Political Communication In The Online World

Theoretical Approaches And Research Designs

Gerhard Vowe download

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-the-
online-world-theoretical-approaches-and-research-designs-gerhard-
vowe-5302846

Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com

Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be
interested in. You can click the link to download.

Poaching Politics Online Communication During The 2016 Us Presidential

Election Frontiers In Political Communication New Paul Booth

https://ebookbell.com/product/poaching-politics-online-communication-
during-the-2016-us-presidential-election-frontiers-in-political-
communication-new-paul-booth-43474828

Political Communication In The Time Of Coronavirus 1st Edition Peter

Van Aelst

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-the-time-of-
coronavirus-1st-edition-peter-van-aelst-34526278

Political Communication In The Roman World Cristina Rosillolpez

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-the-roman-
world-cristina-rosillolpez-6679610

Political Communication In The Anglophone World Case Studies Theodore

F Sheckels

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-the-
anglophone-world-case-studies-theodore-f-sheckels-51236448
Political Communication In Britain The Leader Debates The Campaign And
The Media In The 2010 General Election 1st Edition Dominic Wring

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-britain-the-
leader-debates-the-campaign-and-the-media-in-the-2010-general-
election-1st-edition-dominic-wring-5363512

Political Communication In Britain Campaigning Media And Polling In

The 2019 General Election 1st Edition Dominic Wring

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-britain-
campaigning-media-and-polling-in-the-2019-general-election-1st-
edition-dominic-wring-36504222

Political Communication In Britain Polling Campaigning And Media In

The 2015 General Election 1st Edition Dominic Wring

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-britain-
polling-campaigning-and-media-in-the-2015-general-election-1st-
edition-dominic-wring-5838334

Political Communication In Britain Campaigning Media And Polling In

The 2017 General Election 1st Ed Dominic Wring

https://ebookbell.com/product/political-communication-in-britain-
campaigning-media-and-polling-in-the-2017-general-election-1st-ed-
dominic-wring-7320200

Communication In The Age Of Trump Frontiers In Political Communication

New Arthur S Hayes Editor

https://ebookbell.com/product/communication-in-the-age-of-trump-
frontiers-in-political-communication-new-arthur-s-hayes-
editor-43474554
Henn and Vowe’s collection reviews and expands several of the central
theories and methods involved in political communication on the inter-
net. From gatekeeping to media influence and many other topics, this
book invigorates both theoretical issues in the field. The methodologi-
cal sections on topics such as data mining and social networks integrate
issues that cut across the field of political communication. This book will
be useful for anyone seeking deeper understanding of the field.
Jeremey Hunsinger, Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada

This collection offers an impressive updating of political communication

theory and methods for the online world. As ever more personalized and
socially networked communication dominate our political lives, research-
ers need to think about whether old models and methods still work and,
along with what new perspectives are needed. This volume addresses the
full spectrum of these concerns in impressive fashion.
Lance Bennett, University of Washington, USA
This page intentionally left blank
Political Communication
in the Online€World

As a consequence of the rapid diffusion of online media, the conditions

for political communication and research concerning it have radically
changed. Is empirical communication research capable of consistently
describing and explaining the changes in political communication in the
online world both from a theoretical and methodological perspective?
In this book, Gerhard Vowe, Philipp Henn, and a group of leading
international experts in the field of communication studies guide the
reader through the complexities of political communication and evaluate
whether and to what extent existing theoretical approaches and research
designs are relevant to the online world. In the first part of the book,
nine chapters offer researchers the opportunity to test the basic assump-
tions of prominent theories in the field, to specify them in terms of the
conditions of political communication in the online world, and to modify
them in view of the systematically gained experiences. The second meth-
odological section tests the variations of content analysis, surveys, expert
interviews, and network analyses in an online environment and docu-
ments how successful these methods of empirical analysis have proven to
be in political communication.
Written accessibly and contributing to key debates on political com-
munication, this bookshelf essential presents an indispensable account of
the necessary tools needed to allow researchers decide which approach
and method is better suited to answer their online problem.

Gerhard Vowe is Professor of Communication and Media Studies at the

University of Duesseldorf, Germany. He is spokesperson of the research
group “Political Communication in the Online World.” His research
focuses on political communication and media policy.

Philipp Henn is research assistant at the Department of Communication

and Media Studies, University of Duesseldorf, Germany. He is coordi-
nator of the research group “Political Communication in the Online
World.” His research focuses on political communication and security
issues in mass media.
Routledge Research in Political Communication

╇ 1 Political Campaigning in ╇ 6 Social Media and Democracy

Referendums Innovations in Participatory
Framing the Referendum€ Politics
Issue Brian Loader and Daniel Mercea
Claes H. de Vreese and Holli
A. Semetko ╇ 7 Political Leadership, Nations
and Charisma
╇ 2 The Internet and National Vivian Ibrahim and Margit
Elections Wunsch
A Comparative Study of Web
Campaigning ╇ 8 The Media, Political
Edited by Nicholas W. Participation and
Jankowski, Randolph Kluver, Empowerment
Kirsten A. Foot and Steven M. Edited by Richard Scullion,
Schneider Roman Gerodimos, Daniel
Jackson and Darren Lilleker
╇ 3 Global Political Marketing
Edited by Jennifer ╇ 9 Digital World: Connectivity,
Lees-Marshment, Jesper Creativity and Rights
Strömbäck and Chris€Rudd Edited by Gillian Youngs

╇ 4 Political Campaigning, 10 Political Marketing

Elections and the Strategic ‘Campaign Culture’
Internet Edited by Kostas Gouliamos,
Comparing the US, UK, Antonis Theocharous, Bruce
Germany and France Newman, Stephan Henneberg
Darren G. Lilleker and Nigel
A. Jackson 11 Politics and the Internet in
Comparative Context
╇ 5 Public Broadcasting and Views From the€Cloud
Political Interference Edited by Paul G. Nixon,
Chris Hanretty Rajash Rawal and Dan Mercea
12 Political Communication 13 Political Communication in the
Online Online€World
Structures, Functions, and Theoretical Approaches and
Challenges Research Designs
Ognyan Seizov Edited by Gerhard Vowe and
Philipp€Henn
This page intentionally left blank
Political Communication
in the Online€World
Theoretical Approaches and
Research Designs

Edited by Gerhard Vowe

and Philipp€Henn
First published€2016
by Routledge
711 Third Avenue, New York, NY€10017
and by Routledge
2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14€4RN

Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor€& Francis Group, an

informa business
© 2016 Taylor€& Francis
The right of the editor to be identified as the author of the
editorial material, and of the authors for their individual
chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections€77 and 78
of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act€1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted
or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented,
including photocopying and recording, or in any information
storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from
the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be
trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication€Data
Names: Vowe, Gerhard, editor. | Henn, Philipp, 1986- editor.
Title: Political communication in the online world : theoretical
â•… approaches and research designs / edited by Gerhard Vowe &
â•… Philipp Henn.
Description: New York, NY : Routledge, 2016. | Series:
â•… Routledge research in political communication ; 13 | Includes
â•… bibliographical references and index.
Identifiers: LCCN 2015024621| ISBN 9781138900080 (hbk) |
â•… ISBN 9781315707495 (ebk)
Subjects: LCSH: Communication in politics—Technological
â•… innovations. | Communication in politics—Research. | Mass
â•… media—Political aspects. | Social media—Political aspects.
Classification: LCC JA85+ | DDC 320.01/4—dc23
LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2015024621
ISBN: 978-1-138-90008-0 (hbk)
ISBN: 978-1-315-70749-5 (ebk)
Typeset in€Sabon
by Apex CoVantage,€LLC
Dedicated to Wolfgang Donsbach (1949–2015) and
Kurt Imhof (1956–2015)
This page intentionally left blank
Contents

List of Figuresxiv
List of Tablesxv

Introduction: Political Communication Research in the

Online World 1
PHILIPP HENN AND GERHARD€VOWE

PART€I
Theoretical Approaches Revisited9

╇ 1 The Traditional Paradigm of Political Communication

Research Reconstructed 11
PHILIPP HENN, OLAF JANDURA, AND GERHARD€VOWE

╇ 2 A New Agenda for Agenda-Setting Research in the

Digital Era 26
GABRIEL WEIMANN AND HANS-BERND BROSIUS

╇ 3 Old and New Dynamics of Agenda Building in a Hybrid

Media System 45
BARBARA PFETSCH, PETER MILTNER, AND DANIEL€MAIER

╇ 4 Gatekeeping Revisited 59

KATJA FRIEDRICH, TILL KEYLING, AND HANS-BERND BROSIUS

╇ 5 The Influence of Online Media on Political Knowledge 73

MARCUS MAURER AND CORINNA OSCHATZ

╇ 6 The Spiral of Silence Revisited 88

CHRISTIANE EILDERS AND PABLO PORTEN-CHEÉ
xiiâ•… Contents
╇ 7 Third-Person Effect and Influence of Presumed Media
Influence Approach Revisited 103
MARCO DOHLE AND ULI BERNHARD

╇ 8 The New Institutionalism Revisited 118

PATRICK DONGES AND PAULA NITSCHKE

╇ 9 Theoretical Approaches to Grasp the Changing

Relations Between Media and Political Actors 133
JULIANA RAUPP AND JAN NIKLAS€KOCKS

PART€II
Research Designs Revisited149

10 Fundamental Methodological Principles for Political

Communication Research: Validity Even in the
Online World? 151
GERHARD VOWE AND PHILIPP€HENN

11 Database-Driven Content Analysis 170

MARCUS MAURER, JÖRG HASSLER, AND THOMAS HOLBACH

12 Observing Online Content 183

TILL KEYLING AND JAKOB JÜNGER

13 Mining Big Data With Computational Methods 201

ANNIE WALDHERR, GERHARD HEYER, PATRICK JÄHNICHEN,
ANDREAS NIEKLER, AND GREGOR WIEDEMANN

14 Survey Research Online 218

ULI BERNHARD, PABLO PORTEN-CHEÉ, AND MARTIN SCHULTZE

15 Identifying and Analyzing Hyperlink Issue Networks 233

SILKE ADAM, THOMAS HÄUSSLER, HANNAH SCHMID-PETRI,
AND UELI€REBER

16 Flesh and Bone or the Integration of Perspectives in

Social Network Analysis 248
JAN NIKLAS KOCKS AND JULIANA€RAUPP
 Contentsâ•…xiii
17 Organizations as an Analytical Category: Conceptual
and Methodological Challenges 262
PAULA NITSCHKE AND KIM MURPHY

Conclusion: Political Communication Research in the

Online World 275
PHILIPP HENN AND GERHARD€VOWE

Notes on Contributors281
Index287
Figures

5.1 Research Model 81

7.1 Model of the Main Propositions of the Third-Person
Effect and the Influence of Presumed Media Influence
Approach104
10.1 Model of Sociological Explanation: Micro–Macro Link 154
11.1 List of Feeds with Tags for Multimedia Recognition 178
11.2 Saved Articles in the Database View 179
12.1 Basic Problems at Different Stages in the Process of
Online Data Collection 193
13.1 Co-occurence Graph for the Word Terror  205
13.2 Co-occurence Graph for the Word Soviet206
13.3 Frequency Plot for the Words Soviet and Terror in the
State-of-the- Union-Address Corpus 208
13.4 Sample Topics Created by an LDA Model of 50 Topics 208
14.1 Sampling of Online Surveys in Political Communication
Research (Total Number of Studies) 224
15.1 From Hyperlink to Issue to Classified Issue Networks 240
15.2 Climate Countermovement vs. Climate Advocates in
the US Hyperlink Network 242
16.1 Potentials of a Flesh-and-Bone Approach to Social
Network Analysis 256
Tables

1.1 Facets of the Traditional Paradigm 12

8.1 Three Pillars of Institutions 120
10.1 An Overview of the Methodological Foundational Model 153
11.1 Pros and Cons of Current Processes for Saving Online
Articles176
12.1 Dimensions in the Collection of Online Data and
Examples184
13.1 How Text Mining Contributes to the Toolbox of
Content Analysis 213
16.1 Methods of Data Collection for Social Network Analysis 253
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction
Political Communication Research
in the Online€World
Philipp Henn and Gerhard€Vowe

