Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 1
Mohammed El-Khatib
November 2, 2009
Critical Studies in Journalism
Professor Kimberly Meltzer
Research Project
Abstract
Efforts by transnational news agencies to localize news gathering to their different audiences has
parallel concerns over ideological disparity between the different office bureaus. Drawing upon
Chang’s localization theory (2001), Warren Breed’s “Newsroom Sociology framework” and
Barbie Zelizer’s theory on journalistic norms, This paper seeks to examine the ways in which
ideological disparity is manifest within such an environment, using comparative content analysis
of Al-Jazeera’s English and Arabic websites around coverage of the Israeli offensive on Gaza in
January 2008, and through qualitative analysis of second source material on high profile
instances involving editorial friction at Al Jazeera. Initial findings from both data sets point to
ideological disparity at the station suggesting that editorial friction between the two bureaus is
significant.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 2
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network: A
Comparative Case of Al-Jazeera Arabic and English.
Introduction
Much like the product localization initiatives that followed the emergence of multi-national
corporations and trade liberalization policies in the early eighties, transnational news
broadcasters have sought to undertake similar strategies in their attempts to expand into other
markets, namely through establishing regional news bureaus or franchise outfits that conform to
the cultural and lingual norms of their target audiences. The Arab satellite news broadcasting
arena serves as a compelling case study of this phenomenon at work with a surge in localized
western exports or ‘franchises’ hitting Arabic satellite waves in recent years. Alongside the two
local news giants Al-Arabiyah and Al-Jazeera, foreign news exports from MSNBC Arabic, and
Al Hurra TV (a television offshoot off of the US state Department’s Voice of America), to
BBC’s Arabic offshoot have sought to capitalize on one the most news-rich corners of the globe.
Even more fascinating is the launch of Al Jazeera English in November 2006 signals a strategy
by the original Arabic channel to diversify into English-speaking markets- a first by any Arabiclanguage media institution.
The emergence of the foreign broadcast outfits within transnational news organizations has
created a unique set of challenges in the way the news is delivered. First, the ability to broadcast
in Arabic has shifted accessibility from the English-speaking elite in the Arab world to a much
wider audience, one beholden to significantly different ideologies and interests (Amin 1999).
Second, for operators to be competitive in the region, broadcasters have had to develop the
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 3
necessary apparatus to cover local centered issues. This goes beyond simply hiring and training
local journalists or emulating local institutions; in addition to these measures, institutions have
had to accommodate local newsroom norms. Scholars and industry analysts have noted for
example that Arab reporters tended to be more emotional invested and responsive to the issues
they are covering (El-Nawawwy 2004).
Under a normative framework, the transnational broadcaster would be able to establish as wide
an audience reach as possible while minimizing the impact of editorial variance between the
different bureaus and offices on the ideological core of the institution. This ideal can be
approached by either (1) severely dimming or restricting the leverage of editorial structures
within the organization and adopting a technical approach to news sourcing and covering, or by
(2) Relying on methods to enforce strict editorial contiguity that keep the satellite bureau in line
with the ideological framework of the broadcaster as a whole. While both measures seek to
minimize editorial friction between the different bureaus, this becomes problematic when dealing
with two antagonistic editorial cultures. Both David Marash’s departure from Al-Jazeera English
in mid-2007 and the ensuing fallout between reporters from that channel and its Arabic
counterpart over editorial centrality- serve as examples of how conflict can arise out of the need
to reinforce an overarching ideological center over a foreign or ‘activist’ bureau.
While these two incidents highlight typical scenarios that occur frequently within newsrooms,
they do more by calling into question theoretical models that view transnational news
organizations as ideological monolithic institutions. Indeed, studies of the globalization and
information industries have tended to rely on this interpretation while failing to account for the
internal socio-cultural dynamics that create ideological disparity within institutions.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 4
To that end, this paper seeks to explore how such disparate cultural and ideological norms
operate within a transnational news agency, the conditions under which they come to fruition,
and the implications on the agenda-setting protocols of the organization as a whole (McCombs &
Shaw 1972). The research questions I will explore are:
RQ1. Under what conditions does ideological disparity occur at Al-Jazeera?
