Media literacy and its influence on the relation between immigration and
integration news coverage and the support for anti-immigrant parties.
June 29, 2012
Author :
Jelte Maarten Bakker
Supervisor:
Fadi Hirzalla
Student number:
6176941
Master’s Thesis
Graduate School of Communication
Political Communication
University of Amsterdam
Abstract
In the Netherlands, news media are substantially biased in coverage concerning immigration
and integration. A result of this tendency is that it contributes to the growing electorate of
anti-immigrant parties. A related but contrasting development is the increasing number of
Dutch citizens who are critical about the news reports concerning immigration and integration.
This research uses ‘media-literacy’ as the theory to study this criticism among news users and
asks: Does media-literacy affects the electoral support of an anti-immigrant party? The overall
goal is to unlock a new explaining factor in the research field that connects media and antiimmigration party support. By using empirical data, gathered through a survey, a number of
analyses were conducted. Results indicate that persons with a higher level of media-literacy,
are less inclined to support an anti-immigrant party. However, the exact impact and
significance of this effect remains unclear
Keywords
Media-literacy, anti-immigrant party, immigration and integration, newspaper
coverage, the Netherlands
2
Introduction
The rising star of media cannot be denied. In all its guises, media seems to affect many
aspects of everyday life. The average Dutchman spends nineteen hours a week on media.
Various types of media are used for entertainment, information and social contacts (The
Netherlands Institute for Social Research [SCP], 2004). Numerous studies have shown the
impact of media-use on e.g. social interaction and citizens political voting decisions
(Baumgartner & Morris, 2010; Iyengar & Simon, 2000). In this current study I will focus on
the role of media in modern democracies. This by investigating news media’s role in relation
to electoral support, especially the support for anti-immigrant parties. An earlier study found
that news media are substantially biased in issues concerning immigration and integration
(Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden, 2007). A result of this tendency is the growing support for
Dutch extreme right-wing and anti-immigrant parties (Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden, 2005).
In recent history this led to events that changed the political as well as the societal landscape.
For instance through the emergence and dead of politician Pim Fortuyn and the growing
electorate of the PVV. The PVV is currently the best example of an anti-immigrant party
which is best defined as a “political party that employ the immigration issue as the core
political concern in political campaigns or that are considered by elites of other parties to do
so” (Van der Brug, Fennema & Tillie, 2005, p. 3).
A recent finding shed an interesting light on the relation between biased news media and the
electoral support for the PVV. A 2011 citizen monitor report (SCP, 2011) showed that an
increasing number of Dutch citizens are critical about the news reports on immigration and
integration. The question is if it could be the case that Dutch citizens, who use news media,
are becoming growingly aware of the bias in the media? A niche in the broad field of
communication effect research that is related to this question, is the ‘media-literacy’ theory.
3
This theory considers that media-users play an important role in the effects that media could
or could not have. This role can be played by the media-user through the critical assessment
of media-messages. The theory states that media-literacy among media-users can reduce the
negative effects of distortion and bias in media about e.g. race, class and gender (Anderson,
1983). Given the important role of media on the support for anti-immigrant parties, this study
wants to investigate the influence of criticism among citizens about news reports. This by
applying media-literacy as a possible influencer on the relation between coverage of
immigration and integration and the support for anti-immigrant parties. The central question
of this study therefore is: Does media-literacy affects the electoral support of an antiimmigrant party?
To answer this question I proceed in three sections. First I elaborate on the theories about
immigration and integration coverage and their effect on anti-immigration party support.
Furthermore I theorize the concept of media-literacy and its connection to the Dutch situation.
In the second part a survey is conducted to find empirical evidence in order to answer the
central question. In the last part the results of the survey are analyzed and the implications
will be discussed. The overall goal is to unlock a new explaining factor in the research field
that connects media and anti-immigration support. My expectation is that media-literacy
proves to be of significant influence and thus important for future research and policies.
Theoretical background
Selective media and the portrayal of immigration and integration
Because of the numerous amounts of news events around the globe, media are selective in
their portrayal of the news (Schoemaker & Reese, 1996). As a result, the media consumer is
only confronted with the selection made by journalists and their organizations (MC Quail,
4
1992). The selection process of news events is studied by Galtung and Ruge (1965), they
found that news values determine what is news and what not. Among those news values are
e.g. frequency of the events, reference to elite persons or nations or the level of conflict and
drama. A relevant question that follows on this theory about the selection process is, what
elements of ‘reality’ are portrayed and how ‘reality’ influences the ‘media reality’?
Based on this question, Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2007) studied the effects of ‘reality’
on ‘news reality’. The scholars divided reality in socio-economic ‘real-world developments’
like the number of asylum applications or consumers trust and ‘political key events’ like
elections or a prolonged war. Their study is based on an eleven year period (1992 – 2002) of
Dutch newspaper coverage. The analysis focuses on whether the prominence of immigration
and integration of minorities in news coverage, reflects ‘real-world developments’ or
‘political key events’. The results of the study show that the newspapers portray a ‘media
reality’ that is particularly influenced by ‘key-political events’. This implies that the amount
of asylum applicants and the actual immigration and integration of minorities have a limited
effect on media coverage. ‘Key-political events’ like public actors discussing integration and
events as elections and wars, prove to be more influential in the selection process of
journalists and media organizations. As a consequence of this discrepancy, ‘media reality’ is
not accurate about the immigration and integration situation in the Netherlands.
Portrayal of immigration and integration and the support for anti-immigrant parties
In a previous research, Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2005) studied the effects of the
portrayed media reality about immigration and integration on the electoral support for antiimmigrant parties. Earlier studies that sought explanations for the rising electorate of antiimmigrant parties focussed on the individual voter (Lubbers, Gijsberts & Scheepers, 2002;
5
Van der Brug & Fennema, 2003; Van der Brug, Fennema, & Tilly, 2000). Other studies
sought explanations in the social and political environment (Jackman & Volpert, 1996; Rink,
Phalet & Swyngedouw, 2009). Also the mediating role of the media on the support for antiimmigrant parties is studied and demonstrated (Kitschelt, 1995; Knigge, 1998).
However, the aim of Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2005) was to explain the independent
effect of the media, controlled for social and economical developments. The assumptions of
the study were based on the agenda-setting theory and the issue-support voting hypothesis.
The agenda-setting theory (McCombs & Shaw, 1972) considers that the amount of attention
in mass media for certain issues, influences the importance that citizens assign to these issues.
Resulting from this theory, the assumption is that the more mass media covers issues
concerning immigration and integration, the more citizens will be aware of these issues. The
issue-support hypothesis expects that when a political party exclusively claims an issue, the
electorate considers this party as the answer to the issue (Petrocik, Benoit & Hansen, 2002).