There are currently more than seven€billion mobile phones in the world—
approximately as many mobile phones as there are people (Interna-
tional Telecommunication Union, 2014). Nearly two€billion people use
a smartphone, which enables them to have mobile access to the Internet
(“Smartphone Users,” 2014). In the span of just two years, between 2013
and 2015, the number of people using a smartphone has nearly doubled.
Young people in Western societies are now online for more than four
hours a day, which is twice as much time as they spend watching televi-
sion and is a steep increase as compared to the amount of time young
people spent online five years ago (Duggan, Ellison, Lampe, Lenhart,€&
Madden, 2015; Seo, Houston, Taylor Knight, Kennedy,€& Inglish, 2014).
In conjunction with the increase in Internet access, there has also been a
fundamental change in the way political information can be accessed. It
is now possible for individuals to engage in communications about politi-
cal subjects in a very different manner—for example, by commenting on
political online news sites. As a result of these recent changes, participa-
tion in political decisions has been transformed.
Supply and demand accumulate reciprocally, and with the rapid spread
of the Internet, the “Big Five”—Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft,
Amazon—have also increased in significance. These five companies have
a combined value of about 1.7€trillion US dollars (status as of May€2015),
which not only makes them economic heavyweights, but also political
power factors on an international scale.
Not only has the constellation of economic actors fundamentally
changed with the introduction of the Internet, but political actors now
use Internet initiatives as part of their strategies. Out of a total of well
over a€billion dollars spent on electoral campaigns during the 2012 US
presidential elections, approximately 100€million US dollars were spent
on online campaigning alone (Center for Responsive Politics, n.d.). All
estimates anticipate that the total budget for electoral campaigns in 2016
will increase dramatically, including increases in the proportion allocated
to online initiatives.
2â•… Philipp Henn and Gerhard Vowe
These facts indicate that there have been fundamental changes to polit-
ical communication. They reveal a small segment of the overall picture in
which it is clear to see how much and how quickly our communication
world has changed and continues to change into an online world.
This shift to online communication raises the question of how political
communication in general is changing within this new environment and
which politically relevant consequences are involved in these changes to
political communication. In order to answer these questions, political
communication research must first determine the answer to the follow-
ing question: Can the new challenges to political communication posed
by the online world be adequately addressed and answered by the tradi-
tional theoretical approaches of communication research and its empiri-
cal methods, or do the new conditions necessitate the development of a
new theoretical and methodological basis for political communication
research? Given this fundamental, structural transformation, it cannot be
taken for granted that the theories and methods that were developed for
a political communication landscape dominated by the press and radio
will continue to shape the research and have a secure role in practical
communication (Young€& Pieterson, 2015). It is important to determine
whether the arsenal of theories and methods developed and tested for
political mass communication are still valid given the variety of political
communication avenues now utilized online.
The aim of this book is to answer these general questions. With respect
to the theoretical approaches, this investigation provides an opportunity
to test their basic assumptions, to specify these approaches in terms of
the conditions of political communication in the online world, and to
modify them in light of the systematically gained experiences. Testing
these theoretical approaches in an online world allows their effectiveness
in that setting to be evaluated. The chapters on individual theoretical
approaches each provide answers to the following questions: What are
the basic assumptions of the theoretical approach? How successful has
the approach proved to be based on empirical research investigating its
effectiveness in the online world? What modifications are necessary in
order to adapt the approach to suit the conditions of the online world?
The methods of empirical communication studies are also put to the
test in an online environment, and the methodological part of this book
is intended to document how successful the methods of empirical analysis
of political communication phenomena have proved to be in the online
world. In the methodological chapters, the following questions are
addressed: What are the principles of the method? How successful has
this method been in terms of its application to online media? And what
demands does the method place on the researcher?
In answer to the question of whether traditional theories and methods
continue to be suitable in the online world, the first part of this book is
dedicated to demonstrating that the arsenal of theories in communication
 Introductionâ•…3
studies is capable of overcoming the challenges of the online world in
order to analyze the transformations to political communication. How-
ever, for the most part, this will require modifications to the theoretical
approaches. For example, it is necessary to expand the agenda-setting
approach to include new modes of agenda flow. In the second part of this
book, it will be demonstrated that the methods are also capable of reveal-
ing new forms of research in accordance with the conditions of an online
world. In particular, the methodological base of empirical communica-
tion research continues to be valid in the online world. But adjustments
must also be made to the methods—sometimes to a greater extent, as is
the case for content analysis, and sometimes to a lesser extent, as is the
case for surveys. As a result, this book presents a differentiated picture
from a methodological as well as a theoretical perspective.
What exactly is meant by an online world? This term is understood to
refer to a communications world dominated by the logic of online media.
This does not mean that other media have disappeared from political
communication. Television, radio, press, and books, as well as forums for
debate, continue to play an important role in political communication,
but these media no longer determine the foundational rules for politi-
cal communication. Instead, the subject preferences, actor constellations,
and rhythms of online media are increasingly determining the course of
political communication, with the degree of online media influence vary-
ing between countries, groups, and subjects. Synonyms for online world
are the Internet age, or digital era, and included under the umbrella of
online media is all media that allows communication based on networked
computers. Examples of online media include the websites of organiza-
tions, social network sites, blogs, search engines, electronic encyclope-
dias, and many more. Political communication should be understood
as all symbolic interactions that concern collective, binding decisions
(Parsons, 1969, p.€352 ff.). Our understanding of political communica-
tion research arises from this, proceeding from Chapter€1 with regard to
theory and from Chapter€10 with regard to methodology.

Theoretical Approaches Revisited—Chapters€1–9

In the introductory chapter€of the theoretical part (Chapter€1), Philipp
Henn, Olaf Jandura, and Gerhard Vowe reconstruct the traditional para-
digm of political communication research. Political communication, they
conclude, has largely been considered by scholars to be mass communica-
tion between politicians in established political organizations, journalists
in mass media, and politically open-minded citizens. But this paradigm
fails to accommodate the changing political communication in an online
world. The authors discuss the shortcomings and blind spots of our tra-
ditional view of political communication, and outline necessary adjust-
ments, like the need to integrate micro, meso, and macro levels of effects.
4â•… Philipp Henn and Gerhard Vowe
Gabriel Weimann and Hans-Bernd Brosius take a look at agenda-setting
research in Chapter€2. They identify six basic assumptions of the
agenda-setting theory, and by reviewing numerous studies, they conclude
that it is still valid in an online world, although it requires substantial
adjustments. There are new characteristics of the online agenda-setting,
and they require new methods and research designs such as network
analysis, or diffusion patterns.
Chapter€3 deals with a different aspect of agendas. Barbara Pfetsch,
Peter Miltner, and Daniel Maier examine old and new dynamics of
agenda building. They ask if the processes by which various groups bring
their demand onto the public agenda have changed in online environ-
ments, and conclude that online communication complements the tra-
ditional agenda building process and offers new opportunities for new
actors who can now circumvent traditional mass media.
Gatekeeping is the topic of Chapter€4. Katja Friedrich, Till Keyling,
and Hans-Bernd Brosius question whether the gatekeeping approach is
still adequate to explain who controls the flow of political information
in the online world. They argue that two forms of gatekeeping must be
distinguished: editorial gatekeeping practiced by journalists, which is still
a major factor; and audience gatekeeping, which now undermines the
power of the traditional actors.
Marcus Maurer and Corinna Oschatz discuss the changes in the dis-
semination of political information and the process of political knowl-
edge gain in Chapter€5. After distinguishing two different approaches
to political knowledge—an objective and a subjective approach—they
discuss the role of news media for knowledge gaps online and offline. The
final part of the chapter€is a description of a research program that aims
to integrate the objective and subjective approaches.
The spiral of silence is revisited in Chapter€6 by Christiane Eilders
and Pablo Porten-Cheé. Eilders and Porten-Cheé first sketch out the
basic assumptions of Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann’s theory, then discuss
whether they still hold in the online world. Next they review the empiri-
cal evidence to determine the effects online communication has on public
opinion, perceptions, and willingness to speak out—including their own
research on the debate on climate change and German elections. They
conclude that a spiral of silence is unlikely to develop in online environ-
ments because of selective exposure in high-choice media environments
that prevents people from encountering opposing views.
In Chapter€7, Marco Dohle and Uli Bernhard discuss which character-
istics of online communication are relevant for presumed influences of
media. By reviewing the literature and presenting the results of their own
studies, they show that the third-person effect and the influence of pre-
sumed media influence approach are still valid in the online world. An
outline of future research directions is given at the end of this chapter,
for example with regards to the specific characteristics of online media
 Introductionâ•…5
such as the possibility to write and observe comments on online news
articles.
Patrick Donges and Paula Nitschke take a look at political organiza-
tions and search for a theoretical link between the usage of the Internet
and organizational and political context factors in Chapter€8. Their solu-
tion is new institutionalism, a collection of approaches that is discussed
and modified in this chapter. Special attention is given to the concept of
isomorphism, meaning that organizations observe their environment and
incorporate institutional requirements.
The approaches of the field of media relations are explored by Juliana
Raupp and Jan Niklas Kocks in Chapter€9. They ask what the contri-
butions of different approaches are in describing and analyzing media
relations. After reviewing major theoretical approaches, they argue for
a combination of institutionalist and network-based approaches. The
implications that such a combined approach would have on future
research are then discussed, including, for example, the need to observe
new types of actors.

Research Designs Revisited—Chapters€10–17

The second part of the book deals with research designs in an online
world and addresses the question: Are the methods and techniques used
in political communication research still able to deal with this new world?
In Chapter€10, Gerhard Vowe and Philipp Henn argue that political
communication research should be based on three basic methodological
principles: causality, intersubjectivity, and incompleteness. The authors
state that these principles are still valid in the new landscape of political
communication research. However, they claim that while these principles
should still be a guiding light for research, the changing environment
does present a challenge for them—for example, the principles are chal-
lenged by the differentiation, pluralization, and acceleration of research.
Conclusions for how research methods should be structured in light of
the new online environment are suggested, for instance, a new balance of
theory and (big)€data.
Marcus Maurer, Jörg Haßler, and Thomas Holbach describe a method
of database-driven content analysis in Chapter€11. After explaining the
challenges that the analysis of websites poses for researchers, they give
instructions on how to tackle these challenges. Their ARTICLe (Auto-
matic RSS-Crawling Tool for Internet-Based Content Analysis) database,
which uses RSS feeds and automatically creates HTML files and screen-
shots of websites to be analyzed, is one way of meeting these challenges.
In Chapter€12, Till Keyling and Jakob Jünger write about the observa-
tion of online content. They try to provide orientation for researchers who
are less experienced with data collection on the Internet, especially with
data from social network sites. Three specific ways of data collection for
6â•… Philipp Henn and Gerhard Vowe
the purpose of political communication research are introduced: working
with raw data, access to programming interfaces, and the exploitation of
user interfaces.
How to deal with vast amounts of unstructured text data is the ques-
tion that Annie Waldherr, Gerhard Heyer, Patrick Jähnichen, Andreas
Niekler, and Gregor Wiedemann address in Chapter€13. They describe
computational methods to mine big data. The methods are developed in
natural language processing and allow for automatic capturing of seman-
tics in massive populations of texts. The authors discuss the potential and
limitations of selected supervised and unsupervised methods for political
communication research.
Uli Bernhard, Pablo Porten-Cheé, and Martin Schultze take a look at
the pros and cons of online survey research in Chapter€14. They pro-
vide recommendations of when and how to use online surveys, provide
examples of how these methods were used in recent years, and reflect on
their experience with online surveys in their own research on social elites,
individual media repertoires, and Voting Advice Applications.
In Chapter€15, Silke Adam, Thomas Häussler, Hannah Schmid-Petri,
and Ueli Reber discuss how hyperlink issue networks can be identified
and analyzed. They explain how snowballing techniques can be used to
obtain a network, how to get a real issue network, how to understand
the sociological meaning of hyperlinks, and how to use methods of social
network analysis to further investigate these hyperlink issue networks.
Chapter€16 deals with the integration of quantitative and qualitative
methods in social network analysis. Jan Niklas Kocks and Juliana Raupp
describe a “flesh-and-bone” approach that aims to enrich quantitative
data within network interviews. They discuss theoretical and empiri-
cal perspectives and the possibilities and limitations of an integration of
these methods in an online world. They conclude that an integration of
qualitative and quantitative methods promises new insights for political
communication research in an online world.
Finally, Paula Nitschke and Kim Murphy take a look at organizations
as an analytical category in Chapter€17. They argue that organizations
are predominately viewed as actors in political communication research,
but the increasingly ambivalent status of organizations in an online world
calls for the adoption of new perspectives—for example, viewing organi-
zations as structures or processes. Two studies with multi-methodological
approaches are presented in the chapter, one on the mediatization of
political interest organizations, and the other on networked media gov-
ernment relations in online conditions.
These chapters provide a wide range of answers that at least partially
address the current challenges to theory and methodology; however,
a full catalog of theoretical approaches and methods for communica-
tion studies is not possible within the scope of this book. It was equally
impossible to consider the many theoretical approaches and methods
 Introductionâ•…7
from neighboring disciplines that also explore the online world, such as
theoretical approaches from an economic perspective, or methods from
computer science. Concentrating primarily on communication stud-
ies does not imply a claim to exclusive agency of that particular field,
nor does it imply that the contributions of other sciences have no value.
Instead, it is simply a reflection of the fact that testing and comparing all
theories and methods in terms of effectiveness and complementarity is
not feasible within this€book.
The fact that testing is focused on the communication studies theories
and methods presented in this book can also be justified by considering
that this book has arisen due to the work of the “Political Communica-
tion in the Online World” research group. This research group has been
supported since 2011 by the German Research Society (DFG) and the
Swiss National Fund (SNF). Between the years of 2011 and 2014, as an
initial step, the group performed empirical tests to determine whether a
range of theoretical approaches to communication research were suitable
for the online world. This produced a variety of results that are presented
here. This book presents an interim report of the research team’s work in
the form of an inventory.1
In conclusion, thanks are owed first and foremost to the DFG and
SNF who made the project possible, in particular the reviewers who have
accompanied the research from the start on behalf of these organizations.
We would also like to thank all of the researchers who contributed chap-
ters to this book. Despite their countless other obligations, all authors
were prepared to invest a lot of time and effort into their contributions,
coordinate with other authors, handle the demands of the publishers,
and not least to keep to a tight schedule. Thanks are also owed to those
cooperation partners who collaborated with the research group over the
last three years, particularly the participants at the ICA Pre-Conference
20122 organized by the research group, and those at the national conven-
tions and workshops conducted by the research group in cooperation
with other organizations. We hope to continue this cooperation in the
coming years.
We would also like to thank the collaborators who played a role in this
book’s production, particularly Halina Bause, Dennis Frieß, Ole Kelm,
and Raphael Kösters for their support in research and editing the book.
Our gratitude also goes out to Routledge publishers, particularly Natalja
Mortensen and Lillian Rand, who supported and attended to this publi-
cation of our research team’s inventory.
We hope this book will inspire further discussion and dialogue about
whether communication studies are adequately equipped to investigate
and shape the structural transformation of political communication. The
fog is slowly lifting, and a faceted image is emerging that displays the
ways in which political communication is changing, and how this trans-
formation can be researched appropriately.
8â•… Philipp Henn and Gerhard Vowe
Notes
1 For additional information on the research team and an overview of their
publications, see http://www.fgpk.de/en/.
2 See https://www.icahdq.org/conf/2012/print_program.pdf, pp.€16–17.

References
Center for Responsive Politics. (n.d.). 2012 presidential race. Retrieved from
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres12/
Duggan, M., Ellison, N.╛B., Lampe, C., Lenhart, A.,€& Madden, M. (2015, Janu-
ary). Social media update 2014. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://
www.pewInternet.org/2015/01/09/social-media-update-2014/
International Telecommunication Union. (2014). The world in 2014. ICT facts
and figures. Geneva, Switzerland: International Telecommunication Union.
Parsons, T. (1969). On the concept of political power: Politics and social struc-
ture. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Seo, H., Houston, J.╛B., Taylor Knight, L.╛A., Kennedy, E.╛J.,€& Inglish, A.╛B.
(2014). Teens’ social media use and collective action. New Media€& Society,
16(6), 883–902. doi:10.1177/1461444813495162
Smartphone users worldwide will total 1.75€billion in 2014. (2014, Janu-
ary). eMarketer. Retrieved from http://www.emarketer.com/Article/
Smartphone-Users-Worldwide-Will-Total-175-Billion-2014/1010536
Young, L.,€& Pieterson, W. (2015). Strategic communication in a networked
world: Integrating network and communication theories in the context of gov-
ernment to citizen communication. In D. Holtzhausen€& A. Zerfaß (Eds.), The
Routledge handbook of strategic communication (pp.€93–112). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Part€I

Theoretical Approaches
Revisited
This page intentionally left blank
1 The Traditional Paradigm
of Political Communication
Research Reconstructed
Philipp Henn, Olaf Jandura, and
Gerhard€Vowe

Why Reconstruct the Traditional Paradigm of Political

Communication Research?
How was political communication understood in previous research?
This chapter€will reconstruct the perspective researchers have used so
far. Thus, we will identify which elements of political communication
the research focused on, and how these were combined into a specific
paradigm, a pattern of thought (Fleck, 1935/1979). This chapter€is not
concerned with presenting the state of empirical research. Also, it is not a
summary of the following chapters, which take a closer look on specific
theories and empirical evidence. Rather, the tacit premises and implicit
assumptions behind the theoretical approaches and research designs
will be highlighted in this chapter. Why is this necessary? Without it,
it is impossible to precisely discern the changes currently taking place
in research. These changes in research are driven by the fundamental
changes the spread of online media brings to political communication.
Identifying the starting point as precisely as possible is the only way to
clarify what is currently changing the research and what a new paradigm
of research might look like. Currently, we are experiencing a massive
change in research: The traditional paradigm is still dominant, but new
elements are already being implemented and€used.

