Article published In: The Agenda Setting Journal
Vol. 1:2 (2017) ► pp.158–179
News sources and the same sex marriage issue
Through the lens of the agenda-setting theory
Published online: 4 September 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/asj.1.2.05che
https://doi.org/10.1075/asj.1.2.05che
Abstract
Using agenda-setting theory, this study explores the effects of news sources on public opinion on the issue of the same-sex marriage over 10 years. It examines immediate substantive salience, immediate affective salience, cumulative substantive salience and cumulative affective salience of the news sources cited in news articles from The New York Times from 2003 to 2013 and compares the coverage to public opinion polls. Four findings merit notice. First, news sources with a clear standpoint had counter effects on public opinion. Second, the salience of news sources is as influential as the affective attribute salience of news sources on public opinion. Official sources had the power to influence public opinion the most. Thirdly, the influence of the media is stronger than the influence of news sources on influencing public opinion. Fourth, LGBTQ sources were the least used sources in the same-sex marriage coverage.
Article outline
- Literature review
- Influences of news sources
- Importance of official sources
- Agenda setting and sources
- Sources and controversial issues
- Method
- News coverage of same-sex marriage
- Coded variables
- Public opinion data
- Results
- News sources: Trends within the 10-year period
- Discussion
- Non-neutral sources have a counter effect on public opinion
- Official sources had the power to influence public opinion towards the same-sex marriage issue
- The salience of news sources is as influential as the affective attribute salience of news sources on public opinion
- The influence of media is stronger than the influence of news sources on moving public opinion
- LGBTQ sources were the least quoted of all sources on the marriage issue
- Limitations
References
References (60)
Baunach, D. M. (2012). Changing same-sex marriage attitudes in America from 1988 through 2010. Public Opinion Quarterly, 761, 364–378.
Bennett, W. L., & Paletz, D. L. (1994). Taken by storm: The media, public opinion, and US foreign policy in the Gulf War. University of Chicago Press.
Berkowitz, D. (1987). TV news sources and news channels: A study in agenda building. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 64(3), 508.
Berkowitz, D., & TerKeurst, J. V. (1999). Community as interpretive community: rethinking the journalist‐source relationship. Journal of Communication, 491, 125–136.
Brown, J. D., Bybee, C. R., Wearden, S. T., & Straughan, D. M. (1987). Invisible power: Newspaper news sources and the limits of diversity. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 641, 45.
Chen, V. Y., & Pain, P. (2016, June). What changed public opinion on the same sex marriage issue? New implications of attributes in media agenda setting. Paper presented at International Communication Association Annual Conference. Fukuoka, Japan.
Church statement on proposition 8 ruling. (2010, August 4). The Church of Jesus Christ of Later-Day Saints. Retrieved from [URL]
Curtin, P. A. (1999). Reevaluating public relations information subsidies: Market-driven journalism and agenda-building theory and practice. Journal of Public Relations Research, 111, 53–90.
Davey, M. (2011, February 1). Illinois: same-sex civil unions legalized. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Dominus, S. (2009, April 10). Another blow to self-regard of New York. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Donovan, J. (2010, September 13). Pope condemns gay marriage, warns on biotech before U.K. Trip. Bloomberg. Retrieved from [URL]
Druckman, J. N. (2001). On the limits of framing effects: who can frame? Journal of Politics, 631, 1041–1066.
Eckholm, E. (2013, April 24). Gay marriage measure advances in Rhode island. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Erbring, L., Goldenberg, E. N., & Miller, A. H. (1980). Front-page news and real-world cues: A new look at agenda-setting by the media. American Journal of Political Science, 16–49.
Gandy, O. H. (1982). Beyond agenda setting: Information subsidies and public policy. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, Newsweek, and Time. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
Geitner, P. (2012, July 26). Open borders, but trouble crossing. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Goodstein, L. (2008, April 25). Gay bishop plans his civil union rite. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Hallin, D. C. (1992). Sound bite news: Television coverage of elections, 1968–1988. Journal of communication, 421, 5–24.
Harlow, S., & Johnson, T. J. (2011). The Arab spring| overthrowing the protest paradigm? How the New York Times, Global Voices and Twitter covered the Egyptian revolution. International Journal of Communication, 51, 16.
Harrison, B. F., & Michelson, M. R. (2015). God and marriage: The impact of religious identity priming on attitudes toward same‐sex marriage. Social Science Quarterly, 961, 1411–1423.
Hartman, T. K., & Weber, C. R. (2009). Who said what? The effects of source cues in issue frames. Political Behavior, 311, 537–558.