Following on the combination of these two theories, the assumption is that an increased media
attention for immigration and integration will lead to a growing electorate for anti-immigrant
parties (Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden, 2005). An electoral analysis and a data analysis of
Dutch newspapers in a thirteen year period (1990 – 2002) confirms this assumption. Media
attention influences the support for anti-immigrants parties significantly. The analysis took
into account the emergence of the late Dutch Pim Fortuyn as a ‘mediagenic’ and charismatic
actor and various socio-economic variables as unemployment, number of immigrants and the
economic situation.
6
The results in the preceding part appear to indicate a twofold conclusion. Firstly, newspapers
are substantially biased in issues concerning immigration and integration. Due to this
tendency, newspapers do not reflect the objective situation but exaggerate the issues
continuously. The second conclusion is that newspaper attention for immigration and
integration influences the support for anti-immigrants parties positively. In the period 1990 –
2002, the rise of coverage influenced the rise of anti-immigrant parties significantly.
The right wing voter and the right wing media
In the 2008 citizen monitor report (SCP, 2008) the Dutch situation regarding citizens and their
media behaviour is analyzed. According to the SCP this analysis is important because of the
increasing influence of media on citizens. An interesting distinction in the report is that
between the so-called left and right-wing oriented media and its users. The formation of these
two groups does not answer the question if the media influences the political preference or
vice versa. Nevertheless, the report shows that a large proportion of the Dutch citizens can be
characterized by the specific connection between media use and political preference.
Especially on the subject of immigration and integration, the users of left and right-wing
media show remarkable differences. Overall the right-wing media users are more inclined to
agree with the statement that “The Netherlands would be a better country without immigrants”
(SCP, 2008, p. 20). Based on these findings and earlier discussed tendencies in coverage
concerning immigrants and integration and the electoral outcomes, the first hypothesis reads:
Anti-immigration party support is strongest among consumers of right-wing media.
In this research I will investigate the hypothesis by using the Dutch newspaper sector as the
case study. The foremost reason for this approach is the left-right division in the newspaper
sector (Krouwel, 2008). The Telegraaf and the Algemeen Dagblad are marked as right-wing
7
newspapers. The left side of the newspaper market is represented by Trouw and the
Volkskrant. The two right-wing newspapers are known for their sensational tone of reporting.
Furthermore they tend to have right conceptions in subjects such as: tax, crime and
immigration and integration (Krouwel, 2008). In general the leftist newspapers are
characterized by the in-depth coverage on a moderate tone. In this fashion they often employ
a different approach than the Telegraaf and the Algemeen Dagblad. This difference is
noticeable in immigration and integration stories. Right-wing newspapers tend to present
immigration and integration in a more negative light by focussing on the problems and threats
(Krouwel, 2008; Lubbers, Scheepers & Vergeer, 2000; Van Dijk, 1993).
The foregoing part is particularly concerned with the unaffected relation between media and
media consumers. However, this view is questioned in media and communication science.
Current studies take into account that the reception of media messages is influenced by
personal or interpersonal factors (Hall, 1980; Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955; Lazarsfeld, Berelson
& Gaudet, 1944). These studies have shown that messages can be interpreted differently by
active and differentiated media consumers. Based on this consideration, an interesting
question is what the opinions of media consumers are about the news reports on immigration
and integration? The 2011 citizen monitor report (SCP, 2011) notes an interesting finding
regarding this question. In the report participants had to respond to the statement: “In general,
Dutch media are to negative in their reporting on allochthonous people” (SCP, 2011, p. 9)
(allochthonous is a Dutch term for – children of – immigrants). The outcome was striking: a
percentage of 56% strongly agreed with the statement and only a percentage of 9% strongly
disagreed. Moreover, the outcome appears to be stable in different subgroups. The differences
between high and low educated groups are relatively small, respectively 64% and 42%.
Unfortunately the report does not specify for differences in media use or political preferences
8
(SCP, 2011, p. 8). Compared to a study with the same subject in 2009, there is a 10% increase
in 2011. In 2009, 46% strongly agreed with the statement, 21% strongly disagreed. Similarly
as in 2011, the outcome is relatively stable between the higher and lower educated. There is
also no specification for the differences in political or media preferences in this report (SCP,
2009, p. 26). Apparently, the situation is that a large proportion of media consumers share a
critical opinion about the news coverage on immigration and integration. Moreover, this
proportion increased with 10% in a time span of one and a half year. The SCP reports do not
address possible reasons for this increasing criticism about the reporting. An interesting point
is what the reason(s) for this development are and what could be the consequence of this
development. Because, if it is the case that media consumers are increasingly critical and
negative about the reporting of immigrants and integration, a provocative question is: whether
this opinion has influence on the support for anti-immigrant parties?
Regarding the tendency of media consumers who are increasingly critical, ‘media-literacy’ is
a salient theory. Media-literacy is been defined as: “A critical thinking skill that enables
audiences to develop independent judgments about media content” (Silverblatt, 1995, p. 2).
The theory is applied by scholars to refer to the process of critically analyzing en evaluating
media messages. The claim of many of these scholars is that the risk of distortion and bias in
media about e.g. race, class and gender can be reduced by media-literacy among users
(Anderson, 1983). Media-literacy includes multiple components that provide the media user
with the ability to critically analyse the media and its messages. The five core components of
media-literacy theory are the following: media messages are constructed; media messages are
created within an influencing context such as: economy, social environment, politics and
history; the interpretation of a media message is a process of interaction between the reader,
the text and the culture; media messages are constructed using a language that is shaped by
9
genres, formats and symbols; media determines, to a greater or lesser extent, a person’s
understanding of social environment (Hobbs, 1998, pp. 17-18).
Since the 1990’s, when the attention and research around the theory took a flight, medialiteracy is listed on the political agendas of almost all Western Democracies (Hobbs, 1998).
The commonly mentioned motivation behind this growing importance of media-literacy, is
it’s indispensability in modern citizenship (Vande Berg, Wenner & Gronbeck, 2004). As the
Dutch Council for Social Development states: “Society and culture are increasingly
medialized [...] therefore it is crucial that citizens become media-literate’’ (Council for Social
Development, 2004, p. 2). Thus, media-literacy is seen as the instrument to prevent media use
in a passive, non-reflective and one-way manner. The more media-literate a citizen is, the
better he or she is able to deconstruct media-messages, active usage and critical assessment of
what is there and not there in a media-message. This must eventually lead to better informed
and engaged citizens in modern democracies (Vande Berg et al., 2004).
The assumption that media-literacy can reduce the bias in the media, is interesting in the light
of earlier discussed studies of Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2005; 2007). These studies
found that newspapers are substantially biased in issues concerning immigration and
integration. Due to this tendency, newspapers do not reflect the objective situation but
exaggerate the issues. Subsequently this biased coverage of immigration and integration
positively influences the support for anti-immigrant parties. A possibility is that medialiteracy could affect this relation by a moderation effect. Moderation implies that a third
variable, in this case media-literacy, affects the strength of the relation between the
independent and dependent variable. This consideration leads to the second hypothesis:
Media-literacy moderates the relation between the coverage of immigration and integration
issues and support for anti-immigrant parties.
