Content uploaded by Danielle K Brown
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Danielle K Brown on Mar 18, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjos20
Journalism Studies
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjos20
Is the Whole World Watching? Building a Typology
of Protest Coverage on Social Media From Around
the World
Summer Harlow, Danielle K. Brown, Ramón Salaverría & Víctor García-
Perdomo
To cite this article: Summer Harlow, Danielle K. Brown, Ramón Salaverría & Víctor García-
Perdomo (2020) Is the Whole World Watching? Building a Typology of Protest Coverage
on Social Media From Around the World, Journalism Studies, 21:11, 1590-1608, DOI:
10.1080/1461670X.2020.1776144
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1776144
Published online: 12 Jun 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 8109
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Citing articles: 25 View citing articles
Is the Whole World Watching? Building a Typology of Protest
Coverage on Social Media From Around the World
Summer Harlow
a
, Danielle K. Brown
b
, Ramón Salaverría
c
and
Víctor García-Perdomo
d
a
Jack J. Valenti School of Communication, Houston;
b
John & Elizabeth Bates Cowles Professor of Journalism,
Diversity and Equality, Hubbard School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Minnesota -
Twin Cities, Minneapolis;
c
School of Communication, University of Navarra Pamplona, Spain;
d
Universidad de
La Sabana, Autopista Norte de Bogotá, Colombia
ABSTRACT
Previous research suggests that mainstream media coverage
around the world follows a “protest paradigm”that demonizes
protesters and marginalizes their causes. Given the recent increase
in global protest activity and the growing importance of social
media for activism, this paper content analyzes 1,438 protest-
related English and Spanish news stories from around the world
that were shared on social media, examining framing, sourcing,
and marginalizing devices across media outlet type, region,
language, and social media platform in order to create a typology
of how the protest paradigm operates in an international and
social media context. Results showed type of protest, location of
protest, and type of media outlet were significantly related to
whether news stories adhered to the protest paradigm. Social
media shares were predicted by region of media outlet, English-
language media, and type of protest.
KEYWORDS
Activism; content analysis;
international news; news
audiences; protest paradigm;
social media
Over the last decade, there has been a global increase in large-scale protests around the
world. The Global Database of Events, Language, and Tone (GDELT 2016) found that on-
going protest frequency is higher in the 2010s than it was in the 1990s and 2000s.
Given the international spike in protest activity (Carothers and Youngs 2015), it is impor-
tant to understand the role of the media, particularly social media, in spreading news
about protests.
According to the protest paradigm, mainstream media coverage tends to demonize pro-
testers and delegitimize protests (Chan and Lee 1984; McLeod and Hertog 1999), which
can influence whether society will accept or reject protesters’claims (McLeod and
Hertog 1992). Considering the complex and often antagonistic relationship between main-
stream media and protesters (Gitlin 1980), exploring how different types of media treat
different types of protests in various countries around the world becomes all the more
critical. This study of English- and Spanish-language news coverage shared on social
media of global protests in 2015 aims to offer a typology for better understanding how
the paradigm operates in an international and social media context. More specifically,
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
CONTACT Summer Harlow sharlow@central.uh.edu
JOURNALISM STUDIES
2020, VOL. 21, NO. 11, 1590–1608
https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1776144
this content analysis examines protest-related articles published by mainstream, alterna-
tive, and digital-only media outlets, and distributed via Facebook and Twitter, to test
the continued relevance of the paradigm in this new media ecology, and to identify the
content characteristics that might influence the extent to which social media audiences
choose to engage with articles about protests.
Protest Paradigm
Research points to an asymmetrical relationship between the mainstream news media and
protesters. Protesters need media coverage to promote their cause, but to attract media
attention the protest must involve many people and employ radical tactics (Gitlin 1980;
McCarthy, McPhail, and Smith 1996). At the same time, news coverage often stigmatizes
protesters as deviants (McLeod and Hertog 1992,1999). Scholars refer to this pattern of
negative coverage as the protest paradigm (Chan and Lee 1984). Stories adhering to this
paradigm are characterized by journalists’reliance on official sources over voices of pro-
testers, and narrative structures, such as framing, that favor conflict and the status quo
(McLeod and Hertog 1999).
The protest paradigm typically is attributed to the norms and routines underlying tra-
ditional journalistic practices that value conflict in stories and privilege official viewpoints
(McLeod 2007; McLeod and Hertog 1999). Recent research, however, questions the extent
to which paradigmatic coverage is automatic, in light of the complexities of issues and
identities in today’s social movements (Cottle, 2008). Some studies, especially those exam-
ining the paradigm in an online context, identify factors mediating adherence to the para-
digm. For example, Shahin and colleagues (2016) found that while an over-reliance on
official sources and a focus on violence where characteristic of news coverage in India,
China, and Brazil, use of other marginalization devices varied, suggesting that country spe-
cificities diminished adherence to the paradigm outside of Western countries. Studies
examining traditional media indicate that protesters advocating against the status quo
are delegitimized while those protesting on behalf of the status quo are covered in
more substantial ways (Gitlin 1980; McLeod and Hertog 1992).
Frames and Devices
Media framing can shape the public’s understanding of an event by emphasizing certain
elements in a news story over others (Entman 1993). Media frames have the potential to
influence attitudes and behaviors. As such, framing is an important factor in influencing
whether the public will perceive a protest as legitimate (McLeod and Detenber 1999).
Key components of framing include the use of story narratives (or frames), devices that
portray certain characteristics of the story’s actors, and source selection.
Frames
Hertog and McLeod (1995,2001) noted four main frames in media coverage of protests:
riot (highlighting the conflict between protesters and society, and portraying protesters
as deviants), confrontation (emphasizing the conflict between police and protesters), spec-
tacle (focusing on the drama, oddity, and spectacle of the protests and protesters, includ-
ing the number of protesters), and debate (emphasizing the reasons for the protest and
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1591
focusing on protesters’viewpoints and demands). The riot, confrontation, and spectacle
frames usually serve to delegitimize protests and protesters (McLeod and Hertog 1992).
Devices
Protests can be marginalized through the use of certain devices, such as the way protes-
ters’tactics and actions are characterized (e.g., Dardis 2006). Describing protesters as
violent associates lawlessness with a particular cause. However, peaceful protest descrip-
tions have a counter effect. While still focusing on protesters’actions instead of protesters’
demands, mentions of peaceful protest serve as legitimizing devices.
Sourcing
Mainstream news coverage relies on official sources –a product of journalistic practice –
that can impact the framing of a story. The use of official sources to drive narratives also
gives official sources more control over the portrayal of a story (Bennett and Segerberg
2011). Thus, relying on official sources often delegitimizes protests while inclusion of pro-
testers as sources increases balance and legitimizes protesters and their claims.
