This research analyzes news-making decisions and self-censorship among student journalists through the lens of gatekeeping theory. Using Q methodology, the study examines responses of 45 student journalists who were asked about variables that would influence their decisions not to pursue a controversial story. Four factors emerged based on analysis of three principal variables: the source of perceived threats, the nature of those threats, and the parties most likely to suffer if the threats come to fruition.
American Association of University Professors, College Media Association, National Coalition Against Censorship, & Student Press Law Center. (2016). Threats to the independence of student media. Retrieved from https://www.aaup.org/report/threats-independence-student-media
2.
BishopR. (2000). To protect and serve: The “guard dog” function of journalism in coverage of the Japanese-American internment. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 2, 65-104.
3.
BishopR. (2009). “Little more than minutes”: How two Wyoming community newspapers covered the construction of the Heart Mountain internment camp. American Journalism, 26(3), 7-32.
4.
BobkowskiP. S.BelmasG. I. (2017). Mixed message media: Girls’ voices and civic engagement in student journalism. Girlhood Studies, 10, 89-106.
5.
BreedW. (1955). Social control in the newsroom: A functional analysis. Social Forces, 33, 326-335.
6.
BurnsA. (2011). Gatekeeping, gatewatching, real-time feedback: New challenges for journalism. Brazilian Journalism Research, 7, 117-136.
7.
CareyM. C. (2017). The news untold: Community journalism and the failure to confront poverty in Appalachia. Morgantown: West Virginia University Press.
8.
CarlsonJ. M.HydeM. S. (1984). Situations and party activist role orientations: A Q study. Micropolitics, 3, 441-464.
9.
CarterR. E. (1958). Newspaper “gatekeepers” and the sources of news. Public Opinion Quarterly, 22, 133-144.
10.
DalisayF.HmielowskiJ. D.KushinM. J.YamamotoM. (2012). Social capital and the spiral of silence. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24, 325-345.
11.
DicksonT. V. (1994). Self-censorship and freedom of the public high school press. Journalism Educator, 49(3), 56-63.
12.
DonohueG. A.OlienC. N.TichenorP. J. (1989). Structure and constraints on community newspaper gatekeepers. Journalism Quarterly, 66, 807-845.
13.
DonohueG. A.TichenorP. J.OlienC. N. (1995). A guard dog perspective on the role of media. Journal of Communication, 45, 115-132.
14.
FarquharL. K.MeedsR. (2007). Types of fantasy sports users and their motivations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1208-1228.
15.
FilakV. F. (2010). Self-interest, the common good and a sense of purpose: Examining precipitating factors of the willingness to self-censor. College Media Review, 47(3-4), 24-30.
16.
FilakV. F. (2012). A concurrent examination of self-versus-others perceptual bias and the willingness to self-censor: A study of college newspaper editors and advisers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 89, 299-314.
17.
FilakV. F.MillerA. (2008). The impact of self-censorship on high school newspaper advisers’ comfort level regarding the publication of controversial stories. Southwestern Mass Communication Journal, 23(2), 13-25.
18.
FilakV. F.ReinardyS.MakslA. (2009). Expanding and validating applications of the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale: Self-censorship and media advisers’ comfort level with controversial topics. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86, 368-382.
19.
GlynnC. J.HayesA. F.ShanahanJ. (1997). Perceived support for one’s opinions and willingness to speak out: A meta-analysis of survey studies on the “spiral of silence.”Public Opinion Quarterly, 61, 452-463.
20.
HayesA. F. (2007). Exploring the forms of self-censorship: On the spiral of silence and the use of opinion expression avoidance strategies. Journal of Communication, 57, 785-802.
21.
HayesA. F.GlynnC.ShanahanJ. (2005a). Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale: Individual differences in the effect of the climate of opinion on opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17, 443-455.
22.
HayesA. F.GlynnC.ShanahanJ. (2005b). Willingness to self-censor: A construct and measurement tool for public opinion research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17, 298-323.
