relationship between media and affective polarization, we must consider the people accessing media content (e.g., identities and (mis)perceptions), the media itself (e.g., source and content effects), and the interactions between media and people (e.g., media diets and behaviors). Additionally, we introduce the Complexities of Media and Affective Polarization Framework to provide an overview of current perspectives in media and affective polarization research. We call on scholars to calibrate measurements of affective polarization to increase clarity and further assess the complexities of media and affective polarization research. Further research should assess how media can reduce affective polarization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research in political communication has shown that visual news coverage can affect news consumers' evaluations of political candidates. Yet, so far, the effects of subtle (positive/negative) visual background cues on candidate evaluation remain largely unclear. Also, the role of individuals' media trust has not been explored in this context. That is, trusting individuals may interpret subtle visual cues in different ways compared with mistrusting individuals. Drawing from theory on visual communication, media trust, and the persuasion knowledge model a quota-based online experiment revealed that media trust moderates the relationship between the exposure to negative visual cues and candidate evaluation in the context of a political scandal. Mistrusting individuals showed more positive candidate evaluations, whereas trusting individuals showed more negative evaluations. Thus, visual background cues can have a polarising effect on citizens' evaluations of political actors and influence the electorate in very different ways. Implications for journalism practice are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined how Muslims are depicted in connection with Islamist terrorism and to what extent journalists use undifferentiated coverage – that actively links Muslims to terrorism – and differentiated coverage that actively differentiates Muslims from terrorism. Drawing from research in journalism studies and from terror management theory, we examined media-specific and event-specific predictors using a quantitative content analysis (12 quality/tabloid newspapers from three countries, N = 1071 articles). Results reveal that undifferentiated coverage occurs in almost every other article. Differentiation occurs much less. Tabloids use undifferentiated and differentiated coverage in fact-oriented and opinion-oriented articles. Quality news only do so in opinion-oriented articles. Proximity of a terror event resulted in more undifferentiated and less differentiated coverage. Results have important implications for journalism practice, terrorism research and intergroup relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Donald Trump frequently attacks foreign countries such as Germany (e.g., via Twitter). Drawing from social identity theory and intergroup threat theory, I theorized that exposure to news about Trump's anti-German utterances indirectly increases anti-Americanism in Germany. First, I theorized that Trump's utterances result in negative attitudes toward Trump and, in turn, increase anti-Americanism (spillover effect). Second, I theorized that Trump's anti-German utterances indirectly affect anti-Americanism via increased European Union (EU) popularity. Furthermore, I assumed that effects would be stronger for individuals low in political interest. A quota-based online experiment (N = 428) revealed that Trump's anti-German utterances increased EU's popularity. This effect was moderated by political interest. EU's popularity was increased for moderately interested individuals and individuals low in political interest. No effects were detected for highly interested individuals. EU popularity, in turn, increased anti-Americanism. Therefore, Trump's anti-German utterances indirectly increased anti-Americanism burdening relations between Germany and the United States. Implications for journalistic news coverage are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rising political polarization is, in part, attributed to the fragmentation of news media and the spread of misinformation on social media. Previous reviews have yet to assess the full breadth of research on media and polarization. We systematically examine 94 articles (121 studies) that assess the role of (social) media in shaping political polarization. Using quantitative and qualitative approaches, we find an increase in research over the past 10 years and consistently find that pro-attitudinal media exacerbates polarization. We find a hyperfocus on analyses of Twitter and American samples and a lack of research exploring ways (social) media can depolarize. Additionally, we find ideological and affective polarization are not clearly defined, nor consistently measured. Recommendations for future research are provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on misinformation and disinformation in social media and how it has impacted democracy. Topics include the effects of visual disinformation and "deepfakes," how to correct multimodal disinformation, and the importance of debunking falsehoods.

