ROLE
OF MEDIA AS PERCIEVED BY PUBLIC
Introduction
Media as fourth pillar of state and an important agent of society serves
for public by providing them basic knowledge and information on all aspects of
a single issue or on various issues of national and international level. It not
only provides information and updates on various issues and happenings but it
also gives a direction to public for making up their judgments and perceptions.
Previously it was impossible to mold public opinion for certain issues through
media, and people living in different societies were unaware of the happenings
of the world and of their concerned societies, but with the advent of
technological revolution and development of journalism specifically made it
possible to inform general public no matter where they are living and to whom
they belong. Journalism has evolved as the major element of media to inform
people living at every echelon of society which help them for making up certain
perceptions regarding certain issues. In the age of information revolution
media exceeded the physical boundaries of the world’s states and citizens of
present world are now aware of all the happenings. Turning the whole world in
to global village made it possible for people to have the information on each
and every aspect and this is only possible through the media of present era,
when there is no restriction on information accessibility on different issues
of importance, similarly people have access on all types of information of
their choices.
Media is able to set its schema to produce desired effects with in the
society or for the people living in that specific society. Whatever media
present, what it intend to promote and making some issues as the important of
all. According to Maxwell & McCombs, media (mainly the news media) is not
only successful in telling us what to think but they are stunningly successful
in telling us what to think about (McCombs, Maxwell, 2005). Similar is
the case in public perception, people form perceptions according to what media
present to them. Perception plays very important role in making some issues
important and some unimportant, this is due to many reasons; sometimes
perceptions are affected by lots of other things. According to Severin (2001),
different psychological factors influence perceptions and they include past
experience, cultural expectations, motivations, moods, needs and attitudes.
According to Feldman (1999), “Perception is the sorting out, interpretation,
analysis and integration of stimuli involving our sense organs and brain”.
Whereas Social Perception means that how we make sense of social world,
this is related to phenomenon that how we make impressions of and make
inferences about other people. Severin (2001) further suggests that different
people react to same message in a very different way, and this is all related
to the process of decoding; that how people process specific information. But
sometimes exposure to selective content on media plays a very significant role
in making up perceptions towards certain issue, according to Turner and West
(2007), Selective exposure “is a method for reducing dissonance by seeking
information that is consonant with current beliefs and actions”.
Chan (2007), described the role of media in guiding public opinion, he
mentioned that guidance of public opinion is more indirect, flexible and subtle
way of dealing with public opinion. He further elaborated that media’s
role in guiding public opinion is somewhat related to the concept of propaganda
by shifting the focus on “what people think” to “what people think about”. This
is the main hub of media, to give issues to public for what they think and act
accordingly of the perceptions they have and in many cases what media give them
direction to perceive and act on. Societies are affected by the function of
media for providing information, but this could vary from individual to
individual. It can be related with the need for orientation which is a
cognitive action of an individual about certain topic or issue.
Media could be strong enough through its surveillance function, and it
can have a very strong impact through contemporary news media. Media’s
functions also include socialization function which is to transfer specific
culture among people of the society. A journalistic function of media is to
provide information on each and every aspect of all issues of the globe at
doorstep of the target audience. Due to this fact media can influence the
public opinion and perceptions very easily, because in this era of technological
revolution generally public rely on media for immediate and actual information
of the surroundings, therefore pubic can easily be influenced from the content
of media and it becomes very easy to mold and influence the general public
opinion in a dimension and direction where media wants to. In present era media
is a tool by which one could control the minds of people or could produce the
climate of harmony. But sometimes media can produce conflict between different
societal groups and the result would be in the shape of instability within the
society or vice versa. This can relate to media construction of social reality,
that how media is successful in constructing some important aspects of
reality out of nowhere, or sometimes from the facts and happenings that go
unnoticed in society. Again this is very important role of media to construct
certain aspects on one issue or more than one issue and then to present in
front of public to make certain perceptions accordingly whatever media
constructed.
There are different roles of media including; providing education,
entertainment, information in addition to the role of gate keeping which is to
keep a check and balance that which information is passing by and which is not.
