Tag Archives: media impact

Earthquake, Tsunami and Fukushima Nuclear Crisis in Japan, One Year After – Media Impact Analysis

Posted on by • Posted in Corp - AFLAC, Corp - New York Times, Country - Japan, Disasters, Earthquake, Event - Fukushima, Event - Tsunami Japan, Issue - Nuclear Crisis, Debate, Rep Issue - Communication Crisis, Rep Issue - Media Bias, Rep Issue - News Content Analysis • Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , • 1 Comment

In this first anniversary of the massive disaster and tragedy suffered by Japanese people by 11 March 2011, we want to show with our readers some of the empirical results we gathered and learnt about media impact and reputation analysis.

This post is intended to be also a tribute to all victims of the catastrophe, specially to survivors. As many other people, I was astonished by the heroic civil society reaction to the disaster. In the midst of terrible suffering, this was really and profoundly inspiring.

I would like to share with you a video that was created and sent to me by a reader of this post a while ago. This is a highly emotional video, as you can imagine. As Lucy explained,

I’m an Australian poet/lyricist based in Canberra. A short while ago I finished a project with an American singer and producer Rick Tallis – a song dedicated to the Japanese people who died or lost their loved ones in the tsunami last March. This song is a cover of Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah with re-written lyrics that talk about a child trapped in the rubble with their mother after the tsunami. The video of the song is now out on Youtube – a slide show of some very powerful images of the event. We would like to get the song heard and would be very grateful if you could listen to it and watch the video and share it with others, as we believe the pain and suffering caused by this tragic event is ongoing. We strongly believe that to remember is to care, especially now that it’s coming up to the first anniversary of this tragic event. We would appreciate any feedback or suggestions on how to spread the word regarding this project.

Kind regards,

Lucy Prasad

I think that this video shows the soul of this tragedy with respect, and transmits the humanity of Humanity: disaster, tragedy, immense and unbearable suffering, tears, crying and despair, injustice and grievance. Death, mourning, abandonment, loneliness. And sacrifice, struggle and fight, heroic efforts, endurance, strength, serenity and hope. Smiles and laughts. Future. Life.

If you are looking for images comparing before-after, you can check the images in the following external sources:

Before-After the earthquake and tsunami; satellite images

New York Times

El Mundo, Spain

Aftermath of the devastating effects – one year after.

New York Times

El País, Spain

See also the series by Good Morning America

Our analysis.

We pubished our first results about media impact just in the aftermath of the tsunami, still 11 March 2011, showing how the disaster was aprehended by international media, when almost nothing was know about the devstating effects, except as for the magnitude of the earthquake, measured at first at 8.9 points Richter scale. We compared initially the news content profile about the earthquake and the tsunami against news about Wikileaks, concerning their association to scandal and tragedy. This was due to the fact that all our previous post referred to the news content analysis to Wikileaks related issues.

This was followed a day after by our first analysis about media reaction to first blast in Fukushima nuclear plant. That day there was no possibility to assess the extent of the ongoing problems as possible nuclear crisis. In our third post we compared initial media coverage of tsunami in Japan against other recent tragedies or disasters, like Haiti and Chile Earthquakes 2010, Duisburg Love Parade Stampede.

We had another post measuring initial media reaction to Fukushima blast. We considered that media did not react quickly, in accordance with the foreseable crisis impact of the events. Only 12-24 hours after the blast, international media attention turned to the analysis of the implications of the nuclear plant blast. This was a 13 March 2011 post.

Using our media impact techniques, we published a first post about the cities in Japan that received more international media attention. Being able to idenify which are the cities most present in the news in a pure quanitative way allow you to identify where the focus of a crisis is located.

Results in the figure below shows the evolution of the media coverage given to main cities in the four first days after the tsunami.

Sendai was the region most devastated by the tsunami (and the one with more available video footage in the beginning). Fukushima exceeded Sendai as international media reference by the end of 12 March.

Then came the second adn third blasts in Fukushima nuclear plant, by 15 March 2012. Events turned dramatic, as it became clear that the situation was completely uncontrolled. We measured the news content profile about second blast in comparision with those about the first explosion. We had a substantial increase of news profile association to tragedy and scandal. The vector components more sensitive to second blast were ‘worrying’, ‘mistake’, ‘harm’ and ‘embarrassing’.

By 18 March 2011 we run a comparative media content analysis by countris about Fukushima nuclear crisis. We shoewd how the crisis was explained by media from the United States, India, United Kingdom and Australia. Below there is an example of the findings.