RQ2. How deep is the ideological rift between the two channels?
RQ3. What are the broader implications for this study on Agenda-setting within the broader
transnational news community?
My methodology will pursue qualitative and quantitative analyses to determine the emergence of
ideological disparity and the conditions the lead to editorial friction, using Al Jazeera as a case
study, I explore endogenous and exogenous factors that point towards ideological friction at Al
Jazeera by analyzing conditions where ideological disparity is apparent, particularly through the
lens of (1) Audience formation, (2) newsroom culture and lastly, (3) Journalistic community
norms. My methodology will involve framing these three factors within the context of AJA’s
relationship to AJE, particularly through the study of existing academic literature on the channel
and second source articles involving recent high profile cases of fallout between the two bureaus.
I support this argument with findings from parallel content analysis between Al Jazeera Arabic
and it’s English websites around a common issue-area- in this case- the Israeli offensive on the
Gaza Strip in December, 2008 and January, 2009. My preliminary findings point to ideological
disparities in the nature of coverage of the Gaza War, with AJE displaying significantly more
concern for bias against Israel than its Arabic counterpart.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 5
Problematics and Challenges
Defining Al-Jazeera’s ideological cannon
The main challenges to this study revolve around issues of media framing both Al Jazeera Arabic
and English under a single ideological mission or cannon. Prior to the advent of AJE, scholarly
literature recognized two theoretical frames that typed Al-Jazeera as (1) an undergirding force of
democratization in the region “that facilitates sociopolitical changes by criticizing and
challenging the institutionalized structures and the prevalent social discourse in the Arab world”
(Wojcieszak, 2007), and (2) as an agency of contra-flow, one whose existence is predicated on
challenging the dominance of the consortium of Western transnational media agencies (Seib
2004, Azran 2007, Thussu 2007). While both of these frameworks serve as a solid ideological
platform for the Arabic channel, Al Jazeera English has led to a diffusion of these ideas by
courting and being accountable to-Western and English speaking audiences. Within the
discipline of marketing communication, the advent of Al Jazeera English has to a “retooling of
Al Jazeera’s brand image to match these new realities. (Levy 1999). For example, El-Nawawy
argues that AJE is likely to be viewed as a mediated form of conflict resolution and conciliatory
media with the potential to reduce dogmatism amongst viewers (2008). This definition falls out
of the activist, counter hegemonic rubric that is often associated with the network as a whole. ElNawawy’s findings are reinforced in a study conducted by Leon Barkho on discursive social
assumptions in the news. Barkho concluded that AJE’s coverage of the Palestinian-Israeli
conflict tended to pursue a discursive strategy that “transformed Palestinian official discourses
into public language but with no discernable attempt to vilify Israelis” (2007). This is in contrast
to AJA’s inherent pro-Palestinian slant. Indeed, the preliminary findings from my content
analysis of coverage of the Gaza war support his findings.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 6
In summary, the meta-theoretical framework of ideological disparity is predicated upon
examining the interplay between a dominant ideological framework vis-à-vis a resistant or
adversarial context. The emergence of Al-Jazeera English has led to rethinking of these classical
interpretations.
Disciplinary Restraints on Ideological Formation
Another significant obstacle to this kind of research is ascertaining the source of ideological
formation within each of the bureaus. I recognize that while being comprehensive, media
influence theory may not be able to address the full spectrum of influences that lead to ideology
formation within a news bureau. For example, theoretical frameworks within organizational
communication can be tremendously useful in illuminating the cultural interplay between editors
and staff from both bureaus. Additionally, marketing communication can be beneficial in
determining the extent to which brand loyalty (or lack thereof) plays into agenda-setting.
The Need for Ethnographic Research
Successfully linking the causality between ideological disparity and internal editorial friction
necessitates the input from Al Jazeera staff. Insofar as this paper is concerned, limited resources
prevented a more capable analysis of the internal social dynamics of staff. Insofar as this paper is
concerned, secondary sources of cases involving conflict between AJA and AJE staff were used.
Future revisions of this paper will address this deficiency.
