Measuring news bias: Russia’s official news agency ITAR-TASS’ coverage of the Ukraine crisis

Abstract

Objectivity in news reporting is one of the most widely discussed topics in journalism, and a number of studies on bias in news have been conducted, but there is little agreement on how to define or measure news bias. Aiming to settle the theoretical and methodological disagreement, the author redefined news bias and applied a new methodology to detect the Russian government’s influence on ITAR-TASS during the Ukraine crisis. A longitudinal content analysis of over 35,000 English-language newswires on the Ukraine crisis published by ITAR-TASS and Interfax clearly showed that ITAR-TASS’ framing of Ukraine was reflecting desirability of pivotal events in the crisis to the Russian government. This result reveals Russia’s strategic use of the state-owned news agency for international propaganda in its ‘hybrid war’, demonstrating the effectiveness of the new approach to news bias.

Keywords

Computerized-content analysis news bias propaganda Russia Ukraine crisis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aday

(2010) Chasing the bad news: An analysis of 2005 Iraq and Afghanistan war coverage on NBC and Fox News channel. Journal of Communication 60(1): 144–164.

Aday

Livingston

Hebert

(2005) Embedding the truth a cross-cultural analysis of objectivity and television coverage of the Iraq war. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 10(1): 3–21.

Barkho

(2013a) How mainstream media can learn from philosophical deliberations of impartiality. In: Barkho

(ed.) From Theory to Practice: How to Assess and Apply Impartiality in News and Current Affairs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 23–48.

Barkho

(2013b) Introduction: The theory and practice of impartiality in news and current affairs. In: Barkho

(ed.) From Theory to Practice: How to Assess and Apply Impartiality in News and Current Affairs. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 1–21.

Bennett

(1990) Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication 40(2): 103–127.

Besova

Cooley

(2009) Foreign news and public opinion: Attribute agenda-setting theory revisited. Ecquid Novi: African Journalism Studies 30(2): 219–242.

Boyd-Barrett

(2012) Intercultural integration and informational infrastructure A case study from the Russian Federation and former Soviet Union. International Communication Gazette 74(6): 525–539.

Boyd-Barrett

(2014) Interfax: Breaking into Global News. Lancaster: Scotforth Books.

Brandenburg

(2005) Political bias in the Irish media: A quantitative study of campaign coverage during the 2002 general election. Irish Political Studies 20(3): 297–322.

10.

Card

Krueger

(1994) Minimum wages and employment: A case study of the fast-food industry in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. American Economic Review 84(4): 772–793.

11.

Chaudhary

(2001) International news selection: A comparative analysis of negative news in the Washington Post and the Daily Times of Nigeria. Howard Journal of Communications 12(4): 241–254.

12.

Cushion

Lewis

Groves

(2009) Reflecting the four nations? Journalism Studies 10(5): 655–671.

13.

D’Alessio

Allen

(2000) Media bias in presidential elections: A meta-analysis. Journal of Communication 50(4): 133–156.

14.

Dickson

(1994) Understanding media bias: The press and the U.S. invasion of Panama. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 71(4): 809–819.

15.

Dobek-Ostrowska

De Smaele

(eds) (2010) In search of a label for the Russian media system. In: Dobek-Ostrowska

De Smaele

(eds) Comparative Media Systems: European and Global Perspectives. Budapest: Central European University Press, pp. 41–62.

16.

Dominick

(1977) Geographic bias in national TV news. Journal of Communication: 27(4): 94–99.

17.

Donsbach

Klett

(1993) Subjective objectivity: How journalists in four countries define a key term of their profession. International Communication Gazette 51(1): 53–83.

18.

Entman

(1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4): 51–58.

19.

Entman

(2004) Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion, and U.S. Foreign Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

20.

Entman

(2007) Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication 57(1): 163–173.

21.

Entman

(2010) Media framing biases and political power: Explaining slant in news of Campaign 2008. Journalism 11(4): 389–408.

22.

Entman

Page

(1994) The news before the storm: The Iraq war debate and the limits to media independence. In: Bennett

Paletz

(eds) Taken by Storm: The Media, Public Opinion, and U.S. Foreign Policy in the Gulf War. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 82–104.

23.

Evans

(2005) Spinning Russia. Foreign Policy. Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2005/12/01/spinning-russia/.

24.

