The language of journalism – The language of agenda setting effects

The evolution of agenda setting over the past 50 years is an in-depth, large-scale case study of the scientific method. This oscillating history of theoretical explication and extensive empirical investigation has identified major aspects of the language of journalism that have significant impact on the formation of public opinion. The theory of agenda setting now includes three levels of agenda setting effects, intermedia agenda setting and the concept of compelling arguments that identify key aspects of the language of journalism. Other theoretical concepts, need for orientation, and most recently civic osmosis and agendamelding explicate the process of agenda setting. All of these are intellectual tools for dealing with the contemporary problem

The evolution of agenda setting over the past 50 years is an in-depth, large-scale case study of the scientific method, an oscillating history of theoretical explication and extensive empirical investigation. This continuous expansion of agenda setting, theoretically and empirically, has identified major aspects of the language of journalism, especially in the news media's reporting of public affairs, which have significant impact on formation of public opinion and on observable civic behavior.
The seminal Chapel Hill study (McCombs & Shaw, 1972) compared news coverage of public issues and public concern about those issues during the 1968 U.S. presidential campaign. The substantial correspondence between the media agenda and public agenda found in Chapel Hill subsequently has been extensively replicated worldwide (McCombs, 2014).
And these hundreds of studies have included other objects of attention, such as public figures. In the language of journalism these are the key nouns that impact public opinion. This focus on objects of attention is now referred to as the first level of agenda setting.
Expansion of the theory followed swiftly. The second major agenda setting study, a panel study during the 1972 U.S. presidential election (Shaw & McCombs, 1977), introduced the theoretical concept of attribute agenda setting. The objects that are the focus of attention at the first level of agenda setting have attributes, those characteristics and properties that describe each object. And the third major agenda setting study, which was carried out in three diverse communities during the 1976 U.S. presidential election (Weaver et al., 1981) empirically compared the attribute agendas of the news media for the two major presidential candidates with the public's attribute agendas for these men.
The strong fit between these attribute agendas also has been widely replicated, and this area of research is now referred to as the second level of agenda setting. In the language of journalism these are the key adjectives that frame the objects of attention.
The first and second levels of agenda setting identify key elements in the language of journalism that have significant impact on the formation of public opinion. Subsequent research also has identified additional dynamics in the language of journalism involving these elements that also have significant impact on public opinion.
These are the third level of agenda setting -network agenda setting, intermedia agenda setting and the concept of compelling arguments.
The most recent of these additions to the theory of agenda setting is the third level of agenda setting, network agenda setting (Guo & Mc-Combs, 2016 (Ghanem, 1996(Ghanem, , 1997Saldana, 2017). The diagonal arrow in Figure 3 diagrams the concept of compelling arguments.
All five of these concepts, the three levels of agenda setting, plus intermedia agenda setting and compelling arguments, identify aspects of the language of journalism that influence the formation of public opinion. In addition, another theoretical concept, need for orientation, provides a psychological explanation for the strength of agenda setting effects (Weaver, 1977). Conceptually, an individual's need for orientation is defined by two lower-order concepts, relevance and uncertainty. Relevance is the initial defining condition of need for orientation. Where relevance to the individual is low or even non-existent, the need for orientation is low and agenda setting effects are weak. If relevance is high, but uncertainty is low -that is, individuals already have all the information that they desire about a topicthen the need for orientation is moderate and the strength of agenda setting effects is moderate. If both relevance and uncertainty are high, the need for orientation is high and the agenda setting effects are strong.

Concepts, domains and settings
To understand fully the continuing expansion of agenda setting theory, it is useful to distinguish between the Ultimately, there are two safeguards to the diffusion of fake news.  (Lee, 2007;Boczkowski, 2010;Maier, 2010