Ideological Disparity Defined
Scholarship on Media industries and Globalization has long pointed to the rapid growth in
transnational news agencies, particularly within traditional mediums (print and broadcast) and
the burgeoning of press and broadcasting exports from the developed world to developing
countries. This literature parallels concerns raised by the proponents of cultural imperialism, who
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 7
have long cited this trend as a dangerous coefficient for Western cultural homogeneity (Banerjee,
2002). However, this theory relies on monolithic interpretations of media institutions while
failing to account for the currency in ideological disparity that comes with demographic
franchising within transnational news networks.
Inferring from the above, we can thus define ideological disparity as the conflicting ideological
narratives within a transnational news organization, ideological disparity creates editorial friction
which can be defined as credibility maintaining measures. This can be achieved either by (1)
centralizing gate-keeping mechanisms across the different bureaus, or by (2) diffusing editorial
authority through the local bureau by decentralizing brand cohesion (i.e. each bureau might be
marketed as a distinct institution). Whatever the measure, the determining factors are largely
predicated on the brand cohesion of the transnational news agency. Loose brand association, as
in the case of a news group like News Corp, might rely on the latter measure whereas an agency
like the BBC would be more inclined to restrict editorial variance. Understanding how these
responses work is important to our analysis of Al-Jazeera, which, while exhibiting brand
cohesion between its Arabic and English bureaus, has, up until recently, relied on dislocating
editorial authority between the two bureaus1. In order to understand why a shift might have
occurred, we must explore how media influences affect the ideological cannon of each of the
bureaus. To accomplish this, I will apply Shoemaker and Reese’s aggregation of media influence
theories (1996, pp 4) to describe how ideological disparity might arise in the newsroom.

Audience localization: Local bureaus are driven by social reality.
In an interview with Brent Cunningham of the Columbia Journalism Review, David Marash cited “attempted centralization of editorial authority
by the Al Jazeera Arabic office in Doha” as one of the reasons why he decided to resign from Al-Jazeera English in April, 2007.
Marash, D. “Why I Quit”, (2008) Columbia Journalism Review
1
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network

Page 8
Sociology of Newsroom Culture and Norms: Dynamics of social construction
within the news room (using Warren Breed’s typology) and interpretive
communities of journalists (Zelizer 1993).

Norm Formation and Journalistic Interpretive Communities: Competing
journalistic norms can impact the ideological trajectory of the news.
Localization
H1. The more comprehensive audience localization efforts are the likelihood for ideological
disparity in the newsroom.
As mentioned earlier, bureaus in transnational networks adopt “regionalization and localization”
measures to assimilate within the communities they are practicing in (Chang 2001). Localization
efforts vary amongst transnational news networks and can include reporting in the local language,
adopting regionally recognized gate-keeping mechanisms and content tailoring.
In their book, Shoemaker and Reese briefly discuss how regional audience targeting amongst the
American networks lead to differences in practice and routine, but they do not articulate how
ideological slanting may occur within transnational news agencies nor do they offer a strong case
as to the sources of ideological disparity within such instances.
This research gap was addressed by Jacob Groshek, who, in his content analysis of CNN’s
domestic and international offices, found no significant differences in the ideological premise
between the two bureaus. Groshek refers to this phenomenon as the formation of “Homogenous
agendas”, in that the agenda setting functions of CNN and CNNI exhibited surprisingly positive
correlation, while only the proportions of the coverage differed. His research suggests a uniform
cross-section of CNNI viewers who share similar values with their American counterparts.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 9
In contrast, the very distinct localization measures at Al Jazeera has resulted in cultivating
distinct audiences across lingual, demographic and geographic boundaries. From this we can
deduce that each bureau is beholden to different agenda-setting protocols. Indeed, literature on
localization suggests that AJA’s loyalty gathering methods relies on slanting and coverage of
populist issues and perceptions (Seib, 2003 Azran, 2007), whereas AJE’s model relies more on
cultivating credibility and objectivity (the BBC model). Reconciling these different narratives
may pose a challenge to measures aimed at reducing ideological disparity.