Ho, S. S., & McLeod, D. M. (2008). Social-psychological influences on opinion expression in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 351, 190–207.
Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 151, 635–650.
Kim, M. (2015). Partisans and controversial news online: Comparing perceptions of bias and credibility in news content from blogs and mainstream media. Mass Communication and Society, 181, 17–36.
Kiousis, S., & McCombs, M. (2004). Agenda-Setting effects and attitude strength political figures during the 1996 presidential election. Communication Research, 311, 36–57.
Kulish, N. (2010, July 18). Gay parade in Warsaw meets jeers from some. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Liptak, A. (2015, June 26). Supreme court ruling makes same-sex marriage a right nationwide. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
McCarthy, J. (2015, May 19). Record-High 60% of Americans support same-sex marriage. Gallup. Retrieved from [URL]
McCombs, M., Lopez-Escobar, E., & Llamas, J. P. (2000). Setting the agenda of attributes in the 1996 Spanish general election. Journal of Communication, 501, 77–92.
McCombs, M., & Valenzuela, S. (2007). The agenda-setting theory. Cuadernos de Información, 201, 44–50.
Nagourney, A. (2005, April 9). G.O.P. consultant weds his male partner. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Norris, P., Kern, M., & Just, M. R. (2003). Framing terrorism: The news media, the government, and the public. New York, NY: Routledge.
O’Heffernan, P. (1991). Mass media and American foreign policy: Insider perspectives on global journalism and the foreign policy process. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishers.
(1994). Mass media roles in foreign policy. In D. Graber (Ed.) Media Power in Politics (pp.325–326). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
On the issues. (2005, April 20). The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
Page, B. I., Shapiro, R. Y., & Dempsey, G. R. (1987). What moves public opinion?. American Political Science Review, 811, 23–43.
Peters, J. (2009, February 9). For supporters of gay marriage, a dashing of great expectations. The New York Times. Retrieved from [URL]
ProCon.org. (n.d.). Should gay marriage be legal. Retrieved from [URL]
Ragas, M. W., & Tran, H. (2013). Beyond cognitions A longitudinal study of online search salience and media coverage of the president. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 901, 478–499.
Reese, S. D., & Danielian, L. H. (1989). A closer look at intermedia influences in agenda setting: The cocaine issue of 1986. Communication campaigns about drugs: Government, media, and the public, 47–66.
Rim, H., Hong Ha, J., & Kiousis, S. (2014). The evidence of compelling arguments in agenda building: Relationships among public information subsidies, media coverage, and risk perceptions during a pandemic outbreak. Journal of Communication Management, 181, 101–116.
Rogers, E. M., & Chang, S. (1991). Media coverage of technology issues: Ethiopian drought of 1984, AIDS, Challenger, and Chernobyl. In L. Wilkens, & P. Paterson (Eds.), Risky business: Communicating issues of science, risk, and public policy (pp. 75–96). New York: Praeger.
Ryan, M. (2004). Framing the war against terrorism US newspaper editorials and military action in Afghanistan. Gazette, 661, 363–382.
Schudson, M. (2002). The news media as political institutions. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1), 249–269.
Schwartz, J. (2011). Whose voices are heard? Gender, sexual orientation, and newspaper sources. Sex Roles, 641, 265–275.
Sigal, L. V. (1986). Who? Sources make the news. In R. K. Manoff, & M. Schudson (Eds.), Reading the news (pp. 9–37). New York, NY: Pantheon.
Sleurs, K., & Jacobs, G. (2005). Beyond preformulation: an ethnographic perspective on press releases. Journal of Pragmatics, 371, 1251–1273.
Smith, C. (1993). News sources and power elites in news coverage of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 701, 393–403.
Soloski, J. (1989). Sources and channels of local news. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 661, 864.
Son, Y. J., & Weaver, D. H. (2006). Another look at what moves public opinion: Media agenda setting and polls in the 2000 US election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 181, 174–197.
Tan, Y., & Weaver, D. H. (2013). Agenda diversity and agenda setting from 1956 to 2004: What are the trends over time? Journalism Studies, 141, 773–789.
Tichenor, P. J., Donohue, G. A., Olien, C. N., & Clarke, P. (1980). Community conflict & the press. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Turk, J. V., & Franklin, B. (1987). Information subsidies: Agenda-setting traditions. Public Relations Review, 13(4), 29–41.
US Supreme Court rules gay marriage is legal nationwide (2015, Jane 27). BBC. Retrieved from [URL]
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