We published two post, always using our own techniques for media impact analysis, about the companies from Europe and America most affected by Japan earthquake, tsunami or Fukushima nuclear crisis. We show below the tables, and you can chek if you wish the posts in order to know more about the list.

Companies from Europe most affected by the Japan earthquake, tsunami, nuclear crisis, measured by media impact.

Companies from the United States most affected by the Japan earthquake, tsunami, nuclear crisis, measured by media impact.

Once that the initial stage of ermegency and rescue was concluded, it appeared a more clear picture of the extent of the devastation and tragedy by casualties. Many people were looking for information about the cities most affected by the earthquake and tsunami. Even if data about casualties and damages existed, it is hard to establish a list of cities, as the effects are not comparable: there are people killed by the earthquake and the tsunami, there are people missing mainly in areas devastated by the tsunami, there are buildings and infrastructure destroyed by the direct effect of the massive earthquake, or razed by the tsunami. There are finally villages and areas abandoned due to the nuclear crisis.

We wanted to provide an answer of how media perceived or focused attention in each  component of the disaster. We monitored the media impact received internationally by all cities and locations with more thn 10.000 inhabitants in relationship with tsunami, earthquake or nuclear crisis.

We published a post with the list of cities most affected by the disaster, based exclusively by the media attention received since 11 March 2011. For each city, we provided the available information concerning casualties and damages. We provided information about this table in the blog post. This is the blog entry that has received more visits.

In another related post, we investigated the relationship between media coverage received by each prefecture and the kind of casualties and damages suffered, as shown in the following figure.

We explored the existence of media bias by checking how New York Times and Wall Street Journal covered Fukushima nuclear crisis. We wanted to see if the Japanese crisis was presented by leading American  newspapers showing different perceptions concerning a very sensitive issue also in terms of local business and politics. We covered this news content analysis of the nuclear crisis storyline in two different posts (post 1, post 2).

Our analysis suggested that New York Times presented Fukushima crisis in a most dramatic way, or, conversely, that Wall Street Journal explained it in a more indulgent way. Wall Street Journal was as expected more focussed on issues with economic and commercial implications. Below, the example of a couple of figures of the analysis.

Concerning the media coverage given to Fukishima nuclear crisis, we followed an indirect indicator showing how serious the accident was judged by the media. We measured the prevalence of news about Fukushima mentioning past nuclear accidents, like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. We published the time evolution of this measure right after Fukushima was declared a Level 7 (max) accident. This was 12 April 2012. Things worsened later, but we did not publish additional pots about this topic in this blog.

We run also a reputation an communications crisis case that emerged within the framework of the Japanese tsunami. Comedian Gilbert Gottfired was ‘the voice’ of AFLAC duck, a very popular and main brand asset of this American insurance company with a very strong presence in Japan. He published some tweets with jokes about the tsunami with an awful bad taste and sense of the opportunity. He was inmediately fired.

We performed a reputation crisis analysis based again in news content analysis. We eventually published a report with the results, that you can download here.

Our findings show that even if the nes about the jokes tarnished AFLAC reputation, as shown for instance in the figure below, quick response taken by the comany preserved the quality of the media perception about the AFLAC mascot. We also compare how media portrayed the controversy about the jokes with media treatment given to other topics judged irreverent and polemic like South Park, The Simpsons and nuclear episode.

Full report includes media perception of AFLAC in comparison with competitors like Metlife, Prudential Financial or Aetna.

The Image of FHFA Lawsuit Against 17 Banks

Posted on by • Posted in Companies, Corp - Bank of America, Rep Issue - Newspapers • Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , • 5 Comments

(Note: as Bank of America is in the news for additional mortgage related lawsuits, we put in the frontline this analysis posted before)

The precedent post showed which banks are more present in the media in relation with the multibillion lawsuit of the US Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) against 17 major American and international banks.

Now we show results about the images portrayed by the media when covering the FHFA lawsuit.

This is a new tool of analysis that we present in this blog. It has been developped at our research center MRI Universidad de Navarra, and it has been applied to other studies.

Image analysis show striking results for media reputation analysis. All analysis presented in this reputation crisis blog is entirely based in news content analysis from newspapers. Image analysis is also based in newspapers articles. What we do here is to identify all photos used by the journalists to illustrate the news published about any kind of issue or event.

We collect all available photos used, and we regroup them into relevant categories. The final step is to present the results. We can show the numerical results or a graphical representation of it. The reputation collage is the resulting image emerging from all photos chosen by journalists.