This study is related to media’s informational role in the form of news to
audience with special emphasis on the issue of judicial restoration. This study
includes the important element of public perception; according to Lahlry,
(1991) Perception has been defined as the process by which we interpret sensory
data. Present study specifically focuses on the extent in which media is
successful in producing an impact regarding the judicial issue among the
individuals of the society, in such a manner that individuals of society took
up this issue and responded as media wanted them to respond. In short, this
study has investigated how people perceived the issue and to what extent their
perceptions match media’s coverage of judicial crisis, either media covered the
issue as people perceived or not; in addition to what role it had played
specifically with the perspective of Judicial Restoration in Pakistan.
In Pakistan; Judiciary as the main pillar of state has been suffering
from time to time at the hands of political regimes in Pakistan. It has not been
flourished in the country as it should have. This study focuses on the aspect
of judicial crisis in 2007, when the former President General Pervez Musharraf
took an independent decision to dismiss the judiciary on March 9th, 2007 and as
result Justice. Javed Iqbal appointed as Chief Justice of Pakistan. According
to Kumar (2007), “Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry of Pakistan has
created history by defying the chief executive of a country in which judiciary
was always suppressed by the chief executive, or else it played a subservient
role of its own accord. And the game of suppression began much before the first
military coup in 1958”.
For this specific issue all lawyers associations took a stand against
the judicial dismissal throughout the country, with the passage of time when
political parties came into play and they joined hands together for the
restoration of judiciary and the Chief Justice of Pakistan. In this specific
scenario media played a vital role in covering the issue. Therefore the focus
of this study is about the media’s role in producing a climate where people
have better understanding of the issue or not. This study focused the aspect
that to what extent media is successful in producing an impact among
individuals of the society, specifically for the purpose of Judicial
restoration, and to see whether media played the same role that people
perceived about it through its coverage of judicial crisis.
According to Silverblatt (2004) media is a social institution and “a
social institution is an organization that is critical to the socialization
process; it provides a support system for individuals as they struggle to
become members of a larger social network”. The reason to choose this dimension
of study because much of work has been done on media, but the greater portion
is related to media’s impact and its relation with election campaigns. This is
timely study focusing the role of media in covering the judicial restoration
typically related to long march, and how people perceived it.
Again this is related to the fact whether media always played the same
role what people perceived in their minds regarding judiciary issue. In
addition, judiciary being the important pillar of state suffered for a specific
period of time, and this study will explore the fact that how media is
important in taking stands and reverting decisions on some important and
critical issues of national concern. This study actually explored the power of
media and communication in specific setting. According to McCombs and Maxwell
(2002), “The power of the news media is to set a nation’s agenda, to focus
public attention on a few key public issues, is an immense and well-documented
influence”. This is obvious that news media is immensely powerful in guiding
public opinion towards specific direction or it could be like this to change
the perception of people in some specific way so that people can start thinking
or perceiving in a way media want to.
Wakefield, conducted a research on the ways through which youth
affiliate themselves through the advertising and product placement in movies
and television through which they become attracted towards smoking. According
to researchers, “Television and radio are the media to which most teenagers are
exposed, but newspapers frequently set the agenda for what is reported later in
the day on television, so that the synergy between print and electronic news is
important, and newspapers serve as an accessible proxy for all news reporting”.
According to Gerald & Stephen (1997), media’s role as watch dog is the
important of all, but with the erosion of public’s faith in mass media has
initiated the debate that still people think media role as watch dog or not?
Media’s role is mainly important in not only providing information to general public
but also in making or bridging up a gap between two different ends of an issue.
What media is presenting is not important, but the angle with which it is
covering and through which perspective it is performing its role is important.
Another important variable of the study is Public Perception, is what people
perceive about certain event, issue, organization, state, or anything in a ray
of knowledge, information, cultural background or past experience they have.
Diana (1989) discussed the role of perception in making public opinion and this
is related to the perceptions of the others which help and influence public
opinion formation. Vallon, Rose & Lepper (1985), studied the biasness of
media coverage on two sides by taking and analyzing the equal sample of both
pro-Israeli and pro-Arab partisans. In this study they have clearly stated that
media is responsible in making out of certain perceptions that could be either
in favor or against.
