Online News Consumption Research: An Assessment of Past Work ...

Online News Consumption Research

1 

Running head: ONLINE NEWS CONSUMPTION RESEARCH Online News Consumption Research: An Assessment of Past Work and an Agenda for the Future

Eugenia Mitchelstein and Pablo J. Boczkowski Department of Communication Studies Northwestern University Frances Searle Building 2240 Campus Drive Evanston, IL 60208 USA Electronic mail addresses: [email protected] / [email protected]

In Press, New Media & Society Date of this version: September 3, 2009

Authors’ bios: Eugenia Mitchelstein (M. Sc., Media and Communications, London School of Economics, 2005) is a third-year Ph.D. student in the Department of Communication Studies at Northwestern University. Her research focuses on new media, political communication, and online journalism. She has co-authored "Between tradition and change," which is forthcoming in Journalism: Theory Practice & Criticism, 10 (5). Pablo J. Boczkowski (Ph.D., Science and Technology Studies, Cornell University, 2001) is Associate Professor in the Department of Communication Studies at Northwestern University. His research program interrogates core concepts in social theory by examining cultural processes and formations made particularly visible in the transition from print to digital media. He pursues this program through ethnographic studies of journalistic work and organizations. His publications include the award-winning Digitizing the News: Innovation in Online Newspapers (MIT Press, 2004), the forthcoming News at Work: Imitation in an Age of Information Abundance (University of Chicago Press, 2010), and articles in journals and edited volumes. Authors’ note: This paper was greatly improved as a result of the most useful feedback received from four anonymous reviewers and the two journal editors. Maggie Griffith provided terrific editorial assistance. We also thank Jim Webster for helpful comments on a much earlier version of this paper, and Dan O’Keefe for his always savvy advice.

© 2009 Eugenia Mitchelstein & Pablo J. Boczkowski – Do not quote, circulate or reproduce without permission from the authors 


2 

Abstract This paper assesses the main findings and dominant modes of inquiry in recent scholarship on online news consumption. The findings suggest that the consumption of news on the Internet has not yet differed drastically from the consumption of news in traditional media. The assessment shows that the dominant modes of inquiry have also been characterized by stability rather than change (because research has usually drawn on traditional theoretical and methodological approaches). In addition, these modes of inquiry exhibit three systematic limitations: the assumption of a division between print, broadcast, and online media; the notion that the analysis should treat media features and social practices separately; and the inclination to focus on ordinary or extraordinary patterns of phenomena but not on both at the same time. On the basis of this assessment, this paper proposes an integrative research agenda that builds on this scholarship but also contributes to solve some of its main limitations.

Keywords: Online news – Online journalism – Online news consumption – Media consumption – Internet Publics – Audiences – New media scholarship

Word count (excluding authors’ bios and note): 8941



3 

Online News Consumption Research: An Assessment of Past Work and an Agenda for the Future News consumption is a central aspect of everyday life in modern societies (Bogart, 1989; Butsch, 2008; Dayan & Katz 1992; Luhmann, 1996; Morley, 1980; Thompson, 1995). In recent years, the consumption of online news has experienced major growth. As online news audiences have expanded and entered the mainstream, scholarship about them has also developed and matured. Research has unfolded in a piecemeal fashion, with a myriad of studies tackling narrowly defined topics. But with a few exceptions (Boczkowski, 2002), there is a dearth of thorough examinations of this area of research. Thus, there has been a lack of attempts to offer a panoramic depiction of the road traveled so far and a programmatic vision of possible directions for future journeys. This paper aims to contribute to filling these twin voids by critically assessing the recent scholarship and, on the basis of this assessment, presenting the outline of an integrative research agenda on online news consumption that builds upon the strengths of the existing scholarship but also helps to overcome its main limitations. The assessment of the scholarship indicates that online news consumers have not behaved radically differently from traditional media audiences.i The empirical studies show that despite the proliferation of sites and technologies, most users are still influenced by past consumption habits. Although changes have occurred, they have not drastically altered the news consumption landscape. This assessment is presented in the next four sections. The first centers on research about whether online news complements or displaces traditional media use. The second looks at the links between online news and political knowledge. The third addresses analyses of audience fragmentation and homogenization, and the fourth issues of civic participation.ii Continuity has also often characterized the dominant modes of inquiry about online news



4 

consumption by relying on traditional conceptual and methodological preferences. These modes of inquiry have yielded valuable insights, but have also proven to be limited to address phenomena that challenge these traditional preferences. Three such limitations are salient: the assumption of a division between print, broadcast, and online media; the notion that the analysis should treat media features and social practices separately; and the inclination to focus on ordinary or extraordinary patterns of phenomena but not on both at the same time. To help overcome these limitations, this paper presents a general outline of an integrative research agenda. This agenda advocates a) turning the often taken-for-granted assumptions that subtend these limitations from gives into outcomes of the inquiry; b) pursuing empirical strategies that address the multiple relevant dimensions of the phenomena studied; c) relying on mixed-methods designs to better grasp these multiple dimensions; and, d) developing theory from explanations of the resulting findings that resort to situational and structural factors that have been fruitful across media scholarship. Does Online News Consumption Complement or Displace Traditional Media Consumption? Two positions have marked the research on the relationship between news consumption in online and traditional media: one argues that Internet news use complements traditional media consumption, and the other that it displaces it. We suggest that the lack of conclusive findings might be due to an analytical stance that separates the use of print, broadcast, and online media, thus preventing an exploration of how consumers integrate news consumption across media. One stream of studies suggests that the use of online news media complements the consumption of news in traditional media (Chan & Leung, 2005; Hujanen & Pietikainen, 2004; Kayany & Yelsma, 2000; Livingstone & Markham, 2008; Nguyen & Western, 2007). On the basis of a survey about news consumption in Texas, Chyi and Lasorsa argued that “the