10
This possible moderating effect of media-literacy, could contribute to unanswered questions
in earlier research. Especially research that focussed on the role of mass media on the rise of
anti-immigrant parties (Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden, 2005; Walgrave & De Swert, 2004).
These studies were aimed at the influence of the media but left the role of the media user
untouched. This study could contribute to this gap by explaining the behaviour of the
receiving party by applying the media-literacy theory. It the same way, this current study
expands the scope of studies that did take the features of voters under consideration. A whole
range of studies traced the motivations and characteristics of anti-immigrant party voters
(Billiet, 1995; Kitschelt, 1995; Norris, 2005; Rydgren, 2009; Van der Brug et al., 2000). I
hope to add media-literacy as a new explaining feature to this line of research.
In addition, the findings about media-literacy associated with political involvement and
preferences could lead to interesting conclusions. Vande Berg et al. (2004) argue that medialiteracy is a necessity for informed and engaged citizens in modern democracies. This study
can reflect on this statement and shed light on the Dutch situation. Because is it the case that
media-literacy is associated with certain electoral decisions? And if this is the case, what does
this tell us about the state of citizenship? This study hopes to find (pieces of) answers to these
questions and in that way contribute to future research and policies.
Methods
In this section I will first introduce the research design and data, as well as how the data is
collected. Furthermore I describe the variables employed and finally how these variables are
analyzed. The study uses a quantitative research design and is administered by a survey. The
survey was conducted in the presence of the researcher. The researchers’ presence gave the
11
possibility of answering questions of respondents and give explanations. All respondents were
assigned to the same questionnaire, anonymously.
Sample
The study is conducted within the Netherlands in the year 2012. The participants were
recruited in public places in the cities: Purmerend, Utrecht, Volendam and Zaandam between
the 1st and 9th of June. A total of 206 respondents between the ages of 18 and 78 participated
in the study. The representativeness of the study seems acceptable (see the control variables
under measurements for an overview). Yet, the central aim of the study is to investigate
correlations between variables rather than produce descriptions of the population. Therefore,
the representativeness of the sample was not the most important goal. Given the hypotheses,
however, there ought to be enough variation in certain observed variables. This proved to be
the case. As regards newspaper consumption, the respondents are divided into four
newspapers. The percentage of readers and an average reading score on a 1 to 5 scale are as
follows: Algemeen Dagblad (33.8%, M = 1.88, SD = 1.34), Telegraaf (46.4%, M = 2.39, SD =
1.66), Trouw (20.3%, M = 1.48, SD = 1.04), Volkskrant (28.5%, M = 1.72, SD = 1.28). The
variable support for the PVV reached a total of 77% of respondents who support the party
more than 1 on a 1 to 10 scale (M = 4.68, SD = 3.18). Finally the media-literacy variable is
well distributed in high and low media-literacy, on a 1 to 25 scale (M =13.37, SD = 5.21).
Measurements
Along the lines of the hypotheses this study first aims to demonstrate that anti-immigration
party support is strongest among readers of right-wing newspapers. The second aim is to
investigate if media-literacy moderates the relation between the coverage of immigration and
integration issues and support for anti-immigrant parties (see Figure 1 for an illustration). The
12
dependent variable is named: support for anti-immigrant party. This variable is measured by
asking respondents to their likelihood of ever voting for the Dutch anti-immigrant party: the
PVV. In addition the same question is asked for the seven other main parties in current Dutch
parliament. See appendix 1 for the complete questionnaire and answer scale.
This measure has been used extensively to analyse electoral behaviour (Van der Brug et al.,
2005; Van der Eijk, 2002). The advantage of the measurement is that it prevents respondents
from political correct answers. The question has a general character: it asks if the participant
can indicate the chance of one time voting for the party. The respondent had to fill out a score
for the eight largest parties that currently hold seats in parliament: CDA, Christenunie, D66,
GroenLinks, PVDA, PVV, SP and VVD.
Figure 1. Conceptual model.
Trust in political
institutions
Social trust
Importance
immigration /
integration
Support antiimmigrant party
(PVV)
Sociodemographics
Right-wing
news (immigration and
integration
stories)
‘Media-literacy’
13
The most important independent variable is news reading behaviour. Central element is if left
or right-wing newspapers are read and how frequently. Therefore I asked for two left and two
right-wing newspapers: Generally, how often do you read the following newspaper online or
offline? Earlier study shows that large percentages of news consumers read newspapers online
(SCP, 2008). Therefore, I chose to incorporate both online and offline reading of the
newspapers in the variable. See appendix 1 for the questionnaire and answer scale. This
variable is recoded in a left and right-wing newspaper group. The left-wing group consists out
of respondents who read: Trouw and/or the Volkskrant. The right-wing group consists out of
respondents who read: the Telegraaf and/or Algemeen Dagblad.
Subsequently I asked to what extent the respondent reads news stories about immigration and
integration. I asked: On average, how often do you read news stories concerning immigration
and integration? The response categories on a five-point Likert scale are ranging from: 1:
never, 2: seldom, 3: occasionally, 4: regularly, 5: frequently. For hypothesis 1 and 2 it is
crucial that respondents read these news items and therefore only respondents who read these
news stories at least occasionally are included in the analysis.
Three control variables were selected, these are important regarding the dependent variable:
support for anti-immigrant party. The control variables concern individual characteristics of
the respondents. The variables are: institutional trust, social trust and the importance that the
respondent ascribes to immigration and integration in the electoral decision. The selection of
these variables is based on earlier research in the field of radical right-wing and antiimmigrant party support (Norris, 2005; Rydgen, 2009; Van der Brug et al., 2000). It is
demonstrated that the three variables are important when analyzing the electorate of radical
right-wing and anti-immigrant parties.
14
The first control variable is institutional trust. The importance of this feature is claimed by
Norris (2005). She showed that the support for radical right-wing parties is related to the trust
in political institutions. This implies that when the trust in institutions as parliament, the legal
system and politicians decreased, the support for radical right-wing parties increased. I used
this variable in the current study by asking the respondents to what extent they trust various
political institutions. I adopted the ESS (European Social Survey) measurement for this
purpose. The scale consists of six items (see Appendix 1). The Cronbach's a = .938 for this
scale, indicating a reliable scale.
Following the social capital theory of Putnam (1993; 2000), Rydgren (2009) studied the
influence of social capital on the support for radical right-wing parties in Western Europe.
The concept of social capital is broad as the definition of Putnam shows: “Features of social
organization, such as trust, norms, and networks, that can improve the efficiency of society by
facilitating coordinated actions’’ (Putnam, 1993, p. 167). In his study, Rydgren (2009) tested
the different components of social capital on radical right-wing voting. His findings show that
social trust is the most important determinant, within the broad concept of social capital, for
explaining radical right wing voting. As the author states: “The more the people are inclined
to social trust, the less likely they are to vote for a radical right-wing party” (Rydgren, 2009, p.
140). Following these findings I include a measurement of social trust in the study, I adopted
the ESS (European Social Survey) measurement for this purpose. The scale consisted of three
items (see Appendix 1). Cronbach's a = .878 is indicating a reliable scale.
