NETWORKING OR NOT WORKING? A Comparison of Arab Spring Coverage in Belgian Newspapers and TV News

Van Leuven et al., Journalism Practice (2014) DOI: 10.1080/17512786.2014.894325

1

NETWORKING OR NOT WORKING?

A Comparison of Arab Spring Coverage in Belgian

Newspapers and TV News

Sarah Van Leuven, Annelore Deprez, and Karin Raeymaeckers

This paper examines journalists’ changing sourcing practices in the context of an

emerging media ecology initiated by processes of globalisation, digitalization,

commercialism and concentration. Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter

or YouTube provide the means to access a more diverse range of sources, including

civil society organisations and ordinary citizens. We developed a quantitative content

analysis to examine to what extent Belgian news coverage showed signs of diverse

sourcing practices during the 2011 uprisings in three Arab countries. We analysed a

total sample of 1121 news items about the street protests in Syria, Egypt and Tunisia,

in four Belgian newspapers (two popular and two quality dailies) and two Belgian

broadcasters (the public broadcaster VRT and the commercial channel VTM). The

analysis shows that ordinary citizens and non-mainstream groups are important news

sources and that social media platforms are relatively often consulted compared to

everyday foreign news coverage. In terms of inter-media differences, the findings

show that broadcasters’ dependency on video footage and eyewitness accounts is

reflected in their use of ordinary citizen sources and amateur footage. Moreover, the

analysis confirms that the quality newspapers display more diverse and more

innovative sourcing practices than the popular newspapers do.

KEYWORDS Arab Spring; content analysis; network journalism; news access;

social media; sourcing practices

Introduction

In the contemporary context of an emerging media ecology initiated by processes of

globalisation, digitalization, commercialism and concentration, many authors are pessimistic

about the future of democratic news provision. In Flat Earth News, Davies (2008) describes

how traditional media brands increasingly cut costs for purely economic reasons, resulting in

“churnalism”, or the production of stories in “greater numbers at greater speed and of much

worse quality” (Davies 2008, 62). Journalists’ workload has increased even more due to the

increasing number of pages, supplements and online editions (Franklin and Carlson 2011;

Lewis et al. 2006). In these circumstances, “desktop news production” increasingly

substitutes active news gathering outside the newsroom (Van Hout, Pander Maat, and De

Preter 2011, 1876). Foreign coverage is often one of the first victims, as research has shown

that news organisations increasingly replace their network of correspondents with news

agency copy (Hafez 2009; Rantanen and Boyd-Barrett 2004). The traditional use of news

agency copy and recycled news articles from other media brands has moreover been


2

expanded with the application of public relations (PR) content, which strengthens the

privileged news access of elite or mainstream sources, such as politicians, multinationals,

and experts (Davies 2008; Franklin and Carlson 2011).

Nonetheless, this approach to journalist-source relations is increasingly criticised. In light of

recent advancements in digital technologies, the empowering capacities of social media

applications may constitute a key element for more balanced news access in the field of

foreign coverage. In accordance with the work of Castells (2008, 2011), some scholars state

that the network is the “new dominant social structure in contemporary societies […] in which

our ability to connect beyond time and space constraints takes center stage” (Heinrich 2011,

23-24). The growing gap between the global scene, where problems such as environmental

pollution or terrorism arise, and the nation-state, where these problems need to be managed,

has induced the rise of a global civil society, which might broaden the spectrum of actors with

a voice in the media (Castells 2008, 2011). Some authors claim that in order for this capacity

to be fully realized the new, global environment is—or should be—characterized by a novel,

networked mode of communication that can be described as a synthesis of interpersonal and

mass communication (Castells 2008; Hafez 2009; Hermida 2010; López-Rabadán 2011). In

the context of news production, Heinrich (2011) contends that journalistic organisations

should go through a structural transformation and adapt to the sphere of “network journalism”

in order to allow journalists to navigate the new global information map. The increased speed

of information dissemination and the connectivity within the network sphere allow for non-

linear, decentralized and multi-directional information flows between the (almost)

uncountable nodes in the network. “A large array of potential new sources can now be

