IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/meanco/v8y2020i3p304-320.html

Self-Inflicted Deprivation? Quality-as-Sent and Quality-as-Received in German News Media

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Geiß

    (Department of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology—NTNU, Norway)

Abstract

Both the news media and citizens have been blamed for citizens’ lack of political sophistication. Citizens’ information source choices can certainly contribute to suboptimal results of opinion formation when citizens’ media menus feature few, redundant, or poor-quality outlets. How strongly news consumers’ choices affect the quality of information they receive has rarely been investigated, however. The study uses a novel method investigating how content-as-sent translates into content-as-received that is applicable to high-choice information environments. It explores quality-as-sent and quality-as-received in a content analysis that is combined with survey data on news use. This study focuses on ‘selection quality’ measured in terms of scope and balance of subtopic units, information units, and protagonist statements sent/received. Regarding quality-as-sent , the scope of news proves to be lowest in TV news and substantially greater for online news and newspapers; imbalance of coverage varies only moderately between outlets. As for quality-as-received, the scope citizens received was only a small fraction of what the news outlets provided in combination or what the highest-quality news outlet provided, but was close to what one average news outlet provided. There was substantial stratification in the extent to which news coverage quality materializes at the recipient level. Scope-as-received grew mainly with using more news, relatively independent of which specific news outlets were used. Imbalance-as-received, however, was a function of the use of specific outlet types and specific outlets rather than the general extent of news use. Using additional news media improved the quality-as-received, invalidating the notion that different news outlets merely provide “more of the same.”

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Geiß, 2020. "Self-Inflicted Deprivation? Quality-as-Sent and Quality-as-Received in German News Media," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 304-320.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v8:y:2020:i:3:p:304-320
    DOI: 10.17645/mac.v8i3.3139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/3139
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/mac.v8i3.3139?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:apsrev:v:57:y:1963:i:02:p:368-377_24 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Jason Barabas & Jennifer Jerit, 2009. "Estimating the Causal Effects of Media Coverage on Policy‐Specific Knowledge," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 73-89, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matt Guardino & Suzanne Mettler, 2020. "Revealing the “Hidden welfare state†: How policy information influences public attitudes about tax expenditures," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(1).
    2. Max Grömping & Darren R. Halpin, 2021. "Do think tanks generate media attention on issues they care about? Mediating internal expertise and prevailing governmental agendas," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 849-866, December.
    3. Reinald Besalú & Arantxa Capdevila & Carlota M. Moragas-Fernández, 2025. "Ecological Transition in Spain: Political Polarization Through Institutions and Media," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-23, April.
    4. Simon D Angus & Lachlan O'Neill, 2024. "Paired Completion: Flexible Quantification of Issue-framing at Scale with LLMs," Papers 2408.09742, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
    5. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    6. Giebler, Heiko & Banducci, Susan & Kritzinger, Sylvia, 2017. "New perspectives on information and electoral competition," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 429-435.
    7. Katerina Linos & Kimberly Twist, 2016. "The Supreme Court, the Media, and Public Opinion: Comparing Experimental and Observational Methods," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(2), pages 223-254.
    8. Thuy Nguyen & Victoria Perez, 2020. "Privatizing Plaintiffs: How Medicaid, the False Claims Act, and Decentralized Fraud Detection Affect Public Fraud Enforcement Efforts," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(4), pages 1063-1091, December.
    9. Garz, Marcel & Szucs, Ferenc, 2023. "Algorithmic selection and supply of political news on Facebook," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    10. Joke Matthieu & Laura Jacobs & Matthias Van Campenhout & Stefaan Walgrave, 2026. "Voting Advice Application Use Increases Party Position Knowledge: An Experimental Study Among Belgian Youngsters," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 14.
    11. Grady, Christopher & Iannantuoni, Alice & Winters, Matthew S., 2021. "Influencing the means but not the ends: The role of entertainment-education interventions in development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    12. David Bartolini & Agnese Sacchi & Domenico Scalera & Alberto Zazzaro, 2023. "Voters’ Distance, Information Bias and Politicians’ Salary," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 9(2), pages 637-664, July.
    13. Banducci, Susan & Giebler, Heiko & Kritzinger, Sylvia, 2017. "Knowing more from less: how the information environment increases knowledge of party positions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 47(3), pages 571-588.
    14. Laura S. Loy & Karen R. S. Hamann & Gerhard Reese, 2020. "Navigating through the jungle of information. Informational self-efficacy predicts climate change-related media exposure, knowledge, and behaviour," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(4), pages 2097-2116, December.
    15. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Htay-Wah Saw & Dana P. Goldman, 2020. "Political polarization in US residents’ COVID-19 risk perceptions, policy preferences, and protective behaviors," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 177-194, October.
    16. Quinton Mayne & Brigitte Geißel, 2018. "Don’t Good Democracies Need “Good” Citizens? Citizen Dispositions and the Study of Democratic Quality," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 33-47.
    17. Stefan Geiß, 2020. "Self-Inflicted Deprivation? Quality-as-Sent and Quality-as-Received in German News Media," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 304-320.
    18. Schoonvelde, Martijn, 2014. "Media Freedom and the Institutional Underpinnings of Political Knowledge," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 163-178, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:meanco:v8:y:2020:i:3:p:304-320. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.