Galeotti

(2015) ‘Hybrid War’ and ‘Little Green Men’: How it works, and how it doesn’t. In: Pikulicka-Wilczewska

Sakwa

(eds) Ukraine and Russia: People, Politics, Propaganda and Perspectives. Bristol: E-International Relations, pp. 156–164.

25.

Hester

Gibson

(2003) The economy and second-level agenda setting: A time-series analysis of economic news and public opinion about the economy. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 80(1): 73–90.

26.

Hofstetter

(1976) Bias in the News: Network Television Coverage of the 1972 Election Campaign. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.

27.

Hopmann

Aelst

Legnante

(2012) Political balance in the news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism 13(2): 240–257.

28.

Hopmann

De Vreese

Albæk

(2011) Incumbency bonus in election news coverage explained: The logics of political power and the media market. Journal of Communication 61(2): 264–282.

29.

Horvit

(2006) International news agencies and the war debate of 2003. International Communication Gazette 68(5–6): 427–447.

30.

Iyengar

Simon

(1993) News coverage of the Gulf crisis and public opinion: A study of agenda-setting, priming, and framing. Communication Research 20(3): 365–383.

31.

Jones

(2008) Television news: Geographic and source biases, 1982–2004. International Journal of Communication 2: 223–252.

32.

Kahn

Kenney

(2002) The slant of the news: How editorial endorsements influence campaign coverage and citizens’ views of candidates. American Political Science Review 96(2): 381–394.

33.

Kleinnijenhuis

Van Hoof

AMJ

Oegema

. (2007) A test of rivaling approaches to explain news effects: News on issue positions of parties, real-world developments, support and criticism, and success and failure. Journal of Communication 57(2): 366–384.

34.

Lankina

Watanabe

(in press) ‘Russian spring’ or ‘Spring betrayal’? The media as a mirror of Putin’s evolving strategy in Ukraine. Europe-Asia Studies.

35.

Light

(2015) Russian foreign policy themes in official documents and speeches: Tracing continuity and change. In: Cadier

Light

(eds) Russia’s Foreign Policy: Ideas, Domestic Politics and External Relations, 1st edn. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 13–29.

36.

McCombs

Llamas

Lopez-Escobar

. (1997) Candidate images in Spanish elections: Second-level agenda-setting effects. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 74(4): 703–717.

37.

Maras

(2012) Objectivity in Journalism, 1st edn. Cambridge; Malden, MA: Polity Press.

38.

Meyer

(1989) Global news flows: Dependency and neoimperialism. Comparative Political Studies 22(3): 243–264.

39.

Miller

(2007) Viewing the South: How Globalisation and Western Television Distort Representations of the Developing World. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

40.

Nelson

Orttung

Livshen

(2015) Measuring RT’s impact on YouTube. Russian Analytical Digest 177: 2–9.

41.

Pang

Lee

(2008) Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 2(1–2): 1–135.

42.

Pfau

Haigh

Gettle

. (2004) Embedding journalists in military combat units: Impact on newspaper story frames and tone. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 81(1): 74–88.

43.

Rantanen

Boyd-Barrett

(2004) Global and national news agencies: The unstable nexus. In: De Beer

Merrill

(eds) Global Journalism Topical Issues and Media Systems. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, pp. 35–49.

44.

Robinson

Sheehan

(1983) Over the Wire and on TV: CBS and UPI in Campaign ’80. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

45.

Salwen

Matera

(1992) Public salience of foreign nations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 69(3): 623–632.

46.

Stevenson

(1984) Pseudo debate. Journal of Communication 34(1): 134–137.

47.

TASS (n.d.) TASS history. Available at: http://tass.com/history (accessed 25 November 2016).

48.

Turney

Littman

(2003) Measuring praise and criticism: Inference of semantic orientation from association. ACM Transactions on Information Systems 21(4): 315–346.

49.

Vartanova

(2011) The Russian media model in the context of post-soviet dynamics. In: Hallin

Mancini

(eds) Comparing Media Systems beyond the Western World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 119–142. Available at: http://ebooks.cambridge.org/ref/id/CBO9781139005098A014.

50.

Vartanova

Frolova

(2010) News agencies in Russia: Challenging old traditions and new media. In: Boyd-Barrett

(ed.) News Agencies in the Turbulent Era of the Internet. Barcelona: Agència Catalana de Noticies, Generalitat de Catalunya, pp. 260–281.

51.

Wanta

Golan

Lee

(2004) Agenda setting and international news: Media influence on public perceptions of foreign nations. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 81(2): 364–377.