reached via many connection points other than (traditional) official sources such as

governmental institutions or press offices. Instead of a rather ’closed’ system of

newsgathering, production and distribution, in which only a limited number of partakers had

the power to make and shape news, the network journalism sphere is an open space of

information exchange” (Heinrich 2012, 767). Some authors state that today more than ever

before, non-mainstream sources—as nodes in the network—have at their disposal the

channels necessary to gain access to journalists, namely the Internet and especially social

media applications (Hermida, Lewis, and Zamith 2012; McNair 2013; Russell 2011). Social

media, a term that has been broadly used since 2005, are applications that are typical of the

new, interactive Web 2.0 as they enable the production and distribution of user-generated

content (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Well-known examples are weblogs, Wikipedia,

YouTube, Flickr and social networking sites such as Facebook or Twitter. In contrast with the

traditional means for information dissemination such as press releases, social media allow

users to spread information cheaply and instantaneously throughout their network. As a

result, they can open the news gates for non-mainstream sources (Castells 2008; Kaplan

and Haenlein 2010; Webster 2011). “Many of the information providers who run these blogs,

Twitter accounts or Facebook pages are citizen journalists, pressure groups or private

persons whose intention is not necessarily to act as journalists. However, they have access

to pieces of information that potentially add to the overall picture of news stories” (Heinrich

2012, 766-767). This new information context offers the potential for journalists to revise their

sourcing practices in light of the often cited dangers of heavy reliance on elite or mainstream

sources that may lead to manipulation in favour of those in power (Gans 1979). Allowing a

greater diversity of sources into the news production process might help to establish greater

diversity in viewpoints and thus assist to balance agenda setting interests of different groups.

The sourcing opportunities on offer within the global, network journalism sphere do


3

correspond with the claim for “multiperspectival news” made by Gans (2011) who demands

that news coverage should represent the general public and make their views and voices

heard to foster public discourse. In terms of international news coverage, social media

availability and digital networks offer new opportunities to approach the news from the

perspective of local sources (including non-mainstream sources) as journalists can get more

easily in touch with foreign sources in a virtual manner (Heinrich 2011). Yet the question

remains whether news outlets make full use of the new possibilities for news gathering

available through social media, and whether their newsroom management is adapted to the

conditions of the network sphere.

Several studies illustrate that in the everyday (foreign) news production process, social

media are rarely used as a means to access alternative sources (Van Leuven, Deprez, and

Raeymaeckers 2013). Many journalists admit they struggle with “information overload”,

language hurdles, and the doubted reliability of online information (Hafez 2009; Lariscy et al.

2009; Paulussen and Ugille 2008). News gathering routines, often impacted by

organisational imperatives, have become established over decades and are ways for

journalists to deal with time and resource limitations while ensuring credibility (Gans 1979;

Hall et al. [1978] 1999; Shoemaker and Reese 1996). Standardized sourcing practices, in

particular relying on official and other mainstream sources, are meant to ensure objectivity

and productivity (Sigal [1973] 1999). In contrast, case studies point out that journalists might

be more inclined to “practice” network journalism in the context of breaking news or media

restrictions where they cannot (immediately) access the area themselves and therefore try to

learn from on-the-ground sources (Lotan et al. 2011). In some cases, such as the Boston

Marathon bombings in April 2013, news organisations published unverified videos and

anonymous tweets from ordinary citizens in addition to traditional coverage. The uprisings in

several Arab countries in early 2011, often termed “Facebook Revolutions” due to the central

role of social media in cases such as Egypt, serve as another example in this regard (e.g.,

Russell 2011). Bloggers, Twitterers and activists, demonstrating for democratic rights, sent

messages from inside the crowd. “Each of these information providers were just a few of

many. What could be witnessed on TV or online, on traditional news outlets, or on Twitter,

were numerous updates roaming through the global information space. They all contributed

to a mix of perspectives contextualizing the events. Each provider added just one piece to

the complex, unfolding story line” (Heinrich 2012, 768). The analysis presented in this article

rests on a quantitative content analysis to examine to what extent Belgian news coverage of

the uprisings in three Arab countries has tapped into this new type of source material.