5 

simultaneous use of the print and online editions suggested that to some extent print and online products complement each other” (2002: 103). Findings from some analyses of the behaviors and motivations of online news consumers support the complementarity hypothesis. Flavian and Gurrea (2007) surveyed news consumers in Spain and concluded that accessing Internet news is tied to seeking specific or up-to-date information, and there is a negative association between reading the newspaper for leisure and going online for news. Drawing on uses and gratification theory (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974), a different perspective contends that users’ goals and interests shape consumption more strongly than medium attributes (Flanagin & Metzger, 2001). Thus, people focus on specific types of content, such as sports, politics, and entertainment in the multiple platforms used to access the respective stories (Lin, Salwen, & Abdulla, 2005; Livingstone, 2004; Sheehan, 2002). Dutta-Bergman reported that, in the United States, people who go online to get sports (or other kinds of) news also followed sports (or these other) news on traditional media more closely than nonusers of sports information. The author thus concluded that ‘the search for news information in a specific content area drives the consumption of specific news types across different media outlets’ (2004: 55). Echoing the principle of relative constancy (McCombs, 1972), an alternative research stream contends that use of traditional media has decreased since the popularization of the Web, thus signaling a displacement effect (Gentzkow, 2007; Gunter, Russell, Withey & Nicholas, 2003; Kaye & Johnson, 2003; Lin, Salwen, Garrison & Driscoll, 2005). The 2008 Pew Biennial News Consumption Survey showed that the portion of Americans who read a newspaper ‘yesterday’ fell from 40 to 34 percent between 2006 and 2008, whereas the percentage who accessed their news online ‘yesterday’ rose from 23 to 29 percent in the same period. Research has found that the displacement trend is in part dependent upon demographic factors such as age,



6 

with effects appearing to be greater among young users (Ahlers, 2006; Coleman & McCombs, 2007; Lee, 2006; Ogan, Ozakca, & Groshek, 2008). In their study of news habit formation among American college students, Diddi and LaRose concluded that members of ‘the first internet generation’… ‘are less likely to read newspapers than older people and less likely to watch network news’ (2006: 197 and 205). However, some studies suggest that displacement effects among young users might not be geographically homogeneous. Hasebrink and PausHasebrink (2007) found that although 85% of young people in Germany access the Internet, only 27% used it for online news consumption. There seems to be a complex relationship between complementarity and displacement that is, in part, dependent on temporal and socioeconomic factors. Some contend that audience behavior could change over time, as the appropriation of online technologies is normalized (Metzger, Flanagin, & Zwarun, 2003; Salwen, Garrison & Driscoll, 2005; Tewksbury, 2003). Althaus and Tewksbury suggest that studies of Internet use are time-bound, because patterns of consumption ‘may change dramatically as use of computer technologies becomes more widespread in the general population’ (2000: 22). Research has also found that access to online news varies according to socioeconomic status, educational attainment, and age. Online news audiences tend to have more years of education and higher incomes than people who do not access online news (Chadwick, 2006; Nguyen & Western, 2007). The use of news sites may complement traditional media use for older, less educated, and lower socioeconomic status groups, but it may displace offline news consumption for younger and more educated users. Thus, the latter group ‘perhaps… will never acquire the habit of reading a print version of a newspaper’ (Davis, 1999: 42). The lack of conclusive findings about issues of displacement and complementarity might



7 

result from an artificial differentiation among print, broadcast, and online news consumption in most of the research. For instance, Nicholas and colleagues examined consumer logs to the London Times website, and found that midweek was the busiest time for the online newspaper, whereas Saturday – the highest circulation day of its print counterpart – was the quietest (Nicholas, Huntington, Lievesley, & Wasti, 2000). Because this study only analyzed website logs, it cannot ascertain whether it signals displacement or complementarity: accessing timesonline.co.uk midweek might or might not be related to heavy reading of the paper on Saturdays. Thus, the persistence of conflicting findings might be tied to analytical strategies that ignore the manifold interpenetration of news consumption across media. The Consequences of Online News Consumption for Political Knowledge This section focuses on the ties between access to online news and political knowledge. While some scholars have proposed that increased availability of information will lead to higher levels of political knowledge, others have contended that access to online news is less conducive to acquiring this knowledge. We also analyze the related area of the credibility of online content, showing that there has been little research that links the credibility of news sites to the level of political information acquired by their consumers. We argue that this is in part due to the traditional separation between accounts of media features and analyses of social practices. To some scholars influenced by Downs’ economic theory of democracy (1957), the vast availability of online news makes it easier for citizens to access political information (Bimber, 1998; Neuman, 2001; Weber, Loumakis & Bergman, 2003). This is because ‘(t)he Web provides a theoretically limitless news hole of up-to-date, mostly raw information that is available whenever the user wants it’ (Johnson & Kaye, 2003: 12). But others have argued that this availability might only increase access to public affairs content (namely, political, economic and



8 

international subjects) for those already engaged in the political process (Graber, 1996; Margolis & Resnick, 2000; Nisbet & Scheufele, 2004; Tolbert & McNeal, 2003). Poindexter and McCombs (2001) found that people who already acknowledged a civic duty to be informed were more likely to read political news online. Scholars have also analyzed whether online news consumption is more or less conducive to learning political knowledge than news consumption in traditional media. Some have argued that increased choice of online news reduces exposure to public affairs stories, and thus, knowledge and recall of current events (Dalrymple & Scheufele, 2007; Schoenbach, de Waal, & Lauf, 2005). In an experiment, Althaus and Tewksbury (2002) found that participants exposed to print news could recognize and recall more public affairs stories than subjects exposed to online news. They attributed the difference to the reduced story salience cues in the online version, which gave subjects more freedom to follow their own interests. Still other studies have shown that access to online news does not lead to a decrease in knowledge of public affairs in contrast with traditional news media and might even have different cognitive effects (Drew and Weaver, 2006; Kenski & Stroud, 2006; Xenos & Moy, 2007). Eveland, Seo, and Marton (2002) exposed subjects to television, print newspaper, and online news during the 2000 U.S. election, and found that although both newspapers and television news produced more overall accurate recall than online news, the Web helped users to structure political knowledge better. To some scholars, use of the Internet might increase the likelihood of incidental news knowledge. Consumers are often exposed to online news as a consequence of general Web use, which in turn can lead to greater awareness about public affairs subjects (Lupia & Philpot, 2005; Salwen, 2005). These findings echo Baum’s (2003) research on the positive effects of soft news programs on the political knowledge of otherwise inattentive television audiences. Tewksbury,