The #MeToo movement has restarted an extensive and worldwide debate about sexual harassment especially directed against women. When women publicly accuse an alleged perpetrator they often do so with a strong delay and frequently come forward with allegations years after a harassment occurred. Yet, we lack research on how news about delayed sexual harassment accusations affect victim blaming. Drawing from construal level theory and attribution theory, we experimentally tested how participants react to news about a victim's delayed accusation (harassment occurred years ago), non-delayed accusation (harassment occurred days ago), or accusations with no time cue. Findings showed that delayed accusations resulted in the attribution of negative motives toward the victim. Negative motives, in turn, increased victim blaming. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined how the journalistic differentiation of Muslims from Islamist terrorists and terror news proximity (i.e., proximity of terroristic acts to viewing audience) influence the effects of news reports about terrorism by the Islamic State on Islamophobic attitudes. Drawing from social identity theory, findings from two experimental studies revealed that coverage not clearly distinguishing Muslims from Islamist terrorists (i.e., undifferentiated coverage) activated negative stereotypes about Muslims and, in turn, heightened Islamophobic attitudes. However, terror news proximity did not affect audiences' reactions of fear, negative stereotypes about Muslims, or Islamophobic attitudes. We discuss the implications of those findings for research on terrorism as well as for journalistic practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies have demonstrated that the media, by specifically framing news articles, may systematically affect a nondisabled recipient's perception of athletes with disabilities (AWDs). However, it remains unclear how specific sports news frames affect a recipient's quality perception of a journalistic product and if news frames further affect an individual's postexposure behavior in social interaction with a person with a disability (PWD). To shed some light on these potential news-framing effects, 2 experimental studies (between-subjects designs) were conducted. Study 1 revealed systematic news framing's effects on recipients' attitudes toward a depicted AWD and showed effects on a recipient's perceived quality of a news story. Study 2 further revealed that specific news frames may (automatically) affect a recipient's behavior (e.g., verbal communication performance, visual attention/ eye contacts) in a subsequent face-to-face social interaction with a PWD. The findings are discussed regarding their implications for the journalistic coverage of disability sports in the media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study took an actor-based approach to explain news differentiation in terrorism coverage. Actors were defined as non-Muslim sources, Muslim sources, and journalists. Actors who generate undifferentiated statements actively link Muslims to terrorism, whereas actors who use differentiated statements explicitly distinguish Muslims from terrorism. We examined actor-specific, media-specific, and event-specific predictors of differentiation using a quantitative content analysis in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland, 2015–2017 (12 quality/tabloid newspapers, N = 1071 articles). Results reveal that non-Muslim sources and journalists are more likely to make undifferentiated statements and less likely to make differentiated statements compared to Muslim sources. This gap between Muslim sources on the one side and non-Muslim sources as well as journalists on the other side is more accentuated for severe terroristic attacks and for articles mentioning dead and injured victims. For differentiated statements, the gap is also more pronounced in tabloid newspapers as compared to quality newspapers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scandal severity may affect public perceptions of both scandalous political actors and news sources reporting political misconduct. Yet, research that has empirically tested these assumptions is lacking. Drawing from theory on anchoring effects, the results of two experimental studies conducted using mediation analyses revealed that severe scandals hurt politicians (candidate evaluation) and weaken voting intentions. Although non-severe scandals have no such effects, they increased news consumers' exaggerated scandalization perceptions and indirectly degraded news source evaluations. Severe scandals had no effect on the news source. Implications for the coverage of political scandals are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Political hypocrisy – a frequent feature of contemporary politics – oftentimes occurs when politicians resign from office and then engage in behavior that is in fundamental opposition to the standpoints they originally campaigned for as incumbents. Previous research has neglected to examine negative spillover effects of news about ex-politicians' hypocritical behavior. Drawing from the inclusion/exclusion model and the feelings-as-information model, we conducted two experiments in two different countries and used different stimuli to increase external validity. Results suggest a dual process account of scandal spillover effects (an attitudinal and emotional mechanism) revealing that hypocrisy negatively affected both attitudes and emotions toward an ex-politician. Mediation analysis further showed that evaluations in turn negatively affected attitudes and voting intentions for the party the hypocritical politician used to belong to (attitudinal spillover process). No effects on general political trust emerged. In contrast, negative emotions had no effect on party attitudes and voting intentions but decreased political trust toward politicians in