Methodology

The analysis presented in this article discusses if and how Belgian news coverage of the

2011 uprisings in Arab countries shows signs of diverse sourcing practices. These events

are related to a wave of democratic grass roots revolts in many North-African

countries─often called the “Arab Spring”─but we specifically focus on three cases─Egypt,

Tunisia and Syria─that were the scene of major protests whereas other countries such as

Sudan or Saudi Arabia only knew minor protests. Moreover, the selected cases are often

termed “Facebook Revolutions” due to the central role of social media in the production and

distribution of information about the street protests. Pieces of information were roaming

social media platforms such as Twitter, YouTube and Facebook, available not only to the

local network of activists, but also in the global information sphere, waiting for close


4

observers to be picked up and to be further distributed to activists and newsrooms all over

the world. Due to these specific circumstances, the findings of our study cannot be

generalized to everyday foreign coverage. However the relevance of our case lies in the fact

that it allows to measure to what extent the network sphere offers opportunities for more

diverse sourcing practices. From this point of departure, we formulate the following two

research questions:

RQ1 – Are ordinary citizens and non-mainstream groups important sources in Belgian

news coverage of the Arab Spring?

RQ2 – How often are social media used as information channels in Belgian news

coverage of the Arab Spring?

In order to search for inter-media differences or similarities, the focus is set on two popular

(Het Nieuwsblad and Het Laatste Nieuws) and two quality (De Standaard and De Morgen)

newspapers, Belgium’s four most important Flemish language newspapers. We furthermore

included both Flemish newscasts at the public broadcaster Eén and the commercial

broadcaster VTM.

RQ3 – Can we observe different sourcing practices in newspapers and TV news?

Based on the assumption that quality newspapers and the public broadcaster are believed to

save more resources for quality and innovation in foreign coverage (Joye 2010; Wolfsfeld

2011; Wouters, De Swert, and Walgrave 2009), we formulate a fourth research question:

RQ4 – Can we find more signs of diverse sourcing practices in quality newspapers

and the public broadcaster compared to popular newspapers and the commercial

broadcaster?

We developed a quantitative content analysis to examine coverage of the selected cases.

The first focus of the study lies with sources: the people and organisations that are quoted in

the news (RQ1). We developed a categorization of eight types of sources, grouped along

elite/mainstream and non-mainstream sources. The group of mainstream sources

categorizes politicians, government institutions, companies (and umbrellas), journalists,

experts (e.g., scientists, universities), and a remainder category of other mainstream sources

(e.g., celebrities). The group of non-mainstream sources consists of ordinary citizens and

non-mainstream groups (e.g., non-governmental organizations (NGOs), groups of

demonstrators). Ten sources (0.5% of all sources) could not be identified as mainstream or

non-mainstream sources (e.g., anonymous sources) and are therefore not taken into

consideration. A second focus of this article lies with the use of social media (e.g., Facebook,

Twitter, weblogs, YouTube, WikiLeaks) as an information channel to access a greater

diversity of sources (RQ2).

We applied selective sampling1 to collect all articles in the time frame of the actual street

protests because at those moments demonstrators took reporting matters into their own

hands, therefore acting as a potential networked news source for foreign reporters (Heinrich

2012). All newspaper articles were collected via Mediargus (Belgian equivalent of

LexisNexis), all broadcast items via the Electronic News Archive2. In total, 1121 news items

were selected and analysed by a team of four trained coders. A coding guide and registration

form were developed to ensure uniformity in the selection and analytical choices. A critically


5

composed sample of 40 articles was tested for intercoder reliability with an outcome of

Cohen’s Kappa values ranging from 0.76 up to 1.00. Analysis was carried out using PASW

Statistics 18.