The third control variable is concerned with the importance that the respondent ascribes to
immigration and integration in the electoral decision. This variable is addressed as ‘policy
consideration’ in earlier research (Van der Brug et al., 2000). It has been demonstrated that
this consideration about immigration and integration policies, is the most important reason to
15
vote for an anti-immigrant party (Kitschelt, 1995; Van der Brug et al., 2000). Therefore I
asked our respondents: When voting for a political party, how important is the matter of
immigration and integration in your decision? 1: Extremely unimportant – 10: Extremely
important. See appendix 1 for the complete answer scale.
The moderator is the pivotal variable in this research. To measure media-literacy, respondents
are asked to give a score on five questions. These questions are based on earlier medialiteracy research (Hobbs, 1998; Vande Berg et al., 2004). The five questions are introduced by
the statement that I want to investigate the respondent’s opinion about the media sector and
news stories and their perspective on media effects. See appendix 1 for the questionnaire and
answer scale. The scale consisted of five items. Cronbach's a = .867 is indicating a reliable
scale. In the analysis the group of respondents is divided in a high and low media-literacy
group. Thirteen points or less means low media literacy, fourteen or more points means a high
media-literacy.
Lastly I controlled for a set of demographic characteristics. This is a selection of variables that
are proven to be influential in earlier studies about support for radical right-wing and antiimmigrant parties (Norris, 2005; Rydgren, 2009). Included in the questionnaire are: gender,
age, ethnicity of parents, education level and religion. See appendix 1 for the questionnaires
and answer scales. Age (M = 39.7, SD = 15.6). Gender is recoded into a dummy variable: 0 =
man (n = 86) and 1 = woman (n = 121). Ethnicity of both parents is measured as: 0 = Dutch (n
= 153) and 1 = one or two of my parents are born abroad (n = 55). The value of this variable
is to determine if the respondent belongs to the autochthonous or allochthonous group.
Education was measured with five categories and is made a dummy variable. 0 = low (n = 74)
and 1 = high (n = 134). I chose for this clear cut distinction because the total group of
16
respondents was reasonably well divided in a group that achieved a bachelor or master degree
and a group that did not. Finally I asked the respondents if they belonged to any particular
religion or denomination. Mainly to indicate what percentage of respondents belonged to the
Muslim group. The necessity of this detail is caused by the negative association between the
Muslim community and the PVV (Van Gent & Musterd, 2010). Analysis revealed that only 3
Muslims participated in the study, which is a negligible number. Therefore the variable is
recoded in 0 = no religion (n = 134) and 1 = religious (n = 74) with the notion that religion
could be of influence as control variable.
Analyses
In the following part the hypotheses and the associated analyses are discussed. The first
hypothesis reads: Anti-immigration party support is strongest among consumers of right-wing
media. The second hypothesis reads: Media-literacy moderates the relation between the
coverage of immigration and integration issues and support for anti-immigrant parties.
In order to test these hypotheses a set of models is formed, these are presented in table 2.
Hypothesis 1 is tested in the first two models which involve the measurement of the
associations between news reading and the support for the PVV. Model 3, 4, 5 and 6 are
concerned with hypothesis 2 and include media-literacy as moderator. The models will be
further elaborated in the coming part.
All models are tested against the dependent variable: support for an anti-immigrant party. In
all these six models the effect of demographic variables: age, gender, education level,
ethnicity of parents and religion are taken into account. Furthermore all models incorporated
the tendency to consume right-wing news stories about immigration and integration. In the
analyses only respondents who read these stories occasionally (or more often) are included. I
17
expect positive associations for the right-wing newsreaders. This means that the more rightwing news stories about immigration and integration people consume, the higher the support
for the PVV will be.
Model 2 (and also models 4 and 6) include the variable social trust. Respondents are asked
three questions to determine the level of trust they have in fellow citizens. Model 2 (and
models 4 and 6) also controls for the variable trust in political institutions. Respondents are
asked to what extent they trust six different institutions. Lastly, model 2 (and models 4 and 6)
also includes the control variable that measures the importance of immigration and integration
matters in electoral decision-making. Following on the analysis of hypothesis 1, the bivariate
correlations of the different variables with the dependent variable will be presented.
Subsequently the results of the regression analysis will show the effects of model 1 and 2 and
thus the outcomes for hypothesis 1.
Models 3 until 6 are concerned with the second hypothesis (see Table 2). Through these
regression models we trace the moderating effect of media-literacy. To investigate this effect
we make a distinction between high and low media-literacy. Models 3 and 4 analyse the
group with low media-literacy. This is the group that scores thirteen points or less (the
maximum is twenty five) on the media-literacy scale. Similar to the first model, the third
model is concerned with demographic variables and the use of right-wing media, in particular
immigration and integration news. Subsequently the fourth model controls for the effects of
trust in political institutions, social trust, and the importance of immigration and integration
matters in electoral decisions. Models 5 and 6 analyse the high media-literacy group. This is
the group of respondents that scores fourteen points or higher on the twenty-five point scale.
Also this group is divided in two models: the fifth is concerned with demographic variables
18
and the use of right-wing immigration and integration news. Subsequently the sixth model
controls for the effects of the trust in political institutions, social trust and the importance of
immigration and integration matters in electoral decisions.
Results
The first hypothesis is concerned with the association between the use of right-wing media
and the support for an anti-immigrant party. I hypothesized that the support for the PVV
would be strongest among readers of immigration and integration stories in right-wing
newspapers. The results of the analyses confirm this expectation. As Table 1 shows, both leftwing and right-wing newspaper reading are significantly correlated with the support for the
PVV. However, these two correlations are divided in opposite directions. The bivariate
analysis shows that right-wing news reading is positively associated with the tendency to
support the PVV (r = .334, p < .001). For left-wing news reading we find the associations in a
negative direction (r = -.433, p < .001). As expected, the more right-wing news people read
the more likely they are to support the PVV, the reverse applies for left-wing news readers.
19
Table 1. Bivariate (Pearson) correlations of the variables involved.
