Examination of cross-cultural studies of news coverage, zjalues and images, and journalistic standards suggests the value of searching for commonalities to extend our knowledge of human behavior.If there is ferment in mass communication research in the lYSOs, comparative analysis across cultures probably is involved more as agent than as actor. In that parlance, just as the actor controls the action and the agent is the object of it, so too will comparative analysis not create ferment but rather be its catalyst.Cross-cultural comparative methods have been used to suggest, among other things, that Western societies are sending more news to Third World nations than they are receiving from them; that Western values as reflected in film heroes, teachers, and similar figures are different from, and perhaps less to be admired, than those of other cultures; and that Third World journalists are less professional in their orientation to their tasks than are U.S. journalists.Are such data persuasive? Do they possess validity because they agree with our common sense expectations? Should they be accepted as evidence by a scholarly community?These are troubling questions. We are left in many compar a t' 1ve studies with only reports of raw data: A is greater or less than B. Yet, as scholars, we must ask, what do these data mean and what are the sources of those meanings? Are the data generalizable?