Results

Despite the shorter sample period, the uprising in Egypt generated the highest percentage of

articles in the total sample (45.3%) followed by Syria (24.4%) and Tunisia (16.4%). A total of

13.9% of the articles combined coverage of one of these countries with coverage of street

protests in one or more other Arab countries and are therefore more generally categorized as

“Arab Spring”. The main body of 1121 analysed news items consists of newspaper articles

(79.5%) compared to 20.5% broadcast pieces, which is related to the bigger publication

volume in newspapers (RQ3). 70.8 per cent of all news items about the Arab uprisings

appear in the quality newspapers and the public broadcaster, which confirms that these news

media save more space for international news than the popular newspapers and the

commercial broadcaster do (29.2%) (RQ4).

RQ1 – The role of non-mainstream sources

With a total of 723 ordinary citizens in 1121 articles, or 36.9% of all 1961 sources, ordinary

citizens outnumber all other sources. In contrast to everyday foreign news coverage (Van

Leuven, Deprez, and Raeymaeckers 2013), then, news about the selected cases seems to

respond to Gans’ (2011) call for multiperspectival news that represents the general public.

Political sources (26.3%) follow at the second rank. Non-mainstream groups such as NGOs

or groups of demonstrators are ranked third (10.0%). The top three is followed by

government sources (7.0%), journalists (6.6%), companies (6.0%), experts (5.4%), and a

remainder category of mainstream sources (1.3%). A more broad comparison of mainstream

(52.6%) and non-mainstream (46.9%) sources further reflects the balance between different

types of sources. Nonetheless we also found signs of traditional sourcing practices as, in

accordance with a content analysis of everyday foreign coverage (Van Leuven, Deprez, and

Raeymaeckers 2013), the analysis shows that most mainstream sources (besides experts)

are relatively more present in factual news reports where journalists have less room for

active news gathering and prefer to rely on official sources (Gans 1979). In contrast, ordinary

citizens are relatively more present in background articles.

Figure 1. Media type versus % of sources (N=1961), M=mainstream

30%

16%

26%

30%

60%

37%

11%

9%

10%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Newspapers

Broadcasters

All CoveragePolitical

Government

Companies

Journalists

Experts

Other M source

Ordinary Citizen

Non-M Group


6

Dominant sources - Our original optimism is further tempered as 32.1% of all 763 sources

that are firstly quoted in each article (“dominant” sources) are political sources. This finding

exemplifies that journalists still prefer to place authoritative sources first to introduce an issue

and thereby set its interpretation framework, which is in line with traditional literature on

source selection (Gans 1979; Hall et al. [1978] 1999). This conclusion is confirmed if we

make a more broad comparison between mainstream (61.9%) and non-mainstream (37.9%)

dominant sources. Nonetheless, further signs of diverse sourcing practices can be found in

the fact that ordinary citizens (25.7%) and non-mainstream groups (12.2%) follow at rank two

and three as dominant sources. This latter finding is especially important as NGOs, social

movements and groups of demonstrators are more important as dominant news sources

compared to the overall coverage (10.0%), which especially for NGOs points to their

development as authoritative news sources in given fields of discourse (Davis 2000).

Relation of sources to the event - The majority of all sources are personally involved in the

event (45.9%) or provide eyewitness reports (34.8%). If we set the focus specifically on

ordinary citizen sources, they are seldom quoted as vox pop (11.5%) merely to add colour to

mainstream sources’ standpoints. Instead most of them are consulted as eyewitnesses

(78.6%), mainly Arab demonstrators testifying about their participation in the street protests

or Belgian tourists talking about their evacuation from holiday resorts. Although we cannot

conclude solely based on these findings that every eyewitness account brings more

viewpoints and story angles on board (as envisioned by the network journalism concept), the

findings do reveal that ordinary citizens are more often heard compared to everyday foreign

coverage (Van Leuven, Deprez, and Raeymaeckers 2013; Gans 2011).