How Is the Traditional Paradigm Being Reconstructed?

This reconstruction is not easy, since the term political communication
is generally vague in the relevant literature. Graphical representations of
the fundamental relationships are rarely seen in textbooks, review arti-
cles, and handbook contributions, because they would require a precise
definition of the various terms and their relationships (with the excep-
tion of McNair, 2011). Also, you will find relatively few metastudies or
overviews that consider the research field as a whole (with the exception
of Kamhawi€& Weaver, 2003). Because of the conceptual blurring, a lot
of interpretation is required to reconstruct the traditional paradigm of
political communication research.
12â•… Philipp Henn et al.
The concepts used in literature are different in many ways, but there
is a common core that is reconstructed in this chapter. It will be referred
to here as the traditional paradigm. The presentation of this paradigm
is structured according to seven basic dimensions of communication
(Dance, 1970; Merten, 1977).
Anomalies will also be analyzed, that is to say phenomena that do not
fit into the traditional paradigm. These phenomena are closely connected
to general trends of social change and occur in conjunction with the dif-
fusion of the Internet. They do not show up consistently, but are always
accompanied by conflicting trends and forces.

Facets of the Traditional Paradigm: Seven Dominant

Characteristics
The dominant characteristics in each of the seven dimensions and the
trends of change that challenge the explanatory power of the traditional
paradigm are clear from the overview below.

Table 1.1╇ Facets of the Traditional Paradigm

Dimension Dominant Trends of Change

Characteristic

Context: Sphere of public Erosion of the boundaries

In what context political between the spheres
is political communication in
communication liberal-democratic
positioned? systems
Social: Actor constellation Pluralization of actors,
Politically, who of mass increasing the flexibility
communicates with communication: of role requirements;
whom? fixed roles for hybridization of
politicians, communication modes
journalists, and
citizens
Content: Preference for issues Differentiation of
What is communicated of public interest content: differences in
politically? the preferences
Temporal: Synchronous Individualization of the
When does political reception as a temporal structure of
communication occur? dominant pace reception
setter
Spatial: Nation-states as areas Globalization and
Where does political of communication glocalization
communication occur?
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…13

Dimension Dominant Trends of Change

Characteristic

Technical: Broadcasting Digitization: convergence

How does political technology as the of broadcasting,
communication basis for political telecommunications
happen on a technical communication and computer
level? technology into
computer networks
Causal: Normatively Integration of levels of
What are the effects assessed changes effects: linking micro-,
attributed to political in individual meso- and macro-levels
communication? perceptions, to an explanatory
attitudes, and model
behaviors induced
by political
communication

Context Dimension: Public Sphere in the Liberal-Democratic

System as the Dominant Sphere
In what context is political communication positioned? This first ques-
tion refers especially to the spheres in which political communication is
embedded. Spheres should be understood as expectancy patterns, sets of
rules for communication. They regulate the communication, especially
accessibility and observability of communication.
The base of the traditional paradigm of political communication research
is a strong legal sphere model—not only in Germany. It is strictly divided
between three spheres, each with their own logic (Habermas, 2006):

• Public political communication is political communication that is

widely accessible (public space) and generally observable (public
eye). Other areas of public communication comprise, for example,
public economic communication or public sports communication.
• Governmental political communication is political communication
where state actors decide who is allowed to observe and participate.
In many areas, governmental political communication is subject to
secrecy requirements and is thus located in an arcane sphere.
• Private political communication is political communication where
private actors decide who is allowed to observe and participate.

Based on this sphere model the traditional paradigm is characterized by a

five-stage order of preference for contexts. This results in a funnel of attention:

• In the traditional understanding of political communication, the

focus is on the sphere of public political communication. The other
14â•… Philipp Henn et al.
spheres play a minor role: Governmental communication is only
interesting as a source (public relations of governments) and private
communication only as a scope of effect.
• In the sphere of public political communication, the focus of the tra-
ditional paradigm is on mass media communication. Other forms of
public political communication, such as public meetings in the form
of party or parliamentary sessions, garner much less notice (Nei-
dhardt, 1994).
• Traditional research follows the relevance criteria of mass media, as
it focuses on specific situational contexts of political communication
with a high news value, such as elections (Strömbäck€& Kiousis,
2014), referendums (de Vreese€& Schuck, 2014), conflicts, scandals,
coups, international crises, and wars (Robinson, 2014). Other situ-
ational contexts—especially the political communication of normal
situations—are less investigated (Blumler€& McQuail, 2001).
• Traditional research focuses on the context of liberal democratic
political systems (Ferree, Gamson, Gerhards,€& Rucht, 2002). Other
political systems, such as authoritarian and totalitarian systems, fade
into the background (Moy, Bimber, Rojecki, Xenos,€& Iyengar, 2012).
• Lastly, traditional research primarily takes the political context into
account; little note is made of other contexts of political communica-
tion, such as the socio-cultural context (social change), the economic
context (liberalization), and the scientific and technical contexts
(scientification).

Long before the spread of the Internet, this narrowing of context has cer-
tainly been identified as a problem in research literature. Other contextual
factors besides politics have been taken into account on various occasions
(Norris, 2000; Schulz, 2014). The fixation on both liberal-democratic sys-
tems (Moy et€al., 2012) and election campaigns (Nimmo€& Swanson,
1990) have been criticized. Finally, this focus on public political communi-
cation has certainly not happened unanimously. For example, the impor-
tance of private and semi-public communication for media effects has been
highlighted by Lazarsfeld in the Two-Step Flow (Lazarsfeld, Berelson,€&
Gaudet, 1944). Also, social network research highlights other forms of
communication (Huckfeldt€& Sprague, 1995; Katz€& Lazarsfeld, 1955).
At the moment, the attention funnel and, in particular, the sphere model
have proved inadequate in dealing with the increasingly diverse political
communication relationships. There are a growing number of anomalies,
that is, phenomena that cannot be explained or even perceived in the
context of the traditional paradigm. This is especially evident since the
practices of political communication lead to an erosion of the strict sepa-
ration of spheres. Private, semi-public, public, and governmental political
communication blend into one another, especially in the routine use of
online media (see Chapter€9).
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…15
Social Dimension: Mass Communication as the Dominant
Actor Constellation
How has research analyzed who communicates with whom politi-
cally? The question revolves primarily around which actor constellation
research has focused on. Actor constellations should be understood as
relationships that are stabilized through role requirements. Two variables
affect the actor constellation:

• What types of actors communicate politically? In the traditional

paradigm, there are mainly three types: (1) politicians in established
political organizations that concentrate their activity in the public
sphere, that is, intermediaries such as political parties, associations,
and electoral candidates; (2) professional journalists in media organ-
izations, in particular news agencies and television stations, press
publishers; (3) and groups of citizens, that is, groups of individuals
involved in political roles.
• In what constellation are these actors found? In the traditional para-
digm, the actors are connected to each other in a relationship of politi-
cal mass communication. They each take on a rigidly defined role: some
politicians act as a source; a few journalists act as communicators; and
a large number of citizens act as recipients (Nielsen, 2014, p.€11).

Other characteristics of the two variables recede into the background for
the traditional paradigm and remain blurred. For example, other types of
actors play a subordinate role: government bodies, private sector organi-
zations that only communicate politically sporadically (such as compa-
nies), or disorganized groups of people (such as crowds), individuals in
roles other than their civic role (such as consumers), households, and
computers and computer networks. Similarly, other constellations play a
minor role in research. These constellations are based on other modes of
communication, such as interpersonal political communication (“one-to-
one”) or political group communication (“few-to-few”) (Livingston,
2004). In these communication modes, actors switch their communica-
tive roles. During a conversation, a participant may take on the role of
speaker, listener, and observer until another takes over. The switching of
roles happens quickly and often. By focusing on the role distribution of
mass communication, it can be overlooked that the actors are able to take
other communicative roles. Thus, citizens are not only recipients, but also
sources and intermediaries; political organizations can be intermediaries
or recipients; and political organizations and citizens can communicate
directly and bypass the mainstream media completely (see Chapter€4).
Long before the spread of the Internet, narrowing down political com-
munication on mass communication has been identified as a problem
in the research literature: Blumler and Kavanagh (1999), for example,
16â•… Philipp Henn et al.
recognized early on that traditional actor constellations were at risk due to
the emergence of new, populist actors. Also, the increasing implementation
of direct democratic elements in political systems brings relevance to other
actor types and modes of communication (de Vreese€& Schuck, 2014).
In the online world, the focus on mass communication is becoming
increasingly problematic because the pluralization of actors, the flexi-
bilization of role requirements, and the hybridization of modes of com-
munication have all increased significantly (Castells, 1996). Previously
sharply distinct communication modes are now being combined in com-
mon communication practices (Boomgaarden, 2014; de Vreese€& Möller,
2014). This is being driven by the technical possibilities of online media
(Schoder, Sick, Putzke,€& Kaplan, 2006), but also by the extension of
civic participation repertoires (Klingler, 2014). These developments can-
not be adequately examined by researchers who stick to the traditional
paradigm. Understanding these new actor constellations requires new
perspectives (see Chapter€2).

Content Dimension: Public Interest as the Dominant

Theme Preference
How has research analyzed what is being communicated politically? Spe-
cifically, what topic preferences have been exposed as being decisive for
political communication? Topic preferences should be understood as cri-
teria according to which facts for political communication are selected
and thus raised as an issue, such as immigration or terrorism.
The traditional paradigm highlights themes that are of public interest
and the object of public debate, carrying controversy and positions of
values (e.g. Delli Carpini, 2004; McQuail, 2010, p.€165). What seems to
be the subject of public interest is strongly filtered by the media through
news factors that act as content selectors for media (Galtung€& Ruge,
1965; Schulz, 1982).
Other possible content plays a subordinate role in research; namely
issues of secret communication, assigned to the arcane sphere of the
State; or issues of particular interest to companies, associations or other
private actors. Also, visual messages are pushed to the edge of research
by the text emphasis of political communication research (Schill, 2012).
Lastly, media content with a focus on entertainment with political sub-
stance is overlooked by mainstream research.
Before the spread of the Internet, the restriction on issues of public
interest has barely been identified as a problem in political communica-
tion research. On the contrary, the media are criticized because person-
alization (Van Aelst, Shaefer,€& Stanyer, 2012) and tabloidization (Esser,
1999) keep them from accomplishing their task, namely to identify issues
of public interest for the political opinion-forming process of the popula-
tion (Zelizer, 2009).
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…17
At present, the focus on issues of public interest is increasingly creating
problems. In an online world, less and less can be explained and pre-
dicted through this focus. Whether a political message is discussed and
disseminated, depends on many factors, such as the excitement poten-
tial and humor of the content (Becker€& Waisanen, 2013), or proper-
ties of the groups involved in communication. Generally, differentiation
prevails: The selection of topics for political communication is detached
from the common public interest and is based on group-specific criteria
for salience (see Chapters€4, 5, and 6). In the traditional paradigm, it is
difficult to take these tendencies into account.

Temporal Dimension: Synchronous Reception as the Dominant

Pace Setter
How has research analyzed when politically communication occurs?
Specifically, what pace setters are exposed by research as being decisive
for political communication? Pace setters should be understood as those
factors that influence the temporal structure of political communication
processes.
In the traditional paradigm, the synchronous reception of political
media content is the key to the communication process. All other stages
of the process (production, distribution, and effect) are arranged around
this. Thus far, research has been based on the idea of a linear communi-
cation process. Broadcast media should be broadcast and printed matter
should appear in accordance with a fixed schedule. That way, synchro-
nous reception is possible. This is how the public is defined (Bühl, 1982,
p.€291). This simultaneous reception is a prerequisite for citizens’ opin-
ions on current issues and allows for the insinuation of a “common real-
ity” through the “feeling of being in the loop” (Luhmann, 1981, p.€319).
Long before the spread of the Internet, linking political effects to
synchronous reception was already identified by researchers as a prob-
lem. As studies have illustrated, the level of attention to certain issues
is not necessarily bound to a synchronous reception of media content
(Krause€& Gehrau, 2007).
In an online world, this focus is no longer adequate, considering the
increasing individualization of the reception of political communication.
More and more recipients don’t use the linear program. This means that
synchronicity is decreasing, while the asynchronous element of political
communication is on the rise. Since political media content is becoming
available to individuals at any time, the basic idea of a current discourse in
a public sphere is losing its importance (see Chapter€2). Maintaining the tra-
ditional paradigm would make the decline in synchronous reception appear
exclusively as a threat. That is because individualization is seen a threat
for social solidarity and for the formation of political opinions. In the tra-
ditional paradigm, chances of asynchronous reception are not considered.
18â•… Philipp Henn et al.
Spatial Dimension: Nation-State as the Dominant€Space
How has research analyzed where political communication takes place?
Specifically, what communication spaces are identified by research as being
decisive for political communication? The communication space should be
understood as a territory whose limits are marked by media, such as the
distribution areas of different types of newspapers or television programs.
The answer in the traditional paradigm is that the space of political
communication is primarily determined by national borders. It focuses on
the national space, which is covered by the media systems of the respective
countries. Media systems are shaped by regulation in the form of national
legislation. Similarly, there is a methodological focus on the nation-state.
The selection of media for content analysis and of recipients for survey
research is based on national boundaries of communication (Moy, Maz-
zoleni,€& Rojas, 2012). Last but not least, the theoretical approaches of
political communication research are marked by spatial reference. For
example, research on polarization is very strongly dependent on the polit-
ical and media systems of the country being examined (Rojas et€al., 2012).
In the United States, with its strict separation of powers, two-party system,
and a media system dominated by private companies, this polarization is
much stronger than it is, for example, in Germany, with its parliamentary
system, a large number of parties, and an influential public broadcasting
service. Besides, the close relation between researchers and their countries
of origin makes it difficult to exchange and compare findings, methods,
and theories (Moy et€al., 2012; Rojas et€al., 2012).
Other spaces for communication, for example local, regional, suprana-
tional, or global communication, are analytically pushed into the back-
ground. Also the comparison of national spaces with each other or with
other spaces is unusual (Hanitzsch€& Esser, 2012). And other limitations,
such as cultural segmentation (by language boundaries) or market segmen-
tation (by economic tiers), play a minor role compared to national borders.
In the online world, the focus on the nation-state is increasingly prob-
lematic. The diagnosis of a world society networked through the Internet
is not compatible with clinging to national frontiers in political commu-
nication research (Castells, 1996). Communication spaces have recently
expanded enormously through economic processes (globalization) and are
increasingly interwoven (glocalization, see Robertson, 2012). The com-
munication habits of media users have become global thanks to the possi-
bilities of online media, in particular social network sites (see Chapter€3).

