Browsing by Subject "News media"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Agenda-setting and mathematically predictable mass behavior.
    (2010-05) Massart, Caitlin Anne
    Agenda-setting, or the influence of media on public perception, has been the focus of numerous studies over the past three decades (Bryant & Zillman, 2002; Lowery & DeFleur, 1995). Although these studies vary in methodological and ideological approach, there is strong support for the agenda-setting influence of news media, especially over extended periods of time (Bryant & Zillman, 2002; Funkhouser, 1973; Zhu, 1992). However, correlation strengths between media and public agendas in studies range from .05 to .967 (in the most extreme cases, with the majority falling closer to an average influence range of .35-.8) (Wanta & Ghanem, 2007), and some have argued that these correlation differences are evidence of a flaw in agenda-setting theory (McLeod, 1974). Correlation variations do not, however, necessarily contradict agenda-setting theory but may instead be the natural variation resulting from a dynamic process between the media and the public, where information is acquired, absorbed and organized by individuals, and then used to seek out and organize further information. Originally a simple prediction of correlation between the news media and public issue salience, agenda-setting has evolved to include a myriad of variables dealing with the ‘discrepancies’ of human behavior (McCombs, 2005; Wanta & Ghanem, 2007). Human behavior is not perhaps as simple as predicting the movement of particles, largely due to a phenomenon commonly known as free will (Ball, 2004; Dalton, Beck, Heckfedldt & Koetzle, 1998). It is, however, predictable, because even pure randomness – either in particles or in human behavior - gives way to determinism if the number of random events is large, as individual will is submerged by the constraints of society (Ball, 2004). The means to predict mass behavior is already available in existing agenda-setting studies. Theoretically, by looking at existing agenda-setting studies and understanding the conditions under which different correlation strengths occur, it should be possible to extract patterns of behavior, extrapolate the influence of variables on the relationship between the media and the public, and effectively predict varying correlation strengths of different studies according to their situational conditions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Associated Press v. Meltwater: Are Courts Being Fair to News Aggregators?
    (Minnesota Journal of Law, Science and Technology, 2014-05) Quinn, Dylan
    While it has long been thought that news aggregators were protected from news providers by the fair use defense of the Copyright Act, Meltwater demonstrates that this may not be true. Although this was the first time a judgment had actually been rendered against a news aggregator for copyright infringement, it is noteworthy that the controversy ended like other infringement suits do, just prior to appeal—with a licensing agreement or other mutually beneficial agreement. Therefore, it is unlikely this case will dramatically alter the landscape. Even if Meltwater does not completely alter the relationship between news aggregators and news providers, it is important that courts take a more expansive view of what is “transformative,” since it is such a crucial part of the fair use analysis. Weighing in favor of news aggregators on the first factor will make it more likely that aggregators will be protected by fair use. This is desirable because aggregators increase news consumption, which leads to wider dissemination of information and a more informed public. The court’s analysis does provide some guidance for aggregators in order to find protection under fair use. This includes the implication that aggregators market themselves as a search engine (or just not as a news clipping service) and allow as many users to access the website (or service) as possible. However, there are still important questions on how best to classify an aggregation service that is protected by fair use and one that is not. Aside from being more flexible in terms of what constitutes “transformative use,” courts should more seriously consider the expanded implied license defense and opt-out framework proposed by Meltwater. This way the aggregators may continue to disseminate information broadly, while also giving the copyright holder discretion to choose who is using the content. This might be the best option for the future, since it is questionable if the Meltwater court, in applying the fair use factors, is being fair to aggregators.