9 

Weaver, and Maddex analyzed survey data and found that overall exposure to the Internet was positively associated with incidental exposure to news. They concluded that ‘for this reason, perhaps more than for many other hyperbolic claims one hears, the Web may be a positive force in American politics’ (2001: 547). A cognate area of scholarship has examined the role of media and social factors in the credibility of Internet knowledge. Regarding media factors, some studies have argued that online news is more credible than television and radio, but less than newspapers (Flanagin & Metzger, 2000; Kiousis, 2001; Schweiger, 2000). However, drawing on a survey of news consumers in the United States, Abdulla, Garrison, Salwen, Driscoll and Casey (2005) reported that respondents rated online news highest in credibility. Other studies looked at differences concerning the institutional affiliation of online news sites and found that users rate traditional media sites as more credible than independent sites (Flanagin & Metzger, 2007; Kiousis, 2006; Pew, 2008). Melican and Dixon (2008) found that survey respondents considered online counterparts of traditional media to be just as credible as offline news, whereas nontraditional Internet sources ranked lowest in terms of credibility. Concerning credibility as a function of social factors, some studies have shown that more experienced users rate online news as more credible than less experienced users (Flanagin & Metzger, 2000; Johnson & Kaye, 2000; Johnson, Kaye, Bichard, & Wong, 2007). Other analysts have suggested that younger users tend to find online information more credible than older consumers (Bucy, 2003; Metzger, Flanagin, & Zwarun, 2003). Although some studies have indicated that users report credibility problems in online information (Flanagin & Metzger, 2000; Savolainen, 2007), Flanagin and Metzger found that Internet users are ‘skeptical of web-based information, know they should verify the information they get online, and yet fail to do so’ (2007: 334).



10 

Like research about the effects of online news consumption on traditional media, scholarship about the relationship between the credibility of, and knowledge acquisition from, news sites has also yielded a body of often conflicting findings. We suggest that one reason for this state of affairs is that studies have often looked at either media features or social practices, but less frequently at the interactions between these two dimensions. These studies frequently fail to capture how users may variously enact different appropriation practices of diverse media features, and these factors may be tied to varying levels of credibility and knowledge. By contrast, in one of the few studies looking at both features and practices, D’Haenens, Jankowski and Heuvelman found that subjects’ gender and interest in specific topics had a larger influence on recall of news articles than the medium, and concluded that “the manner in which readers consume and recall news provided by online and print newspapers is (…) complex and varied” (2004: 380). Further research that explores the connections between media features and social practices may shed additional light on the conflicting findings on issues of knowledge and credibility—and, as argued below, other key topics. Fragmentation and Homogenization among Online Media Audiences This section explores scholarship on whether increased content choice online is tied to either fragmentation or homogenization of the audience. It examines two streams of research. The first has looked at the highly diversified supply of online news and inferred that the audience is more fragmented than in the past. The second contends that the public is not becoming increasingly fragmented, and that, on the contrary, content online is increasingly more homogenous. We suggest that the tension between fragmentation and homogenization might be in part due to the tendency to focus on either ordinary or extraordinary patterns of phenomena. Drawing on selective exposure theory (Zillmann & Bryant, 1985), some scholars have



11 

argued that the diversification in online news supply may lead to polarization as people obtain their information increasingly from, and discuss public affairs with, like-minded individuals (MacDougall, 2005; Margolis & Resnick, 2000; Stroud, 2008; Sunstein, 2001). The possibility of polarized news audiences ‘has raised fears of political balkanization and break-down of the national political consensus’ (Graber, 2006: 376). Other analysts have proposed that a lack of interest in public affairs news is particularly problematic in relation to the fragmentation of the news supply (Davis, 1999; Mutz, 2006). Prior examined the links between content preferences and the media environment and concluded that the proliferation of choices ‘causes increasing segmentation between news and entertainment fans’ (2007: 274). Some scholars have tied audience fragmentation to socioeconomic factors (Castells, 1997; Graber, 1996). Papacharissi has suggested that ‘access to online information is not universal and equal to all [because] those who can access online information are equipped with additional tools to be more active citizens’ (2002: 15). Few studies on this topic analyze actual consumption patterns. One exception is Tewksbury, who found that news sites users had distinctive profiles in terms of demographic characteristics and topic selection, and concluded that ‘fragmentation may reduce the likelihood of sustained, widespread attention to political issues, thereby weakening the potential of consensus’ (2005: 346). The opposite camp contends that the public is not becoming increasingly fragmented (Chadwick, 2006; Neuman, 2001). Some authors have focused on the construction of the news agenda (Boczkowski, 2009; Boczkowski & de Santos, 2007; Lee, 2007). Others have looked at the reception side. Coleman and McCombs studied agenda-setting effects among consumers of different media in the United States and argued that ‘there is little support for the logically intuitive idea that this diversity of media will lead to the end of the public agenda as we have



12 

known it’ (2007: 503). Hindman has argued that audience distribution on the Web shows the existence of ‘a small set of winners that receive the lion's share of the traffic, and a host of tiny Web sites that, collectively, receive most of the remaining visitors’ (2009: 134). The conflicting evidence about homogenization and segmentation could be related to the tendency to look into either ordinary or extraordinary phenomena. That is, while an exclusive focus on ordinary patterns reveals the existence of homogenization, a concentration on extraordinary ones shows the presence of segmentation. By contrast, Boczkowski argues that ‘homogenization might characterize the center of the media spectrum and segmentation its periphery’ (in press: 250). He adds that if consumption ‘was arrayed in a single dimension, the more frequent activities would be located at the center and marked by rising homogenization, and the less frequent ones would be placed at both ends and be signaled by increasing segmentation’ (Ibid: 250). Thus, studying ordinary and extraordinary patterns of online news consumption could help to furnish more comprehensive and nuanced accounts of the tension between homogenization and fragmentation. Online News as a Resource for Civic Participation This section explores two strands of research about whether online news consumption might contribute to civic participation. The first examines the impact of online news consumption on democratic processes. Two positions have emerged in the literature: one posits that there is no positive effect, and the other argues the existence of a positive effect but mediated by variables such as political talk and type of news source. The second stream analyzes online discussion and user-authored content as forms of civic participation fostered by the online environment. This stream is also divided between studies that underscore the possibility of changes, and those that center on why these changes have not been very likely so far. We suggest