Support for
Readers
Readers
Media-
PVV
RWmedia
LWmedia
literacy
Age
Gender
Education
Ethnicity
Religious
Trust in pol.
parents
Social trust
Importance
inst.
i&i matters
1
,334***
-,433**
-,287***
-,101
-,208**
-,208***
-,043
-,085
-,092
-,171*
,406***
,334***
1
-,435***
-,226**
,082
-,173*
-,302***
-,011
,025
-,179*
-,244**
,179*
-,433***
-,435***
1
,222**
-,023
,075
,294***
-,023
-,129
,182*
,222**
-,284***
-,287***
-,226**
,222**
1
,024
,010
,165*
,035
-,153
,133
,217**
-,039
-,101
,082
-,023
,024
1
-,044
,083
-,081
,195*
-,044
,050
-,067
-,208**
-,173*
,075
,010
-,044
1
,014
,069
-,024
-,054
-,117
-,083
-,208**
-,302***
,294***
,165*
,083
,014
1
,063
,042
,203*
,291***
-,213**
-,043
-,011
-,023
,035
-,081
,069
,063
1
,212**
,033
-,031
,127
-,085
,025
-,129
-,153
,195*
-,024
,042
,212**
1
-,206*
-,076
,062
-,092
-,179*
,182*
,133
-,044
-,054
,203*
,033
-,206*
1
,601**
,036
-,171*
-,244**
,222**
,217**
,050
-,117
,291***
-,031
-,076
,601***
1
,013
,406***
Importance i&i matters
*p < .05. **p < .01 ***p <. 001
,179*
-,284***
-,039
-,067
-,083
-,213**
,127
,062
,036
,013
1
Support for PVV
Readers RWmedia
Readers LWmedia
Media-literacy
Age
Gender
(0=man / 1=woman)
Education
(0=low / 1=high)
Ethnicity parents
(0=Dutch / 1=non Dutch)
Religious
(0=no / 1=yes)
Trust in pol. instit.
Social trust
Subsequently the analysis concerning hypothesis 1 is extended with control variables. In
model 1 the demographic variables: age, gender, education level, ethnicity of parents and
religion are taken into account.
Table 2. Multiple regression models hypotheses 1 and 2.
Model 1: H1
Model 2: H1
Model 3: H2
Model 4: H2
Model 5: H2
Model 6: H2
All
respondents
All
respondents
Low media
literacy
Low media
literacy
High media
literacy
High media
literacy
Support PVV
Support PVV
Support PVV
Support PVV
Support PVV
Support PVV
(B, SE)
(B, SE)
(B, SE)
(B, SE)
(B, SE)
(B, SE)
Age
-.312
(.243)
-.203
(.229)
-.508
(.403)
-.480
(.367)
-.148
(.310)
-.052
(.305)
Gender
-1.017*
(.485)
-1.050*
(.454)
-1.679*
(.807)
-1.411
(.788)
-.666
(.603)
-.866
(.574)
Education
level
-.773
(.514)
-.147
(.499)
-1.138
(.930)
-.595
(.854)
-.419
(.623)
0.15
(.620)
Ethnicity
parents
-.161
(.536)
-.587
(.499)
.242
(.880)
-.444
(.798)
-.257
(.680)
-.608
(.650)
Religious
-.920
(1.049)
-1.484
(.991)
-1.929
(1.328)
-3.032*
(1.275)
-.909
(1.821)
-1.387
(.1.732)
Readers
RW i & i
news
.870***
(.251)
.701**
(.241)
.1.053*
(.517)
.400
(.536)
.672*
(.290)
.563
(.291)
Trust pol.
institutions
N/A
-.044
(.283)
N/A
-.483
(.455)
N/A
.129
(.392)
Social trust
N/A
-.546
(.292)
N/A
-.915*
(.446)
N/A
-.289
(.399)
Importance N/A
immigration
& integr.
1.123***
(.235)
N/A
1.326***
(.386)
N/A
.1.001**
(.305)
R²
n
.317
142
.256
54
.463
49
.117
88
.244
83
.168
149
Note. B = Unstandardized Coefficients, SE = Standardized Errors
*p < .05. **p < .01 ***p <. 001
The first model explains the variation in the dependent variable for 16.8%. However, only
right-wing news reading and gender show significant associations. In this model the influence
of right-wing news reading on the dependent variable is positive and strong (B = .870, SE
= .251, p < .001). The negative influence of a respondents gender implies that women are less
inclined to support the PVV (B = -1.017, SE = .485, p < .05). Model 2 includes the control
variables: trust in political institutions, social trust and the importance of immigration and
integration matters in electoral decision-making. This model is largely a reflection of the first
model, the only addition is the significant association between the importance of immigration
and integration matters and the tendency to support the PVV (B = -1.123, SE = .235, p < .001).
This shows that people become more likely to support the PVV the more they agree with the
statement that immigration and integration are important matters when voting for a political
party.
The discussed results above demonstrate that the first hypothesis can be confirmed. The
association between the use of right-wing newspapers and the support for the PVV is
significant. This finding is the foundation for the second hypothesis. The investigation
regarding this hypothesis, examines if the respondent’s level of media-literacy affects the
association found by the first hypothesis. This possible moderating effect is analyzed by
dividing the total group of respondents is a high and low media-literacy group. Models 3 and
4 are concerned with the low-media literacy group. In model 3 the demographic variables are
taken into account. This model explains the variation in the dependent variable for 25.6%.
Next to right-wing news reading only gender shows a significant association with the
dependent variable (B = -1.679, SE = .807, p < .05). This indicates that women are less
inclined to support the PVV. In model 4 the addition of the three control variables improves
the prediction of the tendency to support the PVV. This model explains 46.3% of the variation
22
in the dependent variable. The variables: religion, social trust and the importance of
immigration and integration matters in electoral decision-making are significant in this model.
A remarkable change is that right-wing news reading is not significantly associated with the
dependent variable any more.
Models 5 and 6 are concerned with the high media-literacy group. The fifth model, with the
demographics variables, explains 11.7% of the total variation in the dependent variable. In
this model, the influence of right-wing news reading on the dependent variable is still positive
and fairly strong (B = .672, SE = .290, p < .05). An important detail is that this model
provides an indication for the moderating effect of media-literacy. This because of the lower
association between right-wing news reading and the support for the PVV when compared to
models 1 and 3. Hereafter in the sixth model, the effect of right-wing news reading is no
longer significant. Nevertheless the model explains more variation than the fifth: 24.4%. The
most notable finding in model 6 is that the importance of immigration and integration matters
in electoral decision-making stays a strong predictor, as in models 2 and 4 (B = 1.001, SE
= .305, p < .01).
There are considerable differences between the high and low media-literacy group and their
support for the PVV. Evidence comes from the variating associations between reading rightwing newspapers and the support for the PVV in models 1, 3 and 5. In model 1, which
involves all respondents who read immigration and integration news at least occasionally, the
association is strong (B = .870, SE = .251, p < .001). Subsequently this association increases
for the low media-literacy group (B = .1.053, SE = .517, p < .05). In model 5, which is
concerned with the high media-literates, the association decreases to a more moderate level (B
= .672, SE = .290, p < .05). This reflects the moderating effect of media-literacy as expected
23
in hypothesis two: the higher the level of media-literacy, the lower the support for the PVV.
However, these results must be examined in the wider context. In models 3 to 6, reading of
right-wing news is not the most influential predictor. And in models 4 and 6, right-wing news
reading does not show significant associations with the dependent variable. This indicates that
even though there are differences between the high and low media-literacy group and the
support for the PVV, it is difficult to determine the exact contribution of media-literacy as a
moderator.
