Search

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01493.x Byline: Eran N. Ben-Porath (1), Lee K. Shaker (2) Abstract: This study looks at the effect of news images and race on the attribution of responsibility for the consequences of Hurricane Katrina. Participants, Black and White, read the same news story about the hurricane and its aftermath, manipulated to include images of White victims, Black victims, or no images at all. Participants were then asked who they felt was responsible for the humanitarian disaster after the storm. White respondents expressed less sense of government responsibility when the story included victims' images. For Black respondents this effect did not occur. Images did not affect attribution of responsibility to New Orleans' residents themselves. These findings are interpreted to support the expectations of framing theory with the images serving as episodic framing mechanisms. Abstract (French) Les images mediatiques, la race et l'attribution a la suite de l'ouragan Katrina Eran N. Ben-Porath & Lee K. Shaker Cette etude explore l'effet des images mediatiques et de la race sur l'attribution d'une responsabilite quant aux consequences de l'ouragan Katrina. Les participants, Noirs et Blancs, ont lu la meme nouvelle concernant l'ouragan et ses suites, l'histoire ayant ete manipulee pour inclure des images de victimes blanches, des images de victimes noires ou aucune image du tout. On a ensuite demande aux participants de dire qui etait selon eux responsable du desastre humanitaire ayant suivi la tempete. Les repondants blancs ont exprime moins d'impressions de responsabilite gouvernementale lorsque l'histoire incluait des photos de victimes. Cet effet n'est pas apparu chez les participants noirs. Les images n'ont pas eu d'effets sur l'attribution de responsabilite aux residents de la Nouvelle-Orleans. Ces resultats sont interpretes de maniere a appuyer les attentes de la theorie du cadrage, les images servant de mecanismes de cadrage episodique. Mots cles : attribution, race, cadrage de responsabilite, ouragan Katrina Abstract (German): Nachrichtenbilder, Rasse und Zuschreibung im Fall Hurrikan Katrina Eran N. Ben-Porath & Lee K. Shaker Diese Studie betrachtet die Wirkung von Nachrichtenbildern und Rasse auf die Zuschreibung von Verantwortlichkeit fur die Konsequenzen von Hurrikan Katrina. Die Teilnehmer schwarzer und wei[sz]er Hautfarbe lasen die gleichen Nachrichten uber den Hurrikan und dessen Folgen. Die Bilder zeigten entweder wei[sz]e Opfer, schwarze Opfer oder es wurde auf eine Bebilderung verzichtet. Die Teilnehmer wurden dann gefragt, wen sie fur die humanitare Katastrophe nach dem Sturm verantwortlich machten. Wei[sz]e Teilnehmer zogen die Regierung weniger in die Verantwortung, wenn Bilder von Opfern gezeigt wurden. Fur schwarze Teilnehmer zeigte sich dieser Effekt nicht. Die Bilder beeinflussten nicht die Zuschreibung von Verantwortlichkeit auf die Einwohner von New Orleans selbst. Diese Ergebnisse werden im Sinne der Annahmen der Framing-Theorie interpretiert, bei denen Bilder als episodische Framing-Mechanismen dienen. Author Affiliation: (1) SSRS/Social Science Research Solutions, 53 W. Baltimore Pike, Media, PA 19063, USA (2) Department of Politics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA Article note: Eran N. Ben-Porath; e-mail: ebenporath@ssrs.com

To authenticate to the full-text of this article, please visit this link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01365.x Byline: Eran N. Ben-Porath (1) Abstract: Although political interviews have been a mainstay of U.S. television, they are undertheorized in the media effects tradition. This article seeks to ground possible interview effects into theory-particularly to recent developments in the study of incivility and its effect on public opinion. An experiment-based study finds that viewers are likely to think more negatively about journalists in an environment marked by uncivil interviewing. At the same time, exposure to interviews perceived as not sufficiently adversarial could also reduce trust in journalists, which suggests that the effect extends beyond the question of incivility, depending on viewers' expectations. Beyond the particular findings, this study indicates the possibilities of a research agenda centering on political televised interviews and their social implications. Abstract (French) Les effets de l'interview : theorie et indices de l'impact des interviews politiques televisees sur les attitudes des telespectateurs E. Ben-Porath Bien que les interviews politiques constituent un pilier de la television americaine, elles sont sous-theorisees dans la tradition des effets mediatiques. Cet article cherche a ancrer des effets possibles des entrevues dans la theorie et particulierement dans certains recents developpements de l'etude du manque de civilite et de ses effets sur l'opinion publique. Une etude experimentale revele que les telespectateurs sont susceptibles de penser plus de mal des journalistes dans un environnement marque par des techniques d'interview manquant de civilite. Parallelement, l'exposition a des interviews percues comme n'etant pas suffisamment conflictuelles pourrait egalement reduire la confiance en les journalistes, ce qui suggere que l'effet va au-dela de l'enjeu du manque de civilite, tout dependant des attentes des telespectateurs. En-dehors des resultats specifiques, cette etude indique les possibilites d'un programme de recherche se concentrant sur les interviews politiques televisees et leurs consequences sociales. Abstract (German): Intervieweffekte: Theorie und Evidenz fur einen Einfluss von politischen Interviews im Fernsehen auf die Einstellung der Zuschauer E. Ben-Porath Auch wenn politische Interviews im amerikanischen Fernsehen allgegenwartig sind, werden sie im Sinne einer Medienwirkungsperspektive theoretisch nicht ausreichend fundiert betrachtet. Dieser Artikel ist ein Versuch, mogliche Effekte von Interviews auf die offentliche Meinung herauszuarbeiten und zu diskutieren. Ergebnisse einer Experimentalstudie zeigen, dass Zuschauer eher negativ uber Journalisten denken, wenn das Interviewumfeld als eher unhoflich eingeschatzt wurde. Gleichzeitig verringern Interviews, die als nicht kontrovers genug eingeschatzt werden, das Vertrauen in den Journalisten, was wiederum darauf hindeutet, dass der Effekt uber den Aspekt der Unhoflichkeit hinausgeht und von den Erwartungen der Zuschauer abhangt. Neben diesen spezifischen Ergebnissen zeigt die Studie Moglichkeiten einer Forschungsagenda fur politische Fernsehinterviews und ihre sozialen Implikationen. Author Affiliation: (1)SSRS/Social Science Research Solutions, Media, PA 19063, USA Article note: Eran N. Ben-Porath; e-mail: ebenporath@ssrs.com