Methodology
The aim of the study is to find out whether the media play the same role
that people perceived about it during its coverage of judicial restoration. And
the study, conducted on the basis of two objectives i.e., to find out media’s
role through its coverage and to find out the relationship between issue’s prominence
in the newspapers and public perception. Research questions and hypotheses of
the study are as follows.
RQ1: What people
think about newspaper’s role?
RQ2: How the
prominence of issue can change the public perception in favor of restoration?
H1: People
considered newspapers role as positive during long march on judicial crisis.
H2: Public
perception was greatly influenced by the prominence given by the newspapers in
favor of restoration.
Instrument was developed and distributed among the sample whereas sample
was selected using convenient sampling from the Social Sciences faculty working
in four federal based universities. Data had been taken regarding the actual
number of social sciences faculty from the related websites of universities,
these universities include; International Islamic University and the total
Social Science faculty working at IIUI– 44, actual questionnaires received were
22 which makes exactly 50 %. Allama Iqbal Open University and the total Social
Sciences faculty – 64, actual questionnaires received were 32 which makes 50%
of the respective university. National University of Modern Languages: total
Social Sciences faculty – 36, actual questionnaires received were 18 and this
is of 50 % of the faculty members. Quaid-e-Azam University: total Social
Sciences faculty – 60, response rate was minimum from QAU and the
questionnaires received were 21 instead of 30 which make only 31% of the sample
from QAU, and this is due to the reason that most of the faculty at QAU were on
summer break for 2009.
Questionnaire was comprised of closed ended questions to know the Public
Perception, which is an important variable of study and it was further
broke down for data analysis. A pilot study was conducted with a sample of 20
faculty members of different universities, and with minor changes in the
instrument a final questionnaire was developed by having 22 questions in all
along with demographic information just to know that to which level people tend
to read newspapers.
First five questions were based on the fact to know that for many days
people read newspapers, which section they read preferably in newspapers, how
much time they spend, which newspaper they read and which source of news they
prefer most. Next six questions are all related to that which news story they
prefer to read and where the respondents like to read the newspapers, i.e.
either at home, library or office., rest of 11 questions have been
divided in to three main categories of time frame, these are Prior to Long
march, Long March, After / Post Long March. 11 questions which were asked
were than further distributed in the upper mentioned three divisions on the
basis of further break down of main variable of Public Perception in to
four sub-variables: Public Perception on Media Coverage / Issue Salience,
Public Perception on News Paper slant, Educational role of Press on Judiciary
Restoration, and Media role as Savior.
Results and Data Analysis
A survey was conducted to evaluate the public’s perception about
coverage given by newspapers during long march. Main variable of the survey
included Public Perception; this variable was further broke down in to Public
Perception of Issue Salience (importance of media coverage), Public
Perception on Newspaper Slant, Educational role of Newspaper, and Media role as
Savior. The questionnaire was developed which included questions related to
all these sub-variables mentioned above, and after getting responses from
respondents of four selected Universities; results were tabulated using SPSS.
Reliability of the instrument was determined through statistics involved
in SPSS, Case processing summary shows that there were total 93 respondents and
there were total 11 questions and they were all related to public perception,
it did not include the demographics and reading habits of the respondents.
Reliability statistics showed that Cronbach’s alpha is 0.704, as the minimum
value of reliability is 0.7, therefore the instrument on the basis of which
data was collected and results were tabulated falls within the criteria of
reliability. Frequencies were determined for each and every question to know
the extent that how much respondents were in favor or against of the
statements, there were total 25 questions including demographics in
questionnaire. Total respondents from four selected capital based federal
government universities were 93. And they were from Social Sciences faculty.
The frequencies and the percentages of each and every respondent were
determined for the questions developed as tool.