Protest Coverage Online
Foundational studies on protest coverage examine mainstream, traditional media.
However, a growing line of research that explores the paradigm in a digital context has
detected some deviations in predicted coverage patterns. Harlow and Johnson’s(2011)
analysis of news coverage of the 2011 Egyptian protests showed that The New York
Times mostly abided by the protest paradigm, while journalists on Twitter and a citizen
journalism news cite often broke free from it. In an international study comparing
Twitter coverage of the Ferguson protests, Harlow (2019)) found media outlets, journalists,
and the general public followed or deviated from the paradigm to varying degrees.
Alternative and online-only media approach protest coverage differently. Alternative
media are expected to publish stories that legitimize socialmovements and include perspec-
tives the mainstream media ignore (Downing 2000). Similarly, online-only news outlets have
been shown to cover the news differently than traditional mainstream media (Brown and
Sinta 2016), suggesting a need to understand how type of media outlet might influence
the way protests are portrayed in articles shared on social media. By focusing on protest cov-
erage published by mainstream, alternative, and online-only media outlets that was shared
via Facebook and Twitter, this present research adds to nascent scholarship by examining
the paradigm in digital, international, and social media settings, in one comprehensive
research project. We propose the following hypothesis:
H1: Online mainstream outlets are more likely to publish protest news coverage that includes
riot, confrontation, and spectacle frames than protest coverage published in online-native or
alternative outlets.
Protest Issue and Location
Type of protest and location of protest in particular have bearing on the nature of media
coverage. Mourão and Chen (2019) examined left- and right-leaning protests in 2013 and
1592 S. HARLOW ET AL.
2015, respectively, in Brazil, and found journalists were more critical of the rightist protests,
contradicting previous literature that would suggest more favorable coverage. Boyle and
colleagues’(2004) found that war-related protests adhered to the paradigm more closely
than protests related to social or labor issues. In their study of protest coverage across
various U.S. media market types, Brown and Harlow (2019) found protest issue to be
key to paradigmatic coverage in traditional media, and identified a “hierarchy of social
struggle”in which protests related to racial injustice tended to follow negative coverage
patterns more than other protest topics. Following these comparative approaches, the
present study adds a global comparison of protest coverage to identify variance in
news coverage or social media interactions according to protest type.
Most of the studies examining the importance of protest type in media portrayals of
protest are limited to protests in one city or one country. Still, some research suggests
that country of protest can make a difference. Wittebols (1996) showed that news cover-
age of protests was more favorable when protesters’issues aligned with the govern-
ment’s foreign policies. Other studies suggest that general attitudes toward protest
activity can influence adherence to the paradigm, as the more protesters are seen as
outsiders, the more negative coverage will be (Shahin et al. 2016; Streeck and Ken-
worthy 2005). Kim and Shahin (2019) pointed out that news media ideological simi-
larities could sometimes overcome national boundaries when covering certain social
movements and protests. The authors argued there is an ideological parallelism
among transnational media coverage that is sometimes mediated by foreign policy
interests. McCluskey and colleagues (2009) found that anti-government protests in
low-pluralism countries received negative coverage, and Brown et al.’s(2018) compari-
son of media coverage of protests related to human rights issues in Mexico and the
U.S. found that foreign protests received more legitimizing coverage in the U.S. than
domestic ones. The current study pays particular attention to the importance of type
and region of protest as potentially shaping adherence to the paradigm, thus furthering
our understanding of the mediating factors disrupting paradigmatic coverage. With this
in mind, we propose the following research question:
RQ1a-d: How do protest topic and location predict use of the a) riot, b) confrontation, c) spec-
tacle, and d) debate frames in protest-related articles shared on social media?
Bilingual and Comparative Research
Language and geographic differences can change media representation patterns. Studies
have found a modulating effect of languages on news framing (Branton and Dunaway
2008; Oganian, Korn, and Heekeren 2016). Language also can have a significant effect
on journalists’selection of news topics (Lams 2016; Van Doorslaer 2009). Additionally,
news coverage is affected by a country’s economic, cultural, political, and historical con-
texts (Hanitzsch 2011; Weaver 1998), so geographic differences can shift representations.
Framing differences have been detected when different countries cover the same news
events (e.g., Machill, Beiler, and Fischer 2006; Peng 2008). Differences in news framing
also stem from culturally specific journalistic practices and audience resonance (Gamson
and Modigliani 1989; Van Gorp 2007). With this in mind, any typology looking to identify
commonalities in protest coverage across borders must take into account linguistic and
regional differences of media outlets, as both influence news coverage.
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1593
RQ2a-d: How do language and location of media outlet predict use of the a) riot, b) confronta-
tion, c) spectacle, and d) debate frames in protest-related articles shared on social media?
Share-Ability and Online News
Social media like Facebook and Twitter have amplified people’s ability to spread, shape,
and comment on online news, and an increasing number of people retrieve news from
social media (Matsa & Shearer, 2018). This shift demands an understanding of the charac-
teristics of news coverage that is shared on social media. Social media users’capability to
overcome mainstream media’s gatekeepers through their recommendations and personal
networks is one of the main disruptions to the media ecosystem (Tenenboim and Cohen
2015). Social recommendations raise questions about what elements make news spread-
able in digital spaces. While some studies focus on the psychological processes (e.g., Ho
and Dempsey 2010) or socio-technical affordances (e.g., Carlson 2015) behind online
engagement, a growing line of studies has focused on how content features trigger
share-ability (García-Perdomo et al. 2018; Trilling, Tolochko, and Burscher 2017); this is
the perspective taken in the present research inquiry.
News values, tone, and valence can influence audience reactions on social media (e.g.,
Bright 2016; García-Perdomo et al. 2018; Brown et al. 2018). Trilling, Tolochko, and Burscher
(2017) found that conflict and human interest increased interactions. Surprise, controversy,
and relevance likewise can predict news shared online (Rudat et al., 2014). This present
study broadens the scope of previous research by exploring audience engagement with
protester coverage on social media, posing the following research questions:
RQ3: What media outlet characteristics, protest characteristics, and protest-paradigm cover-
age components predict the number of Facebook interactions?
RQ4: What media outlet characteristics, protest characteristics, and protest-paradigm cover-
age components predict the number of Twitter interactions?
Methods
To better understand the journalistic coverage of protests by news media outlets globally,
a content analysis of news stories shared on social media was conducted. Articles were
collected using Newswhip’s Insights platform, which includes records from the application
program interfaces (APIs) of over 50,000 news organizations worldwide, and archives all
unique universal record locators (URL) for articles shared on social media. Each URL is
then tracked within the APIs of social media networks to provide the number of times
the URL (news article link) was engaged with on Facebook and Twitter.
