Table of Links Abstract and 1 Introduction 2. Data 3. Measuring Media Slant and 3.1. Text pre-processing and featurization 3.2. Classifying transcripts by TV source 3.3. Text similarity between newspapers and TV stations and 3.4. Topic model 4. Econometric Framework 4.1. Instrumental variables specification 4.2. Instrument first stage and validity 5. Results 5.1. Main results 5.2. Robustness checks 6. Mechanisms and Heterogeneity 6.1. Local vs. national or international news content 6.2. Cable news media slant polarizes local newspapers 7. Conclusion and References Online Appendices A. Data Appendix A.1. Newspaper articles A.2. Alternative county matching of newspapers and A.3. Filtering of the article snippets A.4. Included prime-time TV shows and A.5. Summary statistics B. Methods Appendix, B.1. Text pre-processing and B.2. Bigrams most predictive for FNC or CNN/MSNBC B.3. Human validation of NLP model B.4. Distribution of Fox News similarity in newspapers and B.5. Example articles by Fox News similarity B.6. Topics from the newspaper-based LDA model C. Results Appendix C.1. First stage results and C.2. Instrument exogeneity C.3. Placebo: Content similarity in 1995/96 C.4. OLS results C.5. Reduced form results C.6. Sub-samples: Newspaper headquarters and other counties and C.7. Robustness: Alternative county matching C.8. Robustness: Historical circulation weights and C.9. Robustness: Relative circulation weights C.10. Robustness: Absolute and relative FNC viewership and C.11. Robustness: Dropping observations and clustering C.12. Mechanisms: Language features and topics C.13. Mechanisms: Descriptive Evidence on Demand Side C.14. Mechanisms: Slant contagion and polarization C. Results Appendix C.1. First stage results C.2. Instrument exogeneity In this Section, we follow Ash and Galletta (2023) to demonstrate that our instrument is unrelated to demographic characteristics that predict policy preferences or news channel viewership. We use linear regressions with demographic characteristics and state fixed effects as covariates to predict viewership and newspaper content. Specifically, we obtain predictions related to the endogenous regressor (viewership) and to the outcome (the probability of newspaper content to be Fox-like). These predictions capture the variation in viewership and news content due to pre-existing cultural, economic, and political county characteristics. We then regress these predictions on different definitions of our instrument Positionjs. Table C.2 summarizes this identification check. Columns 1 and 2 document that there is no significant relationship between the absolute position of Fox News and the predicted values for viewership or newspaper content. Columns 3 and 4 show that there is no significant relationship between relative FNC channel position and the respective predicted values. Overall, these results suggest that channel positions are not associated with county characteristics otherwise important for our endogenous regressor or outcome. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors:
(1) Philine Widmer, ETH Zürich and philine.widmer@gess.ethz.ch;
(2) Sergio Galletta, ETH Zürich and sergio.galletta@gess.ethz.ch;
(3) Elliott Ash, ETH Zürich and ashe@ethz.ch. Table of Links Abstract and 1 Introduction 2. Data Abstract and 1 Introduction 2. Data 3. Measuring Media Slant and 3.1. Text pre-processing and featurization 3. Measuring Media Slant and 3.1. Text pre-processing and featurization 3.2. Classifying transcripts by TV source 3.2. Classifying transcripts by TV source 3.3. Text similarity between newspapers and TV stations and 3.4. Topic model 3.3. Text similarity between newspapers and TV stations and 3.4. Topic model 4. Econometric Framework 4.1. Instrumental variables specification 4.1. Instrumental variables specification 4.2. Instrument first stage and validity 4.2. Instrument first stage and validity 5. Results 5.1. Main results 5.1. Main results 5.2. Robustness checks 5.2. Robustness checks 6. Mechanisms and Heterogeneity 6.1. Local vs. national or international news content 6.1. Local vs. national or international news content 6.2. Cable news media slant polarizes local newspapers 6.2. Cable news media slant polarizes local newspapers 7. Conclusion and References 7. Conclusion and References Online Appendices Online Appendices A. Data Appendix A.1. Newspaper articles A.1. Newspaper articles A.2. Alternative county matching of newspapers and A.3. Filtering of the article snippets A.2. Alternative county matching of newspapers and A.3. Filtering of the article snippets A.4. Included prime-time TV shows and A.5. Summary statistics A.4. Included prime-time TV shows and A.5. Summary statistics B. Methods Appendix, B.1. Text pre-processing and