This paper examines diversity in online news reporting and explanatory factors that shape news production. The analysis is based on online news from six countries (the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, France, and Italy), comparing online-only news sites and legacy media. The analysis shows that most online media reported in a diverse way, comprising multiple topics and actors. Furthermore, event-driven news journalism explains the occurrence of high diversity in news reporting. Available resources and the intensiveness of online reporting (the extent as well as the editing style) also account for diversity. We draw from these findings to make a contribution to research on diversity in online news and to comparative communication studies. Qualitative comparative analysis is used to reflect on the direction and meaning of changes in journalistic practices in the current media environment.
AalbergT.van AelstP.CurranJ.2010. “Media Systems and the Political Information Environment: A Cross-National Comparison.” The International Journal of Press/Politics15:255–71.
2.
BaronD. P.2006. “Persistent Media Bias.” Journal of Public Economics90 (1–2): 1–36.
BennettW. L.LivingstonS.2003. “A Semi-Independent Press: Government Control and Journalistic Autonomy in the Political Construction of News.” Political Communication20: 359–62.
5.
BensonR.HallinD.2007. “How States, Markets and Globalization Shape the News: The French and US National Press, 1965–97.” European Journal of Communication22 (1): 27–48.
6.
BensonR.OerstenM.PowersM.WilligI.VeraS.2010. “Media Systems Online and Off: Comparing the Form of News in the U.S., Denmark, and France.” Journal of Communication62 (1): 21–38.
7.
BesleyT.PratA.2006. “Handcuffs for the Grabbing Hand? Media Capture and Government Accountability.” American Economic Review96 (3): 720–36.
8.
BochslerD.2011. “It Is Not How Many Votes You Get, but Also Where You Get Them. Territorial Determinants and Institutional Hurdles for the Success of Ethnic Minority Parties in Post-communist Countries.” Acta Politica64 (2): 217–38.
9.
BraumoellerB.GoertzG.2000. “The Methodology of Necessary Conditions.” American Journal of Political Science44 (4): 844–58.
10.
BrüggemannM.EsserF.HumprechtE.2012. “The Strategic Repertoire of Publishers in the Media Crisis.” Journalism Studies. Journalism Studies13 (5–6): 742–52.
11.
BrüggemannM.KönigslöwK. Kleinen-v.2013. “Explaining cosmopolitan coverage.” European Journal of Communication. doi:10.1177/0267323113484607.
12.
BrunoN.NielsenR.2011. Survival Is Success: Journalistic Online Start-Ups in Western Europe. Oxford: The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
13.
ChalabyJ.2004. “Scandal and Rise of Investigative Reporting in France.” American Behavioral Scientist47:1194–207.
14.
CurranJ.2005. “What Democracy Requires of the Media.” In The Institutions of American Democracy: The Press, ed. OverholserG.JamiesonK., 120–40. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15.
CurranJ.2011. Media and Democracy. London: Routledge.
16.
DowneyJ.StanyerJ.2010. “Comparative Media Analysis: Why Some Fuzzy Thinking Might Help. Applying Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis to the Personalization of Mediated Political Communication.” European Journal of Communication25:331–47.
17.
DownieL.SchudsonM.2009. The Reconstruction of American Journalism. New York: Columbia Journalism Review.
18.
DuranteR.KnightB.2012. “Partisan Control, Media Bias, and Viewer Responses: Evidence from Berlusconi’s Italy.” Journal of the European Economic Association10:451–81. doi:10.1111/j.1542-4774.2011.01060.x.
19.
EsserF.HanitzschT.2012. “On the Why and How of Comparative Inquiry in Communication Studies.” In The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research, ed. EsserF.HanitzschT., 3–22. New York: Routledge.
20.
EsserF.StrömbäckJ.2012. “Comparing News on National Elections.” In The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research, ed. EsserF.HanitzschT., 308–326. New York: Routledge.
GwetK.2001. Handbook of Inter-rater Reliability. Gaithersburg: StatAxis Publishing.
24.
HallinD. C.ManciniP.2004. Comparing media systems. Three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25.
HamiltonJ.2004. All the News that’s Fit to Sell: How the Market Transforms Information into News. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
26.
HellmannH.2001. “Diversity—An End in Itself? Developing a Multi-measure Methodology of Television Programme Variety Studies.” European Journal of Communication16:181–208.
27.
HollifieldC. A.2006. “News Media Performance in Hypercompetitive Markets: An Extended Model of Effects.” The International Journal on Media Management8 (2): 60–69.
KriesiH.2008. “Social Movements.” In Comparative Politics, ed. CaramaniD., 392–418. Oxford: University Press.
30.
LombardM.Snyder-DuchJ.BrackenC.2002. “Content Analysis in Mass Communication: Assessment and Reporting of Intercoder Reliability.” Human Communication Research28 (4): 587–604.
31.
McDonaldD.DimmickJ.2003. “The Conceptualization and Measurement of Diversity.” Communication Research30:60–79.
32.
MutzD.YoungL.2011. “Communication and Public Opinion.” Public Opinion Quarterly75 (5): 1018–44.
33.
NapoliP.1999. “Deconstructing the Diversity Principle.” Journal of Communication49 (4): 7–34.
34.
Nguyen VuH.2010. “Money Matters—A Cross-National Study of Economic Influences on TV News.” PhD diss., University of Zurich. http://opac.nebis.ch/ediss/20100925_003287877.pdf (accessed July 4, 2013).
35.
PeterJ.2003. “Country Characteristics As Contingent Conditions of Agenda Setting: The Moderating Influence of Polarized Elite Opinion.” Communication Research30 (6): 683–712.
36.
PicardR.2000. “Audience Fragmentation and Structural Limits on Media Innovation and Diversity.” In Media & Open Societies: Cultural, Economic and Policy Foundations for Media Openness and Diversity in East and West, ed. Van CuilenburgJ.Van der WurffR., 180–91. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
37.
PicardR.2010. Value Creation and the Future of News Organizations: Why and How Journalism Must Change to Remain Relevant in the Twenty-First Century. Lisbon: Media XXI.
38.
PicardR.2011. Mapping Digital Media: Digitalization and Media Business Models. Open Society Media Program. Cambridge: Open Society Foundation.
39.
QuandtT.2008. “News on the World Wide Web.” Journalism Studies9 (5): 717–38.
40.
RaginC.2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry. Fuzzy Sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41.
SamfordS.2010. “Reform in Latin America—Averting ‘Disruption and Reversal’: Reassessing the Logic of Rapid Trade.” Politics & Society38:373–407.
42.
SchneiderC.WagemannC.2012. Set-Theoretic Methods in the Social Sciences: A Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43.
ShoemakerP.ReeseS.1996. Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content, 2nd edition.White Plains, NY: Longman.
44.
SirkkunenE.CookC.2012. Chasing Sustainability on the Net. International Research on 69 Journalistic Pure Players and Their Business Models. Tampere, Finland: Juvenes.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2011. “Labor Force Statistics including the National Unemployment Rate (Current Population Survey—CPS).”http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment (accessed July 16, 2013).
50.
Van CuilenburgJ.2007. “Media Diversity, Competition and Concentration: Concepts and Theories.” In Media between Culture and Commerce, ed. de BensE., 25–54. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51.
Van der WurffR.Van CuilenburgJ.2001. “Impact of Moderate and Ruinous Competition on Diversity: The Dutch Television Market.” Journal of Media Economics14 (4): 213–29.