Conclusion and discussion
Media, let alone newspaper coverage, are obviously not the only indicators to explain the
behaviour of anti-immigrant party supporters. Nonetheless, various studies demonstrated that
the media played a significant role in the electoral successes of Dutch anti-immigrant parties
(Van der Brug & Fennema, 2007; Vliegenthart & Boomgaarden, 2005). The results, that
support our first hypothesis, are connected to these studies by showing a positive association
between the use of ring-wing media and support for the PVV. However, the results
concerning the second hypothesis are less straightforward. Media-literacy proves to be an
interesting variable but its influence is ambiguous. The outcome of a comparison between
models 1, 3 and 5 implies a moderating effect of media-literacy as expected in hypothesis 2.
These models show that when the level of media-literacy increases, the support for the PVV
decreases. This evidence suggests that persons with a higher level of media-literacy (in model
5) are better able to critically analyse right-wing media, as theorized by Silverblatt (1995, p.
2). With this ability they appear to moderate the relation between the biased coverage of
immigration and integration issues and support for anti-immigrant parties as demonstrated by
Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2005). Also the bivariate correlations (Table 1) show
connecting results. Media-literacy correlates negatively with the variables right-wing media
24
and support for the PVV. This implies that: the higher the level of media-literacy, the lower
the tendency to support the PVV and read right-wing media. Nonetheless, the multipleregression models 3 until 6 (Table 2) are not clear about the moderating role of media-literacy.
In models 4 and 6, which involve three extra control variables, right-wing news reading does
not show significant associations with the support for the PVV. The results appear to indicate
that despite the differences between the high and low media-literacy group on the support for
the PVV, these are not necessarily and just the result of moderation from the level of medialiteracy. Altogether it seems that the influence of newspaper coverage on the support for the
PVV, is not sufficient enough to involve media-literacy as a consistent moderator. The
ambiguous results lead to an ambiguous answer to the main question: Media-literacy proves
to affect the electoral support of an anti-immigrant party, however the impact and significance
of this moderating effect is unclear.
The initial cause for this research is partly addressed with the response to the main question.
This cause was the finding that a large proportion of the Dutch news consumers are critical
about the news coverage of immigration and integration (CPB, 2009; 2011). Based on the
media-literacy theory, this study found interesting outcomes that could be related to this
criticism. Yet, as the results display, media-literacy was not the consistent moderator as
expected in hypothesis 2. A possibility is that media-literacy, based on its five components, is
not related to the critical attitude of the Dutch news-consumers. It could be that the criticism
is a specific reaction to the reporting on immigration and integration. In that case, medialiteracy was not the correct theory for this research. However, the negative correlations
between media-literacy and the variables right-wing media and support for the PVV (Table 1)
indicate a connection. Another possible explanation is that a certain level of media-literacy
resulted in the criticism among news consumers, but not in a constant ability to reduce the
25
bias in the media as Anderson (1983) theorized. Altogether it is difficult to address the effect
that media-literacy has on media consumption and political behaviour. Based on the results
there are leads, which are discussed, but these are not substantial enough to confirm the
expectations without further questions.
Furthermore, the results of the study do have several implications which are noticeable in
relation to earlier research. First of all this study shows that it is beneficial to include
individual features in a research on the effects of media on the support for anti-immigrant
parties. This was not included in earlier studies of e.g. Vliegenthart and Boomgaarden (2005)
and Walgrave and De Swert (2004). However, gender proves to be of significant influence in
three of the models. Models 1, 2 and 3 indicate that women are less inclined to support an
anti-immigrant party. This finding is in line with research that showed that anti-immigrant and
radical right-wing parties are more popular among men. Nonetheless, reasons for this
tendency are not sufficiently theorized (Gidengil, Henningar, Blais, Nevitte & Nadeau, 2003;
Akkerman & Hagelund, 2007). Findings in this study do not provide leads on possible reasons.
Since gender does not show remarkable correlations with one of the other variables under
investigation.
Another characteristic that showed an interesting outcome was religion. Only in the fourth
model this result was significant, but with a striking association. This implies that, in this low
media-literacy model, the tendency among religious people to support an anti-immigrant party
is very low. This is in accordance with a Belgian study which found that church involvement
had a negative and substantial effect on the voting for radical right-wing parties (Billiet, 1995).
Lastly, the variable importance of immigration and integration issues in voting is significantly
and positively associated with the dependent variable. This in all three models it is
26
incorporated in. This finding is in line with studies which showed that the motivation of antiimmigrant voters is mainly policy driven and thus aimed at the specific goals of the antiimmigrant party (Kitschelt, 1995; Van der Brug et al., 2000). This association also confirms
the issue-support hypothesis as theorized by Petrocik, Benoit and Hansen (2002). This
hypothesis expects that when a political party exclusively claims an issue, the electorate
considers this party as the answer to the issue. The PVV proves to be a popular answer for
people who deem immigration and integration issues as important.
Following on the ambiguous answer to the central question, a conclusion could be that
alternative explanations were too strong and the scopes of our models were too narrow. The
first reason that comes to mind for this limitation is the focus on newspaper use. This choice
was mainly made due to the clear distinction between left and right-wing in the newspaper
sector. However, now afterwards it must be mentioned that the omission of a range of other
media probably damaged the explaining powers of our models.
Furthermore the research was based on a range of assumptions. The possible consequence of
the hereafter discussed assumptions, is that these reduced the validity of the study. The first
assumption was that right-wing newspapers actually acted as theorized in the period of
research. However, I did not controlled for the actual media coverage of the immigration and
integration issues. Therefore no guarantees can be made about the left-right coverage of the
four involved newspapers. A second assumption was the involvement of the PVV as an antiimmigrant party. A range of studies incorporated the PVV in the same fashion, yet, there were
intense developments in the last six months. These developments indicate that the PVV
focuses increasingly on other issues than immigration and integration. It seems that the recent
attention of the PVV shifts from immigration and integration to Europe scepticism.
27
Nonetheless, no studies were found which confirmed this surmise A third possible limitation
comes from the assumption that media-literacy had a close connection with the critical
opinion of Dutch media consumers about immigration and integration coverage.
As a consequence of this assumption, no items were included that measured the specific
opinion about immigration and integration news coverage. It can be concluded that such a
measurement could have led to valuable insights.
This study has not demonstrated that media-literacy affects the electoral support of an antiimmigrant party in a consistent manner. Nevertheless, the variable led to some interesting
results. Therefore I advocate for the involvement of media-literacy in future studies. As well
in studies concerned with the relation between media and electoral decisions as in other media
related studies. Lastly, in the case of anti-immigrant party support, it is the combination of
many factors that determines those parties’ success. Inter alia: the public’s concerns and
opinions, coverage in the media and communication of all involved political parties. A better
understanding about the working of these factors can only be achieved by thorough and
systematic research. Therefore I hope that this research is a little piece of the jigsaw and that
many pieces will follow in the coming years.
References
Achter de schermen, een kwart eeuw kijken, luisteren en lezen. (n.d.). Retrieved April 2, 2012,
from http://www.scp.nl/Publicaties/Alle_publicaties/Publicaties_2004/Achter_de_
schermen
Akkerman, T. & Hagelund, A. (2007). Women and children first: anti-immigration
parties and gender in Norway and the Netherlands, Patterns of Prejudice, 41(2),
197–214.
