Review

Author(s): William Gibson

Review by: William Gibson
Source: American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 94, No. 4 (Jan., 1989), pp. 882-884
Published by: The University of Chicago Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2780868
Accessed: 14-08-2015 20:49 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Journal of
Sociology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 170.140.26.180 on Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:49:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AmericanJournalof Sociology
hisown view as all-encompassing.
GeorgeWashington:
The Makingofan
AmericanSymbolis distinguished,
however,not by universality
but by
itspartiality
foritssubject.By thevolume'send, Washingtonthesymbol
has absorbedWashington
theman. ParsonWeems,introduced
as mythologizerat the beginningof the book, is now quoted forevidenceabout
Washington'sactual life(pp. 156-57, 170). Having raisedWashingtonto
Schwartzcan afforda coupleofparagraphson thegreatman's
perfection,
personal foibles to show that private imperfections
failed to corrupt
The shiftfromsocial anthropologist
of civilreligion
publicperformance.
to defenderof the faithis complete.This book, in whichtinyAmerican
eagles mark the separationsbetweenthe sectionsof each chapter,is
bicentennial.
scripturalexegesisforthe Constitutional
News That Matters:Televisionand AmericanOpinion.By ShantoIyengar and Donald R. Kinder.Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1987.
Pp. viii+ 187. $19.95.
WilliamGibson
SouthernMethodistUniversity
Each weekdayeveningan estimated50 millionviewerswatch network
televisionnews. In News ThatMatters,ShantoIyengarand Donald Kinder theorizethat networknews influencesits audience (and through
them,the largerdemocraticprocess)in two fundamentalways. First,
networknews has greatinfluencein "agenda-setting":
"thoseproblems
thatreceiveprominentattentionon thenationalnews becomethe problems the viewingpublic regardsas the nation'smostimportant"
(p. 16).
Second,thenews "primes"its viewingpublicin thatitschoiceof stories
can change"thestandardsthatpeople use to make politicalevaluations"
(p. 63) of the president'sperformance.
To test these hypotheses,Iyengarand Kinder conducted14 experimentson paid, volunteeraudiencesin Ann Arbor,Michigan,and New
Haven, Connecticut.Two kind of special news programswere created.
In "sequential"experiments,
theauthorseditedtapes of regularnetwork
broadcasts,takingout some storiesand replacingthemwithstoriesfrom
othernews broadcastson one of several different
"agendas"-defense,
and civil rights.The objectivewas to
energy,inflation,unemployment,
plantfromfourto seven newscastson a giventopic(runningfromseven
to 17 minutesof coverage)in foureveningnews programs.Participants
watchedone programeach eveningforfourconsecutivedays and completed questionnaireson theirpoliticalbeliefsboth beforeviewingthe
tapesand afterthefourthday. In "assemblage"experiments,
participants
simplywatched fromeightto 13 storiesfromthe threenetworksand
afterwardcompleteda questionnaireon theirpoliticalbeliefs.
Resultsconfirmed
the agenda-setting
hypothesis.In sequentialexperi882