Differences between newspapers and broadcasters (RQ3) - Figure 1 points out that

mainstream sources (especially political sources, 29.6%) are outstanding in newspapers

(59.1% of all sources in newspapers) while non-mainstream sources are outstanding in

broadcast news (68.9%). If we set the focus specifically on ordinary citizen sources, we see

that in newspaper articles their presence is much more limited (29.7%) while in broadcast

news they are overwhelmingly present (60.4% of all sources in broadcast news). A possible

explanation can be found in the bigger publication space of newspapers that allows for a

more contextual treatment of events while broadcasters are faced with limited airtime and are

therefore often forced to treat the news in a more superficial manner. Combined with the

higher importance of the visual element in broadcast news these differences result in a

higher emphasis on spectacle in television news and more references to ordinary people that

eye witnessed or experienced the dramatic event. Indeed, the finding that most sources in

television news are eyewitnesses (62.4%) from Belgian, Egypt, or Tunisian origin indicates

that many of the sources in broadcast news of the revolts are Arab demonstrators or Belgian

tourists in Egypt and Tunisia. This conclusion is important as it shows how television news,

by interviewing tourists, or more importantly by interviewing local demonstrators in the streets

“grants authority to the subjects of this coverage because of its use of film as a mode of

‘eyewitness’ observation” (Peer and Chestnut 1995, 83).

Differences between quality newspapers / public broadcaster and popular newspapers /

commercial broadcaster (RQ4) - As expected, non-mainstream sources are significantly

(p=0.000) more prominent in quality newspapers and the public broadcaster (48.7% of all

sources in these media) compared to popular newspapers and the commercial broadcaster

(40.3%). The relatively higher prominence of ordinary citizens in quality newspapers and the


7

public broadcaster therefore seems to be inspired by network journalism practices rather

than by a commercial strategy to attract a bigger audience that is often applied by popular

newspapers and the commercial broadcaster.

RQ2 – The role of social media and amateur footage3

Social media are consulted in 10.3% of the articles which is a substantially higher proportion

compared to everyday foreign coverage (Van Leuven, Deprez, and Raeymaeckers 2013). A

total of 79 of 128 quotes (61.7%) sourced via social media are attributed to ordinary citizens.

Eleven social media quotes are attributed to non-mainstream groups. Most sources that were

contacted via social media are Egyptian (34), Tunisian (7) and Syrian (12), which indicates

that social media are mainly used to get in touch with local, non-mainstream sources (as

envisioned by the network journalism concept). However, examples where social media

sourcing adds value to the coverage are exceptional (e.g., references to nawaat.org, a

website run by Tunisian activists outside the country). In most cases, Belgian journalists

struggle with social media sourcing. For example, De Standaard repeatedly displayed Twitter

and Facebook quotes in a separate column to illustrate the content of news articles about the

Egypt uprising (44 quoted sources in total). Most of the quotes express the experiences and

emotions of participants in the Egyptian uprising (e.g., “You can do it!!! Tunisia supports u!

Good luck ”). Viewed from the perspective of network journalism, one could interpret this

shift in sourcing practices as a move to allow more non-mainstream sources in the coverage.

Conversely, one can still question how far these personal comments add depth and new

viewpoints to the coverage, especially when they are not integrated in the news article but

instead “packaged away from traditional media coverage” (Heinrich 2012, 769).

Inter-media differences (RQ3 and RQ4) - As expected, the analysis showed that quality

newspapers and the public broadcaster significantly more (p=0.006) than the popular

newspapers and the commercial broadcaster consulted social media sources (RQ4).

Furthermore, we found that the newspapers consulted significantly more (p=0.003) social

media sources than the broadcasters did (RQ3). However, we did not count amateur videos

in broadcast news as social media sources because it was not explicitly mentioned how

these videos were distributed. It is yet highly presumable that most of these were distributed

via social media platforms. As 17.5% of broadcast news or 3.6% of the total coverage

contains amateur footage, the combined count of social media sources and amateur footage

results in a considerable 13.9% of all coverage where journalists make use of social media

sources. From this point of view it is clear that broadcasters significantly more than

newspapers made use of user-generated content and social media platforms. This is again

related to the high importance of the visual element in broadcast news that prompts

journalists to use non-official footage when no other footage is available (35 of 40 uses of

amateur footage occur in coverage on the Syrian uprising, mainly on the public broadcaster).

