\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
What we code<\/h3>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2017 UK General Election. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television)<\/h4>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/h4>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
Our Sample<\/strong><\/h3>\nWe code all\u00a0relevant editorial\u00a0content in TV programmes sampled (see below). For newspapers we code all election related news items that appear: on the front page,\u00a0the first two pages of the domestic news section, the first two pages of any specialist section assigned to the coverage of the campaign and\u00a0the pages containing and facing papers\u2019 leader editorials.<\/p>\n
Sampling commences on 5 May 2017. Our sample focuses on weekday election\u00a0news coverage in:<\/p>\n
UK-wide Television News<\/h4>\n
Channel 4 News 7-8pm; Five News Tonight\u00a06.30-7pm; Sky News 8-8.30pm; BBC1 10-10.30pm; ITV 10-10.30pm;<\/p>\n
UK-Wide Newspapers<\/h4>\n
The Guardian, The I, The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Financial Times, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, The Star.<\/p>\n
News Coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum<\/strong><\/h2>\nWho funds us?<\/h3>\n
The Centre for Research in Communication and Culture’s analysis of national news coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum Election is funded by Loughborough University.<\/p>\n
Our methods<\/strong><\/h2>\nOur weekly \u2018real-time\u2019 news audits present statistical evidence about trends in\u00a0national television and print news outlets throughout the campaign. These measures are based on scrutiny and coding of news content by our research team. This approach has two key advantages over automated coding of web content:<\/p>\n
1. Analysis of published and broadcast news reports (rather than their web equivalents) remains the most robust indication of the editorial values and priorities of news organisations, because of the greater space limitations and greater competition for editorial presence.
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\nWhat we code<\/b><\/h3>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2016 EU Referendum. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television)<\/h4>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/h4>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
Our Sample<\/strong><\/h3>\nWe code all\u00a0relevant editorial\u00a0content in TV programmes sampled (see below). For newspapers we code all election related news items that appear: on the front page,\u00a0the first two pages of the domestic news section, the first two pages of any specialist section assigned to the coverage of the campaign and\u00a0the pages containing and facing papers\u2019 leader editorials.<\/p>\n
Sampling commences on 3 May 2016. Our sample focuses on weekday\u00a0referendum\u00a0news coverage in:<\/p>\n
UK-wide Television News<\/em><\/p>\nChannel 4 News 6.30-7pm; Channel Five News 7-8pm; Sky News 8-8.30pm; BBC1 10-10.30pm; ITV 10-10.30pm; UK-Wide Newspapers<\/em><\/p>\nThe Guardian, The I, The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Financial Times, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, The Star.<\/p>\n
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
2015 UK General Election News Analysis<\/strong><\/h2>\nWho funds us?<\/b><\/p>\n
The Communication Research Centre\u2019s analysis of the 2015 UK General Election is supported by funding from the British Academy and Leverhulme Trust (Grant reference SG142216) We have analysed the news reporting of every UK General Election <\/a>since 1992. Among many other news audits, the research team have conducted three impartiality reviews for the BBC Trust and Board of Governors, investigating BBC Coverage of Rural Affairs (2013\/14), <\/a>the Arab Spring (2011\/12)<\/a> and the Israeli\/ Palestinian conflict (2005\/6)<\/a>.Our Methods<\/strong><\/p>\nOur weekly \u2018real-time\u2019 news audits present statistical evidence about trends in\u00a0national television, radio and print news outlets throughout the campaign. These measures are based on scrutiny and coding of news content by our research team. This approach has two key advantages over automated coding of web content:<\/p>\n
1. Analysis of published and broadcast news reports (rather than their web equivalents) remains the most robust indication of the editorial values and priorities of news organisations, because of the greater space limitations and greater competition for editorial presence.
