Research Portfolio — Major News Media Reporting & International Affairs*
*Select projects; see CV for complete list.
“Media Reporting Patterns and our Biased Understanding of Global Unrest.” Empirical Studies of Conflict Project, 2022. Reject & Resubmit at the Journal of Political Economy (w/ Weintraub, M., Felter, J., Arriaga, K., Farrington, B., McLean, J. & Tobia, M.)
News reports of political violence are systematically compiled into large global conflict-event datasets used by academics, governments, and international organizations. These datasets present opportunities to examine the micro-dynamics of conflict but are often systematically skewed. We compare various news-report based datasets to high quality administrative records from Afghanistan, Iraq, the Philippines, South Africa, and Syria to identify sources of systematic missingness in the former. We identify underreporting biases related to violence intensity, weaponry, target, perpetrator, and non-deadly violence. In a large replication exercise, we show that media-based data fail to uncover the results reported in leading economics/political science journal articles.
“Expanding the Coverage of Conflict Event Datasets: Three Proofs of Concept.” Civil Wars (2023) (w/ Kazis-Taylor, H., Abad, K., Alqarwani, S., Bartschi, M., Bell, C., Bock, S., Cabezas, K., Felix, H., Gonzalez, J., Hoeft, C., Loomis, C., Martinez, A. I., Moroyoqui, J., Paman, K., Patterson, P., Ramirez, E., Reis, P., Santos-Perez, J., Tao, C., Tirado, R., Trivedi, A., Vera, A., Xu, L. & You, M.
Many contemporary studies on political violence and social unrest rely on conflict event datasets, primarily derived from major international/national news media reports. Further, these conflict-event data are widely used and funded by governmental and other entities. Yet, a large body of research identifies systematic patterns of `missingness' in these data, calling into question statistical results drawn from them. In this project, we explore three specific opportunities for additional data collection to help recover systematically excluded events, and to potentially assist in addressing resulting bias. We find that all three approaches result in additional and often systematically different material than that reported in news-based datasets, and we reflect on the advantages and drawbacks of each approach.
“Effects of International Affairs News Reporting on Knowledge and Perceptions — A Study of U.S. Residents and Foreign Affairs Elite.” (under review). (w/ Leonardo Dantas, Shawn Robbins, Nihan Karagul, Keinah Baron, Clay Bell, Hank Cheng, Yuval Cohen, Owen Cooksy, Katie Crumpley, Katherine Gan, John Grammas, Tristan Jahn, Amarpreet Kaur, Robert Kraemer, Courtney Quach, Dylan Richardson, Jazmin Santos-Perez, Lekha Sapers, Grady Thomson, Aishvari Trivedi.) (For survey details, see: TRIP Policymaker Survey 2022 Report.)
U.S. residents and international affairs elite surveyed for this project report significant reliance on news reporting for information on international affairs. They also acknowledge major gaps in international affairs coverage. Do these gaps predictably influence fundamental knowledge and perceptions of international affairs? We begin by analyzing tens of millions of recently published articles and find that 1) many major international issues receive minimal major news media attention, and 2) that many international issues, when they are reported on, are depicted in a manner that deviates from underlying empirical realities (e.g. reporting effectively stops even as crises continue). Through a series of surveys, we then analyze how these reporting patterns influence the knowledge and perceptions of international affairs of two distinct populations: 1) U.S. residents; and 2) international affairs professionals consisting of a) international relations faculty at colleges and universities across the United States, b) current and former senior U.S. government officials who collectively served across (at least) three presidential administrations on issues relating to U.S. trade, development, or national security, and c) international affairs-focused staffers at major U.S. think tanks. Results point to significant causal effects of news media reporting practices on respondents’ knowledge and perceptions of international affairs. More broadly, we argue that the major news media’s role as an international affairs actor is omitted in much international relations theorizing and empirical work.
“Major International Issues Undercovered By the News Media: Does Limited Supply Reflect Low Reader Demand?” (under review) (w/ Shawn Robbins, Nihan Karagul, Clay Bell, Yuval Cohen, Owen Cooksy, Katie Crumpley, Leonardo Dantas, Jacob Duarte, Fernanda Serna Godoy, Courtney Quach, Dylan Richardson, Milo Rudman, Lekha Sapers, Long Yat Job Tam, Aishvari Trivedi)
Many major international issues receive minimal news media attention. Does such lack of reporting reflect low demand? We first identify major underreported international issues through in-depth interviews with hundreds of foreign affairs professionals. Through additional interviews with news media professionals, we document significant heterogeneity in news rooms' editorial decisionmaking on international issues. Finally, we estimate demand for news stories on major international issues amongst two populations, U.S. residents and international relations professionals, divided into three distinct groups -- 1) international relations faculty at colleges and universities across the United States; 2) current/former senior U.S. government officials who collectively served across (at least) three presidential administrations; and 3) international affairs-focused staffers at major U.S. think tanks. Results reveal significant interest in major undercovered international issues, suggesting that demand stories on these topics may significantly exceed their contemporary supply.