In the case of newspapers, we analyzed the sources of pictures separately. 403 of 892

newspaper articles (45.2%) contained one or more pictures. Most pictures are delivered by

(photo) news agencies (81.1%) and professional photographers (6.7%). Copyright of the

picture(s) is unknown in another 6.7% of the cases. Most importantly, we see that social

media (4.2%) and other internet (1.2%) photographs are rarely used.


8

Conclusion

The analysis presented in this article focused on the questions whether Belgian news

coverage of the Arab Spring shows signs of more diverse sourcing practices (RQ1-2) and

whether we can find inter-media differences (RQ3-4). The findings are mixed.

On the one hand, we found signs of more diverse sourcing practices compared to everyday

foreign coverage (Van Leuven, Deprez, and Raeymaeckers 2013). Ordinary citizens and

non-mainstream groups are important news sources, and social media are relatively often

used in the news gathering process (RQ1-2). On the other hand, our original optimism needs

to be toned down, as it appears that Belgian journalists mainly turn to official political sources

to introduce the news and set the interpretation frame for the article. Moreover, non-

mainstream sources may be important news sources in quantitative terms, but it seems that

ordinary citizens (as eyewitnesses) and social media are mainly consulted to illustrate the

information in the news article. In a recurring critique on sourcing ordinary citizens in the

news, some authors state that this approach does not add depth and new viewpoints to the

message (as envisioned by the network journalism concept) but rather dumbs-down the

information in the news article (Habermas 1974). In contrast, Gans (2011) demands that

news media should represent the general public and make their voices heard to foster public

discourse. Other authors stress that this approach allows more ordinary people to

understand the news from real-life experiences. Eyewitness accounts may not add a well-

considered argument to the public debate about the uprisings, but they can still add a new

layer to the discussion (Dahlgren and Gurevitch 2005; McNair 2009).

From this perspective, it is important to keep in mind that non-mainstream sources are most

prominent in quality newspapers and the public broadcaster, which goes against complaints

of dumbing-down the news that are mainly directed towards popular newspapers and the

commercial broadcaster (Joye 2010). Instead, the relatively higher prominence of ordinary

citizens in quality newspapers and the public broadcaster seems to be inspired by network

journalism practices (RQ4). We also found more signs of network journalism practices in TV

news compared to newspaper articles. Our analysis suggests that social media do not only

play an important role as information provider, but also as visual evidence in broadcast news

by showing the viewer what is happening on the ground (RQ3). Because of the word limit

there was no room for a detailed country comparison, but in summary, we did find more

characteristics of network journalism practices in news about the Syrian uprising. It seems

that strict media restrictions inspired Belgian journalists to rely more on on-the-ground, non-

mainstream sources that circumvented the restricted information access by means of digital

networks and social media platforms. This finding indicates that in a situation of information

chaos (McNair 2013), the network sphere offers opportunities for sources and journalists to

connect on a global scale and exhibit power abuse to a global audience. In this sense, our

analysis challenges traditional political-economic conceptions of international news coverage

as a means of “global dominance” by those in power (Cottle 2009).

Despite the fact that our analysis suggests that Belgian journalists are taking baby steps in

the direction of network journalism practices under certain circumstances, we need to add

two important comments to put our findings in the right perspective. First, a similar content

analysis of the Arab uprisings in Belgian TV news showed that most journalists relied on

international news media to verify the reliability of user-generated content before they

incorporated it in the news output (De Dobbelaer, Paulussen, and Maeseele 2013). Although

this finding suggests that most Belgian TV journalists did not yet actively “practice” network

journalism during the Arab uprisings, it cannot be denied that a change is already visible in


9

the news output. Second, our findings cannot be generalized because of the specific

character of the Arab uprisings compared to everyday foreign coverage. The Arab uprisings

dominated the media agenda for several weeks and therefore most news media had a

correspondent at the spot (except for Syria) while instead, everyday foreign reporting is

predominantly desk-bound work. In the case of Egypt and Tunisia, journalists had the

opportunity to go out there and talk to the people in the streets, therefore the higher

prominence of ordinary citizen sources and other non-mainstream sources in this case study

might not (only) be the result of the availability and use of social media material. Moreover,

ordinary people played a central role in the Arab uprisings as they were demonstrating in the

