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.
BarnhurstK.QuinnK. (2012). Political visions: Visual studies in political communication. In SemetkoH.ScammellM. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of political communication (pp. 276–292). Sage.
2.
BarnidgeM.GuntherA. C.KimJ.HongY.PerrymanM.TayS. K.KniselyS. (2020). Politically motivated selective exposure and perceived media bias. Communication Research, 47(1), 82–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217713066
3.
BarryA. M. (1997). Visual intelligence: Perception, image, and manipulation in visual communication. State University of New York Press.
4.
BradleyM. M.CodispotiM.CuthbertB. N.LangP. J. (2001). Emotion and motivation, I: Defensive and appetitive reactions in picture processing. Emotion, 1, 276–298. https://doi.org/10.1037//1528-3542.1.3.276
5.
BrosiusH.-B. (1989). Influence of presentation features and news content on learning from television news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 33, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158909364058
6.
CapleH.KnoxJ. S. (2012). Online news galleries, photojournalism and the photo essay. Visual Communication, 11, 207–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357211434032
7.
ChoiJ.YangM.ChangJ. J. (2009). Elaboration of the hostile media phenomenon: The roles of involvement, media skepticism, congruency of perceived media influence, and perceived opinion climate. Communication Research, 36, 54–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650208326462
8.
CoeK.TewksburyD.BondB. J.DrogosK. L.PorterR. W.YahnA.ZhangY. (2008). Hostile news: Partisan use and perceptions of cable news programming. Journal of Communication, 58, 201–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00381.x
9.
DaltonR. J.BeckP. A.HuckfeldtR. (1998). Partisan cues and the media: Information flows in the 1992 presidential election. American Political Science Review, 92, 111–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585932
10.
EcoU. (1975). A theory of semiotics. Indiana University Press.
FeldmanL. (2010). Partisan differences in opinionated news perceptions: A test of the hostile media effect. Political Behavior, 33, 407–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9139-4
13.
GarciaM.StarkP. (1991). Eyes on the news. Poynter Institute for Media Studies.
14.
GeiseS.BadenC. (2015). Putting the image back into the frame: Modeling the linkage between visual communication and frame-processing theory. Communication Theory, 25, 46–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12048
15.
Giner-SorollaR.ChaikenS. (1994). The causes of hostile media judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1994.1008
16.
GrabeM. E.BucyE. P. (2009). Image bite politics. News and the visual framing of elections. Oxford University Press.
GuntherA. C. (1992). Biased press or biased public? Attitudes toward media coverage of social groups. Public Opinion Quarterly, 56, 147–167. https://doi.org/10.1086/269308
20.
GuntherA. C. (2008). Hostile media phenomenon. In DonsbachW. (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication (Vol. 5, pp. 2139–2143). Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1111/b.9781405131995.2008.x
21.
GuntherA. C.ChristenC. T. (2002). Projection or persuasive press? Contrary effects of personal opinion and perceived news coverage on estimates of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 52, 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02538.x
22.
GuntherA. C.ChristenC. T.LiebhartJ. L.ChiaS. C-Y. (2001). Congenial public, contrary press, and biased estimates of the climate of opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65, 295–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/322846
GuntherA. C.MillerN.LiebhartJ. L. (2009). Assimilation and contrast in a test of the hostile media effect. Communication Research, 36, 747–764. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209346804
HansenG. J.KimH. (2011). Is the media biased against me? A meta-analysis of the hostile media effect research. Communication Research Reports, 28, 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.565280
27.
IyerA.OldmeadowJ. (2006). Picture this: Emotional and political responses to photographs of the Kenneth Bigley kidnapping. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, 635–647. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.316
28.
KeibK.EspinaC.LeeY.WojdynskiB. W.ChoiD.BangH. (2018). Picture this: The influence of emotionally valenced images, on attention, selection, and sharing of social media news. Media Psychology, 21, 202–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1378108
29.
LordC. G.RossL.LepperM. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098–2109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098
30.
MatthesJ. (2013). The affective underpinning of hostile media perceptions: Exploring the distinct effects of affective and cognitive involvement. Communication Research, 40(3), 360–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211420255
31.
MatthesJ.BeyerA. (2017). Toward a cognitive-affective process model of hostile media perceptions: A multi-country structural equation modeling approach. Communication Research, 44(8), 1075–1098. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650215594234
32.
MessarisP.AbrahamL. (2001). The role of images in framing news stories. In ReeseS. D.GandyO. H.GrantA. E. (Eds.), LEA’s communication series. Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world (pp. 215–226). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
33.
PaivioA. (1991). Images in mind. Harvester Wheatsheaf.
34.
PerloffR. M. (1989). Ego-involvement and the third person effect of televised news coverage. Communication Research, 16, 236–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365089016002004
PowellT. E.BoomgaardenH. G.De SwertK.de VreeseC. H. (2015). A clearer picture: The contribution of visuals and text to framing effects. Journal of Communication, 65, 997–1017. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12184
SargentS. L. (2007). Image effects on selective exposure to computer-mediated news stories. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 705–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2004.11.005
39.
SchmittK. M.GuntherA. C.LiebhartJ. L. (2004). Why partisans see mass media as biased. Communication Research, 31, 623–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204269390
40.
SchmuckD.MatthesJ. (2017). Effects of economic and symbolic threat appeals in right-wing populist advertising on anti-immigrant attitudes: The impact of textual and visual appeals. Political Communication, 34(4), 607–626. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2017.1316807
41.
TsfatiY. (2007). Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence and minority alienation: The case of Arabs in Israel. Journal of Communication, 57, 632–651. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00361.x
42.
TsfatiY.PeriY. (2006). Mainstream media skepticism and exposure to extra-national and sectorial news media: The case of Israel. Mass Communication & Society, 9, 165–187. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0902_3
43.
ValloneR. P.RossL.LepperM. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577
44.
Van der MeerT. G.HameleersM.KroonA. C. (2020). Crafting our own biased media diets: The effects of confirmation, source, and negativity bias on selective attendance to online news. Mass Communication and Society, 23(6), 937–967. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2020.1782432
45.
von SikorskiC. (2021). Visual polarization: Examining the interplay of visual cues and media trust on the evaluation of political candidates. Journalism. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884920987680
46.
von SikorskiC.LudwigM. (2018). The effects of visual isolation on the perception of scandalized politicians. Communications: European Journal of Communication Research, 43, 235–257. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2017-0054
ZillmannD.KnoblochS.YuH.-S. (2001). Effects of photographs on the selective reading of news reports. Media Psychology, 3, 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0304_01
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
