On 7 August 2009, Sarah Palin posted two words to her Facebook page that would come to define a summer of discord around health care reform. This study examines how traditional media reported on the ‘death panels’ claim that was immediately debunked by several fact-checking organizations. Our content analysis of over 700 newspaper and television stories shows that, to a significant degree, journalists stepped outside the bounds of procedural objectivity to label the ‘death panels’ claim as false, often without attribution. Many stories, however, simultaneously covered the claim in typical ‘he said/she said’ fashion, thus perhaps extending some legitimacy to the claim. Our study illustrates the challenges to fact-based public deliberation in the contemporary media environment, and suggests that competing practices of objectivity undercut the ability of mainstream media to help the public separate truth from fiction.
JamiesonKHCapellaJN (2009) Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
JamiesonKHWaldmanP (2003) The Press Effect: Politicians, Journalists, and the Stories that Shape the Political World. New York: Oxford University Press.
21.
JenkinsH (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press.
22.
JeritJBarabasJ (2006) Bankrupt rhetoric: How misleading information affects knowledge about social security. Public Opinion Quarterly70(3): 278–303.
23.
JohnsonCK (2009) Getting counsel helps the dying. Boston Globe, 19August, p. 8.
24.
JonesAS (2009) Losing the News: The Future of the News that Feeds Democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
25.
KatzE (1996) And deliver us from segmentation. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science546(1): 22–33.
26.
KovachBRosenstielT (2010) Blur: How to Know What’s True in the Age of Information Overload. New York: Bloomsbury.
27.
KuklinskiJHQuirkPJJeritJSchwiederDRichRF (2000) Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics62(3): 790–816.
28.
KundaZ (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin108(3): 480–498.
29.
LawrenceRG (2000) The Politics of Force: Media and the Construction of Police Brutality. Berkeley: University of California Press.
30.
LawrenceRG (2010) Researching political news framing: Established ground and new horizons. In: D’AngeloPKuypersJA (eds) Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives. New York: Routledge, pp.265–385.
31.
LeeKL (2007) The effect of the internet on homogeneity of the media agenda: A test of the fragmentation thesis. Journalism & Mass Communications Quarterly84(4): 745–760.
32.
McCombsME (2005) A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies6(4): 543–557.
33.
ManjooF (2008) True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-fact Society. New York: Wiley.
34.
MichaelsDMonfortonC (2005) Manufacturing uncertainty: Contested science and the protection of the public’s health and environment. American Journal of Public Health95: S39–S48.
35.
MilnerH (2002) Civic Literacy: How Informed Citizens Make Democracy Work. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
RedlawskDP (2002) Hot cognition or cool consideration: Testing the effects of motivated reasoning on political decision making. Journal of Politics64: 1021–1044.
52.
RiederR (2007) Counting the spoons: Eternal vigilance is the price of covering national security and political campaigns. American Journalism Review29(2): 4.