Technical Dimension: Broadcasting Technology as the

Dominant Communications Technology
How has research analyzed the technological means of political com-
munication? The variable in this dimension is communications tech-
nology. This includes the procedures and artifacts that enable political
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…19
communication. This question plays a subordinate role compared to
other dimensions and issues in the traditional paradigm. But it has gained
in importance, since both political communication itself and research in
the fields of media technology, sociology of technology, and computer
science have developed at a very fast pace. The technical variable now
plays a role of its own, since its momentum for bringing about changes
in other dimensions has been recognized (Barber, 2001; Perloff, 2014,
pp.€38–41; Schulz, 2014). Thus, greater importance is attached to the
evolution of media, and specifically to the rise and fall of leading media.
In the traditional paradigm, broadcasting technology is in the fore-
ground, in particular the technology for production, distribution, and
reception of television signals. This is reflected in many phrases used at
the time: “second age of political communication” (Blumler€& Kavanagh,
1999), “television age” (Norris, 2000), or “broadcast era” (Prior, 2007).
Other communication techniques move to the background. These are
mainly telecommunications and computer technologies. Although newspa-
pers and magazines are still given a strong position in the media landscape,
printing technology itself has not been a topic of research, because technical
changes in the printing process had no fundamental impact on the product.
Before the spread of the Internet, the focus on broadcasting was identified
as a problem during the first convergence bursts, for example, with regard
to the feedback channel in cable television (Katz, 2005; Negrine, 2008).
Now, in an online world, we are experiencing rapid digitization of
political communication. The previously strictly separate areas of tech-
nology, broadcasting, telecommunications, and computer technology
are converging to form new technical complexes (Storsul€& Fagerjord,
2008). Thus, computer networks have become the leading media tech-
nology. This new media environment offers enormous potential both for
political communication (and its actors; see Chapter€8) and for investi-
gating political communication. The keywords are individualization of
communicated content, integration of types of signs, unlimited distribu-
tion and storage, and reproduction without loss of quality. The tradi-
tional paradigm does not adequately provide for this. Digitization has
opened up room for maneuver that was previously primarily used by
communication practitioners and less by communication scholars. This is
also due to the fact that the view on online media in research has become
more skeptical. Threats from the convergence of media, for example with
regard to data protection, are perceived as being stronger, while opportu-
nities seem weaker (Chadwick, 2013; see Chapter€7).

Causal Dimension: Normatively Assessed Changes on the

Micro Level as the Dominant Effect
What effects has research attributed to political communication? Three
fundamental perspectives have emerged for the nature of the effects: an
individual perspective (changes at the micro level), an organizational
20â•… Philipp Henn et al.
perspective (changes on the meso level), and a societal perspective
(changes at the macro level). It is also relevant how these changes relate
to one another (macro-micro link) and which norms are used to assess
the changes (Rogers, 2004, p.€15).
The traditional paradigm of political communication research uses an
individual perspective, and therefore focuses on changes at the micro level,
specifically on changes in the perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors of
individuals (McLeod, Kosicki,€& McLeod, 2009; Moy et€al., 2012). This
is the starting point for explanations. The focus of research is aimed at
individuals and analyzes the extent to which individuals change through
political communication, in terms of cognitive, affective, and conative
effects. This is most evident in the core questions on media effects, for
example whether television influences elections (e.g.,€Glaser, 1965).
Usually an intentional moment is decisive: Many effects are regarded
as intentional. This impact assessment is also normative (e.g.,€Møberg
Torp, 2015). A€large part of research judges effects of political commu-
nication by looking at their potential to stabilize the liberal-democratic
system (e.g.,€Kepplinger, 2014). The media should fulfill a public function
(Althaus, 2012; McQuail, 2010, p.€145). Political communication is to
contribute to the consolidation and development of a basic liberal demo-
cratic order, in terms of cognitions (knowledge about political facts), atti-
tudes (identification with the democratic system), and behaviors (voting
and participation). Thus, political communication as a whole is meant
to strengthen the legitimacy of the political system. Media and political
communications are linked in this way to the common welfare (Bucy€&
D’Angelo, 2004; McLeod, 2001).
Other types of effects and other norms recede into the background.
This is the case, for example, for effects on the meso and macro lev-
els. For example, the extent, to which political communication leads to
social integration or disintegration or—from another perspective—to
plurality or conformity (McQuail, 2010, p.€91), does not play a role in
mainstream political communication research. And other possible assess-
ment factors for the effects—like deliberateness (e.g.,€Gastil, 2008) or
efficiency (e.g.,€Fröhlich€& Rüdiger, 2006)—are subordinate to those
value-rational norms.
In the research literature, the normative orientation of the traditional
paradigm has been identified as a problem in many cases, for example
in more psychological research on the effects of political communica-
tion (Wirth€& Matthes, 2006). This research direction separates what
is and what ought to be more sharply and tries to avoid normative
coloring. In addition, it has been criticized (McLeod, 2001) that politi-
cal communication research at least implicitly asks media outlets to
educate the recipients to become emancipated citizens. Some argue
that this is a task for other institutions of socialization. In addition,
the debate on fragmentation in and through the media has sharpened
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…21
views on the effects of political communication on the macro level
(Mancini, 2013).
It is necessary to integrate micro, meso, and macro levels of effects.
This can be done by mutual linking of the different levels to new explana-
tory models. Otherwise, dense descriptions and coherent explanations
are not possible any more (see Chapter€10).

Conclusion: Where Do We Want to€Go?

In summary, political communication in the traditional paradigm is
seen€as

• public mass communication

• between politicians in established political organizations, journalists
in mass media, and politically open-minded citizens
• on topics of public interest
• with a synchronous reception
• of television signals
• in the context of the liberal-democratic nation-state€and
• with normatively justified effects for individual political perceptions,
attitudes, and behaviors.

These are the main characteristics of the traditional paradigm. It has facil-
itated significant research achievements, and still shapes today’s research.
However, the shortcomings of the traditional paradigm are becoming
apparent. It is increasingly clear that changes of political communica-
tion can be explained less and less via the structures postulated by the
traditional paradigm: the dissolution of the boundaries between com-
munication spheres, pluralization of communication actors, differentia-
tion of communication contents, temporal individualization of reception,
globalization of communication spaces, digitization of communication
technology, and integration of effects levels in political communication.
Some of these changes are induced by the Internet; they would not
occur without it. Some of these changes are only reinforced by the Inter-
net; they would still have occurred without it at a later stage or to a lesser
extent. And some other changes are independent of the Internet; they
would happen even without€it.
Either way, the traditional paradigm is increasingly unable to meet the
challenges of a world of changing political communications. It remains
to be seen what will happen when the trends mentioned above are taken
into account to a greater extent. The more these tendencies of change are
examined by communication research, the stronger the outlines of a new
paradigm can be seen. Political communication will then be seen much
more differentiated in all seven dimensions: contextual, social, content,
temporal, spatial, technical, and causal. The majority of communication
22â•… Philipp Henn et al.
scholars still stick to the traditional paradigm because they were social-
ized in it. But new cohorts of scholars are separating themselves from the
traditional paradigm. This creates a space for new perspectives. Will a
new consistent paradigm of political communication research emerge or
will a plurality of paradigms prevail?

References
Althaus, S. (2012). What’s good and bad in political communication research?
Normative standards for evaluating media and citizen performance. In H. Sem-
etko€& M. Scammell (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of political communication
(pp.€97–113). London, UK:€Sage.
Barber, B.â•›R. (2001). Which technology for which democracy? International
Journal of Communications Law and Politics, 6, 1–8.
Becker, A.╛B.,€& Waisanen, D.╛J. (2013). From funny features to entertaining effects:
Connecting approaches to communication research on political comedy. Review
of Communication, 13(3), 161–183. doi:10.1080/15358593.2013.826816
Blumler, J.╛G.,€& Kavanagh, D. (1999). The third age of political communication:
Influences and features. Political Communication, 16(3), 209–230.
Blumler, J.╛G.,€& McQuail, D. (2001). Political communication scholarship: The
uses of election research. In E. Katz€& Y. Warshel (Eds.), Election studies:
What’s their use? (pp.€219–245). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Boomgaarden, H.â•›G. (2014). Interpersonal and mass mediated political commu-
nication. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp.€469–488). Ber-
lin, Germany: de Gruyter Mouton.
Bucy, E.â•›P.,€& D’Angelo, P.€(2004). Democratic realism, neoconservatism, and the
normative underpinnings of political communication research. Mass Commu-
nication€& Society, 7(1), 3–28.
Bühl, W.â•›L. (1982). Struktur und Dynamik des menschlichen Sozialverhaltens.
Tübingen, Germany:€Mohr.
Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.
Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Dance, F.E.X. (1970). The “concept” of communication. Journal of Communica-
tion, 20(2), 201–210.
Delli Carpini, M.â•›X. (2004). Mediating democratic engagement: The impact of
communications on citizens’ involvement in political and civic life. In L.â•›L.
Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp.€395–434).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
de Vreese, C.â•›H.,€& Möller, J. (2014). Communication and political socialization.
In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp.€529–545). Berlin, Ger-
many: de Gruyter Mouton.
de Vreese, C.╛H.,€& Schuck, A.╛R.╛T. (2014). Political communication in referen-
dums. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp.€129–149). Berlin,
Germany: de Gruyter Mouton.
Esser, F. (1999). Tabloidization of news: A€comparative analysis of Anglo-American
and German press journalism. European Journal of Communication, 14(3),
291–324.
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…23
Ferree, M.╛M., Gamson, W.╛A., Gerhards, J.,€& Rucht, D. (2002). Four models of
the public sphere in modern democracies. Theory€& Society, 31(3), 289–324.
Fleck, L. (1979). The genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press (Original work published 1935).
Fröhlich, R.,€& Rüdiger, B. (2006). Framing political public relations: Measur-
ing success of political communication strategies in Germany. Public Relations
Review, 32(1), 18–25.
Galtung, J.,€& Ruge, M.╛H. (1965). The structure of foreign news: The presenta-
tion of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspapers.
Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–91.
Gastil, J. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Thousand Oaks,
CA:€Sage.
Glaser, W.â•›A. (1965). Television and voting turnout. Public Opinion Quarterly,
29(1), 71–86.
Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy
still enjoy an epistemic dimension? Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.
Hanitzsch, T.,€& Esser, F. (Eds.). (2012). The handbook of comparative commu-
nication research. London, UK: Routledge.
Huckfeldt, R.,€& Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communica-
tion: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York, NY: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Kamhawi, R.,€& Weaver, D. (2003). Mass communication research trends from
1980 to 1999. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(1), 7–27.
Katz, Y. (2005). Media policy for the 21st century in the United States and West-
ern Europe. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Katz, E.,€& Lazarsfeld, P.€(1955). Personal influence. The part played by people
in the flow of mass communications. New York, NY: The Free Press.
Kepplinger, H.â•›M. (2014). Normative theories of political communication. In
C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp.€21–38). Berlin, Germany:
de Gruyter Mouton.
Klingler, U. (2014). The political web: Media, participation and alternative
democracy. European Journal of Communication, 29(6), 749–751.
Krause, B.,€& Gehrau, V. (2007). Das Paradox der Medienwirkung auf Nicht-
nutzer. Publizistik, 52(2), 191–209.
Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B.,€& Gaudet, H. (1944). The people’s choice: How the
voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York, NY: Duell,
Sloan and Pearce.
Livingston, S. (2004). The challenge of changing audiences: Or, what is the audi-
ence researcher to do in the age of the Internet? European Journal of Commu-
nication, 19(1), 75–86.
Luhmann, N. (1981). Veränderungen im System gesellschaftlicher Kommunika-
tion und die Massenmedien. In N. Luhmann (Ed.), Soziologische Aufklärung:
3. Soziales System, Gesellschaft, Organisation (5th ed., pp.€309–320). Wies-
baden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Mancini, P.€(2013). Media fragmentation, party system, and democracy. Inter-
national Journal of Press-Politics, 18(1), 43–60. doi:10.1177/19401612124
58200
McLeod, J.â•›M. (2001). Steven Chaffee and the future of political communication
research. Political Communication, 18(2), 215–224.
24â•… Philipp Henn et al.
McLeod, D.╛M., Kosicki, G.╛M.,€& McLeod, J.╛M. (2009). Political communica-
tion effects. In J. Bryant€& M.╛B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in
theory and research (pp.€228–251). New York, NY: Routledge.
McNair, B. (2011). An introduction to political communication (3th ed.). Lon-
don, UK: Routledge.
McQuail, D. (2010). McQuail’s Mass Communication Theory (6th ed.). London,
UK:€Sage.
Merten, K. (1977). Kommunikation. Eine Begriffs- und Prozeßanalyse. Opladen,
Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Moy, P., Bimber, B., Rojecki, A., Xenos, M.╛A.,€& Iyengar, S. (2012). Shifting
contours in political communication research. International Journal of Com-
munication, 6, 247–254.
Moy, P., Mazzoleni, G.,€& Rojas, H. (2012). On the dichotomies of political
communication. International Journal of Communication, 6, 241–246.
Møberg Torp, S. (2015). The strategic turn in communication science: On the
history and role of strategy in communication science from ancient Greece
until the present day. In D. Holtzhausen€& A. Zerfaß (Eds.), The Routledge
handbook of strategic communication (pp.€34–52). New York, NY: Routledge,
Negrine, R. (2008). The transformation of political communication: Continuities
and changes in media and politics. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Neidhardt, F. (1994). Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen.
In F. Neidhardt (Ed.), Öffentlichkeit, öffentliche Meinung, soziale Bewegungen
(pp.€7–41). Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Nielsen, R.â•›K. (2014). Political communication research: New media, new chal-
lenges, and new opportunities. MedieKultur, 30, 5–22.
Nimmo, D.,€& Swanson, D. (1990). The field of political communication. Beyond
the voter persuasion paradigm. In D. Swanson€& D. Nimmo (Eds.), New direc-
tions in political communication (pp.€7–47). Beverly Hills, CA:€Sage.
Norris, P.€(2000). A virtuous circle? Political communications in post-industrial
democracies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Perloff, R.â•›M. (2014). The dynamics of political communication. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy. How media choice increases ine-
quality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge, UK: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Robertson, R. (2012). Globalisation or glocalisation? Journal of International
Communication, 18(2), 191–208.
Robinson, P.€(2014). News media, war and world politics. In C. Reinemann (Ed.),
Political communication (pp.€187–207). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter Mouton.
Rogers, E.â•› M. (2004). Theoretical diversity in political communication. In
L.â•›L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp.€3–16).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rojas, H., Tsfati, Y., Popescu, M., Maurer, M., Reinemann, C.,€& Iyengar, S.
(2012). Theorizing and conducting research of glocal phenomena. Interna-
tional Journal of Communication, 6, 232–249.
Schill, D. (2012). The visual image and the political image: A€review of visual
communication research in the field of political communication. The Review
of Communication, 12(2), 118–142.
Schoder, D., Sick, S., Putzke, J.,€& Kaplan, A.╛M. (2006). Mass customization
in the newspaper industry: Consumers’ attitudes toward individualized media
 The Traditional Paradigmâ•…25
innovations. The International Journal on Media Management, 8(1), 9–18.
doi:10.1207/s14241250ijmm0801_3
Schulz, W. (1982). News structure and people’s awareness of political events.
Gazette, 30(3), 139–153.
Schulz, W. (2014). Political communication in long-term perspective. In C. Reine-
mann (Ed.), Political communication (pp.€63–85). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter
Mouton.
Storsul, T.,€& Fagerjord, A. (2008). Digitization and media convergence. In
W. Donsbach (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Communication.
Retrieved from http://www.communicationencyclopedia.com/subscriber/toc
node.html?id=g9781405131995_yr2011_chunk_g97814051319959_ss39–1
Strömbäck, J.,€& Kiousis, S. (2014). Strategic political communication in election
campaigns. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp.€109–128).
Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter Mouton.
Van Aelst, P., Sheafer, T.,€& Stanyer, J. (2012). The personalization of mediated
political communication: A€review of concepts, operationalizations and key
findings. Journalism, 13(2), 203–220. doi:10.1177/1464884911427802
Wirth, W.,€& Matthes, J. (2006). Eine wundervolle Utopie? Möglichkeiten
und Grenzen einer normativen Theorie der (medienbezogenen) Partizipation
im Lichte der neueren Forschung zum Entscheidungs- und Informationshan-
deln. In K. Imhof, R. Blum, H. Bonfadelli,€& O. Jarren (Eds.), Demokratie in
der Mediengesellschaft (pp.€341–361). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für
Sozialwissenschaften.
Zelizer, B. (Ed.) (2009). The changing faces of journalism: Tabloidization, tech-
nology and truthiness. New York, NY: Routledge.
2 A New Agenda for
Agenda-Setting Research
in the Digital€Era
Gabriel Weimann and Hans-Bernd Brosius