general (emotional spillover process). In line with the inclusion/exclusion model, the results help to explain inconsistent findings in previous studies that did not account for the suggested dual process account of spillover effects and underline the eroding effects of hypocrisy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars have advanced many theoretical explanations for expecting a negative or positive relationship between individuals' cross-cutting exposure—either through interpersonal or mediated forms of communication—and their political participation. However, whether cross-cutting exposure is a positive or negative predictor of participation is still an unsettled question. To help fill this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of 48 empirical studies comprising more than 70,000 participants examining the association between cross-cutting exposure and political participation. The meta-analysis produced two main findings. First, it shows that, over all studies, there is no significant relationship, r =.002, Zr =.002 (95% CI = −.04 to.05). Second, the null relationship cannot be explained by variations in the characteristics of cross-cutting environments (e.g., topic, place, or source of exposure), participation outcomes (e.g., online vs. offline activities), or methods employed (e.g., experiment vs. survey). Taken together, these results should alleviate concerns about negative effects of cross-cutting exposure on political engagement. Implications for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The international media coverage of athletes with physical disabilities (AWD) shows diverse quantitative and qualitative shortcomings. This study explores what effects a specific visual framing in a print article about disability sports has on recipients' attitudes toward a depicted AWD. In an experiment with a 3 (framed conditions) × 2 (participants' contact with people with disabilities) between-subjects design, 88 participants were randomly assigned to I of the 3 (trained) conditions. The participants read a sports news article with a photograph of a 1-armed javelin thrower with no spectators, a few spectators, or a large crowd shown in the background. Alter examining the participants' responses to a questionnaire, an ANOVA showed that the participants' attitudes toward the depicted AWD were significantly more positive when the visual frame included spectators in the background of the picture. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research in information processing suggests that the journalistic practice of embedding right-wing populist Twitter posts in news may stimulate political polarization. To test this notion, we conducted an online experiment (N = 379). We investigated how highlighted right-wing populist statements affected individuals from different ideological stances and whether potential effects were determined by Twitter-specific characteristics (Twitter frame, profile picture). We exposed participants to two articles, each including a statement by a politician of the Austrian Freedom Party. In the first group, the statements were not highlighted (control group). In the second and third group, the statements appeared as conventional block quotes either without (G2) or with (G3) a picture of the politician. In the fourth and fifth group, the statements were highlighted as Twitter posts, again either without (G4) or with (G5) a picture of the politician. Results revealed that all highlighting conditions increased statement recognition among left-wing individuals. However, the full Twitter post condition exerted the strongest effect. Higher recognition then decreased left-wing individuals' anti-immigrant attitudes and sympathy toward the right-wing populist candidate. Thus, embedding right-wing populists' Twitter posts may induce disconfirmation bias among left-wing voters and trigger a process in which they strengthen their initial attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous framing effects research has largely examined textual and visual influences separately, thus neglecting potential interaction effects between the two communication channels. The present study used a 2 × 2 experiment to examine the textual and visual influences in a separate manner and in an integrated way. It was tested how, if at all, textually and/or visually isolating a politician involved in scandal affects news consumers' perceptions. Results revealed that textual isolation cues had no effect. In contrast, visual isolation resulted in more negative candidate evaluations. Yet, this effect was only detected in the absence of textual isolation cues. Negative evaluations, in turn, decreased participants' intention to vote for the politician depicted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Journalists are frequently reporting about new and innovative products in news articles. Oftentimes, journalists use specific company and product information provided by enterprises that highlight a corporation’s social responsibility (CSR) activities. Based on framing theory and theory of reasoned action, an experiment was conducted to examine how types of CSR-framed news (either highlighting ethical, ecological, or philanthropic responsibilities of a company) affect news recipients’ product purchasing intentions. A mediation analysis showed that CSR-framed news indirectly and positively affected individuals’ purchasing intentions via company and product attitudes. No relevant differences could be detected for the specific type of CSR frame. Implications of the results