Respondents participated in survey had different levels of working
ranged from professor to lecturer, out of 100% total 1.1 % was related to
Professors participated in the survey, 2.2 % were at the position of Associate
Professor, whereas 15.1 % were Assistant Professor and finally 81.7 % were
lecturers. The frequency of the respondents from each university was tabulated
according to SPSS criteria and there were total 23.7 % respondents participated
from International Islamic University, 35.5 % from Allama Iqbal Open
University, 19.4 % from National University of Modern Languages, whereas 21.5 %
were respondents were from Quadi-i-Azam University and this is according to the
criteria of selecting sample size from four universities on the basis of having
50 % sample of each stratum and that purely depend on the number of faculty
members have in the faculty of Social Sciences for each university.
Respondents participated in survey were from different age groups, 55.9
% were from the age group of 25-30, 19.4 % were from the age group of 31-35,
17.2 % were from 36-40, 6.5% were from the age group of 41-45, and only 1.1 %
respondents were from the age group of 51 & above. This shows the number of
young faculty working in different universities but they are all lecturers. The
sample size was not selected on the basis of gender but to know that how much
number was participated in survey percentage was determined and out of 93
respondents, 39.8 % were males and 60.2 % were females, this shows that greater
proportion was from female population. Newspaper reading is one of the
important factor which is essential to know the public perception and then to
compare with coverage given by newspapers.
Therefore a question was being asked to know the reading habits of
respondents and according to the results total 53.8 % people read newspapers
daily, 20.4 % people read newspapers twice a week, 6.5 % people read newspapers
read newspapers thrice a week, while 8.6 % people read newspapers four times a
week, whereas 10.8 % people read newspapers on weekends only. Total time spent
in reading newspapers were categorized, and mostly respondents i.e, 41.9 % or
39 respondents usually spent 10-15 min in reading newspapers, whereas 33.3 % or
31 respondents read newspapers for 16-20 minutes, 17.2 % or 16 respondents
spent 21-30 minutes for reading newspapers, only 2.2 or 2 respondents marked
the option of spending time having 40-46 minutes, whereas 3.2 % or 3
respondents spent more than an hour for reading newspapers. Question pertaining
to which section of the newspapers respondents usually read, the results were
tabulated and finally it was explored that 67.7 % respondents usually read news
content, 24.7 % respondents read editorials, and 4.3 % respondents showed
interest in reading letters to editors. Survey explored different newspapers
read by respondents because they were given with multiple options.
It was determined that 40.9 % respondents reading Daily Dawn, 28.0 %
respondents read The News, 26.9 % respondents read Daily Jang, whereas only 4.3
% or just 4 respondents read Daily Express. According the survey, respondents
marked different options for news sources which they prefer most to rely on,
and it illustrated that 52.7 % respondents prioritize television as news
source, while 34.4 % respondents marked newspapers as source, while only 12.9 %
respondents rely on internet as news source. In a question, total five options
were asked and respondents only marked three sources, those five included
television, radio, internet, newspapers, or one option of any other. Reading
political news is one of the main elements which showed interest respondents in
political arena or current affairs. According to the statistics, 6.5 %
respondents read political news very often in the newspapers of their choice,
3.2 respondents did not read political news in newspapers where as 35.5 %
respondents read political news to some extent. 31.2 % respondents greatly read
the political news, and finally there were 23.7 % respondents read political
news very greatly in newspapers of their choice.
Respondents were also asked that how much they use to read economics
news in newspaper, and finally 22.6 % said that they read often, 10.8 % do not
read economics news, 43.0 % said that they read political news to some extent
in newspapers, 16.1 % respondents said that they read economics news greatly
where only 7.5 % respondents said that they read economics news in newspapers
very greatly.
According to the data collected at the end of survey, 8.6 % respondents
said that they read educational news very often, 4.3 % said that they do not
read any kind of economics news, 24.7 % respondents said that they read
educational news very greatly. In a question regarding the reading habits in
their offices, this was a negative statement and 25.8 % respondents said that
they read newspapers in offices, 7.5 % respondents read very greatly newspapers
in offices, 14.0 % respondents marked the option that they read newspapers at
their offices to some extent, whereas 43.0 % respondents said that they do not
read newspapers in their offices which proves the negative statement that
mostly respondents prefer to read newspapers at other places instead at office.