Sociology of Newsrooms and Journalistic Norms
H2. The more disparate the newsroom cultures, rituals and norms, the more prevalent the case is
for ideological disparity.
Within the sociology of the news, much has been written on the interplay between policy
formation and the interactions between staff and editors. Warren Breed’s “Social Control in the
Newsroom” (1955), considered the foremost seminal work in this area, argues that social
hierarchy in the newsroom (interaction between staff and managers) and not exogenous factors
like ratings, sponsorship defines ideological policy of the newsroom. While Breed does not apply
his model towards understanding how different bureaus might operate within a transnational
news organization, his typology of policy deviation provides a sound template for exploring how
Ideological disparity might arise between the interaction of journalists at both AJE and AJA.
In his work, Breed articulates five conditions that create what calls “deviance” to editorial norms,
these being:
1. Policy Vagueness: When policy norms are vague by virtue of its covert nature and large
scope
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
2.
Page 10
Editorial Ignorance: When Executives are ignorant of certain facts and may be cajoled into
going along with a reporter’s version of the story.
3.
Planting: When reporters ask other newspapers to cover their story, thereby generating hype.
4.
When staff reporters hold editorial dominion over the stories they cover. Breed argues that in
some cases, editors will not come between the reporter’s beat and the story.
5.
When a staff reporter has star status or celebrity
Breed’s conditions for policy deviance can provide a sensible framework for looking at how
editorial friction can arise between staff at both channels. We can look towards two illustrative
instances of where deviance may take shape at Al Jazeera. First, the celebrity status of many of
AJE’s journalists may have unwittingly contributed to the editorial friction between the two
stations. “big-wig” journalists such as Dave Marash, Robert Frost and Riz Khan may have
significant editorial leeway by virtue of their celebrity status which may run contrary to the
agenda-setting protocols of Al-Jazeera. As recalled previously, David Marash’s resignation was
a result of an attempt by editors in Doha to curtail the editorial freedoms his office had enjoyed.
Considered the American face of Al-Jazeera, Dave Marash resigned from the channel over
editorial friction between his bureau and the headquarters in Doha.
The second example draws upon Breed’s understanding of “beat authority” which deals with the
relationship between editors and reporters who have significant editorial authority over a certain
special topic by virtue of their experience. This can also apply within an adversarial context
between experienced and novice reporters within a certain hotspot. AJA journalists may feel
constrained by their lack or “beat experience” in covering regions outside of their purview. In
one example, AJE journalists operating out of the American bureau objected to a plan for a series
on American Poverty” on grounds that it was, to quote Dave Marash, too “stereotypical and
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 11
shallow” and that the editorial staff at Doha lacked sufficient knowledge of American norms to
become authorities on American stories.
Drawing this into the fabric of ideological disparity and transnational news organizations, we can
infer that disparate social norms in the newsroom create avenues for editorial friction.
Journalistic Norm Formation
While Breed’s typology of social construction can help us understand the inner factors that
influence ideological formation within newsrooms, the theory falls short of articulating the ways
in which journalists view themselves within a larger collective. Indeed Breed refers to these
external influences in passing but focuses his study on the microcosmic factors in the newsroom.
Journalists have long coalesced around discourse of shared values and norms, forming what
Zelizer refers to as “interpretive communities” (1993). According to Zelizer, this discourse
creates “shared interpretations that make their professional lives meaningful” by sharing
concerns and dilemmas with one another. Within an intercultural framework, understanding how
interpretive communities created around the disparate journalist groups is useful to observing
how ideological disparity is created.
The unique approach to journalistic practice by Arabic journalists has been significantly
documented in mass communication theory circles. Scholars like El-Nawawwy argued that
AJA’s journalists tended to be more ideologically invested in their stories (2004). Others, like
Amin (2002), have emphasized the clandestine nature of Arab journalists, stating that “selfcensorship is commonplace in the Arab news media today and journalism education programs”.