are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When a celebrity receives negative news coverage, his or her endorsements of politicians can pose negative consequences for the politicians. We investigated such negative consequences with the help of two experimental studies. In Study 1 (celebrity involved in tax scandal), we manipulated whether an endorsement was initiated by a politician or a celebrity (i.e., controllability) in a 2 × 2 between-subject experiment. We also manipulated politicians’ responses (i.e., no response vs. response). Study 2 was a conceptual replication of the first experiment (celebrity involved in a real estate scandal). Results of Study 1 revealed that politicians are perceived to be more in control of self-initiated endorsements than other-initiated ones. Perceived controllability, in turn, influenced feelings of anger and pity, eventually affecting voting intentions. For self-initiated endorsements, no response appears to be the best reaction. By contrast, public response is advised when the endorsement was initiated by another entity. Results were replicated in Study 2. However, particular responses of a political candidate revealed no influences in connection with a real estate scandal. We explain our findings by applying the theory of planned behavior, attribution theory, and situational crisis communication theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In their depictions of scandalized politicians, journalists frequently use news images that highlight the (alleged) isolation of politicians. To test how this way of portraying political actors affects a recipient's attitudes and his/her guilt perception toward such a scandalized politician an experiment was conducted. All participants were exposed to the identical textual information. However, the visual information (degree of isolation) was systematically altered. A multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) showed that participants - exposed to a visual highlighting the isolation of the politician - evaluated the politician in a significantly more negative way and rated other recipients' perceptions of the politician's level of guilt to be higher. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports about political scandals have increased lately. Yet the general impact of news visuals and the specific role of lightness and darkness cues in images of scandalized politicians remain unclear. With the help of an experiment, the present pilot study examined the influence of candidate images and the effects of particular image backgrounds (light versus dark). While the foreground of the image depicting a politician involved in a scandal remained unchanged, the background was systematically altered. The results revealed that a light background had a positive effect on recipients’ attitudes toward the politician. In contrast, participants exposed to a dark image background demanded a more severe punishment for the politician. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The key assumption of spiral of silence theory is that opinion climate perceptions affect political opinion expression. We meta-analyzed the strength of this relationship and clarified the impact of theoretically relevant moderators. Sixty-six studies collectively including more than 27,000 participants were located. We observed a significant positive relationship (r = .10; Zr = .10) between opinion climate and opinion expression. This relationship was not weaker in online as compared with offline opinion expression environments. Also, the relationship did not vary by the number of the targets of opinion expression, the opinion of the targets, the opinion climate characteristics, and the design, measurement, and sample characteristics. The largest silencing effect (r = .34), however, was observed when participants talk to their family, friends, or neighbors about obtrusive issues. Overall, our findings suggest that the relationship between opinion climate perception and political opinion expression is stronger and more robust than previously thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article represents the first attempt to examine the effects of political scandals via meta-analysis. Seventy-eight studies, collectively including more than 54,000 participants, were identified and examined. A quantitative analysis revealed that the number of studies has steadily increased. Research predominantly stems from North America and Europe, and more than two-thirds of studies are based on student samples. Publication outlets are mostly political science and psychology journals, whereas communication journals play only a minor role. A qualitative analysis shows that two central outcome variables are frequently studied (evaluation of politicians/electoral consequences). Overall, studies generally reveal negative evaluative effects for politicians. However, five central moderators (candidate characteristics, behaviors, prior attitudes, context, and scandal type) significantly influence scandal effects. It is also apparent that research has largely neglected to precisely conceptualize the major independent variable in scandal-effects studies: news coverage and its intensity. Central research gaps are identified, and avenues for future research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Introduction provides the conceptual and theoretical context for a Special Section on political scandals in the International Journal of Communication. Mediated political scandals are a worldwide phenomenon and are not limited to liberal democracies only. A main aim of this Special Section, drawing