Introduction
In the second edition of Setting the Agenda, McCombs (2014, pp.€17–18)
notes: “With the vast expansion of communication channels in recent
decades, particularly the continuing proliferation of Internet sites and
personalized social media, we have entered a new era of agenda-setting
research that is seeking answers.” He goes on to suggest three key ques-
tions that may determine the future of agenda-setting research:

1. Do online channels of communication have agenda-setting effects

among the public?
2. Has this proliferation of new channels diminished the agenda-setting
impact of the traditional media?
3. To what extent are there specific channel effects vs. the collective
impact of a communication gestalt?

The theory’s core proposition is that the salience of elements on the

news agenda influences, in turn, their salience on the public agenda.
The agenda-setting effect has been documented in hundreds of studies
on a diversity of issues, using a range of research methods under a wide
variety of circumstances. Several basic assumptions underlie the classical
research on agenda-setting:

(1) The media highlight several issues and by doing so, shape the audi-
ences’ agenda or priority of issues.
(2) There is a cause-and-effect relationship between media agenda and
public agenda.
(3) The public looks at news media for cues to know what is important
(and what is€not).
(4) Because of restricted time and space, the mass media have to select
news items and by doing so, they do not reflect reality but rather
filter and shape€it.
 A New Agenda for Agenda-Setting Researchâ•…27
(5) A key role is played by the media gatekeepers who determine media
agenda.
(6) Different media have different agenda-setting potential.

Since the initial study of McCombs and Shaw (1972), the concept has
become more refined and complex (Weaver, 2007). In addition to inter-
vening factors such as individual characteristics, the political agenda,
type of issue, the media involved, time lag between media and public
agendas, and first and second levels, the agenda-setting paradigm is now
challenged by a rapidly changing media environment.

The New Media Environment

With the rising popularity of the Internet and online social media, people
have become more independent from traditional (offline) news media.
Television, radio, and print media’s role in conveying news is declin-
ing in favor of online/mobile media, and the Internet now constitutes
the main source of news for a majority of Americans who are under
50 (Pew Research, 2011a, 2011b). With more than 1.3€million active
users sharing over 25€billion web articles each month (Facebook, 2010),
the relationship between social media and news consumption must now
be considered as a fundamental part of our media environment. While
the news media have moved onto the Internet, and their news are now
available on different online platforms, the audiences, due to technologi-
cal capabilities, can now create their own news stories and share them
online. Subsequently, even the traditional media are integrating online
platforms, posting links, promoting online versions of their contents, and
citing online sources including bloggers and other social media. Yet, the
new media and “old” media are often a chorus singing together, and as
several studies have revealed, the major traditional media still are the
dominant voices (e.g.,€Tan€& Weaver, 2013).
The emergence of new online platforms has changed the media envi-
ronment dramatically and thus has challenged the basic assumptions of
the agenda-setting theory. In 2005, McCombs acknowledged that “Now,
the Internet is the new frontier for research” (McCombs, 2005, p.€544).
Chaffee and Metzger (2001) argued that “new technologies may give
more power to people whose agendas would not normally be reported
in the major mass media,” and “[t]he key problem for agenda-setting
theory will change from ‘what issues the media tell people to think about’
to ‘what issues people tell the media they want to think about.’â•›”

New Agenda for Agenda-Setting Research

We may expect reduced agenda-setting effects due to an increase in
content choice, outlets, and sources available to news consumers, more
28â•… Gabriel Weimann and Hans-Bernd Brosius
control of the contents by the consumers, and more blurred lines between
content producers and content consumers. However, we may also expect
some stronger agenda-setting effects since much of the social media con-
tents and blogs, in particular, rely on coverage in the traditional media. If
new media follow the cues of traditional media, then the agenda-setting
power has not diminished, but has been transferred to other channels
as well. Thus, traditional media could set the agenda of blogs, social
networking sites, video-sharing sites, and others, which then deliver
those cues to the general public in a modern version of the two-step flow.
Moreover, social media may influence media agenda, thus creating the
“reverse flow of agenda.” Particularly due to the speed with which many
social media outlets such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter function,
they may actually have the ability to influence the agenda of traditional
news outlets.

What Is Now the Media Agenda?

According to Sayre, Bode, Shah, Wilcox, and Shah (2010), traditional
news sources like newspapers, television, or radio, while still important,
are giving way to emerging online platforms for conveying coverage of
issues and providing perspective on social controversies. Traditional
media companies are also adapting some of these new online platforms
and social media. Three-quarters of news consumers online said they
receive news through e-mail or social network sites, and more than half
use those means to share links to news (Purcell, Rainie, Mitchell, Rosen-
stiel,€& Olmstead, 2010). These developments have created three major
media formats: traditional offline, traditional online, and online social
networks.
According to Weimann, Weiss-Blatt, Mengistu, Mazor, and Oren
(2014), blogs are less likely to act as the originators of news in first-level
agenda-setting, but instead exert influence through second-level
agenda-setting. For example, blogs can act as “resuscitators” by fol-
lowing up on stories that the mainstream media have either failed to
follow up on or have considered a low priority, thereby giving them
new impetus to reemerge on the mainstream news agenda. Blogs can
also act as “reframers” by challenging the mainstream media’s fram-
ing of the news. Wojcieszak (2008) suggested a strengthened first-level
agenda-setting as a result of Internet users turning to major media con-
glomerates, as well as the focus of some online and offline sources on
similar topics. However a weakened second-level agenda-setting may be
attributed to the diversity of the sources online describing the same issue
in a different way. The interplay between old media and social media,
blogs, and online news sites is becoming a genre in itself (Hennessy€&
Martin, 2006).
 A New Agenda for Agenda-Setting Researchâ•…29

Who Sets the Media Agenda€Now?

The agendas of online and offline media were found to be correlated.
Intermedia agenda-setting has been studied across various media sys-
tems and platforms (McCombs, 2004). Yet, one of the most confusing
results in the arena of intermedia agenda-setting is the homogenization
of the agenda being presented despite the media diversification: Contrary
to increasing number of sources and actors influencing media and pub-
lic agendas, these developments have actually been linked to increased
homogenization of both media and public agendas, rather than diversify-
ing them (Boczkowski€& de Santos, 2007; Groshek, 2008).
Several studies explored the online–offline intermedia flow, revealing
how the various types of media platforms influence each other’s agenda.
For example, Twitter has changed the process of newsgathering and item
selection among journalists. Many media outlets encourage their staffs to
open Twitter accounts, using them to interact online with their public, to
collect and promote stories (Gleason, 2010). Indeed, Twitter gives jour-
nalists new crowdsourcing capabilities and access to real-time informa-
tion from a wide range of sources. The asynchronous, free, fast, easily
accessed, and always-on nature of Twitter gives it an ‘ambient’ quality
that offers “more complex ways of understanding and reporting on the
subtleties of public communication” (Hermida, 2010, p.€1). The flow
from Twitter to the media agenda has been revealed in several studies
(Parmelee, 2014).
The notion of intermedia spillover was already noted in the “old” media
environment (e.g.,€Mathes€& Pfetsch, 1991). Recently, agenda-setting
research has begun to examine the spillover of online, user-generated
content into the agendas of professional, traditionally offline media. In
one example, Meraz (2011) employed time-series analysis that revealed
that weblogs contributed to setting the agendas of traditional elite media.
Wu, Atkin, Mou, Lin, and Lau (2013) investigated the influence of
micro-blogs on the major agenda-setting media in China in the immedi-
ate aftermath of a catastrophic railway accident. Their results suggest
that “alternative online media played a decisive role in setting main-
stream media agendas and providing a citizen forum on a sensitive issue
that their conventional counterparts downplayed, ignored, or missed
altogether” (Wu et€al., 2013, p.€8).
But the flow is not one-directional; the new media and traditional
media are influencing each other in an interactive way. In a study of 35
issues during the 2004 presidential campaign, Wallsten (2007, p.€580)
found that “on the vast majority of issues, there was a complex, bidirec-
tional relationship between media coverage and blog discussion rather
than a unidirectional media or blog agenda setting effect.” Similarly,
Messner and Distaso (2008) examined the content of weblogs and their
30â•… Gabriel Weimann and Hans-Bernd Brosius
use as sources in the traditional media. Their content analysis of 2059
articles over a six-year period from the New York Times and the Wash-
ington Post found that the newspapers increasingly legitimized online
blogs as useable and credible sources, while a separate content analysis
of 120 weblogs found that they heavily relied on the traditional media
as sources. Thus, the traditional media and social media create what is
referred to as “news source cycle” in which news are passed back and
forth from media to media (see also Chapter€3).

Dynamic Agenda-Setting
As social media prosper, the sources through which we receive news,
information, and opinion continue to evolve. At the intersection of new
communication technologies and flow of agendas is the shift toward a
more dynamic user-producer media environment (Papacharissi, 2009).
The rise of the “produser” (Bruns, 2009),

has altered conceptions of where media agendas begin and end in

relation to the public agenda. Considering the vast array of options
for online media consumers to engage, share, and create with vary-
ing levels of commitment and intensity, it is clear that agenda-setting
processes can now regularly intersect and cross amateur and profes-
sional boundaries.
(Groshek€& Groshek, 2013, p.€17)

Moreover, the technological transformation has not only made it pos-

sible for audiences, but also editors and journalists, to easily and rapidly
monitor the output of other media, including personal chatter on online
platforms.
The dynamic nature of the current agenda-setting process may also
be explained by the reduced impact of traditional gatekeepers. Unlike
traditional media outlets that must rely on routine processing procedure
in their effort to produce reliable, credible, and accurate reporting, inde-
pendent bloggers are bound by no such codes (Meraz, 2009, p.€705).
Today, many scholars question whether gatekeeping can be a relevant
concept in the decentralized, new media environment where media
abundance negates the role of a central news gatekeeper (Bennett, 2004;
Kovach€& Rosensteil, 2007; see also Chapter€4). Bruns (2005, 2009) sug-
gested re-conceptualizing gatekeeping as “gate watching” to account for
the increased power of the decentralized “produsers.”
The dynamic nature of current flow of agendas is also fueled by the
“hybrid media system” (Chadwick, 2013). He argues that the political
process is increasingly defined by organizations, groups, and individuals
who blend older and newer media in this hybrid media system. Accord-
ingly, we have to move beyond treating the flow of agendas in traditional
 A New Agenda for Agenda-Setting Researchâ•…31
and new media as inherently different and start treating them as inter-
connected and mutually dependent. Jungherr (2014) found that Twitter
messages commenting on political parties followed different dynamics
from the coverage of the same actors in traditional media. This is what he
termed as “Twitter’s logic of political coverage.” His results clearly sup-
port Chadwick’s hybrid media system, showing how new and traditional
media and new media interact.
Another dynamic pattern in the new media era is the emerging rela-
tionship between the aggregate search patterns of Internet users and
media coverage trends. There is empirical evidence for agenda-setting
effects of media coverage on online information-seeking behavior (Hes-
ter€& Gibson, 2007; Scharkow€& Vogelgesang, 2011), but also for the
reverse direction: News organizations often monitor and react to online
search trends (Dick, 2011; Peters, 2010a, 2010b), which leads to “reverse
agenda-setting.” Ragas, Tran, and Martin (2014) explored the over-time
relationship between US news media attention and aggregate search of
the online public during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill in 2010. The results
provided strong evidence of an interactive two-way effect in the transfer
of salience between the media and search agendas.

Agenda-Setting or Agenda Diffusion?