search for political change. In contrast, most everyday foreign coverage stems from an

institutional background such as economic negotiations between government leaders or

election coverage, where mainstream sources are the key players. Ethnographic studies in

newsrooms may be a good starting point to examine how far sourcing practices in this study

can be explained by network journalism practices or by the deviation from everyday desk-

bound sourcing practices where journalists may be more inclined to rely on mainstream

sources (e.g., news agencies, government). The paradigm of network journalism suggests

that news organizations develop new and continuous links with mainstream and non-

mainstream sources. Social media can in this respect add to a more diverse news map and

further research will help to assess how journalistic organizations cope with the new sources

at hand, and how much of an influx they allow into their network.

Notes

1 Sample periods: Tunisia (18 December 2010-28 February 2011), Egypt (25 January 2011 -

- 15 February 2011), Syria (15 March 2011 - 18 July 2011). 2 We used the following keywords: Egypt*, Tahrir*, Moebarak, Caïro (Egypt); Tunes*, Tunis,

Ben Ali (Tunisia); Syri*, Damascus, al-Assad (Syria). All news items that did not discuss the

uprisings in the respective countries were deleted from the sample. 3 It is important to keep in mind that we only counted social media sources as far as they

could be observed in the news output. This is an important limitation of quantitative content

analysis as journalists do not always explicitly mention their sources.

References

Castells, Manuel. 2008. “The New Public Sphere.” Annals of the AAPSS 616:78-93.

Castells, Manuel. 2011. “A Network Theory of Power.” International Journal of

Communication 5: 773-787.

Cottle, Simon. 2009. “Journalism and Globalization.” In The Handbook of Journalism Studies,

edited by Karin Wahl-Jorgensen and Thomas Hanitzsch, 341-356. New York: Routledge.

Dahlgren, Peter, and Michael Gurevitch. 2005. “Political Communication in a Changing

World.” In Mass Media and Society, edited by James Curran and Michael Gurevitch, 375-

393. London: Hodder Arnold.

Davies, Nick. 2008. Flat Earth News. London: Vintage.

Davis, Aeron. 2000. “Public Relations, News Production and Changing Patterns of Source

Access in the British National Media.” Media, Culture and Society 22(1):39-59.

De Dobbelaer, Rebeca, Steve Paulussen, and Pieter Maeseele. 2013. “Social Media and Old

Routines.” Tijdschrift voor Communicatiewetenschap 41(3):265-279.


10

Franklin, Bob, and Matt Carlson. 2011. Journalists, Sources and Credibility. London:

Routledge.

Gans, Herbert J. 1979. Deciding What’s News. New York: Pantheon Books.

Gans, Herbert J. 2011. “Multiperspectival News Revisited.” Journalism 12(1):3-13.

Habermas, Jürgen. 1974. “The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964).” New German

Critique 3(Autumn):49-55.

Hafez, Kai. 2009. “Let's Improve ‘Global Journalism’!” Journalism 10(3):329-331.

Hall, Stuart, Charles Critcher, Tony Jefferson, John Clarke, and Brian Roberts. [1978] (1999).

“Policing the Crisis.” In News: A Reader, edited by Howard Tumber, 249-256. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Heinrich, Ansgard. 2011. Network Journalism. London: Routledge.

Heinrich, Ansgard. 2012. “Foreign Reporting in the Sphere of Network Journalism.”

Journalism Practice 6(5-6):766-775.

Hermida, Alfred. 2010. “Twittering the News.” Journalism Practice 4(3):297-308.

Hermida, Alfred, Seth C. Lewis, and Rodrigo Zamith. 2012. “Sourcing the Arab Spring: A

Case Study of Andy Carvin's Sources during the Tunisian and Egyptian Revolutions.” Paper

presented at the International Symposium on Online Journalism, Austin, TX.

Joye, Stijn. 2010 The media(de)construction of Disasters. PhD Thesis, Ghent University,

Belgium.

Kaplan, Andreas M., and Michael Haenlein. 2010. “Users of the World, Unite! The

Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media.” Business Horizons 53:59-68.