This self-censorship may take the form of ideological loyalty in the form of group-think, ritual,
and practice towards a single ideological narrative. Jehane Noujam’s seminal documentary
“Control Room” tackled the issue head on as she documented the emotional upheaval facing Al
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 12
Jazeera employees around the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the polemical and problematic
relationships they formed with their Western counterparts. In one scene, AJA journalists are seen
collectively lamenting the fall of the statue of Saddam Hussein in Ferdows square. In tandem
with Amin’s analysis, the journalists depicted in Control Room shared disparagingly critical
opinions on the Iraq War, suggesting group-think and loyalty at play.
Given the western orientation of the majority of the AJE journalists, group think may be more
partial to Western journalistic norms. Several studies on journalistic interpretive communities in
Western, liberal-democratic societies have argued that, within a classical framework, Western
journalists see themselves as democracy enforcers, committed to principles of objectivity and
upholding the systems of public discourse. (McNair 1998, Schultz 1998). Within AJE, this may
be manifest in presenting a more balanced, less confrontational slant in their coverage.
Absent of democratic discourse and accountability structures, interpretive communities of Arab
journalists have, as argued by Pintak and Ginges (2008), built themselves around reinforcing
ideals of pan-Arab nationalism, anti-colonialism and resistance doctrines. To that end, Arab
journalists see their craft as a vessel for promoting these ideals. In an ethnographic study
spanning interviews with 106 Arab journalists, the authors found that a significant cross-section
of interviewed journalists identified themselves as “journalists first” followed by religious and
national identity.
There is evidence of how disparate norms between Arab and Foreign journalists at AJA and AJE.
In early 2006, Hannah Allan of Night Ridder ran a story that echoed the concerns of AJA
employees who, fearing a “watering down” of Al-Jazeera’s bold, “in-your-face approach”,
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 13
reacted with extreme skepticism to the prospect of an English channel. Allan quoted the
following concerns raised:
Why aren't there more Arab managers? How much does the new British-led team
know about the region? Will they use "insurgents" or "terrorists" (considered a
loaded word) to describe Iraqi fighters? And, most important, if AJI's mission is
to become a global news alternative, what will distinguish it from, say, CNN or
the BBC? (Allan, 2006)
Content Analysis of the Gaza-War
In order to measure the extent to which ideological disparity existed at Al-Jazeera, a preliminary
comparative content analysis between Al-Jazeera’s English and Arabic websites was conducted.
While previous comparative content analyses between the two has tended to focus on issuecoverage (Al-Najjar 2009) and media framing (Al-Emad & Fahmy 2009), this study will focus
more on deciphering patterns of Agenda-setting at both AJA and AJE. This is accomplished by
examining emergent patterns of bias and ideological disparity.
Method
Sample Selection
My method involved extracting randomized sample articles from the Al Jazeera Websites. The
articles had to satisfy the following conditions:
1. Articles had to contain a reference to Gaza
2. Articles had to be published on their respective websites on January 15, 2009.
3. Articles had to appear in the top 8 responses to the search query.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 14
Sampled articles were picked purposively2 via a Boolean search query on all articles written
by Al Jazeera staff. Articles were queried using Google’s site search function with January
15, 2009 chosen as the date of reference. The top eight articles under the search for Gaza
were selected. For the AJA articles, the search term Gaza was translated into Arabic (‫)غزة‬.
The selected articles were then translated via Google’s translating service
(http://translate.google.com) before being coded.3
In selecting the issue-area for the articles, attention was paid to three underlying factors.

The issue had to have chronological consistency over a time period.

The issue had to involve some degree of ideological dichotomy in coverage (that is coverage
could be either positive or negative)

The topic has to be part of a constellation of reoccurring news events with predetermined
frames of reference (this makes coding much easier). (Galting and Ruge,1965)
The word count for both sample groups totaled 5,113 words for the AJA sample group (after
translation) and 5014 word in the AJE sample group.