The traditional conceptualization suggested that agenda-setting requires
a given amount of time for the media agenda to be absorbed into the
public agenda. But in a world increasingly dominated by the fast new
media, the essential time lag needed for “setting” may not exist or may
be too short to be measured. For the offline world, McCombs (2004) set
the range of four to eight weeks for agenda-setting to take effect. The
decay of agenda-setting impact is believed to be between eight and 26
weeks (Tran, 2014). However, Roberts, Wanta, and Dzwo (2002) com-
pared online media salience (mainstream news sites) and online public
salience (bulletin board discussions) and found immediate effects after
just one day. The agenda-setting impact also decayed rather rapidly, after
only two or three days. The immediacy and speed of online communica-
tion have shortened the time span: Online information is processed and
exchanged constantly in a 24-hour cycle, often in real time. Several stud-
ies revealed relatively shorter time lags for online agenda-setting effects
(e.g.,€Hester€& Gibson, 2007). Some reported that the flow of salience
online may take place within the same day (e.g.,€Weeks€& Southwell,
2010). This is where the notion of agenda diffusion may appear to be
more appropriate.
The notion of diffusion relies more on interactive communication,
social networks, multi-step flow of communication, sharing, and pro-
moting agendas. According to Kim and Lee (2006), agenda diffusion in
the Internet is based on the following process: Online news or websites
32â•… Gabriel Weimann and Hans-Bernd Brosius
report the important agenda in the Internet that in turn leads to spread-
ing the agenda to more online publics. However, scholars concluded
that the Internet-mediated agenda-setting or agenda building processes
not always occur in consecutive order and may involve more forms of
diffusion and sharing. Indeed, sharing is the most important element in
social media. Social media platforms or any kind of wikis (for example,
Wikipedia) or video sharing sites are especially designed—technically
and ideologically—for users to share contents. This sharing is related
also to the agenda-setting paradigm. Today, journalists cannot ignore the
fact that the most important news on the web is the one that people are
searching for. Thus, various media are trying to “move” their contents to
“places” on the web where people are talking, sharing, exchanging and
promoting items and opinions: the social media. At the same time, this
fact is creating a shared agenda of news that can no longer be separated
into a media and a public agenda, a really new (and maybe alternative)
agenda-setting paradigm.
The online platforms allow for a variety of diffusion techniques. In
their online postings, people present links to news articles, blogs, photos,
and videos, indicating they find them interesting or important enough
to share with others. On Twitter, markers of interest include a reply
and a retweet. Retweeting allows users to redistribute another’s mes-
sage to their own personal network. More than half of American Twitter
users retweet contents tweeted by others (Smith€& Rainie, 2010). These
retweeted messages reach vast audiences, as found in a study of 106€mil-
lion tweets, revealing that each retweet reached an average of 1,000 users
(Kwak, Lee, Park,€& Moon, 2010). Similarly, on YouTube, one can pro-
mote the viewing and downloading of a posted video by several meas-
ures, including increasing the number of views, responding to the video
or sharing it with others.
The diffusion of agendas relies on active audience members using
interpersonal communication in and around social media. Thus, a new
agenda-setting approach does not rely on the distinction between media
(disseminators) and audiences (receivers), but rather the notion that the
main effect of communication is communication. According to studies
on diffusion of media information, the mass media often inform only
a subset of the public, and these people then talk to others about issues
they have learned about in the mass media, thus creating a two-step flow
of mass communication (Katz€& Lazarsfeld, 1955). In the context of
agenda-setting, Brosius and Weimann (1996) argued “very little atten-
tion€has been paid to the flow from the public to the media and within€the
public, although several studies provide empirical evidence of the public’s
ability to affect the media agenda” (p.€562). They went on to say that
there are “several encouraging indications of the significant role of inter-
personal communication in the agenda-setting process” (p.€562). Wei-
mann and Brosius suggested a development in this context by defining
 A New Agenda for Agenda-Setting Researchâ•…33
the role of opinion leaders as “personal mediators between media and
personal agendas” (Weimann€& Brosius, 1994, p.€325) that “collect, dif-
fuse, filter, and promote the flow of information” (Brosius€& Weimann,
1996, p.€564). Combining the classical two-step flow theory with the
agenda-setting, they suggested different models highlighting the interplay
of opinion leaders or “early recognizers,” mass media, and the public.
Branum (2001) noted that Brosius and Weimann’s (1996) description
of early recognizers also applies to the actions of the filter-style bloggers
who choose which stories to provide a link for and what comments to
make about the stories. Tomaszeski (2006) suggested that bloggers are
being sourced by the traditional media outlets, who are taking original
content from them and incorporating it into their own messages to the
public. The bloggers’ input to traditional media places them in the role of
mediators between the public agenda and the media agenda. In addition,
bloggers’ higher visibility to the general public places them in the role of
early recognizers whose information flows to the public.

Individual Differences
There are two dimensions of the role played by individuals in the agenda-
setting process: that of the actors as creators of the (old and new) media
agendas and that of the receivers. Let us examine each of them. There
are many types of actors involved in the agenda-setting process, rang-
ing from journalists and editors to political figures, lobbyists, and active
bloggers. The traditional agenda-setting paradigm highlighted the role
of journalists and editors who operate as the gatekeepers for politically
relevant information. However, as Williams and Delli Carpini (2004,
p.€1208) argue, “the most profound impact of the new media environ-
ment may be the way it undermines the ability of any elite to play this
central role.” Online communication also opens up new opportunities
for “challengers” such as civil society actors and activists who do not
necessarily fit the professional standards and rules of media selection
(Pfetsch€& Adam, 2011). In some instances, online activists and politi-
cal bloggers are motivated to push an issue into the mainstream media.
Schiffer (2006) focused on the “blogswarm” agenda-setting, which refers
to the ability of the blogosphere to force mainstream media coverage of
ignored issues. Traditional media followed liberal bloggers pressing an
issue more often than conservative bloggers. There are numerous stud-
ies that focus on the role of individual actors in blogs or social networks
whose activity trigger spillovers into traditional media (Pfetsch€& Adam,
2011; Chapter€3). Examining blog influence on media reports, scholars
have found evidence of traditional mass media’s dependence on top,
political bloggers (e.g.,€Farrell€& Drezner, 2008; Meraz, 2009).
The other individual dimension refers to differences between recipi-
ents. One key distinction in studying agenda-setting effect is that between
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
 LOOK, THERE IS YOUR HORSEMAN!

"I see him," said Dick grimly, "coming up from that shack at the
foot of the hill."
"Yes, and see those two sailors going down to the beach;
they're toting sacks or something over their shoulders. They can go
around to Firewood Bay that way. We've got 'em, all right,"
exclaimed Henry joyfully. "What do you reckon we'd better do now?"
"I 'reckon' there's going to be one native of this 'Treasure Island'
who's going to get the beating of his life in just about five minutes,"
answered Dick, taking an extra tug to his belt. "That fellow is coming
right up the hill to this trail, and I'm going to be right at the top to
welcome him. Come along, Hank, but lie low and leave him to me."
Stooping low, both lads ran across the open space till they came
to the edge of the farther wood, where they found an entrance to
the trail up which the lone horseman could be seen spurring and
lashing his worn-out steed. The animal was too far gone to respond
to the cruel treatment, and plodded slowly and wearily upward.
"Hank, you go to the other side in case he should happen to
turn that way," directed Dick. "That brute won't escape us; and let
me tell you something, I'm not going to beat him up for lashing me,
alone, I'm going to try and even up some of the debt for that poor
dumb animal he's torturing."
Henry scuttled to the north side of the trail, while Dick waited
impatiently where he first had hidden.
The labored breathing of the horse came to his ears, and then,
preceded by a volley of oaths, rider and horse reached the ridge
trail. The native, a dark, swarthy, pock-marked man, about thirty-five
years of age, with black, bloodshot eyes and long, yellow teeth, was
broad shouldered, and though slender, was well knit. On reaching
the crest of the hill the horse's head was turned southward and
again the rider raised the heavy quirt to bring it down on the
bleeding, swollen flanks. That blow never fell, for with the quick
spring of a tiger Dick grabbed the rider around the waist and tore
him from the saddle, throwing him to the ground. At the same time
he snatched the quirt from the surprised man's hand and began
belaboring him as he groveled at the boy's feet. The startled horse
meanwhile had turned down the slope and was stumbling towards
the foot of the hill.
"How do you like that, you yellow cur?" questioned Dick coolly,
giving the coward a final blow across the legs. "Do you think you
want to try any more tricks on me?"
"No! No! Señor! Pardon, Señor! Por Dios, no mas!" cried the
man as he saw Dick's arm rise again and the lash snap ominously.
"Get up and vamoose," ordered Dick, pointing along the trail
they had followed. "Never mind your horse; you can get him when I
get through with you."
Never taking his eyes from the man, Dick made him march in
front of them. The native limped along protestingly, but every time
he stopped to argue Dick applied the lash with good effect.
On reaching the trail leading down to Firewood Bay, Dick
pointed towards the town of Dewey.
"You savvy Dewey?" he inquired.
"Si, Señor," came the surly response, and the shifty black eyes
glared for a moment at the boy.
"Well, beat it--pronto," ordered Dick, and with the words he
gave the man a push in the right direction, while both boys, as if
performing a military drill, simultaneously aided him with a
persuading kick.
"Just to help you along a bit," called Henry and then he turned
to Dick. "Shake, Dick; that was a job well and nobly done."
 As he spoke five bullets whistled past them, one dusting the
ground at their feet and ricochetting with a shrill "Z-z-z-i-i-n-n-g."
Instantly the startled boys dropped to the grass beside the trail
and, keeping under cover until a fold in the ground effectually
protected them, they ran for the boat landing.
"Wonder why he didn't use that shooting iron before?"
questioned Dick, looking back over the trail.
"Reckon he was too plumb scared to remember he owned a
gun," said Henry, still beaming with joy over the adventure. "Do you
believe he'll take any more pot shots at us?"
"No, we are out of pistol range down here, and he can't come
down the hill without being seen. Those shots were too close for
comfort to suit me, and yet I hated to have to run away as we did.
Still it would have been worse than foolhardy to tempt Fortune by
hanging around up there with that rascal in hiding. How do you like
being under fire?"
"Can't say I've any hankering for it, but it didn't scare me as I
thought it would," said Henry.
The men from Flamingo Bay were now coming over the brow of
the hill and soon reached the boat. They had not seen the native on
the other side of the hill, but all had heard the five shots. The boys
did not enlighten them as to the cause, having decided to report the
whole matter to First Sergeant Douglass on their return to the
Denver.
While they were shoving the heavy cutter into the water the two
men, Joe Choiniski and "Slugger" Williams, came from around the
point and joined the group. Both men wore rubber boots, and Dick
remembered that they had taken them ashore that afternoon under
their arms, whereas now they carried their shoes, from the tops of
which were sticking some finely branched pieces of unbleached
coral. Dick also noticed how carefully they got into the boat when all
was ready to shove off for the ship.
"Wonder where they hid their booze," said Henry, "for I'd bet a
month's pay they have it somewhere."
"I guess I know, and you watch Corporal Dorlan frisk them
when they go up on deck," answered Dick with a knowing wink.
Arriving at the port gangway, the liberty party went aboard and
fell in on the quarter-deck for inspection before being dismissed.
Corporal Dorlan, standing at the top of the gangway, was surprised
to hear Dick whisper as he passed, "Search the rubber boots,
Corporal," but he was not slow of comprehension, and as soon as
the men were all in line he went directly up to Joe and "Slugger" and
feeling down their boot legs brought forth several flat flasks carefully
wrapped in dry seaweed.
"What is this?" said Mr. Thorp, the Officer of the Deck.
And Corporal Dorlan merely answered:
"'Wilson--that's all,' sir."
"That is fine work, Corporal. I congratulate you," said a hearty
voice behind the line of men who had witnessed this little scene, and
turning Dorlan found Commander Bentley standing near him.
"It's not me what discovered it, sir. All the credit belongs to
Drummer Comstock. He's the lad what put me wise, sir."
"We will hold 'mast' and investigate this matter at once, Mr.
Thorp; have Comstock report here immediately."
Dick, having heard his name called, approached.
 "Now, young man, tell me all you know of this business,"
ordered the Captain, and having heard the entire story of the
exciting afternoon ashore he ordered Dick to go to the Executive
Officer's office and dictate a full report to the Yeoman.
"A man like the one you describe has no business to be at
large," he said. "I will communicate with the authorities ashore and
have him locked up. In the meantime, Mr. Thorp, send a detail of
marines ashore under arms to search and destroy the shack these
two boys discovered. It's on the government reservation and has no
business there. Trumpeter Cabell will go ashore and act as guide."
Then turning to the two culprits, Commander Bentley said:
"I'll keep you men in close confinement until a court-martial can
dispose of your case. Have these two men taken to the brig[#] at
once, Mr. Thorp."

[#] Brig--Cell for confinement of men under punishment.

"Aye, aye, sir!" and Ensign Thorp gave the Master-at-Arms the
necessary orders.

CHAPTER IX
HISTORIC BATTLEFIELDS

"Speaking of that report against our horse beater," remarked Henry

a few days later, "reminds me, Dick, that I never thought to inquire if
you ever heard from the report you wrote out in Washington against
those plotters."
"No," answered Dick, looking up from the signal card he was
studying, "I wrote it the following Monday and sent it to Dad, but
never heard anything from it."
"We heard from your last report," said Henry. "That Spig was a
wise hombre, right enough. The revenue officer found out all about
him, but 'Mexican Pete' was too quick. He left for parts unknown
that same day, and all the authorities in Porto Rico are on the
lookout for him. He's a famous smuggler down in these regions and
a regular bad man in the bargain. It's said he has served jail
sentences in nearly every town from here to Vera Cruz. He's a
Mexican by birth, a bad man by nature and a wanderer most of the
time by necessity."
"That is all true, Hank, but it is not getting down this Morse
code," replied Dick. "We've learned the semaphore, wigwag and
Ardois, and I think we can give the signal boys on the bridge a run
for their money; but I can't seem to get these sound signals. Guess
my ear isn't attuned properly!"
"I don't see why you want to bother with it, anyway. You don't
have to learn it."
"Never can tell when such knowledge will come in handy;
besides, Hank, it helps pass the time when we've nothing else to do.
It proved pretty useful last week when we were having that scouting
drill ashore and by knocking two rocks together I was able to tell
you to go to the left of that clump of bamboo. If you'd gone the
other way the enemy would have captured you and your message,
which would have meant the capture of our whole detachment."
 "Yes, I'd forgotten that, Dick, and seeing that we both hope to
be made privates some day the extra pay we will pull down as first
class signalmen is not to be sneezed at. Well, here goes; see if you
can get this!"
Thereupon Henry began a quick tap-tap with a pencil against
the rim of the brass bugle he held on his knees.
For an hour the two boys practised at their self-appointed task,
never using a spoken word in the meantime, but often smiling at
each other over the messages they sent back and forth.
Richard Comstock was not wasting his time in the service. He
had enlisted with one stated purpose in view, and all his work was to
him a means to an end. Every new bit of knowledge acquired
connected with his profession was just one more step in the ladder
he meant to climb, until his hopes and ambitions were realized.
The friendship existing between Henry Cabell and himself was
of great help to both boys. They often had their differences of
opinion, but petty quarrels and bickerings never entered in their
discussions. Both lads were high spirited, quick to take offense but
as quick to acknowledge their errors in the light of reasoning. Day by
day, Henry was losing his attitude of snobbishness. His association
with Richard, who tried to find something worthy in every person
with whom he came in contact and to see the bright side to every
cloud, was the best thing which could have happened for the hot-
headed Southerner.
Their duties on board ship were not particularly arduous. They
stood four-hour watches as messengers for the Officer of the Deck,
dividing this duty with the ship's sailor-buglers; assisted in the work
of keeping their part of the ship clean, accompanied the marines on
their drills ashore and participated in the routine drills of shipboard
life. Sometimes the musics on the larger vessels are members of the
secondary battery gun's crews or have other battle stations at
"general quarters,"[#] but not so on the Denver, which was only a
third-class cruiser of a little over three thousand tons. Also on
shipboard the marine drummer has but little use for his drum and
sticks, which are generally put away in the storeroom and a bugle
issued in lieu thereof, as all calls are given by means of the trumpet
or the piping of the boatswain's whistles. Therefore, in so far as their
duties were concerned, the boys did identically the same work on
the Denver, and except when their watches interfered they were
generally to be found together.

