![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
While technology news has become a major news genre, the coverage of high-tech products has raised concerns regarding the commercialization of journalism. Drawing on salience transfer and exemplification theory, this study explores how The New York Times and USA Today covered Apple products along quantity and quality dimensions. A content analysis documented a landslide in the amount of coverage on Apple products in both newspapers. Both iPhones and iPads were disproportionately over-covered in relation to their market share. Over one-third of the headlines about the iPhone covered the product favorably. The New York Times published more stories about these gadgets than USA Today did, while USA Today was twice as likely to portray iPhones in a positive light. These findings have raised questions about the commercialization of technology news and its impact on journalism.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dylan Baddour and René Castro for their contribution during the research process. We also thank Jitesh Ubrani and Mike Shirer for their assistance with IDC Personal Computing Devices Tracker data.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. For example, the first iPhone was officially launched on June 29, 2007, but Apple made the announcement on January 9, 2007, several months before the official launch.
2. Percent agreement is the number of agreements divided by the total number of measures.
3. Headlines that suggest the product is innovative, popular, or successful are considered positive. For example, “After iPhone Sales Bonanza in China, Apple's Profit Nearly Doubles” (The New York Times); “Finding Home for Old iPhone; Early Adopters Look Forward to New Version” (USA Today).
4. Headlines that are descriptive in nature or present a balanced view about the product are considered neutral. For example, “Clues in an iPhone Autopsy” (The New York Times); “Latest iPhone Apps Bring New Features—and Costs; Search, Cut and Paste Functions in Next Wave” (USA Today).
5. Headlines that suggest disappointment or faults with the product are considered negative. For example, “Verizon Deal May Expose iPhone Flaws” (The New York Times); “Static Continues for iPhone Debut; Software Hitches, Demand Shortfalls Frustrate Buyers” (USA Today).
6. For example, “Apple Packs All Kinds of High-tech Goodies into iPhone; In Addition to iPod, There's E-mail, Camera” (USA Today).
7. For example, “Apple Profit Doubles in its First Quarter; Sales of iPhones, iPads Soared During Holidays” (USA Today); “Apple Profit Soars Stunning 125%; Worldwide Sales of iPhone Get the Credit” (USA Today); “Apple Misses iPhone Forecasts; Shares Plunge 10% After Hours” (USA Today).
8. For example, “Worry Over Sales Spurs Talk of Cheaper iPhones” (The New York Times); “Verizon Finally to Get iPhone? Announcement Planned for Tuesday” (USA Today).
9. For example, “Anticipation for iPhone 5” (The New York Times); “Apple Tells F.C.C. it is ‘Still Pondering’ Google Voice Application for the iPhone” (The New York Times); “For Apple’s Next Trick … ; After iPhone Comes What?” (USA Today).
10. For example, “Let the iPhone Hype Begin Again; New Version's Faster, Only $199, and Arrives July 11” (USA Today); “Early iPhone Buyers to Get $100 Credit; Many Angry About Quick $200 Price Reduction” (USA Today).
11. For example, “Dropped Calls Plague iPhone 3G; Apple and AT& T Working Together on a Software Fix” (USA Today); “iPhone 5 Woes Go Beyond Maps; Customers Gripe About Battery Life, Wi-Fi Issues” (USA Today).