The Strategic Bias: How Journalists Respond to Antimedia Populism

Abstract

As populist campaigns against the media become increasingly common around the world, it is ever more urgent to explore how journalists adopt and respond to them. Which strategies have journalists developed to maintain the public's trust, and what may be the implications for democracy? These questions are addressed using a thematic analysis of forty-five semistructured interviews with leading Israeli journalists who have been publicly targeted by Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. The article suggests that while most interviewees asserted that adherence to objective reporting was the best response to antimedia populism, many of them have in fact applied a “strategic bias” to their reporting, intentionally leaning to the Right in an attempt to refute the accusations of media bias to the Left. This strategy was shaped by interviewees' perceived helplessness versus Israel's Prime Minister and his extensive use of social media, a phenomenon called here “the influence of presumed media impotence.” Finally, this article points at the potential ramifications of strategic bias for journalism and democracy. Drawing on Hallin's Spheres theory, it claims that the strategic bias might advance Right-wing populism at present, while also narrowing the sphere of legitimate controversy—thus further restricting press freedom—in the future.

Framing as a tool of influencer marketing in the management of marketing communications and brand representation

“…O. Karpenko considers the overton window as a manipulative mechanism for the transformation of public values on the part of the government [36], and G.-D. Bobric describes it as an instrument of information warfare [37]. A. Panievsky describes the use of the concept of Hallin's spheres as a reactive tool of journalism against anti-media populism, resulting in a change in political frames [38]. B. Ross, exploring the model of the Spiral of Silence within social media, came to similar results, confirming that the number of acting actors is capable of reframing [39].…”

When Will one Help? Understanding Audience Intervention in Online Harassment of Women Journalists

“…In this sense, the goal of misogynistic harassment towards women journalists is to silence these journalists from reporting news. Although these two types of online harassment vary in its severity, both can influence public perceptions of news media and journalists through functioning as a form of soft censorship that compromises professional norms and diminishes journalistic authority (Carlson, 2017;Panievsky, 2021).…”

Media Framings of the Transgender Athlete as “Legitimate Controversy”: The Case of Laurel Hubbard at the Tokyo Olympics

“…In contrast, journalists writing about topics within the 'sphere of legitimate controversy' are looked upon to uphold traditional ideas of objectivity and represent "both sides" of an issue, ultimately framing the subject as publicly debatable. Importantly, subjects of journalistic coverage do not 'naturally' fall into one sphere or another, with several scholars arguing that journalistic sourcing practices, language, frames, and responsiveness to reader feedback and cultural changes contribute to their positioning within one of the three spheres (Billard, 2016;Panievsky, 2021;Zuckerman, 2017). Claims of journalistic 'objectivity'-a notion thoroughly debunked yet continually used to train journalism students (Panievsky, 2021)-thus serve to obscure the journalist's own actions in positioning topics as up for public debate.…”

“…Importantly, subjects of journalistic coverage do not 'naturally' fall into one sphere or another, with several scholars arguing that journalistic sourcing practices, language, frames, and responsiveness to reader feedback and cultural changes contribute to their positioning within one of the three spheres (Billard, 2016;Panievsky, 2021;Zuckerman, 2017). Claims of journalistic 'objectivity'-a notion thoroughly debunked yet continually used to train journalism students (Panievsky, 2021)-thus serve to obscure the journalist's own actions in positioning topics as up for public debate. Hallin and others therefore see journalists as having the power to create public outcry over particular subjects, in part by using claims of journalistic objectivity to obscure the extent to which their own personal preferences shape language, framings, and sourcing practices, and thus contribute to public perceptions.…”