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\nWhat we code<\/b><\/p>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2015 UK General Election. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television and Radio)<\/p>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/p>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
Who funds us?<\/h3>\n
The Centre for Research in Communication and Culture’s analysis of national news coverage of the 2016 EU Referendum Election is funded by Loughborough University.<\/p>\n
Our methods<\/strong><\/h2>\nOur weekly \u2018real-time\u2019 news audits present statistical evidence about trends in\u00a0national television and print news outlets throughout the campaign. These measures are based on scrutiny and coding of news content by our research team. This approach has two key advantages over automated coding of web content:<\/p>\n
1. Analysis of published and broadcast news reports (rather than their web equivalents) remains the most robust indication of the editorial values and priorities of news organisations, because of the greater space limitations and greater competition for editorial presence.
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\nWhat we code<\/b><\/h3>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2016 EU Referendum. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television)<\/h4>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/h4>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
Our Sample<\/strong><\/h3>\nWe code all\u00a0relevant editorial\u00a0content in TV programmes sampled (see below). For newspapers we code all election related news items that appear: on the front page,\u00a0the first two pages of the domestic news section, the first two pages of any specialist section assigned to the coverage of the campaign and\u00a0the pages containing and facing papers\u2019 leader editorials.<\/p>\n
Sampling commences on 3 May 2016. Our sample focuses on weekday\u00a0referendum\u00a0news coverage in:<\/p>\n
UK-wide Television News<\/em><\/p>\nChannel 4 News 6.30-7pm; Channel Five News 7-8pm; Sky News 8-8.30pm; BBC1 10-10.30pm; ITV 10-10.30pm; UK-Wide Newspapers<\/em><\/p>\nThe Guardian, The I, The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Financial Times, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, The Star.<\/p>\n
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
2015 UK General Election News Analysis<\/strong><\/h2>\nWho funds us?<\/b><\/p>\n
The Communication Research Centre\u2019s analysis of the 2015 UK General Election is supported by funding from the British Academy and Leverhulme Trust (Grant reference SG142216) We have analysed the news reporting of every UK General Election <\/a>since 1992. Among many other news audits, the research team have conducted three impartiality reviews for the BBC Trust and Board of Governors, investigating BBC Coverage of Rural Affairs (2013\/14), <\/a>the Arab Spring (2011\/12)<\/a> and the Israeli\/ Palestinian conflict (2005\/6)<\/a>.Our Methods<\/strong><\/p>\nOur weekly \u2018real-time\u2019 news audits present statistical evidence about trends in\u00a0national television, radio and print news outlets throughout the campaign. These measures are based on scrutiny and coding of news content by our research team. This approach has two key advantages over automated coding of web content:<\/p>\n
1. Analysis of published and broadcast news reports (rather than their web equivalents) remains the most robust indication of the editorial values and priorities of news organisations, because of the greater space limitations and greater competition for editorial presence.
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\nWhat we code<\/b><\/p>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2015 UK General Election. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television and Radio)<\/p>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/p>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\n
What we code<\/b><\/h3>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2016 EU Referendum. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television)<\/h4>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/h4>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
Our Sample<\/strong><\/h3>\nWe code all\u00a0relevant editorial\u00a0content in TV programmes sampled (see below). For newspapers we code all election related news items that appear: on the front page,\u00a0the first two pages of the domestic news section, the first two pages of any specialist section assigned to the coverage of the campaign and\u00a0the pages containing and facing papers\u2019 leader editorials.<\/p>\n
Sampling commences on 3 May 2016. Our sample focuses on weekday\u00a0referendum\u00a0news coverage in:<\/p>\n
UK-wide Television News<\/em><\/p>\nChannel 4 News 6.30-7pm; Channel Five News 7-8pm; Sky News 8-8.30pm; BBC1 10-10.30pm; ITV 10-10.30pm; UK-Wide Newspapers<\/em><\/p>\nThe Guardian, The I, The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Financial Times, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, The Star.<\/p>\n
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
2015 UK General Election News Analysis<\/strong><\/h2>\nWho funds us?<\/b><\/p>\n
The Communication Research Centre\u2019s analysis of the 2015 UK General Election is supported by funding from the British Academy and Leverhulme Trust (Grant reference SG142216) We have analysed the news reporting of every UK General Election <\/a>since 1992. Among many other news audits, the research team have conducted three impartiality reviews for the BBC Trust and Board of Governors, investigating BBC Coverage of Rural Affairs (2013\/14), <\/a>the Arab Spring (2011\/12)<\/a> and the Israeli\/ Palestinian conflict (2005\/6)<\/a>.Our Methods<\/strong><\/p>\nOur weekly \u2018real-time\u2019 news audits present statistical evidence about trends in\u00a0national television, radio and print news outlets throughout the campaign. These measures are based on scrutiny and coding of news content by our research team. This approach has two key advantages over automated coding of web content:<\/p>\n
1. Analysis of published and broadcast news reports (rather than their web equivalents) remains the most robust indication of the editorial values and priorities of news organisations, because of the greater space limitations and greater competition for editorial presence.