13 

that the lack of a consensus on the link between online news and civic participation might be related to the divisions across media, between media features and social practices, and between ordinary and extraordinary patterns of audience behavior. Some authors have proposed that there are no significant links between online news consumption and civic participation (Bimber, 2001; Kenski & Stroud, 2006; Margolis & Resnick, 2000; Weaver & Drew, 2001). Scheufele and Nisbet surveyed Internet consumers in the United States and found that informational uses played “a very limited role … in promoting levels of efficacy, knowledge, and participation” (2002: 65). However, other studies have shown a positive relationship (Amadeo, 2007; Johnson & Kaye, 2003; Norris, 2003). Esser and de Vreese found that searching for information online was a strong predictor of voter turnout in the European parliamentary election of 2004, and concluded that ‘all modes of communication are positively correlated to young people’s political engagement—interactive forms … even more so than traditional one-way forms’ (2007: 1208). Some researchers have noted that the ties between online news consumption and civic participation may be mediated by political discussion because consumers who talk about public affairs are more likely to increase this participation than those who do not do so (Eveland & Dylko, 2007; Hardy & Scheufele, 2005; Nisbet & Scheufele, 2004; Xenos & Moy, 2007). Shah, Cho, et al. studied media consumption and civic participation during the 2004 U.S. election and found that ‘media effects were largely indirect, channeled through political discussion and messaging’ (2007: 696). Other scholars have argued that the conflicting evidence about the connections between online news consumption and civic participation might be due to the differences among Internet sites and among consumption practices (Kenski & Stroud, 2006; Lupia & Baird, 2003; Shah,



14 

Kwak & Holbert, 2001). Lupia and Philpot contended that that the Internet is not a monolith, and urged to focus ‘on how certain kinds of web sites affect certain kinds of people’ (2005: 2). In an experiment that exposed subjects to sites with political information in either interactive or noninteractive conditions, Tedesco (2004) showed that exposure to the interactive condition resulted in stronger levels of political efficacy—and the noninteractive one in lower levels of efficacy. Tedesco concluded that ‘interactive features on Web sites help young adults feel more informed about politics and more valuable or useful to the political process’ (2004: 196). The second strand of research examines online discussion of public affairs as a form of civic participation. Some authors have argued that online media have lowered the cost of debating opinions in public (DiMaggio, Hargittai, Neuman, & Robinson, 2001; Papacharissi, 2004). For Etzioni, ‘it would be much easier online than offline for millions not merely to gain information and to vote, but also to participate in deliberations’ (2003: 97). Yet, studies of online discussion forums have shown that the dominance of vociferous minorities, the lack of civility in the exchanges, and the exclusion of disagreeing voices hampers deliberation (Davis, 1999; MacDougall, 2005; Margolis & Resnick, 2000; Schultz, 2000). Ye and Li (2006) looked at users’ forums in American online newspapers and found that the number of participants was low, postings were trivial, and public affairs topics were not the readers' first preference. They concluded that ‘the value of forum messages is fairly limited, if measured by the high standards of democratic deliberation’ (2006: 255). Researchers have warned that access to online information may foster participation among consumers who are already engaged in the political process (Bimber & Davis, 2003; DiMaggio et al., 2001; Norris, 2000; Prior, 2007). Bimber has argued that the informed citizen may be more likely to engage in the practices of democracy, but ‘increased availability of low-



15 

cost information is not likely to change greatly who is informed and who is not’ (2003: 210). However, Krueger found that the Internet during the 2000 United States election had the potential to act as a political outlet for those previously unengaged, because ‘using the Internet allows individuals to acquire the medium-specific skills required to overcome the technical obstacles associated with the medium’ (2002: 494). Finally, scholars have also argued that the Internet can foster news production as a collective effort between journalists and consumers (Bentley et al., 2007; Boczkowski, 2004; Deuze, 2003; Pavlik, 2000; Russell, 2007). However, research has identified limitations in userauthored news as a form of participation. Some studies have shown that most blogs do not feature public affairs content and instead resemble the personal journal format (Herring, Scheidt, Bonus & Wright, 2005; Papacharissi, 2007; Trammell, Tarkowski & Sapp, 2006). Ornebring analyzed users’ blogs in Swedish and British tabloids and found that they ‘mostly function as an online diary where the most popular topics are every-day life things such as love, work, children, etc.’ (2008: 780). Furthermore, analyses of public affairs user-authored content have shown that bloggers and other consumers rely heavily on journalists for that information (Daniels, 2006; Deuze, Bruns & Neuberger, 2007; Haas, 2005; Reese, Rutigliano, Hyun & Jeong, 2007). Lowrey and Latta interviewed political bloggers in the United States and concluded that they ‘tend to reproduce rather than challenge the work of mainstream media, and many adopt similar practices’ (2008: 187). Research on the link between online news consumption and political participation might have suffered from the three limitations identified in prior sections. First, the differentiation of print, broadcast and online media may hinder the identification of the benefits of online news consumption for civic engagement. Audience members may integrate consumption of different



16 

media, for instance, surfing the web while watching the evening newscast, or using the internet to search for in depth information about an issue they initially learned via print or broadcast media. This makes it difficult to separate the effects of one modality of media consumption from the others. Second, research on users as content producers has usually focused either on media features or on social practices. By dividing content from practices, this scholarship has been unable to illuminate whether it is the mere availability of media features or the sheer practices of their consumers or both what accounts for the varying realizations—from writing to reading to ignoring to resisting—of user-authored news. Third, the separation between ordinary and extraordinary behaviors might also account for some conflicting findings. For instance, studies on user-authored news which have usually relied on purposive or self-selected samples of subjects or content have tended to over-represent this news and their creators: the behavior of highly motivated user-authors has not characterized that of their less motivated counterparts (Johnson & Kaye, 2004; Lowrey & Latta, 2008; Reich, 2008). Steps Towards an Integrative Research Agenda The previous sections have offered a critical assessment of recent research on online news consumption. This assessment shows that despite the growth and innovation in technology and site offers, online news consumption routines appear to be shaped to an important extent by consumption habits that characterized the traditional media landscape. The assessment indicates that continuity has also frequently marked the typical scholarly approaches to online news consumption. These approaches have generated valuable knowledge, but have also exhibited three important limitations: the assumption of a division between print, broadcast, and online media; the notion that the analysis should treat media features and social practices separately; and the inclination to focus on either ordinary or extraordinary patterns of phenomena but not on