28
Anderson, J. (1983). Television literacy and the critical viewer. In J. Bryant & D. R.
Anderson (Eds.), Children’s understanding of television; Research on attention and
comprehension (pp. 297–327). New York: Academic Press.
Aufderheide, P. (1993, February). National leadership conference on media literacy. Paper
presented at conference of media literacy, Washington, United States.
Baumgartner, J. & Morris, J. (2010). MyFaceTube politics: Social networking web sites and
political engagement of young adults. Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 24-44.
Billiet, J. (1995). Church involvement, ethnocentrism, and voting for a radical right-wing
party: Diverging behavioral outcomes of equal attitudinal dispositions. Sociology of Religion
56 (3), 303-326.
Bos, L. & Van der Brug, W. (2010). Public images of leaders of anti-immigration parties:
Perceptions of legitimacy and effectiveness. Party Politics, 16(6), 777–799.
Continu onderzoek Burgerperspectieven 2008, kwartaal 1. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29,
2012, from http://www.scp.nl/Publicaties/Alle_publicaties/Publicaties_2008/COB_
kwartaalbericht_
2008 _1
Continu onderzoek Burgerperspectieven 2008, kwartaal 4. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29,
2012, from http://www.scp.nl/Publicaties/Alle_publicaties/ Publicaties_2009/COB_
Kwartaalbericht _2008_4
Continu onderzoek Burgerperspectieven 2009, kwartaal 4. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29,
2012, from http://www.scp.nl/Publicaties/Alle_publicaties/Publicaties_2010 /COB_
Kwartaalbericht_2009_4
Continu onderzoek Burgerperspectieven 2011, kwartaal 1. (n.d.). Retrieved February 29,
2012, from http://www.scp.nl/Publicaties/Alle_publicaties/Publicaties_2011/COB
_Kwartaalbericht_2011_1
Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
29
Galtung, J. & M. H. Ruge (1965). The Structure of Foreign News. Journal of
Peace Research, 2(4), 64–91.
Gidengil, E., Henningar, M., Blais, A., Nevitte N., & Nadeau, R. (2003, January). The gender
gap in support for the new right: The case of Canada. Paper presented at the Conference on
Populisms in North America, South America, and Europe: Comparative and Historical
Perspectives, Bogliasco, Italy.
Hainsworth, P. (2000). Introduction: The Extreme Right. In P. Hainsworth (Ed.), The Politics
of the Extreme Right: From the Margins to the Mainstream (pp. 1–17).
London: Pinter.
Hall, S. (1980). Encoding/decoding: Culture, Media, Language. London: Hutchinson.
Hobbs, R. (1998). The seven great debates in the media literacy movement. Journal of
Communication, 48 (2), 9-29.
Iyengar, S. & Simon, A. (2000). New perspectives and evidence on political communication
and campaign effects. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 149-169.
Jackman, R.W. & Volpert. K. (1996). Conditions favouring parties of the extreme right in
Western Europe. British Journal of Political Science, 26(4), 501-521.
Kats, E. & Lazarsfeld, P.L. (1955). Personal Influence. New York: Free Press.
Kitschelt, H. (1995). The radical right in Western Europe. Michigan: The University of
Michigan Press.
Knigge, P. (1998). The ecological correlates of right-wing extremism in Western Europe.
European Journal of Political Research, 34(2), 249-279.
Krouwel, A. P. M. (2008). Links en rechts in het nieuws: Aandacht voor politieke partijen en
politici in de media. Amsterdam: Centre for Applied Political Science.
Lazarsfeld, P.L., Berelson, B. & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people's choice: how the voter makes
up his mind in a presidential campaign. Columbia: Columbia University Press
30
Lubbers, M. & P. Scheepers (2000). Individual and contextual characteristics of the German
extreme right-wing vote in the 1990s: A test of complementary theories. European Journal of
Political Research 38, 63–94.
Lubbers, M, Scheepers, P. & Vergeer, M. (2000). Exposure to newspapers and attitudes
toward ethnic minorities: A longitudinal analysis. Howard Journal of Communications, 11(2),
127-143.
Lubbers, M. & P. Scheepers (2001). Explaining the trend in extreme right-wing voting:
Germany 1989–1998. European Sociological Review 17, 431–49.
Lubbers, M., Gijsberts, M. & Scheepers, P. (2002). Extreme right-wing voting in Western
Europe. European Journal of Political Research, 41(3), 345-378.
Mazzoleni, G., Stewart, J. & Horsfield, B. (2003). The media and neo-populism: A
contemporary comparative analysis. Westport, CC: Praeger.
McCombs, M. & Shaw, D.L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public
Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
McQuail, D. (1992). Media Performance: Mass communication and the public interest.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Medialogica, over het krachtveld tussen burgers, media en politiek. (n.d.). Retrieved March
15, 2012, from http://www.adviesorgaan rmo.nl/publicaties/adviezen/2003/ 301/?tab=
summary.
Niemi, R. G., Whitten, G. & Franklin, M. (1992). Constituency characteristics, individual
characteristics and tactical voting in the 1987 British General Election. British Journal of
Political Science, 22, 229–40.
Norris, P. (2005). Radical right: Voters and parties in the regulated market. New York and
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31
Petrocik, J. R., Benoit, W.L. & Hansen, G.J. (2002). Issue ownership and presidential
campaigning, 1952-2000. Political Science Quarterly, 118(4), 599-626.
Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making Democracy Work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton:
Princeton University Press.
Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New
York: Simon & Schuster.
Rink, N., Phalet, K. & Swyngedouw, M. (2009). The effects of immigrant population size,
unemployment and individual characteristics on voting for the Vlaams Blok in Flanders
1991–1999. European Sociological Review, 25(4), 411–424.
Rydgren, J. (2009). Social Isolation? Social capital and radical right-wing voting in Western
Europe. Journal of Civil Society, 5(2), 129-150.
Schain, M., Zolberg, A. & Hossay, P. (2002). The development of radical right parties in
Western Europe. In M. Schain, A. Zolberg & P. Hossay (eds.), Shadows over Europe: The
development and impact of the extreme right in Western Europe (pp. 3–17). New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Schedler, A. (1996). Anti-Political Establishment Parties. Party Politics, 2, 291–312.
Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. D. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on
mass media content. London: Longman.
Silverblatt, A. (1995). Media literacy: Keys to interpreting media messages. Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Silverblatt, A. (2004). Media as Social Institution. American Behavioral Scientist, 48, 35-41.
Tillie, J. (1995). Party Utility and Voting Behaviour. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuis.
Vande Berg, L. R., Wenner, L.A. & Gronbeck, B.E. (2004). Media literacy and television
criticism: Enabling an informed and engaged citizenry. American Behavioral Scientist 48,
219-228.