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\nWhat we code<\/b><\/p>\n
We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2015 UK General Election. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n
(For Television and Radio)<\/p>\n
An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n
(For Newspapers)<\/p>\n
In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n
Channel 4 News 6.30-7pm; Channel Five News 7-8pm; Sky News 8-8.30pm; BBC1 10-10.30pm; ITV 10-10.30pm; UK-Wide Newspapers<\/em><\/p>\n The Guardian, The I, The Daily Telegraph, The Times, The Financial Times, The Daily Mail, The Daily Express, The Mirror, The Sun, The Star.<\/p>\n ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n Who funds us?<\/b><\/p>\n The Communication Research Centre\u2019s analysis of the 2015 UK General Election is supported by funding from the British Academy and Leverhulme Trust (Grant reference SG142216) We have analysed the news reporting of every UK General Election <\/a>since 1992. Among many other news audits, the research team have conducted three impartiality reviews for the BBC Trust and Board of Governors, investigating BBC Coverage of Rural Affairs (2013\/14), <\/a>the Arab Spring (2011\/12)<\/a> and the Israeli\/ Palestinian conflict (2005\/6)<\/a>.Our Methods<\/strong><\/p>\n Our weekly \u2018real-time\u2019 news audits present statistical evidence about trends in\u00a0national television, radio and print news outlets throughout the campaign. These measures are based on scrutiny and coding of news content by our research team. This approach has two key advantages over automated coding of web content:<\/p>\n 1. Analysis of published and broadcast news reports (rather than their web equivalents) remains the most robust indication of the editorial values and priorities of news organisations, because of the greater space limitations and greater competition for editorial presence. What we code<\/b><\/p>\n We code any \u2018item\u2019 in\u00a0 our sample frame that makes a clear reference to the 2015 UK General Election. We define an \u2018item\u2019 as follows:<\/p>\n (For Television and Radio)<\/p>\n An item begins the moment a newsreader or presenter introduces a topic. In most cases, this will then lead into a filed report from a journalist or an interview. The item ends either when: (1) The programme returns to the reader or presenter after the conclusion of the filed report\/ interview, or (2) another filed report, clearly authored by a different journalist, segues onto the end of the first report.<\/p>\n (For Newspapers)<\/p>\n In the main, items have their own headline. However, there may be occasions when a separate article has been tagged on to the end of another. On these occasions, it they are deemed as separate items.<\/p>\n2015 UK General Election News Analysis<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\n2. Non-automated coding of news is the most reliable way for capturing more complex themes and evaluations in news reporting<\/a>. (NB Inter-coder reliability checks have been conducted for all measures.)<\/p>\n
![\"P1010142\"](\"https:\/\/blog.lboro.ac.uk\/general-election\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/23\/2015\/03\/P1010142.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n![\"P1010141\"](\"https:\/\/blog.lboro.ac.uk\/general-election\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/23\/2015\/03\/P1010141.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n