17 

both at the same time. These limitations arise, at least in part, from epistemological preferences that have long marked the domains of research that are concerned with the study of online news. First, the analytical distinction among types of media is a legacy of mass communication scholarship that tended to divide the analysis of print and broadcast media and has now added online media as another component of the news landscape. Second, the focus on either media features or social practices stems from a research strategy that emphasizes either product characteristics often elucidated through content analyses or media effects that are usually examined through surveys or experimental designs. Third, the split between studies that look solely at extraordinary patterns and those that focus exclusively on ordinary ones is an expression of the divergent ethos of scholarship on innovation (which tends to highlight the kind of novelty that is most visible in extraordinary situations) and on institutionalized phenomena (which often underscores continuity in social life that ordinary circumstances bring into particularly sharp relief). The existent research has made important contributions in a relatively short period of time. But it has failed to take full advantage of online news consumption for more extensive empirical, methodological, and theoretical renewal. Undertaking this renewal would not mean setting aside the existing empirical foci, methodological approaches, and theoretical lenses. But it would mean broadening the aspects of the phenomena that deserve examination, the tools utilized to learn about them, and the analytical perspectives that explain the resulting findings. The remainder of this paper outlines four building blocks of an alternative, integrative research agenda that offers an initial step in this direction of scholarly renewal. The first building block consists of making explicit the assumptions that have been taken for granted and considering them an outcome of the inquiry rather than its starting point. Thus,



18 

rather than assuming that news consumption is divided across media types, research should inquire into when, where, how and under what conditions this happens—and does not happen— and its consequences for issues such as displacement, complementarity, and civic participation. Similarly, rather than assuming either that media features find direct expression in social practices or that social practices can be understood without also making sense of the media features that are tied to them, the analysis should look at whether there is interdependence between features and practices, under what circumstances and with what effects for issues such as knowledge acquisition and credibility. In addition, rather than focusing on extraordinary (or ordinary) patterns of phenomena and assuming that it also characterizes their ordinary (or extraordinary) counterparts, research should make explicit whether the phenomena are of one kind or the other (if not both) and reflect on the implications of this choice for the resulting findings. The second building block centers on issues of empirical strategy. Rather than narrowly segmenting the empirical landscape into a) distinct media, b) either features or practices, and c) either extraordinary or ordinary patterns of phenomena, the research process should examine the multiple pieces and dimensions of the puzzle. This includes acknowledgment that sometimes consumers integrate across multiple media types and others they do not. Therefore, the analysis should examine how this integration happens—and does not happen. These issues of empirical strategy also affect inquiry by orienting the gathering of data towards the mechanisms that connect media features and social practices—and those that disconnect them. Along similar lines, scholars should also look at both ordinary and extraordinary phenomena within a single study and determine whether, for instance, the behavior of consumers during ordinary news periods changes in periods marked by extraordinary events.



19 

The third building block revolves around matters of research design. In light of the broad and multi-dimensional aim of the empirical strategy, an integrative approach calls for mixedmethods studies. It also implies an effort to triangulate the findings obtained through the multiple methods used. The limitations of the existent scholarship are in part related to a tendency to focus on a single aspect of phenomena at a time (at the expense of other relevant aspects), and to apply a single set of methodological tools. Thus, the rationale for the alternative position advocated here is twofold. First, different methods allow gathering various kinds of data and analyze them in different ways. This is further enhanced by a combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection and/or analysis techniques. Second, triangulation of findings obtained with the different methods helps distinguish the results that converge from those that do not. In this way, triangulation affords a more complete and nuanced rendition of phenomena. Issues of integration across media could be further clarified through circulation, ratings, and site usage data coupled with diaries of news consumption followed up by in-depth interviews. The connections between media features and social practices could be illuminated through a combination of content analyses of news sites and surveys of, and focus groups with, their consumers. The role of extraordinary versus ordinary distribution of phenomena could be captured by relying on sampling strategies that included average, frequent and sporadic consumers, as well as ordinary and extraordinary events. The fourth building block concerns theory development. The integration of consumption across multiple media, the connections between media features and social practices, and the interactions between ordinary and extraordinary patterns of phenomena create opportunities for the actors. Whether and how these opportunities are realized (or not) depends on a number of possible structural and situational factors, and combinations of both. These factors range from



20 

large patterns of income, skill, gender, and ethnic distributions to micro dynamics affecting the interpretive, relational, spatial, and temporal character of everyday life. Theory development in the integrative research agenda occurs by explaining the findings generated through the implementation of the three previous building blocks in a way that links these explanations to existing theorizing on traditional news consumption in particular, and broader aspects of communicative action and experience in general. Theoretical renewal emerges by highlighting how new concepts emerge from existent ones rather than by assuming that new phenomena are better understood through either an automatic application of the current theoretical tool-kit or the creation of an entirely new conceptual framework. This brief outline of an integrative research agenda does not exhaust the possibilities opened up for the study of online news consumption. It simply provides some initial steps for much needed empirical, methodological, and theoretical renewal. At stake in this type of inquiry is not just examining the dynamics of online news consumption, but also challenging traditional assumptions and tackling unresolved dichotomies in the broader study of new media and society.



21 

References Abdulla, R. A., Garrison, B., Salwen, M. B., Driscoll, P. D., & Casey, D. (2005). Online News Credibility. In M. B. Salwen, P. D. Driscoll & B. Garrison (Eds.), Online News and The Public (pp. 147–164). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc Inc. Ahlers, D. (2006). News Consumption and the New Electronic Media. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 11(1), 29-52. Althaus, S. L., & Tewksbury, D. (2000). Patterns of Internet and Traditional News Media Use in a Networked Community. Political Communication, 17(1), 21-45. Althaus, S. L., & Tewksbury, D. (2002). Agenda Setting and the "New" News - Patterns of Issue Importance among Readers of the Paper and Online Versions of the New York Times. Communication Research, 29(2), 180-207. Amadeo, J.-A. (2007). Patterns of Internet use and Political Engagement among Youth. In P. Dahlgren (Ed.), Young Citizens and New Media: Learning for Democratic Participation (pp. 125-146). New York: Routledge. Barber, B. R. (2003). Which Technology for Which Democracy? In H. Jenkins & D. Thorburn (Eds.), Democracy and New Media (pp. 33-47). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Baum, M. (2003). Soft News Goes to War: Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy in the New Media Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bentley, C., Hamman, B., Littau, J., Meyer, H., Watson, B., & Welsh, B. (2007). Citizen Journalism: A Case Study. In M. Tremayne (Ed.), Blogging, citizenship and the future of media (pp. 239-259). New York: Routledge. Bimber, B. (1998). The Internet and Political Transformation: Populism, Community, and Accelerated Pluralism. Polity, 31(1), 133-160.