A search for all articles with the words “protest”and “protester”and their Spanish
equivalents, “protesta,”“protestar,”and “protestante,”was conducted from Jan. 1, 2014
to Dec. 31, 2014. Due to limited download capacity, the top 24,000 most-shared articles
from Facebook in English (n = 12,000) and Spanish (12,000) were collected. Though
these selection criteria were not without limitation, Facebook shares were prioritized
because its network was significantly larger and thus more representative from a global
perspective. Facebook data available included the total number of likes, shares, and com-
ments that appeared cumulatively on all public links shared. Twitter data available
1594 S. HARLOW ET AL.
included the total number of times a link appeared as an original tweet, retweet, or any
tweets from link-shortening sites. Favorites on Twitter were not available. From the total
24,000 posts, a random sample of 750 English articles and 750 Spanish articles was ana-
lyzed. A total of 62 articles were not relevant, resulting in a final sample of 692 English
articles and 746 Spanish articles. Dead hyperlinks were replaced.
All four authors of this study served as coders. Intercoder reliability was calculated on
10% of the sample, resulting in Krippendorff’s alphas that ranged from .71 to 1.0. Variables’
individual alpha levels and operationalizations are presented below.
News Organization Variables
Coders identified the type of news organization as online versions of traditional/mainstream
news outlets (e.g., nytimes.com, CBS, CNN, FOX, BBC or any local newspaper/television
station); alternative media outlet/activist/partisan website (sites that self-identify as such,
i.e., Democracy Now, Alternet, Anonymous, Latino Rebels, Radio Free Europe); and
online-native media outlets (online-native news sites, social news aggregators, video
sharing sites, portal news sites, online media outlets with no explicit alternative desig-
nation in their “about”sections). Coders were instructed to visit each website’s“about”
section to identify the outlet’s type (α= .79). Dummy variables were created for media
type, with traditional/mainstream as the reference.
Coders identified the geographic region of the news outlet from seven regions: Central
and South America & Caribbean; Europe; the United States and Canada; Africa; Asia;
Middle East; and the Pacific Islands of Australia or New Zealand (α= .77). Due to low fre-
quencies, Pacific was collapsed with Asia. Dummy variables were created for media
region, with U.S./Canada as the reference.
Protest Identification Variables
Coders identified the geographic region of the protest: Central and South America & Carib-
bean; Europe; United States and Canada; Africa; Asia; Middle East; Pacific (Australia or New
Zealand); more than one region/worldwide; or not applicable (α= .85). Pacific again was
collapsed into Asia. Dummy variables were created for protest region with the U.S./
Canada as the reference. Additionally, using the geographic location for the media
outlet and the protest, variables were re-coded into whether the media outlet was
located in the same region as the location of the protest.
The type of protest was open coded. Coders wrote descriptions including what the
protest was about, the aim of the protest, whether any names of people were mentioned
as symbolizing the protest, and whether specific hashtags were mentioned. The authors
convened several times to discuss the categories and thus increase interpretive validity
(Lindlof and Taylor 2002). Researchers together settled on 33 specific types of protests
(i.e., Black Lives Matter, pro-freedom of expression, indigenous rights) that ultimately
were collapsed into six broad categories: (1) anti-government/corruption, (2) human
rights/justice/peace, (3) socio-economic (i.e., labor issues, net neutrality, education), (4)
environment/animals, (5) religious (i.e., pro-Islam, pro-Palestine), and (6) conservative/
revivalist (i.e., anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ+ rights, anti-immigration, pro-gun rights). The
first five categories represent progressive protests or those that challenge the status
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1595
quo, while the final category includes those protests that seek to uphold the status quo or
maintain hegemonic power structures. Dummy variables were created for the protest
type, with anti-government/corruption as the reference.
Protest Frames
Coders identified use of the protest paradigm’s riot, confrontation, spectacle, or debate
frame. Frames were not mutually exclusive. The riot frame included a focus on the violence
of protestors through rioting, looting, or causing damage to public property or society (α
= .83). Confrontation included a focus on clashes between protesters and police or auth-
orities, or the arrests of protesters (α= .81). The spectacle frame included articles that
focused on the emotions, drama, or unusualness of protests (α= .80). The debate frame
focused on the social critique of the movement, characterized by the presence of protes-
ters’viewpoints and demands. It also included attention to the background and history of
a movement (α= .80).
Devices
Coders identified if the article attributed violence or violent acts to protesters (α= .73).
Mentions of peaceful protests also were coded (α= .71).
Sourcing
Coders counted the number of named individuals directly quoted in each story. Consider-
ing all the sources used in the story, coders identified whether protesters or officials (gov-
ernment officials, official representatives of the organization being protested, or police)
were cited more often, equally, or not at all (α= .85).
Social Media Interactions Variables
Two social media interaction variables were used in this study. For Facebook, the numbers
of likes, shares, and comments were combined into one composite interaction variable. On
Twitter, only cumulative retweet counts were available via Newswhip, so interactions were
limited to the number of retweets on Twitter. These outcome variables were normalized
using a log-10 transformation so that outcomes would provide more appropriate results
for use in linear regressions.
Results
Data Overview
Most online articles analyzed were published on the websites of mainstream news outlets
(43.3%), followed by alternative outlets (32.1%) and online-native sites (24.6%). The most
common regions where outlets were located were U.S./Canada (40.7%), Latin America/Car-
ibbean (33.1%), Europe (19%), Asia/Pacific (4%), Middle East (1.9%), and Africa (1.5%).
Results showed that most articles were about protests related to human rights/justice/
peace (43.8%), followed by anti-government/corruption (35.5%), socio-economic issues
1596 S. HARLOW ET AL.
(8.2%), conservative/revivalist (6.5%), environment/animals (4.3%), and religious (1.7%).
Most stories were about protests located in the U.S./Canada (36.6%), followed by Latin
America/Caribbean (29.3%), Europe (16.6%), Asia/Pacific (6.6%), Middle East (4.4%), mul-
tiple regions (3.7%), and Africa (2.7%). Nearly two-thirds of stories (64.5%) were published
in media outlets in the same regions where the protests occurred, whereas 34.6% were
about protests taking place in regions other than where the media outlet was located.
For frames, 56.4% of stories contained a debate frame, 45.6% a confrontation frame,
34.1% a spectacle frame, and 21.2% a riot frame. Stories that quoted protesters the
most totaled 34.6%, while 22.3% quoted officials the most, 9.4% quoted protesters and
officials equally, and 33.7% quoted neither protesters nor officials. More articles men-
tioned violence (23.1%) than peacefulness (14.1%).
Protest Paradigm Predictors
RQ1a-d and RQ2 a-d considered 1) how protest type and location and 2) media
outlet language and location might predict adherence to the framing components
of the protest paradigm. Four binary logistical regressions were run with the a) riot, b)
confrontation, c) spectacle, and d) debate frames as the dependent variables (Tables
1–4).