Whereas 18.3 % respondents said that very often they read newspapers at home,
2.2 % said that they do not newspapers at home, whereas 14.0 % said that to
some extent they prefer to read newspapers at home, and 41.9 % respondents
greatly prefer read newspapers at home, and 23.7 % respondents said that they vary
greatly they read newspapers at home. Overall, if we just add the responses of
greatly and very greatly then it shows that 55.9 % respondents used to read
newspapers at home.
A question was asked to know that how much sample read newspapers at
library, according to the statistics 17.2 % respondents said that they often
read newspapers in library, while 34.4 % respondents said that do not read
newspapers in library, 38.7 % said to some extent that they usually read
newspapers in library. 5.4 % respondents greatly read newspapers in library, whereas
only 4.3 % respondents marked the option of very greatly to read newspapers in
library. Placement of pictorial representation related to judiciary restoration
also determines the importance. Pictorial representation is one of the main
attribute which highlight the importance of any issue or of news. A question
pertaining to pictorial representation was asked and the importance of issue in
newspapers, respondents were provided with five options of likert scale to
answer the question. Only 1.1 % respondents were disagree from the statement,
similarly 1.1 % respondents strongly disagree from the statement, 12.9 %
respondents were neutral while filling the questionnaire, 53.8 % respondents
were agree to the statement and 31.2 % respondents said that they strongly
agree. Collectively if the responses of strongly agree and agree would be
combined, the cumulative number is 85 % responses and this is in the favor of
statement of issue.
Coverage is the important variable of this study; therefore to know the
perception of sample respondents were asked to mark options ranging from
strongly agree to strongly disagree. According to the results 3.2 % respondents
were disagree form the statement, 1.1 were strongly disagree, 17.2 % were
neutral, a big proportion of 60.2 % respondents were agree with the statement
while 18.3 % respondents were strongly disagree. The 4.3 % is the cumulative
percentage of respondents, who are not in the favor of statement, whereas 78 %
respondents are in favor of the statement that coverage of newspapers was
constructive towards the judiciary restoration.
A question was asked to know that whether news treatment was in support
to government during the issue of judiciary or not, in fact this was a negative
statement and mostly respondents gave the same answer which was according to
the desired criteria of present research. 17.2 % respondents were agreeing,
only 1.1 respondents said that they strongly agree with the coverage in support
to government during judicial crisis, whereas 26.9 % respondents stayed
neutral. 39.8 % said that they were disagreeing and 15.1 % respondents were
strongly disagreeing with the statement. In total 55.9 % respondents were
against the statement which proves that mostly respondents believed that
coverage was not supportive to government.
The statistics showed the percentage of the question being asked about
that whether newspaper reported and highlighted the issue better during long
march. Statistics showed that 8.6 % were disagreeing, there was none of the
respondents who actually strongly disagreed with the statement, whereas 14.0 %
stayed neutral, 50.5 % were agree and 26.9 % were strongly agree. Overall 77.4
% respondents were in favor that newspapers highlight and reported the issue in
a much better way during long march. Giving epic image in the newspapers is in
fact giving the heroic position to specific figure, so a question was being
asked about the epic image of judiciary as presented by newspapers and
according to the results tabulated 5.4 % respondents were disagreeing from the
statement, only 1.1 were strongly disagreed, 21.5 % stayed neutral, 49.5 % were
respondents were agree while 22.6 % respondents said that they were strongly
agreed with the statement. Therefore statistics showed that total 72.1 % respondents
were in favor of the statement that newspapers gave the epic image of
judiciary.
Results showed the data of question being asked regarding the credit
given to newspapers for restoration of judiciary, 6.5 % respondents were not in
the favor of statement, only 4.3 % were strongly disagreed, 32.3 % stayed
neutral, 35.5 % were agreed and 21.5 % respondents were strongly agreed with
the statement that much of the credit goes to newspapers for restoration of
judiciary. Therefore overall 57.0 % respondents believed that judiciary
restoration was because of newspapers coverage. A question was asked directly
related to public opinion about the newspapers usually and frequently read by
respondents, statistics show that 3.2 % were disagreed, 23.7 % stayed neutral,
46.2 % were agreed and finally 26.9% were strongly agreed and they believed
that newspapers are responsible in molding public opinion successfully towards
judiciary restoration. Overall, 73.1 % were in favor of the statement and they
believed that newspapers coverage was actually responsible in molding public
opinion towards restoration which shows the importance of newspapers coverage
and its impact in molding public opinion.