on articles and studies about scandals in the U.S., China, and Europe, is to discuss the mediation of scandals in countries with different political institutions and media systems. We point to the contradictory status of journalism as an important "watchdog" institution for democracy, holding leaders to account, and a "scandal machine" that often ignores serious political misdeeds and inflates the importance of trivial norm violations. Another aim of this Special Section, discussed in the Introduction, is to shed some light on the effects of political scandals on both the individual and institutional levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Journalists tend to serialize political scandals and publish scandalous information bit by bit instead of all at once in a single news article. Disseminating scandalous information in a serialized way may affect readers' perceptions of the scandal and the politicians involved in it independently of the information that is conveyed. To test this assumption, an experiment was conducted. All participants were exposed to identical scandalous information. However, the form of presentation--exposure to one, two, three, four, or five article(s)--was systematically manipulated. Serialization indeed indirectly increased participants' negative attitudes about the politician via the perceived scandal's importance, participants' reading duration, cognitive elaboration, and intensity of negative emotions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research shows that news about Islamist terrorism can seriously affect citizens’ fear reactions and influence non-Muslims’ out-group perceptions of Muslims. We argue that news coverage that explicitly links Islam to terrorism or terrorists of the Islamic State (IS) may trigger fears in non-Muslim individuals. In contrast, news differentiation (i.e., explicitly distinguishing between Muslims and Muslim terrorists) may dampen particular fear reactions in citizens. To test the specific effects of news differentiation, a controlled laboratory experiment was conducted. Results showed that undifferentiated news about IS terrorism increased participants’ fear of terrorism and resulted in hostile perceptions toward Muslims in general. However, fear of terrorism only enhanced hostile attitudes toward Muslims for individuals with negative and moderately positive prior experiences with Muslims. For those with very positive experiences, no such relationship was found. Implications of these findings for journalism practice and intergroup relations in multicultural societies are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Previous research shows that one-sided and uncivil reader comments posted below professionally edited online news articles may affect a recipient’s perception of the specific issue at hand. However, it remains largely unclear whether specific comments affect a reader’s perception of an individual actor depicted in an online news article. An online experiment showed substantial effects (e.g., attitudes, perceived responsibility, perceived opinion climate) of valenced reader comments on a recipient’s evaluation of a scandalized financial manager depicted in connection with a mediated financial scandal. Furthermore, recipients’ perceived journalistic quality of the article itself was affected by specific reader comments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reader comments posted below online news articles may affect a reader's issue perception. However, it remains unknown how people are influenced by commenters' social status information (high versus low). Potential effects were examined in a 2 (opposing/supporting/no comments) x 2 (high-status/low-status/no comments) between-subjects online experiment in connection with a mediated scandal. A multivariate analysis of covariance revealed that most of the effects--for example, on individuals' scandal perception and their demanded punishments--were triggered by opposing comments and when high-status commenters had posted the comments. The effects of supporting comments were rather limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two experimental studies investigated how news reports about terrorist attacks committed by unidentified perpetrators influence beliefs about the perpetrators and Muslims in general. In Study 1, a quota-based sample of 354 Germans was exposed to terror news coverage describing either non-Muslim or Muslim victims with no reference to the perpetrators of the attacks. Upon stimulus exposure, participants were asked the likelihood that the perpetrators were either Islamist extremists, far-right extremists, or lone operators. In Study 2, no information about the victims was provided, but the perpetrators were either Muslims or unidentified. In addition, we measured news consumers' Islamophobic attitudes in both studies. Results from Study 1 revealed that participants attributed perpetrator-unidentified attacks to Islamist perpetrators when the victims were non-Muslims. In contrast, terrorist attacks directed against Muslim victims were more likely to be attributed to far-right extremists. Additionally, Study 2 revealed that news consumers associated perpetrator-unidentified terrorist attacks with Islamist extremists to an equal degree as terrorist attacks that were committed by Muslim perpetrators. Attributing the attack to Islamists was in turn significantly related to Islamophobic attitudes in both studies. Implications of these findings for journalism practice and society at large are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]