Results for RQ1a showed that articles about conservative protests had significantly
decreased odds of having the riot frame [exp(B) = .143], and articles about socio-economic
protests had significantly increased odds [exp(B) = 2.194] of having a riot frame.
For RQ1b, stories about socio-economic protests [exp(B) = .227] and human rights/
justice/peace protests [exp(B) = .645], as well as those about protests in Europe [exp(B)
= .521], had decreased odds of employing the confrontation frame.
Table 1. Binary logistical regression predicting use of the riot frame
ΒS.E. e
B
Confrontation frame*** 1.095 .217 2.991
Spectacle frame −.352 .233 .703
Debate frame*** −1.652 .222 .192
Media region: Lat Am/Car. −.160 .376 .852
Media region: Europe .075 .367 1.078
Media region: Africa −.599 1.177 .549
Media region: Asia/Pacific 1.243 .646 3.465
Media region: Middle East .853 .929 2.347
Media type: Online .129 .253 1.137
Media type: alternative .172 .245 1.187
Media language: English −.168 .345 .846
Protest type: Socio-economic* .786 .381 2.194
Protest type: Human rights .338 .270 1.402
Protest type: Envir/animals −.078 .555 .925
Protest type: Religious .411 .743 1.508
Protest type: Conservative* −1.948 .780 .143
Protest region: Lat Am/Car. .664 .351 1.943
Protest region: Europe .390 .422 1.477
Protest region: Africa 1.140 .809 3.128
Protest region: Asia/Pacific−.863 .606 .422
Protest region: Middle East .338 .655 1.402
Media region different protest region −.235 .260 .229
Constant** −1.476 .502 .229
*p<.05, **p<.01; ***p<.001
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1597
Answering RQ1c, stories about conservative protests [exp(B) = 2.511] had increased
odds of having a spectacle frame. Articles about protests in regions other than where
the media outlet was located also had higher odds [exp(B) = 1.559] of including the spec-
tacle frame than articles about protests in the same region as the media outlet.
Table 2. Binary logistical regression predicting use of the confrontation free.
βS.E. e
B
Riot frame*** 1.113 .213 3.044
Spectacle frame*** −.786 .180 .456
Debate frame** −.464 .176 .629
Media region: Lat Am/Car. .136 .300 1.145
Media region: Europe .003 .279 1.003
Media region: Africa −1.994 1.113 .136
Media region: Asia/Pacific .368 .511 1.444
Media region: Middle East −.619 .712 .538
Media type: Online −.284 .201 .753
Media type: alternative* −.380 .192 .684
Media language: English .355 .282 1.427
Protest type: Socio-economic*** −1.484 .370 .227
Protest type: Human rights* −.439 .211 .645
Protest type: Envir/animals .132 .420 1.141
Protest type: Religious −.359 .679 .699
Protest type: Conservative .196 .354 1.217
Protest region: Lat Am/Car. .092 .270 1.096
Protest region: Europe* −.652 .292 .521
Protest region: Africa 1.023 .860 2.781
Protest region: Asia/Pacific−.007 .416 .993
Protest region: Middle East .890 .532 2.434
Media region different protest region .234 .201 1.263
Constant .342 .381 1.407
*p<.05, **p<.01; ***p<.001
Table 3. Binary logistical regression predicting use of spectacle frame
βS.E. e
B
Riot frame −.406 .230 .666
Confrontation frame*** −.805 .181 .447
Debate frame*** −.985 .186 .374
Media region: Lat Am/Car.* .641 .323 1.899
Media region: Europe −.208 .288 .812
Media region: Africa −1.417 1.326 .243
Media region: Asia/Pacific** 1.692 .563 5.428
Media region: Middle East −.381 .738 .683
Media type: Online −.215 .215 .806
Media type: alternative −.269 .200 .764
Media language: English*** 1.171 .298 3.226
Protest type: Socio-economic −.524 .386 .592
Protest type: Human rights .272 .225 1.313
Protest type: Envir/animals .174 .449 1.191
Protest type: Religious −.156 .681 .855
Protest type: Conservative* .921 .361 2.511
Protest region: Lat Am/Car. −.256 .280 .774
Protest region: Europe .040 .299 1.041
Protest region: Africa −.270 .797 .763
Protest region: Asia/Pacific−.787 .464 .455
Protest region: Middle East .375 .525 1.456
Media region different protest region* .444 .211 1.559
Constant −.592 .412 .553
*p<.05, **p<.01; ***p<.001
1598 S. HARLOW ET AL.
For RQ1d, stories about protests in Europe [exp(B) = 2.876] had increased odds of
having a debate frame.
Considering RQ2a-d, which examined the media’s characteristics, the odds of using the
spectacle frame increased significantly for media outlets located in Latin America/Carib-
bean [exp(B) = 1.899] and Asia/Pacific [exp(B) = 5.428]. The chances of a spectacle-
framed article being in English [exp(B) = 3.226] were more than three times higher than
the likelihood of being in Spanish. Results also showed articles from media in Latin
America/Caribbean [exp(B) = 2.468], and those in English [exp(B) = 2.945] had increased
odds of employing a debate frame.
Our first hypothesis, which suggested that mainstream news coverage of protests
would include more riot, confrontation, and spectacle framing than coverage in alternative
and online-native sites, was partially supported. Articles published by alternative media
outlets had significantly decreased odds [exp(B) = .684] of using the confrontation
frame. Articles in alternative media outlets [exp(B) = 1.619] also had increased odds of
employing a debate frame.
RQ3 and 4 were answered using hierarchical linear regressions. Media outlet type,
region of media outlet, and language were in Block 1; type of protest, and whether the
protest was in the same region as the media outlet in Block 2; the riot, confrontation, spec-
tacle, and debate frames were in Block 3; and whether protesters or officials were quoted
most as sources, and whether an article mentioned protesters as violent, or mentioned
protesters as peaceful were in Block 4.
For Facebook interactions (RQ3) all four models were significant (see Table 5). Overall,
the final model [F(21, 305) = 2.644, p< .001)] accounted for 15.4% of variance. Results
showed the significant predictors to be region of media outlet [Africa (B = −.138, p
< .05) and Asia/Pacific(B=−.128, p< .05)], and language (English, B = .246, p< .01).
Table 4. Binary logistical regression predicting use of the debate frame.