A question was asked that whether newspapers reported the issue as being
neutral or not. 30.1 % respondents were disagreed, 7.5 % respondents were
strongly disagreed, and 30.1 % stayed neutral, whereas by adding the responses
of agree and strongly agree, the cumulated answer is 31.3 %. It shows very
interesting relationship between the responses in favor and against, there is
very little difference between the two; 37.6 % respondents are in favor of the
statement that newspapers reported the issue of judiciary as being neutral; on
the other hand 31.3 % respondents were against of the statement. As newspapers
are the important agents of change in the society and they can change the
public opinion and they can inform people of every strata by providing the
latest information at the doorstep of its readers. A question was included in
the instrument regarding the role of newspapers for the role of information for
making public aware about the issue of judiciary restoration at the time of
long march. After tabulating the results of responses on the role of newspapers
that newspapers were actually responsible in making public aware about the
issue or not. Only 7.5 % respondents showed disagreement with the statement,
10.8 % stayed neutral, and collectively 81.7 % respondents said that newspapers
coverage was responsible in making public aware about the issue. This is
greater number of respondents in the favor of statement.
A question was asked that newspapers were actually involved in
mobilizing people in favor of long march. 10.8 % respondents were against the
statement, 3.2 % were strongly disagreed, 9.7 % stayed neutral, 44.1 % were
agreed and 32.3 % were strongly agreed. Therefore the overall response in favor
of the statement by adding the scale of agree and strongly agree is 76.4 %.
Finally a question was asked regarding that at the time of long march
people were more informed or not, in against 9.7 % respondents marked the
option of disagree, 18.3 & stayed neutral, 45.2 % were agreed with the
statement whereas 26.9 % respondents said that they are strongly agree with
this that people were more informed at the time of Long March. After compiling
the data, it was find out that results and the percentage of responses support
the study.
Following are the hypotheses which revealed results as per following.
H1: People considered newspapers role as
positive during long march on judicial crisis.
To prove or disprove this hypothesis, people considered newspapers role
as positive during long march on judicial crisis, Chi-Square was used for the
analysis.
|
Indicators
|
Expected
N
|
X²
|
Df
|
|
Better
reporting during Long March
|
23.3
|
38.914
|
3
|
|
Epic
Image
|
18.6
|
67.376
|
4
|
|
Informed
people at Long March
|
23.3
|
25.667
|
3
|
There were total three indicators to test this hypothesis and the
collective chi-square table is as follows for all three indicators. Statistics
shows that number of responses for the statement that newspapers reported and
highlighted the issue in a much better way during the period of long march,
were 23.3 % for the question, 8 respondents were disagreed and the difference
between expected response and disagree is -15.3. Numbers of responses for
neutral were 13 and the difference between expected and neutral responses was
-10.3. Difference between responses of the option “agree” and expected
responses was 23.8. Whereas the difference between expected number of responses
and observed value of strongly agree was 1.8.
Chi-Square(38.914, N=93, df = 3) Results showed the value of Chi-square is
38.914, whereas the degree of freedom is 3, which means that most of the
responses are in the form of three big clusters. 47 respondents said that they
were agreed with the statement that newspapers highlighted and reported the
issue in a much better way, the expected value for the statement is 23.3,
whereas chi-square is 38.914 which strongly approved the hypothesis i.e; people
considered newspapers role as positive during long march on judicial crisis.