B.2. Bigrams most predictive for FNC or CNN/MSNBC B. Methods Appendix, B.1. Text pre-processing and B.2. Bigrams most predictive for FNC or CNN/MSNBC B.3. Human validation of NLP model B.3. Human validation of NLP model B.4. Distribution of Fox News similarity in newspapers and B.5. Example articles by Fox News similarity B.4. Distribution of Fox News similarity in newspapers and B.5. Example articles by Fox News similarity B.6. Topics from the newspaper-based LDA model B.6. Topics from the newspaper-based LDA model C. Results Appendix C.1. First stage results and C.2. Instrument exogeneity C.1. First stage results and C.2. Instrument exogeneity C.3. Placebo: Content similarity in 1995/96 C.3. Placebo: Content similarity in 1995/96 C.4. OLS results C.4. OLS results C.5. Reduced form results C.5. Reduced form results C.6. Sub-samples: Newspaper headquarters and other counties and C.7. Robustness: Alternative county matching C.6. Sub-samples: Newspaper headquarters and other counties and C.7. Robustness: Alternative county matching C.8. Robustness: Historical circulation weights and C.9. Robustness: Relative circulation weights C.8. Robustness: Historical circulation weights and C.9. Robustness: Relative circulation weights C.10. Robustness: Absolute and relative FNC viewership and C.11. Robustness: Dropping observations and clustering C.10. Robustness: Absolute and relative FNC viewership and C.11. Robustness: Dropping observations and clustering C.12. Mechanisms: Language features and topics C.12. Mechanisms: Language features and topics C.13. Mechanisms: Descriptive Evidence on Demand Side C.13. Mechanisms: Descriptive Evidence on Demand Side C.14. Mechanisms: Slant contagion and polarization C.14. Mechanisms: Slant contagion and polarization C. Results Appendix C.1. First stage results C.2. Instrument exogeneity In this Section, we follow Ash and Galletta (2023) to demonstrate that our instrument is unrelated to demographic characteristics that predict policy preferences or news channel viewership. We use linear regressions with demographic characteristics and state fixed effects as covariates to predict viewership and newspaper content. Specifically, we obtain predictions related to the endogenous regressor (viewership) and to the outcome (the probability of newspaper content to be Fox-like). These predictions capture the variation in viewership and news content due to pre-existing cultural, economic, and political county characteristics. We then regress these predictions on different definitions of our instrument Positionjs. Table C.2 summarizes this identification check. Columns 1 and 2 document that there is no significant relationship between the absolute position of Fox News and the predicted values for viewership or newspaper content. Columns 3 and 4 show that there is no significant relationship between relative FNC channel position and the respective predicted values. Overall, these results suggest that channel positions are not associated with county characteristics otherwise important for our endogenous regressor or outcome. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. available on arxiv Authors: (1) Philine Widmer, ETH Zürich and philine.widmer@gess.ethz.ch; (2) Sergio Galletta, ETH Zürich and sergio.galletta@gess.ethz.ch; (3) Elliott Ash, ETH Zürich and ashe@ethz.ch. Authors: Authors: (1) Philine Widmer, ETH Zürich and philine.widmer@gess.ethz.ch; (2) Sergio Galletta, ETH Zürich and sergio.galletta@gess.ethz.ch; (3) Elliott Ash, ETH Zürich and ashe@ethz.ch.

Part of HackerNoon's growing list of open-source research papers, promoting free access to academic material.

Checking for Placebos During Our Media Bias Research

Media Slant is Contagious: Topics From the Newspaper-Based LDA Model

MediaBias.TECH

Too Long; Didn't Read

Make resilience your competitive advantage

First Stage Results of Our Media Bias Research

About Author

Comments

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN

Related Stories

Untitled Story

Bias in Machine Learning Models for Depression Detection

Researching Media Slant: Explaining the Instrumental Variables Specification

Media Slant is Contagious: Robustness Checks to Verify Our Results

Media Slant is Contagious: The Prime-Time TV Shows and Summary Statistics

How We Measured Cable News Slant: Researching Media Bias

Bias in Machine Learning Models for Depression Detection

Researching Media Slant: Explaining the Instrumental Variables Specification

Media Slant is Contagious: Robustness Checks to Verify Our Results

Media Slant is Contagious: The Prime-Time TV Shows and Summary Statistics

How We Measured Cable News Slant: Researching Media Bias

Light-Mode

Classic

Newspaper

Dark-Mode

Neon Noir

Minty

HN StartUps