22 

Bimber, B. (2001). Information and Political Engagement in America: The Search for Effects of Information Technology at the Individual Level. Political Research Quarterly, 54(1), 5367. Bimber, B., & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. Boczkowski, P. (2002). The Development and Use of Online Newspapers: What Research Tells Us and What we Might Want to Know. In L. A. Lievrouw & S. Livingstone (Eds.), Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Consequences of ICTs (pp. 270-286). London: Sage. Boczkowski, P. (2004). Digitizing the news: Innovation in online newspapers. Cambridge: MIT Press. Boczkowski, P. (2009). Technology, Monitoring and Imitation in Contemporary News Work. Communication, Culture & Critique, 2, 39-58. Boczkowski, P. (in press). News at Work: Imitation in an Age of Information Abundance. Chicago: Chicago University Press. Boczkowski, P., & de Santos, M. (2007). When More Media Equals Less News: Patterns of Content Homogenization in Argentina's Leading Print and Online Newspapers. Political Communication, 24(2), 167-180. Bogart, L. (1989). Press and Public: Who Reads What, When, Where, and Why in American Newspapers (Second ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Bucy, E. P. (2003). Media Credibility Reconsidered: Synergy Effects between On-air and Online News. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(2), 247-264. Butsch, R. (2008). The Citizen Audience: Crowds, Publics and Individuals. New York: Routledge.



23 

Castells, M. (1997). The Power of Identity. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers. Chadwick, A. (2006). Internet Politics. New York: Oxford University Press. Chan, J. K. C., & Leung, L. (2005). Lifestyles, Reliance on Traditional News Media and Online News Adoption. New Media & Society, 7(3), 357-382. Chyi, H. I., & Lasorsa, D. L. (2002). An Explorative Study on the Market Relation between Online and Print Newspapers. Journal of Media Economics, 15(2), 91-106. Coleman, R., & McCombs, M. (2007). The Young and Agenda-less? Exploring Age-related Differences in Agenda Setting on the Youngest Generation, Baby Boomers and the Civic Generation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(3), 495-508. Dalrymple, K. E., & Scheufele, D. A. (2007). Finally Informing the Electorate? How the Internet Got People Thinking about Presidential Politics in 2004. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 12(3), 96-111. Daniels, G. L. (2006). The Role of Native American Print and Online Media in the 'Era of Big Stories': A Comparative Case Study of Native American Outlets' Coverage of the Red Lake Shootings. Journalism, 7(3), 321-342. Davis, R. (1999). The Web of Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, USA. Dayan, D., & Katz, E. (1992). Media Events: The Live Broadcasting of History. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Deuze, M. (2003). The Web and its Journalisms: Considering the Consequences of Different types of Newsmedia Online. New Media & Society, 5(2), 203-230. Deuze, M., Bruns, A., & Neuberger, C. (2007). Preparing for an Age of Participatory News Journalism Practice, 1(3), 322 - 338. D'Haenens, L., Jankowski, N., & Heuvelman, A. (2004). News in Online and Print Newspapers:



24 

Differences in Reader Consumption and Recall. New Media & Society, 6(3), 363-382. Diddi, A., & LaRose, R. (2006). Getting Hooked on News: Uses and Gratifications and the Formation of News Habits among College Students in an Internet Environment. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 193 - 210. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social Implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 307-336. Downs, A. (1957). An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row. Drew, D., & Weaver, D. (2006). Voter Learning in the 2004 Presidential Election: Did the Media Matter? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(1), 25-42. Dutta-Bergman, M. J. (2004). Complementarity in Consumption of News Types across Traditional and New Media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 48(1), 41-60. Esser, F., & de Vreese, C. H. (2007). Comparing Young Voters’ Political Engagement in the United States and Europe. American Behavioral Scientist, 50(9), 1195-1213. Etzioni, A. (2003). Are Virtual and Democratic Communities Feasible. In H. Jenkins & D. Thorburn (Eds.), Democracy and New Media (pp. 85-100). Cambridge: MIT Press. Eveland, W. P., & Dylko, I. (2007). Reading Political Blogs During the 2004 Election Campaign: Correlates and Political Consequences. In M. Tremayne (Ed.), Blogging, Citizenship and the Future of the Media. New York: Routledge. Eveland, W. P., Seo, M., & Marton, K. (2002). Learning from the News in Campaign 2000: An Experimental Comparison of TV News, Newspapers, and Online News. Media Psychology, 4(4), 353-378. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2000). Perceptions of Internet Information Credibility. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(3), 515-540.



25 

Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2001). Internet Use in the Contemporary Media Environment. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 153-181. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2007). The Role of Site Features, User Attributes, and Information Verification Behaviors on the Perceived Credibility of Web-based Information. New Media & Society, 9(2), 319-342. Flavian, C., & Gurrea, R. (2007). Perceived Substitutability between Digital and Physical Channels: the Case of Newspapers. Online Information Review, 31(6), 793. Gentzkow, M. (2007). Valuing New Goods in a Model with Complementarity: Online Newspapers. American Economic Review, 97(3), 713-744. Graber, D. A. (1996). The “New” Media and Politics: What does the Future Hold. Political Science & Politics, 29(1), 33-36. Graber, D. A. (2006). Mass Media and American Politics. Washington, DC: CQ Press. Gunter, B., Russell, G., Withey, R., & Nicholas, D. (2003). The British Life and Internet Project: Inaugural Survey Findings. Aslib Proceedings, 55(4), 203-216. Haas, T. (2005). From “Public Journalism” to the ”Public's journalism”? Rhetoric and Reality in the Discourse on Weblogs. Journalism Studies, 6(3), 387 - 396. Hardy, B. W., & Scheufele, D. A. (2005). Examining Differential Gains from Internet Use: Comparing the Moderating Role of Talk and Online Interactions. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 71-84. Hasebrink, U., & Paus-Hasebrink, I. (2007). Young People’s Identity Construction and Patterns of Media Use and Participation in Germany and Austria. In P. Dahlgren (Ed.), Young Citizens and New Media (pp. 81-101). New York: Routledge. Herring, S. C., Scheidt, L. A., Bonus, S., and Wright, E. (2005). Weblogs as a Bridging Genre.