[#] When the ship is ready to go into action. The drill for this preparation is called
General Quarters.

One day they were conversing about the former achievements of the
marines, and Dick, who by now had read Collum's history from
beginning to end, said:
"I wonder if when they put those new dreadnaughts in
commission they will reverse the time-honored custom and move the
marine detachments up forward!"
"I don't reckon I know what you mean, Dick; why shouldn't they
put the marines wherever they want to on the ships?"
"These days there is no real reason why they shouldn't," said
Dick. "But you know what the relation of the marines was originally
as regards the ship's crew, don't you?"
 "Y-e-e-s; at least I think I do. They were the policemen on the
ship, weren't they?"
"Oh, Hank, you simply must read the history of this organization
before you go any further. It will be the best thing to make you get
the right kind of ginger into your work. It will make you proud of
your job and proud to be a U.S. Marine; it is one of the chief things
you need:--esprit de corps--it's what has kept this outfit up to snuff,
and without it no organized body of men could make a name for
themselves any more than you can 'make a silk purse of a sow's
ear.'"
"All right, if you say it takes esprit to make that purse, Dick, I'll
take your word for it, but don't get started preaching. Now tell me
why should or should not the marines be moved, and if not, why
not, or whatever it was you began on when you lost yourself on
Pulpit Street. Go ahead, I'm listening!"
"To begin with, the sailors in the early days were a mighty
tough lot of customers, picked up from nearly every nation under
the sun. They were employed to work the ship; whereas the marines
were organized to do the fighting and were picked men. Because of
the mixed and unruly element in the crew the sailors often became
mutinous. In those days all weapons, and firearms particularly, were
stored in the after part of the ship where the officers had their
quarters and having this advantage, they were able to keep the
crews under subjection. But there were only a few officers as
compared to the crew, consequently the trustworthy marines were
given that part of the ship to berth in between the officers and the
sailors, who generally were berthed in the forecastle. I don't know
just when this was made the fashion, but I do know that it has been
handed down to the present day and you will always find marines in
a compartment next the ward-room. Now do you see what I mean?"
"I understand what you have said, Dick, but what has it to do
with the new battleships?"
"Why, I was wondering if another old Navy custom is going out
of vogue, that's all. For in these new ships the officers are going to
change places with the crew--their living space is going to be the
forecastle instead of the stern. Question: What will they do with the
marines?"
"When did you say that custom started, Dick?"
"Oh, I don't know, Hank; way back in the days of bi-remes and
tri-remes, I guess."
"Then all I have to say is that it's high time a change was made;
allow the officers a chance to take care of themselves--we marines
have nursed them altogether too long," said Henry, and they were
yet laughing at the remark when Police Sergeant Bruckner came
along the deck seeking them.
"The 'Top'[#] says you boys should go with me to the storeroom
and draw rifles, so come right along and get 'em."

[#] "Top"--Top sergeant--first sergeant, or also applied to the highest ranking

sergeant at a post.

"Get rifles?" questioned Dick. "What are we going to do with rifles,

I'd like to know?"
"Ask the Top; don't bother me with your questions;" and
Bruckner led the way below.
 "They're brand new shooting irons, and you will have some job
getting off the cosmoline, so I adwise you to get busy before you
report to the First Sergeant," cautioned Bruckner, whose German
origin accounted for the manner in which he pronounced his letter
"V" on occasions. He had come to the United States as a lad of
fifteen years and after ten years spoke, with this exception, almost
like a native-born citizen. Six of these ten years he had spent in the
Marines.
After noting the number of each rifle in order to enter them on
the public property card of the musics, they all repaired to the upper
deck and the work of cleaning the new rifles was soon under way.
"You musics will fall in for aiming and sighting drill each
morning," called out Sergeant Douglass, who saw them at their
labors. "Although you aren't required to handle a gun you are
required to know how to shoot straight. Come to my office when you
get through with that work, and I'll give you each a score book
which one of our Marine Officers got up and it will give you all the
best dope on rifle shooting."
It was not long before the boys were applying for the promised
books.
"When shall we have a chance to fire on the range?" asked
Dick.
"From the 'galley yarns'[#] flying about the ship, it would not
surprise me if we were on our way to Guantanamo in a day or two,
and when we get there I'm going to try my best to have the guard
put through the regular Marine Corps practice as well as the Navy
course, and I want to keep our high showing up to standard."
[#] In some mysterious way stories get started on shipboard, generally founded
on guess or rumor and turn out to be true; all are supposed to start in the
"galley," hence the name.

"Do we get a medal or anything like that out of it?" asked Henry.
"Yes, you have an opportunity to get a number of things out of
it. The marines shoot the same course for qualification as that
prescribed for the army. There are three grades which pay you well
for trying to do your best. The highest is that of expert rifleman. If
you qualify, you get five dollars more pay per month from the date
of qualification to the end of your enlistment and also a silver
badge,--crossed rifles with a wreath around them. Sharpshooter
pays you three dollars per month till you next shoot for record the
following year and a badge consisting of a silver Maltese cross, while
a marksman's qualification pays two dollars and you get only a silver
bar with 'Marksman' on it. But you will find out all about it in those
books. Run along now and don't bother me any more with your
questions. By the way, Cabell, to-morrow morning you will report to
Ensign Gardiner as orderly for the summary court-martial at ten-
o'clock, in the ward-room. Mr. Gardiner is the recorder of the court."
"What is the recorder of a court?" asked Henry, who was as full
of questions at times as a hive is of bees.
"He is to a summary court what the judge advocate is to a
general court, and the prosecuting attorney to a civil court,"
answered the First Sergeant patiently, "and I hope your
acquaintance with all of these gentlemen may be that of an orderly
or a witness only. And, Comstock, speaking of witnesses, reminds
me you had better stand by for a call, as both Williams and Choiniski
are to be tried to-morrow for smuggling liquor on board ship."
Promptly at ten o'clock the next morning the "musics" were in
attendance at the meeting of the court-martial, but no testimony
was required, as the accused sailors both pleaded "guilty" to the
specifications[#] preferred against them, and merely put in a plea
for clemency.

[#] The written statement of specific acts for which the accused person is being
tried.

Richard was standing outside the ward-room door when Chief

Master-at-Arms Fitch brought the two prisoners aft for their trial.
"I'll get you for this, you fresh Leatherneck, and I give you fair
warning to keep out of my way when I get out of the brig,"
muttered Choiniski, glaring malignantly at the drummer.
"Shut up and don't talk so much or I'll see that you get hung,"
snapped Fitch on hearing the remark. "After you two birds get out of
your cage you'd better be looking round for friends, not enemies,
I'm thinking."
And two days after the trial with the entire crew of the Denver
mustered aft on the quarter-deck, the sentences were published to
the two offenders.
"Whew! You'll never catch me smuggling any liquor on a man-
o'-war," said Dick to his friend, Corporal Dorlan, as they sat talking in
the marines' compartment soon after the crew had been dismissed.
"No, it's bad business no matter how ye bring it on board, inside
or outside," said Mike, dolefully, "and it's meself who should know,
bad 'cess to the stuff."
"Have those two men got to stay in those hot little cells up
forward with nothing but bread and water to eat for thirty days, and
lose three months' pay, and in addition, do three months' extra
police duties with no liberty meanwhile?"
"Not quite that bad, me lad; they'll be after gittin' a full ration
on every fifth day, so as to show them what they're missin' in the
way of good chow,[#] and accordin' to my way of thinkin' it will do
them both a world of good. Until they came to this packet 'twas the
happy ship; but the likes of them are always makin' trouble."

[#] A Chinese term generally used by men in the service for food.

"Did you hear that we are going to Guantanamo Bay before the fleet
arrives here, Mike?" questioned Richard.
"Well, it won't be the first time Michael Dorlan has been in that
place, and well I remember the time we showed the Spaniards they
couldn't fool with Uncle Sam's Marines and git away with it."
"Were you in a fight there during the Spanish War, Corporal?"

* * * * * * * * *
 The Sampson Medal

THE SAMPSON MEDAL

The medal commemorating the U.S. Naval Campaign in the West Indies,
during the war of 1898. The ribbon has a blue center with red on either side.
Commonly called The Sampson Medal after the Commander-in-Chief--William
Sampson, U.S.N.
 A similar medal for Admiral Dewey's victory in Manila Bay was awarded,
suspended from a ribbon with broader band of blue in center and yellow on either
side.

* * * * * * * * *

"Right ye are, me lad, and 'twas no slouch of a scrimmage, at all, at

all. The Navy wanted a good sheltered harbor as a base for their
ships close to Santiago, where that foine old Spanish Admiral,
Cervera, was bottled up. So Guantanamo Bay, being the foinest kind
of a place, they decided to go in there, dhrive away the enemy and
hold it. Well, the ships shelled the beach before we landed and then
us marines was sent ashore under Colonel Harrington; and a hot
reception we got, I'd like ye to know."
"How many marines were there in the fight?"
"About four hundred altogether, and out in the bosky[#] there
were over three thousand Spaniards pouring the lead into us at
every opportunity. We took the beach with a rush and charged up
the hill back of our landin' place, and then havin' got a toe-hold we
dug in and we stayed dug in, with the Dagoes a-takin' pot shots at
us every time we showed a hat."

[#] Really the word "Bosque"--Spanish word meaning wood, and pronounced--
boskay.

Henry, having joined the little group surrounding Dorlan and Richard,
as usual asked a question at this point in the recital:
 "Did the army come to help you, Corporal?"
"Army nothin'. They was busy gettin' ready to take Santiago,
and didn't bother about us. We marines was the first to land and the
first to fight, but unless we drove those Dagoes out of the woods it
wasn't goin' to be a very healthy place to stay put."
"And did you drive them away?" inquired Dick. He had read all
about the fight, but to get first hand news from one who had
participated in the actual fighting was much better than reading it
from a book.
"Of course we did. You see, the Colonel learned from friendly
Cubans that the Spaniards in that region depended for all their water
on a well a few miles away over the hills--Cusco Well, it was called.
So if we took that well then they'd have to git out of the country. It
was up to us to destroy the well. We made all the arrangements,
and one of the ships was told to shell the locality where the well was
located. Finally we started off dhriving the Dagoes ahead of us,
when suddenly the shells from the ship began droppin' all about us
instead of into the ranks of the enemy. Every minute they kept
comin' hotter and faster and there was little chanct of us bein'
successful as things were goin'. Then I saw one of the nerviest jobs
pulled off that mornin'--one of the things ye often read about and
believe is fiction. Right behind us in plain view was a high bare hill
and on the top of that there hill, his back to the Spaniards and facin'
the flashin' guns of the ship, was a marine sendin' wigwag messages
to the ship and tellin' them where to shoot. Begorra, the bullets was
a-flyin' around him like hail. Kickin' up little spats of dust at his feet,
cuttin' down the cactus on either side of him, singin' through the
little flag he was a-wavin', but did he stop? Not onct--and before
long the shell fire lifted and began fallin' among them Dagoes and
off they went with us marines after them, chargin' and yellin',
sweatin' and swearin'. Yes, we found the well and destroyed it and
went back to our own lines carryin' our dead and wounded with us.
And onct again the good old Corps had scored, for Sergeant Major
John Quick, the feller what did the signalin', won the first medal of
honor in the War of 1898."
"Tell us some more, Dorlan," one of the bystanders pleaded.
"Ah, g'wan with ye. Sure I'm so dhry now from so much blabbin'
I can drink the scuttle-butt[#] dhry, and that without half tryin'."

[#] A tank holding drinking water.

"Let us see the campaign medal the government gave you, will you,
Mike?" asked Dick. One of his chief ambitions was to be able some
day to wear some of those little bronze medals suspended from the
bright colored silk ribbons on his own coat. Their intrinsic value was
small but what an honor it would be to have the right to wear them.
Mike Dorlan opened his ditty-box, upon which he was sitting,
and fumbling around in its interior brought forth two bronze medals;
one considerably larger than the other.
"This one," said he, holding up the larger medal, "is the
Sampson Medal, given for bein' on board of a ship of the U.S. Navy
in some of the actions against the coastwise towns or with the
Spanish Fleet. You all know that Admiral Sampson was in command
of our naval forces that bottled up Cervera in the harbor of Santiago.
That feller Cervera was a brave man indeed, and he fought like the
gentleman he was, with no more chance of escapin' than I have o'
bein' made the Commandant of the Corps, and you know how likely
that is, bedad. This other little piece of bronze is the regular medal
everyone got who was in Cuban waters or on Cuban soil durin' the
war. It's the Spanish or West Indian Campaign Medal."
"Why don't you ever wear your ribbons and medal, Mike?"
asked Dick. "Believe me, if I had 'em I'd be so proud I'd want to
show 'em to everybody I met. I would like to see you with them all
on some day at inspection."
"I'll tell ye why, me lad, and ye can belave it or not, as you
please; there's one medal I want mor'n all of these combined and
until I can wear that one, I'll not be wearin' of any."

* * * * * * * * *
 Medal for
Campaign in the
West Indies and
for Spanish War

MEDAL FOR CAMPAIGN IN THE WEST INDIES AND FOR SPANISH

WAR
Issued to those of the Army, Navy and Marines who served on the high seas
en route to or in immediate vicinity of Cuba, Porto Rico or Philippines between
certain dates. In case if the army or navy service was not in the West Indies the
inscription read "Spanish Campaign."
 * * * * * * * * *

"Which one is that, Dorlan?"