This tool is probably very relevant in terms of reputation analysis. Appearing in the news in a reputation crisis may damage the media perception of the affected people, company or institution. This damage increases substantially if the news appearence is not recluded into the body of the article, but appears in the headlines. But it is probably even more damaging if the indicted actor appears in the photo illustrating the news article.

News photos are many times the result of a hard work of media professionals, as they are picked as means to show the “soul of the article”. In many cases, especially when dealing with reputation crisis or scandals, the image chosen come as a result of a journal editorial decision. The impact of a photo is many times stronger than the impact of the content of the text.

We present the result concerning images showed to explain the FHFA lawsuit. As explained in the precedent post, the case we analyze here is ver nice in terms of reputation analysis, as it concerns as much as 17 different companies. The journalist or the editor needs to take a choice if she wants to show the image of a particular bank. As explained, the bank appearing in the photo of news about the FHFA pays a hard price in terms of loss of media reputation, as it creates an association with misleading business behavior, linked to the present economic crisis suffered by many right now.

First reputation collage refers to photos used in news from US newspapers about FHFA lawsuit, published between September 1 and 7.

Main image reference is a picture of a bank. We have shown a unspecified bank image, but they refer all to specific companies. The next collage will show the details of which banks are chosen as examples in the news. Second image reference in importance are photos about the stock markets, normally showing distress and images of falling stock indexes. They are concentrated in news from Monday September 5, when sued banks suffered substantial losses in European markets (Labor Day in the United States). Third and fourth images used to explain the core of the news are images about housing foreclosures and about Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We find also image references to experts/analysts, money, the justice and President Obama.

As announced, we show in the following reputation collage the images concerning the names of banks used in the photo news. This result is the key element concerning the measurement of the reputational impact of the current legal crisis experienced by sued banks. It also answers to the question of which among all banks is paying the reputation bill.

Our empirical answer is quite clear: the crisis is up to now being strongly associated to Bank of America, as it is by far the reference picked by journalists or newspaper’s editor to illustrate the lawsuit. Second bank in terms of presence in news photos is JPMorgan Chase. We find also a significative presence of images about Goldman Sachs. There are only marginal appearences of other banks: Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup and First Horizon. Other banks do not even appear as photo news.

This clear result suggest a kind of Winner-take-all rule, that in the field of reputation crises becomes a curse: in a set of several affected companies by an scandal or a crisis, media tend to concentrate image attention to the one appearing as the most exposed to the scandal, in a disproportionate way compared to all other affected companies.

It is true that Bank of America has been sued by the largest amount of sellings to Fannie and Freddie. But while they support less than a third of all eventual sanctions linked to selling mortgage securities, it completely controls media choices as image to be shown to present the FHFA lawsuit news.

Troy Davis Case: Media Coverage and Death Penalty Debate

Posted on by • Posted in Death Penalty, Rep Issue - Newspapers • Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , • 7 Comments

(upcoming post: Troy Davis Case. International Pressure against execution? Not really)

Troy Davis case

Troy Davis was convicted and sentenced to death, accused of the murder of police officer Mark MacPhail in 1989 in Savannah, Georgia. He was implicated in the murder by other suspected man and arrested four days after the crime. Several eyewitness accused Troy Davis of shooting the police. Two testified that Troy Davis confessed the murder to them. Davis declared always innocent.

Later, some witnesses recanted their previous testimony and described police coercion. After three execution dates stayed. Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency by September 19, 2011. Troy Davis is expected to be executed today September 21, 2011. (update September 22: Troy Davis was executed by lethal injection, 7pm EDT).

Death penalty debate and the media

As it has happened in some precedent cases, doubts about the process have raised a strong movement from people and activists opposed to death penalty. The case is thus creating relevant media attention, not only in Georgia newspapers, but also nationwide in the United States.

Expanded media coverage allows us to analyse this crisis and which kind of information we can derive from the analysis of media behavior.

As in all precedent posts, our unique aim is to provide information and knowledge to people interested in media analysis, reputation impact and crisis management. As for each particular issue treated in each post, we never take any particular position. In this case, we will not present our position in regard to death penalty, as my opinion about it is not relevant for ther readers.

Of course, some readers of this particular post are not mainly interested in media analysis, but about the death penalty debate. Like in all our posts, we try to provide new information that can be useful for understanding the specific topics analyzed.

Death penalty is an open debate in the United States. According to a recent Gallup poll, there is a majority of americans supporting death penalty for convicted murder. According to this source, 64% are in favor of death penalty, while 29% oppose to it. Time evolution shows an increase of opposition to death penalty since mid 90s.

(source: Gallup 2010)

We will show in this post some results from media coverage analysis linked to death penalty debate, using MRI Universidad de Navarra techniques.

