2017
DOI: 10.1080/1461670x.2017.1349547
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Channels Matter?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Sweetser et al (2008), IAS “is not always unidirectional but may be multidirectional” (p. 213). Vonbun-Feldbauer and Matthes (2018) also indicated that agenda building is a multidirectional process shaped by the channel stability and flexibility. Conway-Silva and colleagues (2018), similarly, pointed to a reciprocal relationship across media, where the newspapers had an overall greater impact while Twitter also exhibited “the potential to break free from and influence traditional media gatekeeping” (p. 469).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Sweetser et al (2008), IAS “is not always unidirectional but may be multidirectional” (p. 213). Vonbun-Feldbauer and Matthes (2018) also indicated that agenda building is a multidirectional process shaped by the channel stability and flexibility. Conway-Silva and colleagues (2018), similarly, pointed to a reciprocal relationship across media, where the newspapers had an overall greater impact while Twitter also exhibited “the potential to break free from and influence traditional media gatekeeping” (p. 469).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This development of the theory was called second-level agenda-setting. The concept of agenda-building focuses on awareness-raising activities of interest groups (Vonbun-Feldbauer & Matthes, 2017), including national leaders (Wanta, 1991) and large corporations (Carroll & McCombs, 2003). Therefore, the discussion of the U.S. election in the Russian media could be deliberately designed by individual interest groups.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%