This content downloaded from 170.140.26.180 on Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:49:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Book Reviews
ments,respondentschangedhow theyrankedthenationalimportanceof
particularsubjects,dependingon whetheror not theysaw the "loaded"
broadcasts.For example,whereasonly33% thoughtdefensewas a serious national problembeforethe broadcasts,53% thoughtso afterthe
fourthday. In assemblageexperiments,
respondentsroutinelyrankeda
topic in importanceaccordingto how manystorieson the subjectwere
includedin the"assemblage"theysaw. And, whereasonly58% thought
defensewas a problemin a controlgroupthatsaw no storieson defense,
70% ofanothergroupthatsaw six storiesin one collectionthoughtit was
a major issue.
were also favorable.ResponResultsfromthe "priming"experiments
dentsincreasedtheirevaluationof the importanceof a particularprobin evaluatingthe president'soverall perlem, such as unemployment,
formanceafterthey were exposed to eithersequentialor assemblage
broadcast collectionsstressinga given topic. By theirown standards,
Iyengarand Kinderhave provedtheirtwo major hypotheses(and some
contribution
to the
minorones notdiscussedhere)and made a significant
studyof the mass media and public opinion.
However, the theoryof networknews the authorsarticulatein their
thetheoryofnews
concludingchapter,"News That Matters," contradicts
embeddedin theirexperimental
design.The authorsfavorablyciteprevious studiesthat conceptualizenetworktelevisionnews as a structured
discourseand set of images-news as a symbolsystem.Contemporary
theoriesof discourseagree that everytextcreatesa kind of "position"
inside the textforthe "reader"fromwhich the textis ideallydecoded
(fromthe creator'sstandpoint).An empiricalstudyof how audiences
thenewswouldthusinvestigate
whetheraudiences"decode"the
interpret
news fromthe positionascribedthemwithinthe news textor whether
stance.Such a studywould have to be conducted
theyassumea different
as an ethnography
(as has someoftherecentworkon readersofwomen's
to language and how viewers
romancenovels), with a keen sensitivity
framethe substantiveissues presentedon the news. For example: Do
viewerssee the "enemy"in defensestoriesin the same way that news
framesthe enemy?
In theirexperimental
design,Iyengarand Kinderignoretheseimplicationsof news as a symbolicworldand insteadconceptualizenews as sets
ofreifiedthingsreadilysubsumedunderabstractcategorieslike"defense"
or "unemployment"
thatare thrownfromthe televisionset. Some news
thingshitthe audience,causing"movements"thatcan be measured.To
createconditionsunderwhichmaximummovementcan be measured,the
authorshave heavilyloaded theirspecialbroadcasts.Theyjustifyputting
two to fourminutesof storieson one topic in each of fourconsecutive
one"
but notan extraordinary
broadcastsas a "substantialcommitment,
(p. 11) fromthe network'spointof view. This disclaimerstretchesthe
truth.If networknews normallyfollowedsuch patterns,thencollecting
storiesfrommonthsof broadcastswould not be necessary.
883

This content downloaded from 170.140.26.180 on Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:49:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

AmericanJournalof Sociology
of the news in theexperimental
The reification
designis accompanied
by an abstractionof news fromthe historicalprocessthatnews signifies.
All 14 experiments
wereconductedafterthe 1980Carter-Reaganelection
campaign,but the authorsshowed old preelectionfootageof the Iran
hostagecrisisand storieson thedeclineof"defense"underCarterto some
of theiraudiences. The experimentsthus tacitlyassume that Reagan's
victory,thereturnofthehostageson theday ofhisinauguration,
and his
massivepublicrelationscampaignofhow his administration
represented
a militarily
"strong"Americain mortalconflict
withan evil forcecan be
readilycontrolledin thelaboratory.Such a pretensiondoes notmakefor
illuminating
scholarlyinquiryintohow people use news to interpret
the
world.

China Reporting:An Oral HistoryofAmericanJournalismin the1930s

and 1940s. By StephenR. Mackinnonand Oris Friesen. Berkeleyand
Los Angeles:University
ofCaliforniaPress,1987.Pp. xviii+ 230. $20.00.
Gaye Tuchman
Queens Collegeand the GraduateCenter,CUNY
In 1982 in Scottsdale,Arizona, StephenMackinnonand Oris Friesen
conveneda meetingof46 specialistson China, all historiansat American
or reporters
universities
who had coveredChina in the 1930sor 1940s.In
China Reporting,Mackinnonand Friesen have distilledthe reporters'
recollections,
anecdotes,and sometimesdivergentinterpretations
of the
past, includingthejournalists'responsesto thehistorians'queries,intoa
splendidlyusefuland oftenintriguingoral history.It illuminateshow
U.S.-China relationssoured and, drawingon sociologicalaccounts of
to
news work, dissectsthe special problemsof foreigncorrespondents
analyzehow intelligent
and resourceful
came to misunderstand
reporters
the Chineserevolution.
In the 1930sand 1940s,fewAmericansgave a hootabout China, and
reportingfromChina was an open field.The job of a Chinese foreign
was so open thatalmostone-third
oftheAmericanreportcorrespondent
ers workingin China werewomen;manyof themenobtainedtheirjobs
aftertrampingaround the world and jumping ship to seek work and
adventurein a romanticlocale. Other Americanjournalistswere the
childrenof missionariesor midwesterners
who had graduatedfromthe
JournalismSchool of the Universityof Missouri,whichmaintainedspecial ties with the Departmentof Journalismof YenchingUniversityin
Peking(China Reportinguses Wade-Gilesromanization,
exceptforwellknownnames and place-names).
Unlike the currentRussian and American foreigncorrespondents
workingin New York and Moscow, respectively,
theseAmericanshad
unlimitedaccess to China. They could go wherevertheywanted and
884

This content downloaded from 170.140.26.180 on Fri, 14 Aug 2015 20:49:11 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions