Group status, geographic location, and the tone of media coverage: Jews and Muslims in New York Times and Guardian Headlines, 1985\u20132014

Erik Bleich,Hasher Nisar

doi:10.1186/s40878-019-0153-3

Erik Bleich, Hasher Nisar

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-019-0153-3

Copy DOI

Abstract

Studies demonstrate that both group status and geographic location influence media coverage of immigrants, ethnic groups, and marginalized communities. We examine a systematic sample of headlines about Muslims and Jews from The New York Times and The Guardian between 1985 and 2014 to understand these two factors. We find that headlines about Jews have a more positive tone than those about Muslims, and that headlines about each group situated within the newspaper’s country—such as American Jews or British Muslims—have a more positive tone than those set in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region—such as MENA Jews or MENA Muslims. These findings provide independent confirmation of prevailing research on group status and on the differences between coverage of domestic and foreign events. We expand this research agenda by intersecting these two strands of scholarship to examine the interaction between group status and geographic location, comparing the tone of headlines about lower-status domestic groups—such as Muslims in the United States or Great Britain—to that of the higher-status foreign group of Jews in the MENA region. We find that there is no meaningful difference between the portrayal of American Muslims and MENA Jews in The New York Times, but that Guardian headlines are significantly more positive toward British Muslims compared to MENA Jews. We explore these cross-national differences to show how the relationship between group status and geography is context specific.

Highlights

Studies demonstrate that both group status and geographic location influence media coverage of immigrants, ethnic groups, and marginalized communities
We address this issue by comparing portrayals of Jews and Muslims in the domestic settings of the United States and Great Britain to portrayals of Jews and Muslims in the foreign setting of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) through an analysis of a systematic sample of newspaper headlines from The New York Times and The Guardian over a 30-year time period
If geographic setting is more influential, the reverse will be true. This leads to our key research questions: What is the relative tone of coverage of higher-status groups in a foreign setting compared to lower-status groups in a domestic setting; are these patterns consistent across countries; and what factors help account for crossnational differences? Perhaps the highest stakes in this investigation revolve around whether Muslim immigrants and their descendants are such a stigmatized group that even coverage of them ‘at home’ tends to be negative compared to coverage of Jews in the volatile MENA region

Summary

Introduction

Studies demonstrate that both group status and geographic location influence media coverage of immigrants, ethnic groups, and marginalized communities. If headlines about domestic Muslims have a more positive tone than those about MENA Jews, geographic location likely has a more significant influence than group status on public perceptions about Muslims and Jews; and

Results

Conclusion