26 

Information, Technology & People, 18(2), 142-171. Hindman, M. (2008). The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Hujanen, J., & Pietikainen, S. (2004). Interactive Uses of Journalism: Crossing between Technological Potential and Young People's News-using Practices. New Media & Society, 6(3), 383-401. Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2000). Using is Believing: The Influence of Reliance on the Credibility of Online Political Information among Politically Interested Internet users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(4), 865-879. Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2003). A Boost or Bust for Democracy?: How the Web Influenced Political Attitudes and Behaviors in the 1996 and 2000 Presidential Elections. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 8(3), 9-34. Johnson, T. J., & Kaye, B. K. (2004). Wag the blog: How reliance on traditional media and the Internet influence credibility perceptions of Weblogs among blog users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(3), 622-642. Johnson, T. J., Kaye, B. K., Bichard, S. L., & Wong, W. J. (2007). Every Blog Has its Day: Politically-interested Internet Users’ Perceptions of Blog Credibility. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), Retrieved March 2009 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/johnson.html. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of Mass Communication by the Individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The Uses of Mass Communications: Current Perspectives on Gratifications Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Kayany, J. M., & Yelsma, P. (2000). Displacement Effects of Online Media in the Sociotechnical Contexts of Households. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(2),



27 

215-229. Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2003). From Here to Obscurity?: Media Substitution Theory and Traditional Media in an On-line World. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 260-273. Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Connections between Internet Use and Political Efficacy, Knowledge, and Participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50, 173192. Kiousis, S. (2001). Public Trust or Mistrust? Perceptions of Media Credibility in the Information Age. Mass Communication and Society, 4(4), 381 - 403. Kiousis, S. (2006). Exploring the Impact of Modality on Perceptions of Credibility for Online News Stories. Journalism Studies, 7(2), 348-359. Krueger, B. S. (2002). Assessing the Potential of Internet Political Participation in the United States: A Resource Approach. American Politics Research, 30(5), 476-498. Lee, J. K. (2007). The effect of the Internet on Homogeneity of the Media Agenda: A Test of the Fragmentation Thesis. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 745-760. Lee, K. M. (2006). Effects of Internet Use on College Students’ Political Efficacy. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9(4), 415-422. Lin, C., Salwen, M. B., & Abdulla, R. A. (2005). Uses and Gratifications of Online and Offline News: New Wine in an Old Bottle? In M. B. Salwen, B. Garrison & P. D. Driscoll (Eds.), Online News and the Public (pp. 221–236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Lin, C., Salwen, M. B., Garrison, B., & Driscoll, P. D. (2005). Online News as a Functional Substitute for offline News. In M. B. Salwen, B. Garrison & P. D. Driscoll (Eds.), Online News and the Public (pp. 237-255). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.



28 

Livingstone, S. (2004). The Challenge of Changing Audiences: Or, what is the Audience Researcher to Do in the Age of the Internet? European Journal of Communication, 19, 75-86. Livingstone, S., & Markham, T. (2008). The Contribution of Media Consumption to Civic Participation. British Journal of Sociology, 59(2), 351-371. Lowrey, W., & Latta, J. (2008). The Routines of Blogging. In C. A. Paterson & D. Domingo (Eds.), Making Online News (pp. 185-197). New York: Peter Lang. Luhmann, N. (1996). The Reality of the Mass Media. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Lupia, A., & Baird, Z. (2003). Can Web Sites Change Citizens? Implications of Web White and Blue 2000. Political Science & Politics, 36(01), 77-82. Lupia, A., & Philpot, T. S. (2005). Views from Inside the Net: How Websites Affect Young Adults’ Political Interest. Journal of Politics, 67(4), 1122-1142. MacDougall, R. (2005). Identity, Electronic Ethos and Blogs: A Technologic Analysis of Symbolic Exchange on the New News Medium. American Behavioral Scientist, 49(4), 575-599. Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as Usual: The Cyberspace “Revolution.” Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. McCombs, M. E. (1972). Mass Media in the Marketplace. Journalism Monographs, 24, 1-104. Melican, D. B., & Dixon, T. L. (2008). News on the Net: Credibility, Selective Exposure, and Racial Prejudice. Communication Research, 35(2), 151-168. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Zwarun, L. (2003). College Student Web Use, Perceptions of Information Credibility, and Verification Behavior. Computers & Education, 41(3), 271290.



29 

Morley, D. (1980). The Nationwide Audience. London: British Film Institute. Mutz, D. (2006). How the Mass Media Divide Us. In D. W. Brady & P. S. Nivola (Eds.), Red and Blue Nation? Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press Neuman, W. R. (2001). The Impact of the New Media. In W. L. Bennett & R. M. Entman (Eds.), Mediated Politics (pp. 299-320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nguyen, A., & Western, M. (2007). Socio-structural Correlates of Online news and Information Adoption/Use: Implications for the Digital Divide. Journal of Sociology, 43(2), 167-185. Nicholas, D., Huntington, P., Lievesley, N., & Wasti, A. (2000). Evaluating consumer website logs: a case study of The Times/The Sunday Times website Journal of Information Science, 26(6), 399-411. Nisbet, M. C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2004). Political Talk as a Catalyst for Online Citizenship. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(4), 877–896. Norris, P. (2003). Tuned Out Voters? Media Impact on Campaign Learning. Ethical Perspectives, 9(3), 200-221. Ogan, C. L., Ozakca, M., & Groshek, J. (2008). Embedding the Internet in the Lives of College Students: Online and Offline Behavior. Social Science Computer review, 26(2), 170-177. Ornebring, H. (2008). The Consumer as a Producer of What? Journalism Studies, 9, 771-785. Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The Virtual Sphere: the Internet as a Public Sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 9-27. Papacharissi, Z. (2004). Democracy Online: Civility, Politeness, and the Democratic Potential of Online Political Discussion Groups. New Media & Society, 6(2), 259-283. Papacharissi, Z. (2007). The Blogger Revolution? Audiences as Media Producers: Content Analysis of 260 Blogs. In M. Tremayne (Ed.), Blogging, Citizenship and the Future of