Coding Terms
Coding was done Coding terms revolved around popular media references to the Gaza war and
were divided into four categories: Negative coverage, positive coverage, Israeli favoritism and
Palestinian favoritism. Coding was done in accordance This was done to better locate the
ideological inferences of the articles. This is shown in the table on the following page:
2 Riffe, Lacy and Fico “Analyzing Media Messages, 2nd Ed” 2005, LEA Communication Series, NJ
3
Since this was merely a word extraction using content analysis, I feel that the study was not compromised as a result of using
Google’s translating function. As a side note: Translated articles were surprisingly readable and cohesive.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 15
Consensus
Reference to Positive
coverage
Diplomacy
Ceasefire
Compliance Int'l law
Aggression
Reference to Negative
Coverage
War
Conflict
Shalit
Israelis Killed
Reference to Israeli
Favoritism
Injured
Rockets
Terrorism
Defense
Condemnation of Hamas
Palestinians Killed
Reference to Palestinian
Favoritism
Injured
Phosphorous Shell and Shelling
Condemnation of Israel
Defiance Int'l law
Findings
The table below is a tabulation of the prevalence rate of the key terms used in our content
analysis over the sixteen articles.
Affix
Key Terms
Reference to
positive
coverage
Consensus
Diplomacy
Ceasefire
Compliance Int'l law
TOTAL
Reference to
Negative
Coverage
Aggression
War
Conflict
Shalit
TOTAL
Total
Prevalence:
AJE
Total
Prevalence:
AJA
1
5
6
0
12
0
1
1
2
4
2
1
1
1
5
2
2
1
1
6
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Reference to
Israeli
Favoritism
Reference to
Palestinian
Favoritism
Page 16
Israelis Killed/Injured
4
0
Rockets
Terrorism
Defense
Condemnation of
Hamas
TOTAL
2
0
9
1
0
2
0
14
2
5
7
6
4
5
3
4
13
6
33
15
8
34
Palestinians
Killed/Injured
Civil Structures
Attacked
Phosphorous Shell
and Shelling
Condemnation of
Israel
Defiance Int'l law
TOTAL
The following observations can be made:
Reference to positive events is practically non-existent within the AJA sample, whereas allusion
to negative coverage is equal across both bureaus. This indicates an undergirding skepticism and
wariness over the involvement of international institutions within AJA. With the exception of
one article, none of the AJA articles mention Israeli casualties as opposed to 50% of AJE articles
surveyed. Furthermore, coverage favoring Israeli positions is significantly lower amongst AJA
articles in general, with none mentioning rocket attacks and only one reference to Israel’s right to
defend itself. Not surprisingly, coverage showing Palestinian favoritism is high with both
channels, with 33 and 34 references respectively. This shows that on the issue of Gaza, both AJA
and AJE shared consistent ideological favoritism towards the Palestinian position. From a media
framing perspective, articles from AJE tended to be heavily centered on covering the details of
the offensive itself whereas AJA articles were more skewed towards covering global reaction to
the conflict. Of the AJE sample, only one article, on fallout between Israel and Venezuela, dealt
with reaction to the offensive compared with four articles from the AJA sample. This suggests
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 17
that AJA framed the Gaza war in terms of a global (and unanimously, negative) reactions
towards Israel on the offensive.
While both channels exhibit strong Palestinian favoritism, AJE’s agenda-setting protocol skews
towards presenting a more nuanced side to the conflict by highlighting instances of Israeli
favoritism. In contrast, AJA’s coverage showed less evidence of Israeli favoritism and relied
more on ideologically framing the conflict by covering global reaction to the offensive.
Furthermore, AJE’s coverage tended to be more optimistic, with more stories referencing
diplomatic and reconciliation efforts. In contrast, AJA’s articles contained scant reference to
either of these phenomena.
Conclusion: Al Jazeera English: a Moderating Coefficient?
The preliminary findings from this paper point to a significant variance in ideological disparity
between the two networks and may be indicative of editorial friction between the staff at both
stations. The implications of these findings are twofold. First, understanding the depth of
ideological disparity might shed insight into the ways in which brand retooling might occur.
