1. More or Less Strangers Social distance to the old, the young, the ethnic and the non-ethnic Dutch as reflected in the news media reporting. by Dorota Lepianka, AIAS

2. Agenda Why media analysis? Research questions Research design (Preliminary) results Conclusions Follow-up

3. Theoretical model: Basic assumption: Peoples perceptions of various social groups are reinforced, if not shaped, by the media portrayal of those groups. Why media analysis? benefactor beneficiary media perception

4. Aim of the study The aim of the study The reconstruction of the (dominant) representations of the young, the old, the allochthon and the autochthon in Dutch media (press and tv).

5. Social distance Definition degree of (perceived) seperateness between individuals and groups acknowleged/seen as different Aspects - examples Affective Interactive Normative

6. Research question How do media convey/map social distance with respect to minority groups: the old, the young and the allochthon?

7. Strategies of distancing Othering via: denial of visibility denial of uniqueness denial of knowledge and voice overgeneralisation of the negative What may convey social distance in the media? (in)visibility/lack of attention (lack of) prominence: role in the news degree of homogeneity in presentation nature of evaluation

8. Study design: material Media Newspapers: de Volkskrant, de Telegraaf Tv: NOS Journaal, RTL4 nieuws Internet: www.nu.nlwww.nu.nl Research periods Crisis news reporting: pre-election campaign (May 2010) Routine news reporting (November 2010) Sampling all relevant articles/news messages focus on the actor

9. Study design: method Content analysis a quantitative technique which allows a systematic study of large corpuses of text Coding scheme news-item level actor level

10. Results: visibility CategoriesSample (N = 555) Share in population aged 15-35 and 55+ Young (N= 434) 78.2%52% Young autochthon11.9%38% Young allochthon11.2%14% Young generic55.1% Old (N= 121) 21.8% 48% Old autochthon 3.4%41% Old allochthon 0.5%7% Old generic17.8%

11. Results: prominence position within the news (edition) within-news importance amount of attention received voice? expert status?

12. Results: prominence YOUNGER (15 – 35) Older (55+) (N=118) Younger (15 – 35) (N=372) Autochthon (N=66) Allochthon (N=62) Prominence % headline/ front page news 4.24.66.121.0*** Mean within-story prominence 2.02.12.22.1 Index of prominence -press 8.8 10.217.4 10.6** -tv1.83.7 4.6 % actors with voice31.437.975.838.7*** % experts13.52236.08.3**

13. Results: homogeneity YOUNGER (15 – 35) Older (55+) (N=114) Younger (15 – 35) (N=331) Autochthon (N=52) Allochthon (N=60) Homogeneity % of individual actors among non- institutional actors 30.725.7 61.5 55.0 % of group actors among non- institutional actors 62.367.13.826.7** % of individuals- exemplars, typical representatives of a group 7.07.334.618.3**

14. Results: evaluation explicitly negative evaluations (ratio of negative and) positive evaluations compilation of negative attributes – perpetrators – association with negative social phenomena – (ab)user of social security

15. Results: evaluation YOUNGER (15 – 35) Older (55+) (N=118) Younger (15 – 35) (N=372) Autochthon (N=66) Allochthon (N=62) Evaluation % threatening theme - broad27.131.524.246.8** - narrow15.324.2*22.730.6 % perpetrators2.611.5***7.832.2** % victims19.311.8*13.78.5 % beneficiaries50.925.2***21.611.9 % negative evaluations 21.132.8*19.652.5*** % positive evaluations 32.530.666.723.7***

16. 16 More or less stangers?

17. Follow-up? De-construction of the negative competence vs. warmth who is the speaker? De-construction of the ethnic (allochthon) Differences between outlets