Statistics shows the results of responses for the statement that
newspapers gave epic image of judiciary; the observed response was 1 whereas the
expected responses were 18.6, the difference between observed and expected
responses were -17.6. Observed responses for disagree were 5, expected
responses were 18.6 whereas the difference between observed and expected
responses were -13.6. 20 responses according to the table stayed neutral and
the difference between expected and observed responses is only 1.4. Statistics
showed that 46 were observed responses for the option agree but the difference
between observed responses and expected responses were 27.4. Similarly 21 were
observed responses for the option strongly agree and the only difference for
this option between observed and expected responses were 2.4. Chi-Square (67.37,
N=93, df=4) the expected value as mentioned above is 18.6 which is less required
value for the indicator, which also approves the hypothesis that newspapers
gave epic image of judiciary during long march.
For the indicator i.e. newspapers had role in mobilizing people in favor
of long march, the observed responses for strongly disagree are 3, whereas
expected responses were 18.6 while the difference between them is -15.6.
Similarly the observed score for disagree are 10 and the expected score was
18.6 but the difference between the two is -8.6. The observed responses for
neutral are 9 and the difference between the expected and observed responses
are -9.6. Similar is the case with observed agree responses are 41 and the
residual is 22.4, responses for strongly agree are 30 and the residual between
observed and expected value is 11.4. Whereas Chi-Square(55.978 , N=93, df =
4) the expected value is 18.6 and the chi-square is 55.978 which does not
approve the statement as the chi-square is less than the actual responses got
from the data. Hence it strongly approved the hypothesis.
H2: Public Perception was
greatly influenced by the prominence given by the newspapers in favor of
restoration.
To test this hypothesis Chi-Square was used to compile the results for
the questions pertaining statement particularly for public perception. Chi-Square
was applied for each and every indicator related to this specific hypothesis.
|
Indicators
|
Expected
N
|
X²
|
Df
|
|
pictorial
representation
|
18.6
|
94.473
|
4
|
|
Constructive
Coverage
|
18.6
|
105.441
|
4
|
|
Newspaper
credit for restoration
|
18.6
|
38.237
|
4
|
|
Opinion
about your Newspaper for reporting
|
23.3
|
34.613
|
3
|
Table shows the observed and expected responses of respondents for the
indicator i.e. placement of pictorial representation related to judiciary
restoration also determines the importance of issue, according to which the
observed value for the response of strongly disagree was only 1, whereas the
expected number of response was 18.6 and the difference between observed and
expected number of responses were -17.6. Again the observed number for the
response of disagree was 1, and the difference between observed and expected
values were -17.6 which is the same as observed in the case of strongly
disagree. Observed number for neutral responses was only 12, and the difference
is -6.6. Similarly observed numbers of responses for agree was 50 which is the
greater number in any kind of response, but the difference is 31.4. Difference
between observed and expected values was 10.4 but the observed values were 29. Chi
Square ( 94.473, N=93, df=4), the expected value is -17.6 shows the
significance of hypothesis.
The observed numbers for responses for strongly disagree for statement
i.e. coverage of newspapers was constructive towards judiciary restoration, was
only 1 whereas the expected number for the response was 18.6 and the difference
between expected and observed numbers of responses were -17.6. For disagree the
number of observed responses was only 3, and the difference between expected
and observed numbers were -15.6. Similarly, 16 was the observed number for
neutral and the difference between them is -2.6. Observed number for the
response agree was 56 and the residual was 37.6, whereas the number of
responses for strongly agree was 17 and the difference between them is -1.6.
Chi-Square (105.44, N=93, df=4), whereas the expected value was 18.6 and this
is strongly in the favor of the indicator which further determines the approval
for the hypothesis.
Similarly for the indicator i.e. In your opinion, newspapers you read,
reported the issue of judiciary restoration as the important issue in the
history of Pakistan, the observed responses for disagree was 3, for the
expected value was 23.3 and the difference between the two was -20.3. Similarly
22 was the observed number for neutral and the difference between them was
-1.3, whereas 43 was the observed responses for agree and the residual between
the expected and observed value was 19.8, and 25 was the observed number for
strongly agree and the difference between them is 1.8. The overall responses
for agree and strongly agree were 68, who are in the favor of statement.
