Letter Opinion on ERA: A Test of the Newspaper Bias Hypothesis

Abstract

THE LETTERS-TO-THE-EDITOR columns found in most newspapers today refute the notion that "freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one. " Letters columns provide an outlet for nearly two million expressions of opinion each year (Associated Press Man-aging Editors, 1976:218), combining what one midwestern editor calls "some of the elements of the town meeting, the rural party line, the loafers ' bench on the courthouse square, and the continuing ref-erendum " (Brown, 1976). Scholars are skeptical, however, about the representativeness of opinions expressed in letters columns. This skepticism is based largely on the perception that persons who write letters-to-the-editor are a tiny and atypical group of citizens. Some researchers also hypothesize that "letter opinion " may be biased by editorial policies which govern the selection of letters for publication. Newspapers, acting in a gatekeeping role, frequently elect to publish only a portion of the letters they receive. Abstract This paper compares letter opinion (opinions expressed in published letters-to-the-editor) with public opinion on ERA. Prior research has suggested that letter opinion is biased by atypical letter writers or by newspaper editorial policies which are used to select letters for publication. Drawing on a national sample of 92 daily newspapers, no substantial difference between letter opinion and public opinion on ERA is detected. Little support is found for the hypothesis that newspaper policies bias letter opinion.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 36 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.