βS.E. e
B
Riot frame*** −1.646 .221 .193
Confrontation frame** −.471 .176 .625
Spectacle frame*** −.980 .185 .375
Media region: Lat Am/Car.** .903 .313 2.468
Media region: Europe .015 .295 1.015
Media region: Africa .585 1.089 1.794
Media region: Asia/Pacific** .387 .518 1.473
Media region: Middle East 1.848 1.202 6.350
Media type: Online .217 .209 1.242
Media type: alternative* .482 .199 1.619
Media language: English*** 1.080 .292 2.945
Protest type: Socio-economic −.128 .344 .880
Protest type: Human rights −.130 .225 .878
Protest type: Envir/animals −.024 .435 .976
Protest type: Religious −.746 .683 .474
Protest type: Conservative −.399 .372 .671
Protest region: Lat Am/Car. .087 .285 1.091
Protest region: Europe*** 1.056 .316 2.876
Protest region: Africa −.232 .812 .793
Protest region: Asia/Pacific−.343 .433 .710
Protest region: Middle East .621 .568 1.860
Media region different protest region .158 .212 1.171
Constant −.054 .404 .947
*p<.05, **p<.01; ***p<.001
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1599
For Twitter (RQ4), all four models were significant (see Table 6). The final model [F(21,
408) = 3.907, p< .001] explained 16.7% of variance in Twitter interactions. Media outlet
location in Latin America/Caribbean (B = .178, p< .05), English language (B = .438, p
< .001), religious protest (B = .098, p< .05)], and the debate frame (B = .109, p< .05) all sig-
nificantly predicted increased Twitter interactions, while media outlets from Asia/Pacific
regions (B = −.121, p< .05)], protest type [socio-economic (B = −.101, p< .05) predicted
fewer interactions.
Discussion and Conclusions
This study analyzed how the protest paradigm, particularly frames, devices, and sourcing,
operates on social media across media outlets, languages, and countries in order to offer a
global typology of protest coverage for the digital era. This study contributes to a growing
body of paradigm scholarship by disaggregating types of protest and types of media
outlets, nuancing the different levels at which the paradigm operates on social media.
By examining all types of protests published around the world in two languages, this
study makes an important contribution by demonstrating that protest type has bearing
on the nature of coverage. Our comparative global findings confirm research in studies
conducted in singular locations.
Fewer conservative/revivalist articles included the riot frame, in some ways reinforcing
U.S.-based studies that show pro-status quo protests receive less delegitimizing coverage
than other protests (McLeod and Hertog 1999; Shoemaker 1982). The decreased riot frame
Table 5. Hierarchical linear regression predicting Facebook interactions
Model Correlation
β
1
pvalue rpvalue
Media type: alternative .079 .186 .056 .158
Media type: online .104 .082 .061 .136
Media region: LatAm/Car −.041 .672 −.202 .000***
Media region: Europe −.011 .860 .065 .121
Media region: Africa −.138 .013* −.118 .017*
Media region: Asia/pacific−.128 .030* −.043 .219
Media region: Middle East −.090 .114 −.028 .305
Media language: English .246 .008 .253 .000***
R
2
.109
Protest type: Socio-economic .003 .958 .009 .432
Protest type: human rights/justice/peace −.087 .209 −.040 .236
Protest type: environment/animals .089 .119 .102 .033*
Protest type: religious .060 .290 .044 .214
Protest type: conservative/revivalist −.003 .958 .015 .392
Media region different than protest region .044 .431 .054 .165
R
2
.132
Riot frame .049 .462 −.069 .105
Confrontation frame −.074 .219 −.110 .023*
Spectacle frame .039 .498 .068 .109
Debate frame .105 .088 .159 .002**
R
2
.152
Violent protest −.023 .731 −.083 .068
Peaceful protest −.005 .931 −.011 .421
Sources quoted .048 .416 .112 .022*
R
2
.154
*p<.05, **p<.01; ***p<.001
1
Standardized coefficients
1600 S. HARLOW ET AL.
could be a result of these protests not engaging (or not needing to engage) with tactics
that tend to produce negative coverage. In other words, governments are less likely to use
force to repress pro-status quo protests, so radical tactics become unnecessary. However,
conservative/revivalist protest coverage also had increased odds of having the spectacle
frame, thus suggesting a push-back against the paradigm’s status quo-supporting predic-
tion. The increased use of the spectacle frame for right-wing protests, rather than the
overtly negative riot frame, may be one way journalists subtly question the protesters’
legitimacy—use of the spectacle frame could perhaps be construed as a way to maintain
paradigmatic coverage when the riot and confrontation frames are not applicable. Too,
the increased spectacle-frame use may be indicative of this type of protest engaging
more regularly in spectacular protest tactics. Future research might explore how protest
tactics have changed in the age of social media news and an information-saturated
digital environment.
Stories about socio-economic and human rights/justice protests had reduced odds of
using the confrontation frame, pointing to the fluctuating parameters of the status quo
and the ways in which journalists negotiate it. Failing systems that maintain the status
quo may be reported differently by journalists. It also is likely that the tactics employed
in these types of protests, such as boycotts for an economic protest, do not frequently
provoke confrontation with police.
Location of protest predicted use of the confrontation and debate frames. Stories about
protests in Europe had decreased odds of having a confrontation frame and increased
odds of having a debate frame. As most research has explained national or local
Table 6. Hierarchical linear regression predicting Twitter interactions.
Model Correlations
β
1
pvalue rpvalue
Media type: alternative .046 .372 .082 .046*
Media type: online .047 .350 .023 .320
Media region: LatAm/Car .178 .040* −.145 .001***
Media region: Europe .037 .511 −.002 .481
Media region: Africa −.038 .421 −.003 .479
Media region: Asia/pacific−.121 .020* −.024 .309
Media region: Middle East −.018 .701 .046 .171
Media language: English .438 .000*** .299 .000***
R
2
.122
Protest type: Socio-economic −.101 .050* −.110 .012*
Protest type: human rights/justice/peace −.099 .079 −.038 .213
Protest type: environment/animals .060 .219 .089 .033*
Protest type: religious .098 .046* .095 .025*
Protest type: conservative/revivalist −.057 .267 −.055 .126
Media region different than protest region .025 .601 −.009 .423
R
2
.153
Riot frame −.007 .898 −.071 .070
Confrontation frame −.058 .256 −.057 .119
Spectacle frame −.020 .677 −.010 .414
Debate frame .109 .034* .191 .000***
R
2
.166
Violent protest .046 .424 −.030 .266
Peaceful protest −.017 .723 .012 .400
Sources quoted −.008 .875 .035 .232
R
2
.167
*p<.05, **p<.01; ***p<.001
1
Standardized coefficients
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1601
differences in media coverage, the current research advances the protest paradigm as an
international theory by showing regional influences shaping adherence to the paradigm.
These findings can be partially explained in two ways. First, as McCluskey et al. (2009)
pointed out, protests in high-pluralism countries, such as those in Europe, tend to
receive more positive coverage than in low-pluralism countries. Second, social movements
in Europe have a long history of struggle and high levels of organization to negotiate with
states and the press, which may allow them to convey in a more effective way the main
arguments behind their protests (Mathers 2007; Tilly 2017), thereby gaining more legiti-
mized news media coverage.