Media Attention Index by group of states

We count with information about news published about Troy Davis case in each state in United States. Our strategy is to analyze media coverage behavior by regrouping states by relevant variables to the death penalty debate. This is a strategy that we have also followed in our post concerning New York 9/11 attacks and memorial.

In this analysis we have excluded results from Georgia, as it behaves as a clear outlier as this state is the main source of news and has covered the case in a massive way in comparison with any other state. We have excluded also news from California and New York, as their influence in final results are too big. These two states publish 29% of all news about Troy Davis case.

The basic variable that we analyse is what we call “Media Attention Index”. Media attention index measures how relevant Troy Davis case is in each state. This is measured by the number of news published about the case, in comparison with the media coverage given to a selection of other neutral issues, unrelated with death penalty topic.

If we find similar level of media attention in both groups, this implies that the classification variable that we have chosen is probably no sensitive to the death penalty debate. This absence of sensitiveness is already a result. But it is usually more revealing to find which elements are topic-related, and this result emerges when we find that media coverage diverges in each group of states.

First variable chosen is Republican-Democratic orientation of the states. We could use different measures, as we did in New York 9/11 post. Here we just select the measures that identify as Rep-Dem when there is a margin bigger than 10 points in 2008 presidential election.

Our results indicate that there is a clear partisan media coverage of this death penalty process. Republican oriented states provide a sustained higher media attention than Democratic states.

Now we turn to two other key division of states. First, we look at media attention depending on death penalty status in each state.

According to Death Penalty Information Center, there are currently 34 states with the death penalty, and 16 without (see data in the factsheet provided by DPIC).

We find that states currently with death penalty are following Troy Davis case in with a higher degree of media attention than states without. We can also observe a decrease of the gap, that was unnoticed in with the division Republican-Democrat.

The complementary variable is to regroup states between those with recent executions (year 2010 and 2011) opposed to those without execution, whatever the legal status of death penalty is.

A similar result than before is found out: states with convicted recently executed tend to provide higher levels of media attention to Troy Davis case.

All three results presented show that media attention is sensitive to our variables chosen: Republicans, states with capital punishement and states with recent capital executions tend to show higher degree of media attention to Troy Davis case than others.

As we have shown the time evolution of the selected variables between September 20 and 21, when media coverage explode, we can look inside these results more carefully.

Within the time interval we count with a decisive fact: final clemency denial by Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole. News before this decision refer to the last stages of Troy Davis judicial process and positions of each camp about this case. News after the decision are more focused about the execution itself and its justice. Probably, debate about death penalty is more intense in news after the confirmation of the sentence to death.

We propose to check the results already presented by dividing them into stages before and after denial of clemency.

Results are revealing. First figure shows media attention index by states according the legal status of death penalty. News about the case till the denegation of clemency are more intensely followed in states with death penalty than others. But media attention profile changes if we consider only the flow of news after the decision was announced and execution is fixed for September 21. Then, the states where death penalty does not apply or has been abolished provide a wider media coverage to Troy Davis case than states with death penalty.

If we establish the difference between states with recent lethal executions, we osbserve a similar trend, but less pronounced. Before the clemency decision media coverage was sgubstantialy higher in states with recently executed inmates, while it balances after the decision, but not to the point to reverse the trend.

Update September 22, 2011

As explained before, Georgia Board of Pardons and Paroles denied clemency to Troy Davis sentence to death. Last minute appeals were rejected or non considered. Troy Davis was executed using a lethal injection, by 7pm EDT.

We provide additional results about coverage of Troy Davis case.

First we show the evolution of media attention index during the last hours of the case. As expected in high-profile death penalty case where both sides contend, we observe an explosion of media attention in the last stages of the case. The index dramatically increase from a 50 points value by September 20 to 100 points by September 21 6pm CET. By September 22 10am CET, some 8 hours ahter the execution took place, media attention index reaches almost 200 points.

News about the case are thus concentrated in the period where the execution is confirmed and inminent. Almost 80% of news in US newspapers about Davis case have been published after denial of clemency.

In the last stages, is becomes an all nation issue, and our results show clearly that both camps, in favor and opposed to  death penalty cover the case with the same level of media attention. This is in contrast with the initial coverage pattern, that we have shown that it is more intense in sates applying death penalty. This is confirmed in results shown in the following figure, where we find that media coverage is roughly the same in the execution day in both groups of states.

Main components of media storyline of Troy Davis case

In the first section of this post we have used as tool of analysis media attention index. The goal was to identify different patterns based in ideology, legal staus of death penalty and recent executions.