30 

Media (pp. 21-38). New York: Routledge. Pavlik, J. (2000). The Impact of Technology on Journalism. Journalism Studies, 1, 229-237. Pew. (2008). Pew Research Center Biennial News Consumption Survey: Audience Segments in a Changing News Environment. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. Poindexter, P. M., & McCombs, M. E. (2001). Revisiting the Civic Duty to Keep Informed in the New Media Environment. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 113-126. Prior, M. (2007). Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. New York: Cambridge University Press. Reese, S. D., Rutigliano, L., Hyun, K., & Jeong, J. (2007). Mapping the Blogosphere: Professional and Citizen-Based Media in the Global News Arena. Journalism, 8, 235261. Russell, A. (2007). Digital Communication Networks and the Journalistic Field: The 2005 French Riots. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 24(4), 285-302. Salwen, M. B. (2005). Online News Trends. In M. B. Salwen, B. Garrison & P. D. Driscoll (Eds.), Online News and the Public (pp. 47-77). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Salwen, M. B., Garrison, B., & Driscoll, P. D. (2005). The Baseline Survey Projects: Exploring Questions. In M. B. Salwen, B. Garrison & P. D. Driscoll (Eds.), Online News and the Public (pp. 121-145). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Savolainen, R. (2007). Media Credibility and Cognitive authority. The Case of Seeking Orienting Information. Information Research, 12(3). Retrieved March 2009 from http://informationr.net/ir/12-3/paper319.html Scheufele, D. A., & Nisbet, M. C. (2002). Being a Citizen Online: New Opportunities and Dead



31 

Ends. Harvard International Journal of Press-Politics, 7(3), 55-75. Schoenbach, K., de Waal, E., & Lauf, E. (2005). Online and Print newspapers: Their Impact on the Extent of the Perceived Public Agenda. European Journal of Communication, 20(2), 245-258. Schultz, T. (2000). Mass Media and the Concept of Interactivity: an Exploratory Study of Online Forums and Reader Email. Media Culture & Society, 22(2), 205-221. Schweiger, W. (2000). Media Credibility--Experience or Image?: A Survey on the Credibility of the World Wide Web in Germany in Comparison to Other Media. European Journal of Communication, 15(1), 37-59. Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Nah, S., Gotlieb, M. R., Hwang, H., Lee, N.-J., et al. (2007). Campaign Ads, Online Messaging, and Participation: Extending the Communication Mediation Model. Journal of Communication, 57, 676-703. Shah, D. V., Kwak, N., & Holbert, R. L. (2001). “Connecting” and “Disconnecting” With Civic Life: Patterns of Internet Use and the Production of Social Capital. Political Communication, 18(2), 141-162. Sheehan, K. B. (2002). Of Surfing, Searching, and Newshounds: A Typology of Internet Users' Online Sessions. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(5), 62-71. Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341-366. Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Tedesco, J. C. (2004). Web Interactivity and Young Adult Political Efficacy. In A. P. Williams & J. C. Tedesco (Eds.), The Internet Election: Perspectives on the Web in Campaign 2004 (pp. 187–202). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.



32 

Tewksbury, D. (2003). What do Americans Really Want to Know? Tracking the Behavior of News Readers on the Internet. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 694-710. Tewksbury, D. (2005). The Seeds of Audience Fragmentation: Specialization in the Use of Online News Sites. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49(3), 332-348. Tewksbury, D., Weaver, A. J., & Maddex, B. D. (2001). Accidentally Informed: Incidental News Exposure on the World Wide Web. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(3), 533-554. Thompson, J. B. (1995). The Media and Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press. TNS. (2008). Digital World, Digital Life. Retrieved February 2009 from http://www.tnsglobal.com/_assets/files/TNS_Market_Research_Digital_World_Digital_L ife.pdf Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2003). Unraveling the Effects of the Internet on Political Participation? Political Research Quarterly, 56(2), 175-185. Trammell, K. D., Tarkowski, A., & Sapp, A. M. (2006). Rzeczpospolita Blogow [Republic of Blog]: Examining Polish Bloggers through Content Analysis. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 11(3). Retrieved March 2009 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol11/issue3/trammell.html Weaver, D., & Drew, D. (2001). Voter Learning and Interest in the 2000 Presidential Election: Did the Media Matter? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78(4), 787-798. Weber, L. M., Loumakis, A., & Bergman, J. (2003). Who Participates and Why?: An Analysis of Citizens on the Internet and the Mass Public. Social Science Computer review, 21(1), 2642. Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and Differential Effects of the Internet on Political and



33 

Civic Engagement. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 704-718. Ye, X., & Li, X. (2006). Internet Newspapers’ Public Forum and User Involvement. In X. Li (Ed.), Internet Newspapers (pp. 243-259). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Zillmann, D., & Bryant, J. (1985). Affect, Mood, and Emotion as Determinants of Selective Exposure. In D. Zillmann & J. Bryant (Eds.), Selective Exposure to Communication (pp. 157–190). Mawhaw, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.



34 

Endnotes                                                              i

Several definitions are in order. In this paper we use the notions of “use” and “consumption”

somewhat interchangeably, even though we are aware of the different connotations of these various terms in other contexts. We use “audience” to refer to consumer behavior in the aggregate. By “traditional media” we mean print, television and radio news. “Mainstream media” refers to established media operations which disseminate their work either online or offline. “Online news” and “online media” refer to content that is accessible through the Internet and other digital environments, regardless of whether it also appears in print, radio or television. Finally, this paper mirrors the literature’s focus on news and, particularly, public affairs news. We are mindful of the role of entertainment in cultural and political life, and we acknowledge that news and entertainment are becoming increasingly blurred. However, it is beyond the scope of this paper to address the changes in the online consumption of entertainment. ii

The scholarship included in this paper was retrieved in three ways. First, we conducted

keyword searches of databases such as the Social Sciences Citation Index. Second, we tracked references in the originally retrieved papers. Third, we also read edited volumes and theoretical books that do not carry empirical material. To organize the material, we looked for patterns of thematic similarity and came up with the four topics covered in this paper. When a study fit in more than one topic, we included the reference in two or more of the relevant sections. Taken together, these four topics cover the overwhelming majority of the reviewed scholarship. Attention to them is explained, at least in part, by the importance that the role of media in the democratic process has had in communication studies.