A study examines question bias and the violation of the inherent comparability and equitability of questions posed by journalists during two crucial intraparty debates of the 2004 primaries. It highlights the importance of question bias and offers a method to identify it.

To help inform policy discussions about postpandemic telemedicine reimbursement and regulations, we conducted dual nationally representative surveys among primary care physicians and patients. Although majorities of both populations reported satisfaction with video visits during the pandemic, 80 percent of physicians would prefer to provide only a small share of care or no care via telemedicine in the future, and only 36 percent of patients would prefer to seek care by video or phone. Most physicians (60 percent) felt that the quality of video telemedicine care was generally inferior to the quality of in-person care, and both patients and physicians cited the lack of physical exam as a key reason (90 percent and 92 percent, respectively). Patients who were older, had less education, or were Asian were less likely to want to use video for future care. Although improvements to home-based diagnostic tools could improve both the quality of and the desire to use telemedicine, virtual primary care will likely be limited in the immediate future. Policies to enhance quality, sustain virtual care, and address inequities in the online setting may be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Public health agencies' ability to protect health in the wake of COVID-19 largely depends on public trust. In February 2022 we conducted a first-of-its-kind nationally representative survey of 4,208 US adults to learn the public's reported reasons for trust in federal, state, and local public health agencies. Among respondents who expressed a "great deal" of trust, that trust was not related primarily to agencies' ability to control the spread of COVID-19 but, rather, to beliefs that those agencies made clear, science-based recommendations and provided protective resources. Scientific expertise was a more commonly reported reason for "a great deal" of trust at the federal level, whereas perceptions of hard work, compassionate policy, and direct services were emphasized more at the state and local levels. Although trust in public health agencies was not especially high, few respondents indicated that they had no trust. Lower trust was related primarily to respondents' beliefs that health recommendations were politically influenced and inconsistent. The least trusting respondents also endorsed concerns about private-sector influence and excessive restrictions and had low trust in government overall. Our findings suggest the need to support a robust federal, state, and local public health communications infrastructure; ensure agencies' authority to make science-based recommendations; and develop strategies for engaging different segments of the public. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 2001 anthrax attacks emphasized the need to develop outreach that would more effectively support racial/ethnic minority populations during a bioterrorism incident. Given the importance of antibiotic prophylaxis in a future anthrax attack, it should be a priority to better support racial/ethnic minorities in mass dispensing programs. To examine the needs and perspectives of racial/ethnic minorities, this study used a nationally representative poll of 1,852 adults, including 1,240 whites, 261 African Americans, and 282 Hispanics. The poll examined public reactions to a ''worst-case scenario'' in which cases of inhalation anthrax are discovered without an identified source and the entire population of a city or town is asked to receive antibiotic prophylaxis within 48 hours. Findings suggest willingness across all racial/ethnic groups to comply with recommendations to seek prophylaxis at dispensing sites. However, findings also indicate possible barriers for racial/ethnic minorities, including greater concern about pill safety and multiple attacks as well as lesser knowledge about inhalation anthrax. Across all racial/ethnic groups, roughly half would prefer to receive antibiotics at mass dispensing sites rather than through the US Postal Service. People in racial/ethnic minority groups were more likely to say this preference stems from a desire to speak with staff or to exchange medication formulation or type. Findings suggest the need for tailored outreach to racial/ethnic minorities through, for example, emphasis on key messages and enhanced understandability in communications, increased staff for answering questions in relevant dispensing sites, and long-term trust building with racial/ethnic minority communities.

An attack with Bacillus anthracis ("anthrax") is a known threat to the United States. When weaponized, it can cause inhalation anthrax, the deadliest form of the disease. Due to the rapid course of inhalation anthrax, delays in initiation of antibiotics may decrease survival chances. Because a rapid response would require cooperation from the public, there is a need to understand the public's response to possible mass dispensing programs. To examine the public's response to a mass prophylaxis program, this study used a nationally representative poll of 1,092 adults, supplemented by a targeted focus on 3 metropolitan areas where anthrax attacks occurred in 2001: New York City (n=517), Washington, DC (n=509), and Trenton/Mercer County, NJ (n=507). The poll was built around a "worst-case scenario" in which cases of inhalation anthrax are discovered without an identified source and the entire population of a city or town is asked to receive antibiotic prophylaxis within a 48-hour period. Findings from this poll provide important signs of public willingness to comply with public health recommendations for obtaining antibiotics from a dispensing site, although they also indicate that public health officials may face several challenges to compliance, including misinformation about the contagiousness of inhalation anthrax; fears about personal safety in crowds; distrust of government agencies to provide sufficient, safe, and effective medicine; and hesitation about ingesting antibiotic pills after receiving them. In general, people living in areas where anthrax attacks occurred in 2001 had responses similar to those of the nation as a whole.