Region where the media outlets were located also predicted use of the spectacle and
debate frames. Media outlets in Latin America/Caribbean and Asia/Pacific had increased
odds of using the spectacle frame, and outlets in Latin America/Caribbean also had
increased odds of using the debate frame. The probability of Latin American and Asian
media of adopting the spectacle frame is not a surprise as previous research has shown
a tendency to highlight the drama, oddity, and circus of protests and protesters in
these regions (Boyle, McLeod, and Armstrong 2012; Harlow et al. 2017). What was some-
what contradictory is the fact that Latin America/Caribbean media also were more inclined
to use the debate frame. This finding may indicate a shift in Latin American media cover-
age that could show the relevance of social protest and the vindication of major social
movements’claims in the region. Given the fact that social movements and protests
have gained significance in social media and in alternative media environments (Harlow
et al. 2017; Harlow and Johnson 2011; Brown et al. 2018), there is a possibility that Latin
American media in general are changing their coverage to focus more on the underlying
reasons for protest, legitimizing some historical grievances. Moreover, the transition from
authoritarian military regimes to fragile democracies in the region —which led to the
partial end of direct censorship—may also explain the emergence of a media counter-nar-
rative that favors the debate frame and challenges the protest paradigm in Latin America.
As previous scholars have pointed out, counter narratives in Latin American democracies
can be produced either by alternative media that want to confront the massification of
media (Straubhaar 1989), or by traditional media that changed journalistic norms and rou-
tines to favor certain protests, particularly those that adopt a conservative, elite-supported
account (Mourão 2019). In both cases, the return to democracy in the region showed a
media shift form partisan to a more commercial-corporate press that supports some
Western principles such as objectivity, pluralism, or watch dog journalism, although the
relationships between the press, the state, and the market continue to be intertwined
in the region (Waisbord 2000). As Lugo-Ocando (2008) claimed, media in Latin America
as a whole have become more oriented toward “satisfying market needs,”but they con-
tinue to operate within the “ideological framework of liberal democracies”(2) that
favors public opinion and audiences (18-19).
Type of media outlet had bearing on the confrontation and debate frames. Alternative
outlets had decreased odds of publishing stories with the confrontation frame and increased
odds of using the debate frame. Such a finding substantiates claims of alternative media’s
role as the media of social movements, protesters, and dissidents (e.g., Downing 2000). It
follows that alternative media would include more legitimizing than delegitimizing
protest coverage. Much research differentiates outlets based solely on ideology, so this
study contributes to scholarship by examining differences in platforms. Including
1602 S. HARLOW ET AL.
mainstream media, alternative media, and online-native media (i.e., portals and social news
aggregators) allows this study to demonstrate the importance of distinguishing between
platforms, as type of outlet indeed predicts adherence to the protest paradigm.
Building on previous research that shows language influences journalists’framing and
agenda-setting decisions (Lams 2016; Van Doorslaer 2009), our study finds English articles
were associated with increased odds of use of the spectacle and debate frames. Future
research should consider how journalists’training and opinions about protest topics
might influence how much they follow the paradigm. It also would be interesting to con-
sider whether English-language audiences prefer spectacular stories, or perhaps why
English-language journalists think they do.
Stories published by media outlets in a region different than the location of the protest
increased odds of use of the spectacle frame. This suggests a type of othering through the
dramatization or exoticization produced by the frame. Thus, journalists’ability to accu-
rately and fairly report on protests in foreign regions is brought into question, and in
turn, so are audiences’understandings of citizen uprisings in a foreign context.
This study reveals important findings about how social media users interact with cover-
age. Results showed that region of media outlet and language influenced the number of
Facebook and Twitter interactions. Coverage from outlets located in Africa and Asia/Pacific
regions were negatively related to the number of Facebook interactions. Those in Asia/
Pacific also were negatively related to the number of Twitter interactions, and outlets in
Latin America/Caribbean were positively associated with increased Twitter interactions.
Notably, these findings could be attributed to smaller sample sizes for stories from
these regions, and because English and Spanish, the languages of this study, are not
necessarily the native languages in these regions. Still, these findings raise questions
about the general government and public acceptance of protests in African and Asian
regions. Protests in these regions might be less tolerated by the governments, and there-
fore less accepted as legitimate by the public, potentially explaining the relationship with
social media interactions. Government censorship, lack of internet access in these regions,
and lower social media penetration, also must be considered, and in some of these
countries (e.g., China, Iran, North Korea), Facebook and Twitter are outright banned.
English-language articles received more interactions on Facebook and Twitter, provid-
ing further evidence for the dominance of English on the internet, and social media audi-
ences’sharing decisions reinforce this trend. Additionally, inequalities in Internet access
and social media use also are surely at play. Thus, these results must be examined critically
with a foundational understanding that most social media users are English speakers to
begin with.
Interestingly, type of protest and frames predicted the number of Twitter interactions,
but they did not predict the number of Facebook interactions, highlighting differences
across social media platforms and underscoring the importance of disaggregating social
media in order to fully examine the different uses, affordances, and audiences of individual
platforms. Socio-economic protests and those related to religion garnered increased
Twitter interactions. This finding could be related to the culture of Twitter and the type
of news that attracts more public interest generally. Although unaccounted for in this
study’s analysis, proprietary algorithms that influence what news users see could also
affect the number of interactions, and these algorithms operate differently on each site.
The debate frame was positively related to Twitter interactions. This significance suggests
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1603
Twitter audiences might prefer more legitimizing coverage than journalists traditionally
have provided, indicating a potential disjuncture between journalists’values and audi-
ences’values. This extends previous research on social media and protest coverage that
found news shared on social media tended to disrupt the paradigm (Harlow et al. 2017;
Brown et al. 2018), adding that, internationally, there is a potential desire for more legiti-
mizing coverage of protests in some social media networks.
The fact that only a limited number of framing components explained engagement
suggests that how journalists write about protests may not be as important to social
media users as which protests journalists write about. Such a finding emphasizes the out-
sized role of social media audiences in news distribution patterns, indicating that social
media users, more than journalists, might be responsible for whether the most-circulated
protest news follows or deviates from the protest paradigm. There is potential for impor-
tant, real-world consequences for social movements that are more controversial or less
popular, as social media audiences seemingly have the gatekeeping authority to deter-
mine, based on their personal preferences, which protests receive public attention, and
which are made invisible on social media.
Typology
While previous studies have identified various factors that limit adherence to the paradigm
(e.g., Cottle, 2008; Harlow and Johnson 2011; Shahin et al. 2016), little research has
attempted to comprehensively show how the paradigm in stories shared on social
media varies across the world in different types of media. With this in mind, we offer a
typology to better explain how the protest paradigm operates across countries, languages,
protest topic, and types of media outlets in this social media age (see Figure 1).