Lariscy, Ruthann Weaver, Elizabeth Johnson Avery, Kaye D. Sweetser, and Pauline Howes.

2009. “An Examination of the Role of Online Social Media in Journalists' Source Mix.” Public

Relations Review 35(3):314-316.

Lewis, Justin, Andrew Williams, Bob Franklin, James Thomas, and Nick Mosdell. 2006. The

Quality and Independence of British Journalism. Cardiff: Cardiff University.

López-Rabadán, Pablo. 2011 (8 September). “New Trends in Political Journalism.” Paper

presented at The Future of Journalism, Cardiff, UK.

Lotan, Gilad, Erhardt Graeff, Mike Ananny, Devin Gaffney, Ian Pearce, and Danah Boyd.

2011. “The Revolutions Were Tweeted.” International Journal of Communication 5:1375-

1405.

McNair, Brian. 2009. “Journalism and Democracy.” In The Handbook of Journalism Studies,

edited by Karin Wahl-Jorgensen and Thomas Hanitzsch, 237-249. New York: Routledge.

McNair, Brian. 2013. “Trust, Truth and Objectivity.” In Rethinking Journalism, edited by Chris

Peters and Marcel Broersma, 75-88. London: Routledge.

Paulussen, Steve, and Pieter Ugille. 2008. “User Generated Content in the Newsroom.”

Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture 5(2):24-41.

Peer, Limor, and Beatrice Chestnut. 1995. “Deciphering Media Independence.” Political

Communication 12(1):81-95.

Rantanen, Terhi, and Oliver Boyd-Barrett. 2004. “Global and National News Agencies: The

Unstable Nexus.” In Global Journalism (4th Edition), edited by Arnold S. de Beer and John C.

Mervill, 35-49. New York: Pearson.

Russell, Adrienne. 2011. “Extra-National Information Flows, Social Media, and the 2011

Egyptian Uprising.” International Journal of Communication 5: 1238-1248.

Shoemaker, Pamela J., and Stephen D. Reese. 1996. Mediating the Message. New York:

Longman.

Sigal, Leon V. [1973] (1999). “Reporters and Officials (Excerpt).” In News: A Reader, edited

by Howard Tumber, 224-234. Oxford: Oxford University Press.


11

Van Hout, Tom, Henk Pander Maat, and Wim De Preter. 2011. “Writing from News Sources:

The Case of Apple TV. Journal of Pragmatics 43 (7): 1876-1889.

Van Leuven, Sarah, Annelore Deprez, and Karin Raeymaeckers. 2013. “Towards a More

Balanced News Access?” Journalism: doi 10.1177/1464884913501837.

Webster, Frank. 2011. “Information and Democracy.” In Media Perspectives for the 21st

Century, edited by Stylianos Papathanassopoulos, 21-40. London: Routledge.

Wolfsfeld, Gadi. 2011. Making Sense of Media and Politics. New York: Routledge.

Wouters, Ruud, Knut De Swert, and Stefaan Walgrave. 2009. A Window on the World.

Brussels: Flemish Peace Institute.


12

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Author 1: Dr. Sarah Van Leuven

Affiliation: Ghent University, Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication

Phone: +32 9 33 11 968

E-mail: [email protected]

Homepage: http://www.cjs.ugent.be/members/sarah-van-leuven

Author 2: Prof. Dr. Annelore Deprez

Affiliation: Ghent University, Department of Communication Sciences

Phone: +32 9 264 68 84


Homepage: http://www.cjs.ugent.be/members/annelore-deprez

Author 3: Prof. Dr. Karin Raeymaeckers

Affiliation: Ghent University, Department of Communication Sciences

Address: Korte Meer 7-9-11, 9000 Ghent, Belgium

Phone: +32 9 264 84 29


Homepage: http://www.cjs.ugent.be/members/karin-raeymaeckers

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

NETWORKING OR NOT WORKING? A Comparison of Arab Spring Coverage in Belgian Newspapers and TV News

Documents

Transcript of NETWORKING OR NOT WORKING? A Comparison of Arab Spring Coverage in Belgian Newspapers and TV News