Mapping Boundaries of the Hostile Media Effect

Abstract

The hostile media perception, the tendency for partisans to judge mass media coverage as unfavorable to their own point of view, has been vividly demonstrated but not well explained. This contrast bias is intriguing because it appears to contradict a robust literature on assimilation biases—the tendency to find information more supportive, rather than more opposed, to one’s own position. We set out to explore a theoretical basis for the hostile media perception that would reconcile it with assimilation biases. To do so, we exposed partisans from opposing camps on the genetically modified foods issue to identical information presented in either a mass media or a student essay context. Consistent with the hypotheses, partisans saw the information as disagreeably biased in a news story format. In student-essay format, however, the hostile media perception disappeared, and there was some evidence of biased assimilation. In addition, content evaluations based on perceived influence on oneself vs. influence on a broader audience suggested that the hostile media perception may be explained by perceived reach of the information source. To newspaper editors it is a common, and not unwelcome, criticism. Two readers from opposing partisan groups write letters to the editor, each complaining that news coverage is biased in favor of the other side. Editors welcome such responses (and usually print them side by side) for together they suggest it is readers, not news stories, who are biased. Psychologists refer to this phenomenon— when an individual perceives information to be more disagreeable with his or her own point of view—as a contrast effect. This particular instance of the contrast effect, a familiar experience for editors and reporters, has been called the hostile media perception. The hostile media perception was first described and documented more than 15 years ago (Vallone, Ross, & Lepper, 1985). Over the next decade, two other experimental studies (Giner-Sorolla & Chaiken, 1994; Perloff, 1989) replicated the effect using the same controversial issue—conflict in the Middle East. Interest in