The most important observation that can be discerned from this typology is that all
descriptive aspects of the protest must be considered when addressing whether coverage
shared on social media will follow or disrupt the paradigm. This is evidenced by this study’s
findings that frames matter most when it comes to breaking the protest paradigm.
Our typology predicts alternative media organizations will continue to diverge from
mainstream outlets (traditional and other online media sources) and the paradigm.
Alternative outlets can be expected to use more legitimizing frames and more protesters
as sources, and are increasingly important to consider as alternative outlets have oppor-
tunity for increased exposure in the digital realm. Overall, however, protests around the
world continue to fight the stigmas associated with marginalizing coverage –media cover-
age of protests in every region showed few significant differences in patterns of overall
adherence to the paradigm and individual frames, devices and sourcing patterns, indicat-
ing that protest coverage shared on social media is similar to protest coverage generally.
Our findings build on previous research that suggests protest agendas that align with
the status quo –the current or more traditional state of political and social affairs in a par-
ticular geographic area –receive news coverage that adheres less to the paradigm (Boyle
et al. 2004). However, it is important to mention that conservative/revivalist protests may
be marginalized through spectacleization and other rhetorical methods not analyzed here.
When it comes to protest region, the concept of “othering”may come into play.
Western media organizations have a tendency to outgroup Africa and other non-
Western countries, ultimately leading to a misidentification of needs and demands, and
1604 S. HARLOW ET AL.
a simplification of political and social issues (Besteman 1996). This study’sfindings indicate
othering could be occurring in coverage of any foreign protests outside the region of the
media outlet.
This study is limited in that it analyzed only the most-shared protest-related news
stories, so that any conclusions made herein are restricted to the most popular social
media content. Including stories that were not shared on social media could have pro-
duced different results, and perhaps identified other important factors influencing how
social media audiences interact with protest news. Future research should examine the
paradigm in less-shared content, too. Further, while this study expands the literature by
focusing on two languages, future studies should include additional languages of media
from around the world. It also is important to note that engagement on social media
with certain protest stories does not necessarily mean users support those protests.
Further research should examine to what extent users’support for a particular movement
influences social media engagement with news about that movement.
Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
ORCID
Summer Harlow http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6079-1439
Danielle K. Brown http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7637-8964
Ramón Salaverría http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4188-7811
Víctor García-Perdomo http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7187-1618
Figure 1. Protest typology. This figure illustrates the elements that comprise a typology of protest news
coverage shared on social media.
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1605
References
Bennett, W. L., and A. Segerberg. 2011.“Digital Media and the Personalization of Collective Action:
Social Technology and the Organization of Protests Against the Global Economic Crisis.”
Information, Communication & Society 14: 770–799.
Besteman, C. 1996.“Representing Violence and “Othering”Somalia.”Cultural Anthropology 11: 120–
133. doi:10.1525/can.1996.11.1.02a00060.
Boyle, M. P., M. R. McCluskey, N. Devanathan, S. E. Stein, and D. McLeod. 2004.“The Influence of Level
of Deviance and Protest Type on Coverage of Social Protest in Wisconsin From 1960 to 1999.”Mass
Communication and Society 7: 43–60.
Boyle, M. P., D. M. McLeod, and C. L. Armstrong. 2012.“Adherence to the Protest Paradigm: The
Influence of Protest Goals and Tactics on News Coverage in US and International Newspapers.”
The International Journal of Press/Politics 17 (2): 127–144.
Branton, R., and J. Dunaway. 2008.“English-and Spanish-Language Media Coverage of Immigration:
A Comparative Analysis.”Social Science Quarterly 89 (4): 1006–1022.
Bright, J. 2016.“The Social News Gap: How News Reading and News Sharing Diverge.”Journal of
Communication 66: 343–365.
Brown, D. K., and S. Harlow. 2019.“Protests, Media Coverage, and a Hierarchy of Social Struggle.”The
International Journal of Press/Politics 24 (4): 508–530.
Brown, D. K., S. Harlow, V. García-Perdomo, and R. Salaverría. 2018.“From #Ferguson to #Ayotzinapa:
Analyzing Differences in Domestic and Foreign Protest News Shared on Social Media.”Mass
Communication and Society 21 (5): 606–630.
Brown, D. K., and V. Sinta. 2016.“Six Things you Didn’t Know About Headline Writing: Sensationalistic
Form in Viral News Content From Traditional and Digitally Native News Organizations.”The
International Symposium of Online Journalism Research Journal 6: 111–130.
Carlson, M. 2015.“The Robotic Reporter.”Digital Journalism 3: 416–431.
Carothers, T., and R. Youngs. 2015. The complexities of global protests. Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace. http://carnegieendowment.org/2015/10/08/complexities-of-global-protests-
pub-61537.
Chan, J. M., and C. C. Lee. 1984.“The Journalistic Paradigm on Civil Protests: A Case Study of Hong
Kong.”In The News Media in National and International Conflict, edited by A. Arno, and W.
Dissanayake, 183–202. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Cottle, Simon. 2008.“Reporting demonstrations: The changing media politics of dissent.”Media,
Culture & Society 30 (6): 853–872.
Dardis, F. E. 2006.“Marginalization Devices in U.S. Press Coverage of Iraq War Protest: A Content
Analysis.”Mass Communication and Society 9: 117–135.
Downing, J. D. 2000.Radical Media: Rebellious Communication and Social Movements. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Entman, R. 1993.“Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.”Journal of Communication
43: 51–58.
Gamson, W. A., and A. Modigliani. 1989.“Media Discourse and Public Opinion on Nuclear Power: A
Constructionist Approach.”American Journal of Sociology 95 (1): 1–37.
García-Perdomo, V., R. Salaverría, D. K. Brown, and S. Harlow. 2018.“To Share or not to Share: The
Influence of News Values and Topics on Popular Social Media Content in the United States,
Brazil, and Argentina.”Journalism Studies 19 (8): 1180–1201.
GDELT. 2016. The GDELT Project. http://gdeltproject.org.
Gitlin, T. 1980.The Whole World is Watching: Mass Media in the Making & Unmaking of the new Left.
Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Hanitzsch, T. 2011.“Populist Disseminators, Detached Watchdogs, Critical Change Agents and
Opportunist Facilitators: Professional Milieus, the Journalistic Field and Autonomy in 18
Countries.”International Communication Gazette 73 (6): 477–494.
Harlow, S. 2019.“Framing #Ferguson: A comparative analysis of media tweets in the US, UK, Spain,
and France.”International Communication Gazette 81 (6-8): 623–643.
1606 S. HARLOW ET AL.
Harlow, S., and T. Johnson. 2011.“The Arab Spring| Overthrowing the Protest Paradigm? How The
New York Times, Global Voices and Twitter Covered the Egyptian Revolution.”International
Journal of Communication 5: 16.
