Abstract

Media outlets strategically frame news about violent events using sensationalist labels such as “terrorist” or “Islamist” but also more subtle wording choices that affect the overall article tone. We argue theoretically and show empirically using a conjoint experiment that, contrary to existing studies, the effect of these two framing devices on readers’ perceptions of terrorist events should be carefully separated. Even though article tone transports no factual information, in our experiment negative and sensational wording choices carried a greater impact on threat perceptions than the explicit “terrorist” and “Islamist” labels. In a realistic news article setting, which varied other salient context cues such as proximity or event size, subtle shifts in article tone still subconsciously influenced threat perceptions. This highlights the potential dangers of media coverage fueling otherwise unjustified fears by injecting unnecessary editorial tone.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.