Depending on either measure, this may point to either a widening association gap between the
two stations or an attempt at ideological reconciliation, at which similarities in agenda-setting
might increase. As noted earlier, the physical barriers inherent in the localization policies and the
contradicting journalistic norms between Arab and Western journalists present compelling
questions to undertaking either response. Second, ideological disparity is a useful way of framing
notions of credibility and consistency amongst transnational networks. At present, the brand
proximity of both AJA and AJE, coupled with the ideological variance might point to a lack of
credibility and consistency in the perception of Al-Jazeera as a whole.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 18
Further Research
Given restraints, immediate suggestions for further research would involve a more
comprehensive content analysis (larger article sample and a more detailed coding scheme) over a
multiple range of issue-areas. The small sample size and the lack of diversity in the issue area
was restrictive.
Technicalities aside, future research on the subject of ideological disparity might wish to
examine in more details the measures for controlling ideological disparity in transnational news
agencies and how agenda and brand formation within the network are informed by such
measures. Another key area that warrants exploring is consumer reaction to ideological
formation at other transnational agencies and whether this has any impact on the perceived
credibility on the news source.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 19
Works Cited
Al-Emad, M. and Fahmy, S. "Do ‘They’ Frame it Differently?: Examining the Coverage of the
U.S./Al-Qaeda Conflict in the English-and Arabic-Language Al-Jazeera Websites" Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication, The Renaissance, Washington, DC, Aug 08, 2007
Al-Najjar, A. How Arab is Al-Jazeera English? Comparative Study of Al-Jazeera Arabic and AlJazeera English News Channels. Global Media Journal, Spring 2009
Amin, H. "Social Engineering: Transnational Broadcasting and Its Impact on Peace in the
Middle East." Global Media 3.4 (2004). 1 Nov. 2009.
Amin, H. “Freedom as a Value in Arab Media: Perceptions and Attitudes among Journalists”
Political Communication, Volume 19, Number 2, 1 April 2002.
Auter, P. Arafa, M. & Al-Jaber, K. (2005). Identifying with Arabic Journalists: How Al-Jazeera
Tapped Parasocial Interaction Gratifications in the Arab World Gazette; 67; 189
Azran, Tal. "Mirror, mirror on the wall”: the positioning hypothesis. Traffic
January (2006).
Banarjee, I. The Locals Strike Back? Media Globalization and Localization in the New Asian
Television Landscape. International Communication Gazette 2002; 64; 517
Barkho, L. Unpacking the discursive and social links in BBC, CNN and
Al-Jazeera’s Middle East reporting, Journal of Arab and Muslim Media Research 2007
Breed, W. Social Control in the Newsroom: A Functional Analysis. Social Forces, Vol. 33, No.
4 (1955) pp. 326-335 N. Carolina Press
Chang, Y. L. From globalization to localization: The world's leading television news
broadcasters in Asia. Asian Journal of Communication, Volume 11, Issue 1 2001.
DeWerth-Pallmeyer, D. The Audience in the News, Lawrence, Erlbaum and Associates, NJ, 1997.
El-Nawawy, Mohammed. Al-Jazeera: The Story of The Network that is Rattling Governments
and Redefining Modern Journalism. Basic Books. Print.
Groshek, J, Homogenous Agendas, Disparate Frames: CNN and CNN International Coverage
Online. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, v. 52 no. 1, pp. 52 m 2008 pp. 215-230.
Ideological Disparity, and the Transnational News Network
Page 20
Hermida & Thurman, ‘A Clash of Cultures: The integration of user- generated content within
professional journalistic frameworks at British newspaper websites’, Journalistic Practice,
McCombs, M., Shaw, D. The Agenda-Setting Function of the Mass Media. The Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 2 (Summer, 1972), pp. 176-187
Nossek, Hillel. "Our News and their News: The Role of National Identity in the Coverage of
Foreign News." Journalism 2004.5 (2004): 343-68. Sage Publications.
Pintak, L., Ginges, J. The Mission of Arab Journalism: Creating Change in a Time of Turmoil.
The International Journal of Press/Politics 2008; 13
Seib, Philip M. Al Jazeera effect how the new global media are reshaping world politics.
Washington, D.C: Potomac Books, 2008. Print.
Shoemaker, P., & Reese, S. (1991). Mediating the message: Theories of mass media content.
White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing Group.
Zelizer, B. Has Communication Explained Journalism? Journal of Communication 1993, Vol. 43
no. 4.