Whereas the Chi-Square (34.613, N=93, df=3) which is more than the expected
value and it further supports the hypothesis. Statistics strongly approves the
hypothesis that public perception was greatly influenced by the prominence
given by the newspapers in favor of restoration. Obviously the above mentioned
question was related to the newspapers and its function in molding the public
opinion towards restoration, therefore prominence is the main thing that
emphasized the importance of the issue and if newspapers are giving much of
their space to the issue in order to place it according to the importance then
it has been proved from the above statistics that placement of an issue is
determined with the placement and space given by the newspapers to an issue.
For another indicator that newspapers were actually responsible in
making the public aware about issue, the Chi-Square (44.591, N=93, df=) and the
observed disagreed responses were 7, this has been subtracted from the expected
values of 23.3 thus the difference between them is -16.3. 10 are the observed
neutral responses and the residual is -13.3. Similarly agreed responses were 47
and the residual is 23.8. Whereas the actual observed responses for strongly
agree were 29 and the difference between expected value and the observed value
is 5.8. As chi square is greater than the expected value of 23.3, hence the
statement is highly significant. To prove or disprove hypothesis a statement
pertaining that at the time of long march people were more informed, it was
tested on the basis of chi-square and found out that Chi-Square (25.667, N=93,
df=23.3), the observed responses for disagree was 9 while the residual is
-14.3, the neutral observed responses were 17 and the difference was -6.3, for
agreed the observed value was 42 whereas the residual was 18.8 similarly the
observed responses for strongly agree were 25 and the residual between the
observed and expected value was 1.8.
Therefore it has been proved that public perception was greatly
influenced by the prominence given by newspapers in favor of restoration.
Because perception was made on the basis of what newspapers showed to public
and hence public respond accordingly. Pictorial representation, constructive
coverage played a vital role in making public perception in favor of judiciary
restoration, as public already had the perceptions in favor of judiciary
restoration and prominence of the issue strengthened this perception of people
in favor of restoration. Therefore according to the statistics public believed
that much of the credit goes to newspapers for restoration and they perceived
that whatever the newspaper they read, highlighted the issue of judiciary
restoration as the important issue in the history of Pakistan. In short this
has been proved that there is a string relationship between issue prominence
and public perception.
Discussion
This study was conducted to know the public perception of judicial
restoration in particular context of long march. Here in the case of judiciary
restoration media acted as a mobilizing agent among people but it also creates
an impact of having the importance of respective issue. The perceptual theories
have been used to determine the perceptions that could play a vital role in the
society and could create a stand point among the individuals. Perceptions are
very important and one can respond to the stimulus on the basis of whatever
perceptions he / she hold., in this study perceptions played a very important role
in making judicial issue as the important issue of all. Already made
perceptions of people about the issue have been determined through the
instrument and then results have been calculated. The objective of the study
was to find out media’s role through its coverage, and it was attained that
mostly people perceived that newspapers gave the epic or heroic image of
judiciary in its maximum reporting which compelled people in mobilizing during
long march to be the part of it.
Newspapers role is actually to inform people which comes under
surveillance function of media and in the case of judiciary restoration
newspapers not only provide information to society but it also mobilize people
through its active reporting at the time of long march and this is just because
of the reason that people had already made their perceptions via continues
reporting which again highlighted the importance of media’s construction of
social reality. And in this specific case media played a very serious role in
constructing a reality regarding judiciary restoration as a result of it people
started taking the judiciary as the important reality of society. Which again
supports the notion that media always creates social realities for different
groups living in one society.
To attain the objective of the study which was to find out the
relationship between issue’s prominence in the newspapers and public
perception, statistics were applied and results revealed that public perception
is highly affected by the prominence given by newspapers. This is exactly like
that newspapers are responsible in making up people’s minds and molding up
their perceptions in a way media want to, related hypothesis of this objective
was approved and results showed that people always made up their perception in
favor of judiciary and this was due to excessive reporting and then people’s
exposure to that reporting.
On the basis of findings it is suggested that to activate people on
certain issues and making up their perceptions or shaping up the judgments,
newspapers can play a vital role in producing change in society. And that
change will be in the form of micro to macro level i.e. from individual level
to biggest level of society to influence policy makers and of course people
working at different levels that can play a major role towards the betterment of society.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment