Seeing the Whole Board: New Institutional Analysis of News Content

Abstract

The author assesses the merits of various new institutional approaches to news presented as part of a symposium on the subject and suggests that one of the advantages of these approaches is their effort to see the major variables of news production in relation to one another and moving in time. However, this very sensitivity to interaction and time makes new institutionalist explanations complex. In this regard, of particular importance is the tendency of new institutionalist theorists to conflate at least two definitions of institutions: formal organizations and informal, largely tacit understandings. This article explores the potential of new institutionalist theory in the context of a brief examination of news coverage of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal in major mainstream American newspapers. It shows that the homogeneity of this coverage can be explained in the context of new institutionalist theory. Suggestions are offered for how those interested in new institutionalist explanations of news might move forward.

Keywords:

• Abu Ghraib
• journalism
• new institutionalism

Notes

1. Making this argument inevitably leads into a thorny normative thicket surrounding the question of news diversity. There is not likely to develop any time soon a widely accepted normative standard for judging how much diversity in news coverage on any given issue is “enough.” Empirically, news diversity versus homogeneity will always be assessed in relative terms, as in Entman's comparison of Fallujah and Abu Ghraib. Empirically, Entman appears to be correct that Fallujah received less critical coverage than did Abu Ghraib, though we assess the degree of difference differently.