"It's one of them good-conduct medals the Top Sergeant was
showin' of ye that first day ye come on this ship, and I'll git one yet!
In three days more me present enlistment expires. I'm going to ship
over right off, and I'll be makin' a bargain with ye right now!"
"What's the bargain?" asked Dick.
"Well, if I don't git one of them little bronzes at the end of my
next enlistment, I'll be givin' all the rest o' me medals to ye, and ye
can melt 'em up into copper pennies; but if I do git it, I'll string the
hull lot of them across me chest at the first inspection what comes
along."
And midst much laughter from the group surrounding them,
Dorlan and Richard shook hands on the "bargain."
Ten days later the "galley yarns" came true, as they sometimes
do, and the Denver steamed through the narrow entrance and into
the wonderful, green bordered, blue waters of Guantanamo Bay,
where she anchored for an indefinite stay.
Upon the first opportunity, Sergeant Douglass took the entire
guard ashore for a view of the historic battlefields. Landing at
Fisherman's Point, they climbed the steep slopes of McCalla Hill,
where stands the monument erected in memory of the heroes who
lost their lives in the memorable engagement. But it was Corporal
Michael Dorlan who explained to the interested men every phase of
the landing and the attack; who showed them the hill from which
the intrepid Quick had signalled so calmly oblivious of personal
danger, and finally he took them through the dusty cactus and
chaparral to the old well, the destruction of which forced the Spanish
troops to evacuate and leave the field to the sturdy soldiers of the
sea.
At a later date, the boys in company with Dorlan and others
made a week-end "liberty" to Santiago, where the winning battles of
the war were fought on land and water. They saw the exact spot
where Hobson and his brave crew blew up the Merrimac in the
harbor entrance; they scaled the walls of Morro Castle, which
withstood with hardly a scar the fierce bombardment of our fleet;
and they rode out to San Juan Hill, where the gallant soldiers of
Shafter's army fought so valiantly and successfully.
These little trips to old battlefields resulted in a great demand
for books dealing with the wars of that period, and the crew's library
of the Denver was more popular than it had been for months.

CHAPTER X
WINNING HIS FIRST MEDAL

Overhead the sun shone mercilessly from a cloudless sky. Hardly a

breath of air stirred the stubby grass and scrubby bushes which
covered abrupt little hillocks of piled-up coral lightly spread with
clinging bits of sandy soil. From the floor-like level of the baked sand
flats, covered with white streaks where the sun's rays had gathered
up the water and left small deposits of salt, the heat-waves rose,
bubbling and boiling, a snare to the unwary or unknowing riflemen,
who, from various ranges and positions, were sending little pellets of
lead encased in steel jackets at rows of paper targets surmounting
the earth and concrete parapets, known as the "butts."
It was a busy and interesting scene of action. Marines in khaki
and sailors in white were sprinkled over the vast plain, all intent on
watching the bobbing rectangles of brownish paper with black,
round, bull's eyes whereon was marked each shot-hole caused by
the bullets in their flight.
For days the preliminary drill had been under way. To the men
who never before had fired there seemed to be much useless labor
and time wasted. Position and aiming drills are monotonous at best,
and to stand at long intervals raising the rifle from the hip-position
of "load" to a certain height, then bringing it to rest against the right
shoulder, bending the head and squinting over the sights at small
round black pasters an inch in diameter stuck to a bulkhead or wall
and finally snapping the trigger, seemed the height of folly. When,
however, the sighting drills progressed to their making tiny triangles
by getting points on a piece of white paper twenty feet distant from
the rifle sights and connecting these with straight lines, followed by
explanations why certain triangles were good and if a bullet had
actually travelled along the indicated path, excellent or poor scores
would have resulted, then the drills held more interest for Richard
and Henry.
Each day Sergeant Battiste, one of the famous shots of the
Corps and attached to the Denver, gave lectures on rifle shooting. A
celebrated coach, member of many winning teams in the National
Rifle meets, holder of the coveted Distinguished Marksman Medal,
and Military Rifle Champion of America for two consecutive years, he
was well fitted for his task.
Marines are entitled to fire the regular record practise for
qualification under the Small Arms Firing Manual of the United States
Army once during each target year; but those men who made the
grade of Expert Rifleman were not required to fire again during their
current enlistment and for that time received each month the extra
pay which is a reward for their merit. Naturally all hands were
anxious to make the score necessary to acquire these benefits and
Sergeant Battiste left no stone unturned to help them in their
desires. Each step had been carefully rehearsed, instruction practise
completed and to-day the record firing would decide their final merit.
"I've already told you," said Battiste, the men being gathered
around him on arrival at the 200-yard firing point, "not to get excited
and to take your time. Get your rear sight in perfect alignment with
the front sight and the 'bull' sitting oh top; fill your lungs--then, the
moment you are ready to fire hold your breath for that instant and
squeeze the trigger--don't pull or jerk it, first take up the 'creep,' and
by now every one of you should know just when that little additional
pressure will be sufficient to release the firing-pin. We've a perfect
day for shooting, and if you don't make good scores it's your own
fault. As we go back to the longer ranges the wind will come up, but
it will blow steadily from the left or nine o'clock,[#] if I know
anything about this range and the action of the wind here, and I
claim I do. We shall have to watch out for mirage. Your targets have
been assigned. Each man knows the number he will fire at and there
is no excuse for shooting on the wrong target. To do so would
possibly spoil another fellow's score, and it means you will receive a
'goose egg'[#] for your own shot, and goose eggs mean low
qualifications."

[#] When facing the target the range is supposed to represent the face of a clock.
Twelve o'clock is at the target; six, at the firing point; three, to the right, and nine,
to the left. The direction of the wind is easily designated by reference to any hour
of the clock dial. A clock-face is also imagined on the target-face; twelve at the top
and six at the bottom, facing the firer.
[#] A Zero on the score.

"Are we permitted to blacken our sights on record practise,

Sergeant?" inquired Dick, as Battiste paused for a moment.
"Yes, you may blacken both front and rear sights. I'd suggest
the use of camphor, and I should also smoke the barrel well, as this
sun makes the blued metal glare badly. The red flag is up in the pits,
so the 'sand rats'[#] are ready for us to begin. Get on the line, men,
and begin firing when your target comes up. Each shot will be
marked. If you fail to hit the target a red flag will be waved across
its face, indicating a miss; the white disk placed over the shot hole
means a bull's-eye, or five; the red disk, four; the black and white
disk a three and the black a two. If any of you wish to challenge the
marking, Mr. Gardiner, who is the Range Officer, will call up Mr. Thorp
in the butts and have the target gone over carefully. Remember to
keep your own score in your book and see that it corresponds with
the marking and with the scorekeepers' records."

[#] Men who operate the targets and signal the hits from the butts.
"How many shots do we fire?" called out Private Jones, the most
inattentive man of the guard, but also the one always spotlessly
clean, which reputation had gained for him the position of one of
Commander Bentley's cabin orderlies.
"This is slow fire at 200 yards," answered the coach, who
seldom lost his temper and had the patience of Job. "Each man will
fire two strings of five shots each from the standing position, then
we shall move back to 300 yards, and fire the same number of shots
from either the sitting or kneeling position. No sighting shots allowed
at either of these ranges. The targets are up, men! Commence
firing!"
Immediately following the command came the crack of rifles all
along the line--the record practise was under way.
Neither Richard nor Henry, before this week on the range at
Guantanamo Bay, knew anything of rifle shooting, though both, one
in the New England woods, the other along the bayous of the
Mississippi, had spent many happy hours with dog and shotgun.
Practise with the high-powered military rifle was a decidedly
different proposition, but they took to it as a duck does to water, and
during instruction practise they agreeably surprised Sergeant Battiste
with work that was excellent for beginners.
Dick, having more patience and being more cool-headed, strong
and nerveless, was without doubt the better of the two. Henry's one
failing was his impatience to "get the shot off." In case he failed to
bring his sights in perfect alignment on the bull's eye with a steady
hand, he would fall back on the quick "fly shot" so necessary to the
hunter armed with a fowling piece, but disastrous to one who
aspires to perfection with the military weapon.
 "Five o'clock three for you, Cabell," sang out the coach; "must
have pulled down on your gun at the last moment. Remember my
caution--take your time and squeeze the trigger. Good work,
Drummer Comstock; you've found the bull first shot. It's nipping in
at twelve o'clock.[#] It pays to be calm and deliberate."
"I'm way off to the right, Sergeant," called out Jones irritably;
"all three of my shots have gone in the same place--twos at three
o'clock, and you said there wasn't any wind blowing."

[#] "Nipping in at twelve o'clock"--A rifleman's term for a bull's-eye just barely
cutting the black at the top.

"Not a bit of wind, Jones, and if you would only remember to set
your wind gauge properly those twos would have been bulls, every
one. You have almost three points of right wind on, and you
shouldn't have any. Apply your quarter-point rule. Each quarter-point
on your wind gauge at 200 yards moves your shot how many inches
on the target?"
"It moves it two inches, and three times two is six inches," said
Jones smugly. "My shots are about two feet from the center of the
bull, so there must be wind blowing from the left."
"Your arithmetic needs a little oiling, Jones. There are four
quarters in every full point and that makes twelve quarters
altogether for your three points. Each quarter point moves you two
inches, making twenty-four inches in all. You see, that is the two
feet that your shots are out, which is what I said in the beginning."
Jones sheepishly corrected his sight, and the next shot on his
target was marked a "pinwheel."
 Thus it was the coach went up and down the firing line, offering
the advice of long and successful experience.
At the completion of the firing at 200 yards the line of riflemen
moved back to the 300-yard point, and taking the sitting or kneeling
position, began the next stage of the course. A "possible" or perfect
score of ten shots would mean fifty points towards the three
hundred points necessary to qualify the men as marksmen, and this
they would have to get in order to be permitted to shoot the
sharpshooter's course. The firing at 200 yards was the hardest in
Dick's estimation, and though he had started off with a bull's-eye, or
five, as already stated, he did not continue to see the little white
marker or spotter in the black space as he hoped would be the case.
His first and last shots were fives and the rest fours, making his total
score forty-two. Henry was six points below centers, or thirty-four.
Three hundred yards was an easy range for Dick and he
surprised himself with the high score at that stage--forty-seven
points, all bulls but three, which fell close outside in the four-ring.
Henry had made one over centers, or a score of forty-one.
"Now we will go back to five and six hundred yards," said
Battiste. "Each man must fire two sighting shots at both those
ranges before he can count his shots for record. The firing will be
the same as it was in instruction--from the prone position. I expect
every man to average up his score at the 500-yard range, for the
bull looks as big as a barn-door, and you can't miss it. You know we
change the size of the targets now and use the mid-range or B-
target, and the bull's-eye is twenty inches in diameter. In the short-
range or A-target it is but eight inches, and in the long-range or C-
target it is thirty-six inches. For this reason B-target at 500 yards and
C-target at 800 yards are what we call 'easy marks.'"
"Supposing we fire the twelve shots and the first ten are bulls
but the last two goose eggs, would the latter count against you?"
asked Henry, as he rearranged the leather sling on his rifle around
his left arm before lying down.
"It's your last ten shots which count," replied the coach. "Firing
regulations require you to take the two sighting shots, and you can't
juggle them around to suit yourself; they've got to be the first two
fired. The mirage is no longer boiling straight up,[#] but it's moving
off to the right a bit, so I'd advise you all to take your sighting shots,
make your own deductions and then wait for me to see how nearly
correct you are."

[#] Mirage--Heat waves near the earth, visible on some days to the naked eye,
but more clearly seen through a telescope. It is really the air travelling on the
range, and the best guide for windage, as it is the actual air through which the
bullet travels. When there is no movement to left or right the wind is either still for
a moment or carrying the mirage directly towards or from the target. It appears to
rise and is said to be "boiling."

The moment Dick's target appeared he lay flat on his stomach with
his body at an angle of about forty-five degrees to the firing line,
feet spread apart with the heels turned inwards. His leather sling
was fastened tightly about the upper part of his left arm, and the left
hand was well under the rifle, bearing against the lower swivel,
which held one end of the sling. The butt of the rifle was placed,
with the aid of his right hand, against the right shoulder, both
elbows on the ground, the right hand grasping the small of the stock
with the forefinger curling around the trigger. His cheek was against
the left side of the stock and his right eye so near the rear of the
cocking-piece that to one uninitiated it would appear dangerous. But
it was the safest position he could assume, and the rifle in his grasp
was steady as a rock.
Crack! Crack! The first shots sped on their way to the butts, as
Dick and the man on his right fired almost simultaneously.
Nothing followed! Dick's target screen did not move. He was
certain his position, his aim, his pull, were all perfect. The shot must
have gone through the black paper in the center or one of the black
annular rings and was not seen by the "sand rat" in charge.
"Mark number three target," shouted the sailor who was
keeping Dick's score, and the man at the field-telephone relayed the
message to the butts. A second or two later "number three" was
"sashed," or pulled down; then up it popped with the fatal red flag
waving back and forth across it as if in derision.
Dick was surprised at this, for he was positive his first shot must
have been a bull's-eye. He looked at his sight critically. What was
wrong? Perhaps the wind was blowing enough to throw him off the
"bull," but never could that light breeze throw him off the target
altogether. He had one more sighting shot, and unless he found the
target with that one he would have no "dope" for his ten record
shots that were to follow. Already he had a quarter-point of left wind
on his gauge, which meant, at this range, if he took one-half a point
windage that would move the shot one-half the width of the "bull"--
enough to put him in the four-ring if his aim deviated the slightest
and his "dope" happened to be wrong.
 He was about to make the change, even though against his
better judgment, when the man at the end of the telephone called
out:
"Two shot holes in the bull on Number Four target!"
Dick drew a long breath of relief. He had fired his first shot not
at his own but at his right-hand neighbor's target.
"Thank your lucky star, young man, for the sighting spots, or
else your score would have been spoiled in the making," quietly
remarked Sergeant Battiste, who was standing back, enjoying the
lad's perplexity. "Let it be a lesson to you--always take a squint
through your peep sight at the number below your target before you
fire. One of those fives in Four Target was right in the center--a pin
wheel! How much windage did you have?"
"A quarter-point of left wind," answered Dick.
"Just right--now, go ahead and make a possible."
And that is exactly what Drummer Comstock did--every one of
his following shots hitting the bull's-eye for a perfect score, and to
the present day he shows that page from his score book with great
pride.
Dick's luck continued with him at 600 yards, which to many old
and tried riflemen is one of the most interesting ranges. With forty-
three points here and the fifty at 500 yards, Dick now had a total
score of one hundred and eighty-two points.
"What's your total, Hank?" asked Dick while they rested during
the noon hour.
"One hundred and sixty-three, so far; but do you know who has
the highest total for the day?"
Welcome to our website – the perfect destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world,
offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth.
That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of
books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to
self-development guides and children's books.

More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge

connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an
elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can
quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally,
our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time
and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and

personal growth every day!

ebookbell.com