This study explores the relationship between online news coverage, media use, and political knowledge in the contemporary media environment. Using the debate over health care reform legislation in 2010 as the backdrop, content analysis was performed on 1,268 stories from 10 online news outlets over a 1-month period to identify the media frames being perpetuated by more ideologically partisan versus nonpartisan media organizations. A survey was then conducted with 333 participants to investigate media audience news consumption patterns and their individual frames regarding the issue of health care reform. Results suggest that a person’s individual frames held concerning health care reform often match up with the media frames offered by his or her preferred news outlets. Consequently, a “horizontal” knowledge gap may be observed as a function of the polarization of news coverage and news consumption. Theoretical contributions and implications for later work are discussed.
AdamicL. A.GlanceN. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 US election: Divided they blog. In AdibiJ.GrobelnikM.MladenicD.PantelP. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd international workshop on Link discovery(LinkKDD ’05) (pp. 36–43). New York, NY: ACM.
2.
AltermanE. (2003). What liberal media? The truth about bias and the news. New York, NY: Basic Books.
3.
AndersonB. (1993). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. London, England: Verso.
4.
BakkerT. P.de VreeseC. H. (2011). Good news for the future? Young people, internet use, and political participation. Communication Research, 38, 451–470.
5.
BerloD. K. (1960). The process of communication: An introduction to theory and practice. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
6.
BucyE.GantzW.WangZ. (2007). Media technology and the 24 hour news cycle. In LinC.AtkinD. (Eds.), Communication technology and social change (pp. 143–164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
7.
CareyJ. W. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.
8.
CartwrightD.HararyF. (1956) Structural balance: A generalization of Heider’s theory. Psychological Review, 63, 277–293.
9.
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.
10.
DilliplaneS. (2011). All the news you want to hear: The impact of partisan news exposure on political participation. Public Opinion Quarterly, 75, 287–316.
11.
EarlJ.KimportK. (2011). Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the internet age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
EntmanR. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43, 51–58.
13.
FreyD. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 41–80.
14.
GamsonW.ModiglianiA. (1987). The changing culture of affirmative action. In BraungartR. G.BraungartM. M. (Eds.), Research in political sociology (Vol. 3, pp. 137–177). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
15.
GamsonW. A. (1989). News as framing. American Behavioral Scientist, 33, 157–161.
16.
GansH. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, Newsweek, and Time. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
17.
GarrettR. K. (2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59, 676–699.
18.
GarrettR. K.CarnahanD.LynchE. (2013). A turn toward avoidance? Selective exposure to online political information, 2004-2008. Political Behavior, 35, 113–134.
19.
GodekJ.YatesJ. F. (2005). Marketing to individual consumers online: The influence of perceived control. In HaugtvedtC. P.MachleitK. A.YalchR. F. (Eds.), Online consumer psychology: Understanding and influencing consumer behavior in the virtual world (pp. 225–244). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
GoldbergB. (2003). Arrogance: Rescuing America from the media elite. New York, NY: Warner Books.
21.
GoodeL. (2009). Social news, citizen journalism and democracy. New Media & Society, 11, 1287–1305.
22.
GraberD. A. (2001). Processing politics: Learning from television in the internet age. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
GrosecloseT. (2011). Left turn: How liberal media bias distorts the American mind. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
24.
HargittaiE.GalloJ.KaneM. (2008). Cross-ideological discussions among conservative and liberal bloggers. Public Choice, 134, 1–2.
25.
HelsperE. (2010). Gendered internet use across generations and life stages. Communication Research, 37, 352–374.
26.
HuntD.AtkinD.KrishnanA. (2012). The influence of computer-mediated communication apprehension on motives for Facebook use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56, 187–202.
27.
IyengarS.HahnK. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19–39.
28.
JeffresL. W.AtkinD.FuH. (2011). Knowledge and the knowledge gap: Time to reconceptualize the “content.”The Open Communication Journal, 11, 30–37.
29.
JeffresL. W.NeuendorfK.AtkinD. (2012). Acquiring knowledge from the media in the internet age. Communication Quarterly, 60, 59–79.
30.
KaufholdK.ValenzuelaS.ZunigaH. G. (2010). Citizen journalism and democracy: How user-generated news use relates to political knowledge and participation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84, 111–121.
31.
KinderD. R.SandersL. M. (1990). Mimicking political debate with survey questions: The case of white opinion on affirmative action for blacks. Social Cognition, 8, 73–103.
32.
LinC. A. (2009). Selective news exposure, personal values and support for the Iraq War. Communication Quarterly, 57, 18–34.
33.
MillerM. M.RiechertB. P. (2001). Frame mapping: A quantitative method for investigating issues in the public sphere. In WestM. D. (Ed.), Applications of computer content analysis (pp. 61–75). Westport, CT: Ablex.
34.
MoralesL. (2011). Obama’s birth certificate convinces some, but not all, skeptics. Washington, DC: Gallup.
35.
MutzD. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
36.
NowakK.HamiltonM.AtkinD.RauhC. (2010). Effect of media access and use on the political involvement, communication, and attitudes of college students. American Journal of Media Psychology, 3, 5–31.
37.
Oeldorf-HirschA.SundarS. S. (2012, August). Engagement with news content in online social networks. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Association for Education in Journalism & Mass Communication (AEJMC), Chicago, IL.
38.
OnoH.ZavodnyM. (2003). Gender and the internet. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 111–121.
39.
OsgoodC.TannenbaumP. (1955). The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychology Review, 62, 42–55.
40.
ÖstmanJ. (2012). Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user- generated content relates to democratic engagement among young people. New Media & Society, 14, 1004–1021.
PriorM. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Project for Excellence in Journalism. (2011). The state of the news media 2011. Washington, DC. Retrieved fromhttp://stateofthemedia.org/
44.
RittenbergJ.TewksburyD.CaseyS. (2012). Media preferences and democracy: Refining the “relative entertainment preference” hypothesis. Mass Communication and Society, 15, 921–942.
45.
ScheufeleD. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49, 103–122.
46.
ScheufeleD. A.TewksburyD. (2007). Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9–20.
47.
SchmierbachM.Oeldorf-HirschA. (2012). A little bird told me, so I didn’t believe it: Twitter, credibility, and issue perceptions. Communication Quarterly, 60, 317–337.
48.
SearsD. O.FreedmanJ. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 194–213.
49.
StachowiakJ.MossC. (1965). Hypnotic alterations of social attitudes. Journal of Social Psychology, 2, 77–83.
50.
StroudN. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30, 341–366.
51.
SunsteinC. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
52.
TichenorP. J.DonohueG. A.OlienC. N. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34, 159–170.