Harlow, S., R. Salaverría, D. K. Brown, and V. García-Perdomo. 2017.“Protest Paradigm in Multimedia:
Social Media Sharing of Coverage About the Crime of Ayotzinapa, Mexico.”Journal of
Communication 67 (3): 328–349.
Hertog, J. K., and D. M. McLeod. 1995.“Anarchists Wreak Havoc in Downtown Minneapolis: A Multi-
Level Study of Media Coverage of Radical Protest.”Journalism & Mass Communication Monographs
151: 1–48.
Hertog, J. K., and D. M. McLeod. 2001.“A Multiperspectival Approach to Framing Analysis: a Field
Guide.”In Framing Public Life: Perspectives on Media and Our Understanding of the Social World,
edited by S. Reese, O. Gandy, and A. Grant, 139–161. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ho, J. Y., and M. Dempsey. 2010.“Viral Marketing: Motivations to Forward Online Content.”Journal of
Business Research 63: 1000–1006.
Kim, K., and S. Shahin. 2019.“Ideological Parallelism: Toward a Transnational Understanding of the
Protest Paradigm.”Social Movement Studies,doi: 10.1080/14742837.2019.1681956.
Lams, L. 2016.“China: Economic Magnet or Rival? Framing of China in the Dutch-and French-
Language Elite Press in Belgium and the Netherlands.”International Communication Gazette 78
(1-2): 137–156.
Lindlof, T. R., and B. C. Taylor. 2002.Qualitative Communication Research Methods. Thousand Oaks,
Calif: Sage Publications.
Lugo-Ocando, J. 2008.The Media in Latin America. McGraw-Hill Education.
Machill, M., M. Beiler, and C. Fischer. 2006.“Europe-topics in Europe’s Media. The Debate About the
European Public Sphere: A Meta-Analysis of Media Content Analyses.”European Journal of
Communication 21 (1): 57–88.
Mathers, A. 2007.Struggling for a Social Europe: Neoliberal Globalization and the Birth of a European
Social Movement. London: Routledge.
Matsa, K. E., and E. Shearer. 2018.“News use across social media platforms 2018.”Pew Research
Center.https://www.journalism.org/2018/09/10/news-use-across-social-media-platforms-2018/.
McCarthy, J., C. McPhail, and J. Smith. 1996.“Images of Protest: Dimensions of Selection Bias in Media
Coverage of Washington Demonstrations, 1982 and 1991.”American Sociological Review 61:
478–479.
McCluskey, M., S. E. Stein, M. P. Boyle, and D. M. McLeod. 2009.“Community Structure and Social
Protest: Influences on Newspaper Coverage.”Mass Communication and Society 12 (3): 353–371.
McLeod, D. M. 2007.“News Coverage and Social Protest: How the Media’s Protect Paradigm
Exacerbates Social Conflict.”Journal of Dispute Resolution 1: 185–194.
McLeod, D. M., and B. Detenber. 1999.“Framing Effects of Television News Coverage of Social
Protest.”Journal of Communication 49: 3–23.
McLeod, D. M., and J. K. Hertog. 1992.“The Manufacture of ‘Public Opinion’by Reporters: Informal
Cues for Public Perceptions of Protest Groups.”Discourse & Society 3: 259–275.
McLeod, D. M., and J. K. Hertog. 1999.“Social Control, Social Change and the Mass Media’s Role in the
Regulation of Protest Groups.”In Mass Media, Social Control and Social Change: A Macrosocial
Perspective, edited by D. Demers, and K. Viswanath, 305–330. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
Mourão, R. R. 2019.“From Mass to Elite Protests:.”Mass Communication and Society 22 (1): 49–71.
Mourão, R. R., and W. Chen. 2019.“Covering Protests on Twitter: The Influences on Journalists’Social
Media Portrayals of Left-and Right-Leaning Demonstrations in Brazil.”The International Journal of
Press/Politics 25 (2): 260–280.
Oganian, Y., C. W. Korn, and H. R. Heekeren. 2016.“Language Switching—but not Foreign Language
use per se—Reduces the Framing Effect.”Journal of Experimental Psychology 42 (1): 140–148.
Peng, Z. 2008.“Framing the Anti-war Protests in the Global Village: A Comparative Study of
Newspaper Coverage in Three Countries.”International Communication Gazette 70 (5): 361–377.
Rudat, A., J. Buder, and F. W. Hesse. 2014.“Audience Design in Twitter: Retweeting Behavior Between
Informational Value and Followers’Interests.”Computers in Human Behavior 35: 132–139.
JOURNALISM STUDIES 1607
Shahin, S., P. Zheng, H. A. Sturm, and D. Fadnis. 2016.“Protesting the Paradigm: A Comparative Study
of News Coverage of Protests in Brazil.”China and India. The International Journal of Press/Politics
21: 143–164. doi:10.1177/1940161216631114.
Shoemaker, P. J. 1982.“The Perceived Legitimacy of Deviant Political Groups: Two Experiments on
Media Effects.”Communication Research 9: 249–286. doi:10.1177/009365082009002004.
Straubhaar, J. 1989.“Television and Video in the Transition From Military to Civilian Rule in Brazil.”
Latin American Research Review 24 (1): 140–154. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2503285.
Streeck, W., and L. Kenworthy. 2005.“Theories and Practices of Neocorporatism.”In The Handbook of
Political Sociology: States, Civil Societies, and Globalization, edited by T. Janoski, R. Alford, A. Hicks,
and M. A. Schwartz, 441–460. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tenenboim, O., and A. A. Cohen. 2015.“What Prompts Users to Click and Comment: A Longitudinal
Study of Online News.”Journalism 16: 198–217. doi:10.1177/1464884913513996.
Tilly, C. 2017.Social Movements, 1768-2004. New York, NY: Routledge.
Trilling, D., P. Tolochko, and B. Burscher. 2017.“From Newsworthiness to Shareworthiness: How to
Predict News Sharing Based on Article Characteristics.”Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly 94: 38–60. doi:10.1177/1077699016654682.
Van Doorslaer, L. 2009.“How Language and (non-) Translation Impact on Media Newsrooms: The
Case of Newspapers in Belgium.”Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 17 (2): 83–92.
Van Gorp, B. 2007.“The Constructionist Approach to Framing: Bringing Culture Back in.”Journal of
Communication 57: 60–78.
Waisbord, S. R. 2000.Watchdog Journalism in South America: News, Accountability, and Democracy.
New York: Columbia University Press.
Weaver, D., ed. 1998.The Global Journalist: News People Around the World. Creskill, NJ: Hampton.
Wittebols, J. H. 1996.“News From the Noninstitutional World: US and Canadian Television News
Coverage of Social Protest.”Political Communication 13 (3): 345–361.
1608 S. HARLOW ET AL.
