Truth, honesty and spin

White, Aidan

doi:10.1080/13510340500322017

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As in many policy and academic analyses (e.g., White 2005;Jones 2004b;Heffernan 2006), in this case 'spin' acted as a versatile but ill-defined normative charge. The lack of clarity about exactly what was being alleged provided a strategic ambiguity (Leitch and Davenport 2007) for commentators to take part in a (notionally) joint dialogue, without necessarily agreeing on what was being contended.…”

Section: Spin Politics and Languagementioning

confidence: 95%

“…This was so in relation to WMD debates. 3 Herein 'the context' functioned as an open-ended resource in arguments about government manipulation of intelligence (as in White 2005). For instance, Humphreys (2005: 167) contended that '[f]or some years it has been standard practice in government communications for significant documents to be rewritten within Downing Street'.…”

Section: Closeness and Discrepancymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evidencing similarity

Rappert

2011

JLP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accusations that some purposefully manipulate information in order to create a favourable impression in others are commonplace in political life. The term ‘spin’ has emerged in recent decades as a versatile but ill-defined normative charge that signifies a lost fidelity. This article examines a prominent attempt to adjudicate on allegations of it in order to ask how such debates are collaboratively produced and sustained. The case study is the ‘Butler Inquiry’, an investigation established to determine whether the British government distorted intelligence about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction capabilities in the build up to the 2003 war. It is argued that the Inquiry and the subsequent debate about it is notable for two features: (i) the multiple and shifting orientations adopted to the standing of language; and (ii) the lack of regard in this dispute about likeness to how determinations of likeness should be argued — a kind of “a-resemblance resemblancing”. Through the multiple ways in which matters of similitude were resolved and deferred, treated as publicly demonstrated and beyond simple verification, rendered knowable and undecidable, the debate about the Butler Inquiry established the conditions for further charges of spin. The failure to attend to how claims about resemblance were being grounded limited the public debate as well as conceptions of political accountability.

show abstract

Section: Spin Politics and Languagementioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Closeness and Discrepancymentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidencing similarity

Rappert

2011

JLP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Of the general media sources in this study, presidential debates and news coverage seem likely to be viewed as less subjective and more credible as a basis for voting decisions than commentators' spin, public opinion polls, and political comedy. News coverage, in general, can be seen as intended to inform, but in the era of 24‐hour news channels and the Internet, much of what reaches the public could be considered “spin.” The term “spin” entered the public lexicon in the mid‐1980s, and is often used to describe efforts by campaign operatives and political commentators to frame news events or interpret their meaning (Andrews, 2006; White, 2005). Commentators' spin during a political campaign should be regarded as relatively biased, and an inadequate basis for decision‐making.…”

Section: Perceived Media Influence During the 2004 Us Presidential mentioning

confidence: 99%

Young Voters' Responses to the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election: Social Identity, Perceived Media Influence, and Behavioral Outcomes

Hoffner

Rehkoff

2011

Journal of Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hostile news perceptions, perceived media influence, and behavioral outcomes among Republicans and Democrats were examined before and after the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Predictions were grounded in social identity/self-categorization theories, and influence of presumed influence. Hostile news perceptions were greater among Republicans, especially Fox News viewers. Third-person perceptions (TPPs) for ingroup and outgroup (own party, other party) varied based on media message (debates, news, spin, polls, comedy) and party affiliation. TPPs were larger for the outgroup than the ingroup, but only for Republicans. Following the election, changes in media perceptions were related to the election outcome and interpersonal discussion. Greater perceived influence on outgroup voters was associated with stronger support for censorship, and a lower voting likelihood among Democrats.

show abstract

Is Ideological Coverage On Cable Television An Ethical Journalistic Practice? An Examination of Duty, Responsibility, and Consequence

Meader

2013

Journal of Mass Media Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Truth, honesty and spin

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Evidencing similarity

Evidencing similarity

Young Voters' Responses to the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election: Social Identity, Perceived Media Influence, and Behavioral Outcomes

Is Ideological Coverage On Cable Television An Ethical Journalistic Practice? An Examination of Duty, Responsibility, and Consequence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About