32
Van der Brug, W. & Fennema, M. (2003). Protest or mainstream? How the European antiimmigrant parties developed into two separate groups by 1999. European Journal of Political
Research, 42(1), 55-76.
Van der Brug, W., Fennema, M. & Tillie, J. (2000). Anti-immigrant parties in Europe:
Ideological or protest vote? European Journal of Political Research, 37(1), 77-102.
Van der Eijk, C. (2002). Design issues in electoral research: taking care of (core) business.
Electoral Studies 21, 189–206.
Van Dijk, T. (1993). Elite discourse and racism. London: Routledge.
Van Gent, W. & Musterd, S. (2010). Isolement en angst: PVV in Haagse buurten bij de
gemeenteraadsverkiezingen van 2010. Tijdschrift voor Beleid, Politiek en Maatschappij,
37(2), 140-153.
Vliegenthart, R. & Boomgaarden, H. (2005). Berichtgeving over immigratie en integratie en
electorale steun voor antiimmigratiepartijen in Nederland. Migrantstudies, 21(3),
120-134.
Vliegenthart, R. & Boomgaarden, H. (2007). Real-World indicators and the coverage of
immigration and the integration of minorities in Dutch newspapers. European Journal of
Communication, 22(3), 293–314.
Walgrave, S. & De Swert, K. (2004). The making of the (issues of the) Vlaams Blok: The
media and the success of the Belgian extreme-right party. Political Communication, 21(4),
479-500.
33
Appendix 1 – Questionnaire (the original questionnaire was in Dutch)
Generally, how often do you read the following newspapers online or offline? Please circle
around your answer. The answer scale ranges from: 1: never; 2: seldom; 3: occasionally; 4:
regularly; 5: frequently; 6: don’t know. The percentage of readers and an average reading score on a
1 to 5 scale are as follows: Algemeen Dagblad (33.8%, M = 1.88, SD = 1.34), Telegraaf (46.4%, M =
2.39, SD = 1.66), Trouw (20.3%, M = 1.48, SD = 1.04), Volkskrant (28.5%, M = 1.72, SD = 1.28).
Algemeen
Dagblad
Telegraaf
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Trouw
1
2
3
4
5
Volkskrant
1
2
3
4
5
6=Don’t
know
6=Don’t
know
6=Don’t
know
6=Don’t
know
On average, how often do you read news stories concerning immigration and integration? Please
circle around your answer. (M = 3.12, SD = 1.14).
1=never
2= seldom
3=occasionally 4= regularly
5=frequently
6= don’t know
In general, how often do you consider the following questions to analyze and evaluate the media
system and its companies, media-content and the effects of media (use). Please circle around your
answer. Scale of five items below resulted in (on a 1 to 25 scale) (M = 13.37, SD = 5.21, Cronbach’s a
= .867).
1. Do you ever consider who created this message and why they sending it? (M = 2.5, SD = 1.17).
1=never
2= seldom
3=occasionally 4= regularly
5=frequently
6= don’t know
2. Do you ever consider what techniques are used to attract and hold attention? (M = 2.51, SD =
1.23).
1=never
2= seldom
3=occasionally 4= regularly
5=frequently
6= don’t know
3. Do you ever consider what lifestyles, values and points of view are represented in this
message? (M = 2.33, SD = 1.2).
1=never
2= seldom
3=occasionally 4= regularly
5=frequently
6= don’t know
4. Do you ever consider what is omitted from this message? (M = 2.42, SD = 1.26).
1=never
2= seldom
3=occasionally 4= regularly
5=frequently
6= don’t know
34
5. Do you ever consider how different people could interpret a message? (M =2.95, SD = 1.31).
1=never
2= seldom
3=occasionally 4= regularly
5=frequently
6= don’t know
Could you indicate what the chances are that you will one time vote for the following parties? If you
think you will never vote for this party, fill in a 1; if it is very possible that you will once vote for this
party, fill in a 10. You can of course also fill in any number in between. Please circle around your
answer. VVD (M = 3.38, SD = 2.94), PVDA (M = 2.62, SD = 2.51), PVV (M = 4.68, SD = 3.18),
CDA (M = 2.99, SD = 2.73), SP (M = 3.56, SD = 3.02), D66 (M = 2.87, SD = 2.7), GroenLinks (M =
2.21, SD = 2.15), ChristenUnie (M = 1.41, SD = 1.3).
VVD
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PVDA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
PVV
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
CDA
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
SP
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
D66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
GroenLinks
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
ChristenUnie
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
How much do you personally trust each of the institutions below? 1 means you do not trust
an institution at all, and 10 means you have complete trust. Please circle around your answer. Six
items led to a Cronbach's a = .938. National parliament (M = 5.67, SD = 2.24), Legal System (M =
5.85, SD = 2.12), Police (M = 5.58, SD = 2.21), Politicians (M = 5.29, SD = 2.29), EU (M = 5.24,
SD = 2.41), United Nations (M = 5.99, SD = 2.4).
National
parliament
The legal
system
The police
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Politicians
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
European
parliament
The United
Nations
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
Don’t
know
35
Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted, or that you can’t be
too careful in dealing with people? 1 means you can’t be too careful and 10 means that
most people can be trusted. Please circle around your answer. (M = 6.46, SD = 1.77).
Three itemed scale led to Cronbach's a = .878
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Don’t know
Do you think that most people would try to take advantage of you if they got the chance, or would they
try to be fair?1 means most people try to take advantage of you and 10 means that most people would
try to be fair to you. Please circle around your answer. (M = 6.36, SD = 1.94).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Don’t know
Would you say that most of the time people try to be helpful or that they are mostly looking out for
themselves? 1 means most people mostly look out for themselves and 10 means that people mostly try to be
helpful. Please circle around your answer. (M = 6.24, SD = 2.1).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Don’t know
When voting for an political party, how important is the matter of immigration and integration in your
decision? 1 means extremely unimportant, 10 means extremely important. Please circle around your answer.
(M = 6.39, SD = 2.1).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Don’t know
What is your sex? Please circle around your answer. 0 = man (n = 86) and 1 = woman (n = 121).
Female / Male
What is your age? Please fill in your answer. (M = 39.7, SD = 15.6).
..................
Are both of your parents born in the Netherlands? Please fill in your answer. 0 = Dutch (n = 153) and
1 = one of my parents is born abroad (n = 55).
Yes / No
36
What is the highest level of education you have achieved? Please circle around your answer.
Education was made a dummy variable. 0 = low (n = 74) and 1 = high (n = 134).
1. Elementary school
4. A-level, AS-level or equivalent
2. Secondary education (grade 2-5/GCSE D-G)
5. Degree / postgraduate qualification
3. Secondary education (grade 1/O-level/GCSE)
6. Don’t know
Are you a member of a particular religious denomination or religious group? Recoded in 0 = no
religion (n = 134) and 1 = religious (n = 74).
1. None
2. Protestant
3. Roman Catholic
4. United Reform Church
5. Dutch Reformed
6. Islam / Muslim
7. Other
37