23.
HayesA. F.ScheufeleD. A.HugeM. (2006). Nonparticipation as self-censorship: Publicly observable political activity in a polarized opinion climate. Political Behavior, 28, 259-283.
24.
HayesA. F.UldallB.GlynnC. J. (2010). Validating the Willingness to Self-Censor Scale II: Inhibition of opinion expression in a conversational setting. Communication Methods and Measures, 4, 256-272.
KohutA. (2000). Self-censorship: Counting the ways. Columbia Journalism Review, 39, 42.
30.
KristofN. D. (1983). Freedom of the high school press. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
31.
LeeN. Y.KimY. (2014). The spiral of silence and journalists’ outspokenness on Twitter. Asian Journal of Communication, 24, 262-278.
32.
LiebermanT. (2000). You can’t report what you don’t pursue. Columbia Journalism Review, 39, 44-49.
33.
LindnerA. M. (2017). Editorial gatekeeping in citizen journalism. New Media & Society, 19, 1177-1193.
34.
MakslA. M. (2012). On parents, peers, administrators, and advisers: Developing a system to understand self-censorship of controversial topics in the high school press (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri–Columbia.
35.
MatthesJ.MorrisonK. R.SchemerC. (2010). A spiral of silence for some: Attitude certainty and the expression of political minority opinions. Communication Research, 37, 774-800.
36.
McKeownB.ThomasD. (1988). Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, Series No. 07–066: Q methodology. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
37.
NadadurR. D. (2007). Self-censorship in the Pakistani print media. South Asian Survey, 14(1), 45-63.
38.
NahS.ArmstrongC. L. (2011). Structural pluralism in journalism and media studies: A concept explication and theory construction. Mass Communication and Society, 14,857-878.
39.
Noelle-NeumannE. (1974). The spiral of silence: A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24, 43-51.
40.
ReaderB. (2018). Working with the ‘gated’: A case study of ABC Open’s blend of reciprocal journalism and ‘collegial gatekeeping’. Journalism, 1464884918767595.
41.
RellyJ. E.ZangerM.FahmyS. (2015). Democratic norms and forces of gatekeeping: A study of influences on Iraqi journalists’ attitudes toward government information access. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92, 346-373.
42.
ShoemakerP. J. (1997). A new gatekeeping model. In BerkowitzD. A. (Ed.), Social meanings of news: A text-reader (pp. 57-62.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
43.
ShoemakerP. J.EichholzM.KimE.WrigleyB. (2001). Individual and routine forces in gatekeeping. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 233-246.
44.
ShoemakerP. J.VosT. (2009). Gatekeeping theory. New York, NY: Routledge.
45.
StempelG. H. (1985). Gatekeeping: The mix of topics and the selection of stories. Journalism Quarterly, 62, 791-796.
46.
StephensonW. (1953). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
47.
TichenorP. J.DonohueG. A.OlienC. N. (1980). Community conflict and the press. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
48.
van der MeerT. G. L. A.VerhoevenP.BeentjesJ. W. J.VliegenthartR. (2017). Disrupting gatekeeping practices: Journalists’ source selection in times of crisis. Journalism, 18, 1107-1124.
49.
ViswanathK.AroraP. (2000). Ethnic media in the United States: An essay on their role in integration, assimilation, and social control. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 39-56.
50.
WelbersK.van AtteveldtW.KleinnijenhuisJ.RuigrokN. (2016). A gatekeeper among gatekeepers: News agency influence in print and online newspapers in the Netherlands. Journalism Studies, 19, 315-333.
51.
WhiteD. M. (1950). The “gate keeper”: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Bulletin, 27, 383-390.
52.
ZerbackT.FawziN. (2017). Can online exemplars trigger a spiral of silence? Examining the effects of exemplar opinions on perceptions of public opinion and speaking out. New Media & Society, 19, 1034-1051.