In this and following section we look into the content of news about Troy Davis case. We want to lean which are the key elements of the storyline used by the media.

In this section we show the structure of the main components of media stroyline. In the next session we will analyze to which extent each singular topic suffers from media bias reflecting a sensitiveness to the death penalty debate.

Here we present global media coverage in all states in the United States.

We explore the content of news about Troy Davis case. We select specific topics linked to death penalty debate.  We measure the prevalence of each selected topic in newspapers. The higher the value in the figure, the more frequently the specific topic is present in articles covering Davis case.

Main topics are direct references to the execution and to the clemency process and decision, as they appear almost in 9 out of 10 articles.

Direct references to death penalty reaches a value about 60%, which is more than three times more than the use of the term “capital punishment”.

The presence of supporters to Troy Davis case is relevant, as Amnesty International claims is presented in 60% of all articles. References to former FBI director William Sessions, also favorable to not applying death penalty to Davis is aover 30%.

References to personal and social circumstances of the convicted inmate (“racial” or “poor”) are rather marginal in the storyline as they take value 7.7% and 2.9% respectively.

Finally, the critics about the outcome of the case, considering that Davis “is innocent” or that an injustice is taken are present in some 20% of all articles.

Troy Davis case storyline by death penalty status of states

Now we move to a complementary tool. We measure the prevalence of each selected topic in newspapers comparing states with death penalty against states without death penalty.

Our aim is to identify the sensitive issues in the death penalty debate. If prevalence is different between groups, this media bias indicates that this specific issue is relevant for the death penalty debate.

We have included here results about coverage by media in Georgia. Of course, Georgia pertains to the groups where death penalty is legal and should behave like this group of states. But in the same time, as Davis case is a local case, debate and controversies arise in a clear wide extent, and makes less predictible its media profile.

It is important to take into account when considering Georgia results in comparison to behavoir of other states that this is an outlier case and has its own dynamics. Besides the increase of the controversial profile of the news already mentionned, the richess of the debate and the coverage of the case in Georgia produces as a result that prevalence to single topics will tend to be lower in general than all other states. This is due to the fact that other states do not cover all the issues treated in local media and concentrate in the core topics of the case and the debate. This downward bias requires to be always in mind when analysing Georgia results.

If not noticed otherwise, empirical results refer to news up to September 21, before the execution took place.

Moving to the results, we present first results concerning the core issue of Troy Davis case: it is a death penalty case.

We find that direct references to death penalty are proportionally higher in states with death penalty. In Georgia the rate is lower. As explained, as newspapers in Georgia are covering the case well before the last days, they include news not directly talking about the sentence.

The reference to “capital punishment” instead of death penalty behaves in the opposite way, as it is more profusely used by states without death penalty. Using the capital punishment term is somehow euphemistic as it allows to avoid the mention to death. In contrast it could produce stronger fellings in readers, as it refers to “punishment” instead of “penalty”. Both terms are evidently related, but focus in different aspects.

Direct reference to the execution is again more used in coverage of states with death penalty.

Like in all constested convicted cases, last instance of clemency decision plays a major role in coverage of death penalty case. Our results show that references to clemency is not a partisan element of the storyline, as it is used in the same level in both sides.

When doubts emerge about the fairness and certitude of a death penalty sentence, there is media space for people and movements against death penalty or just supporting the convicted inmate. It is interesting to measure the media prevalence of supporters of Troy Davis interests.

We measure the references to Amnesty International, and to former FBI director, William Sessions. Both have had a prominent and dirct implication calling for not applying death sentence to Davis.

We get a result that is opposed to our own expectations and is counterinutitive. Media from states with death penalty provide higher coverage to Amnesty International than states without. Surprisingly for us, more space is given in states where AI is considered an opponent than in states where it is viewed as a case supporter. Those are results before execution and gap is not substantial, but they are really intriguing to us.

References to William Sessions’ position is higher in states without deatn penalty. We also see a drop of media interest in Georgia.

Next element is the prevalence of issues that are usually present in the death penalty deabte in the United States: the racial and the poor condition components. They are both relevant for Troy Davis case, as he is a black man from a poor area.

As expected, both elements suffer from media bias and clearly indicate that they are issues that are more present and used by states opposed to death penalty than states with death penalty.

The final issue we want to chek is the global assessment of the case. In the following figures we present the prevalence of direct references to “is innocent” and to “injustice”. Those are terms that are advanced by people and institutions opposed to Davis’ execution and critizise the fairness of the legal process.

“Injustice” is mentioned more times in newspapers from states without death penalty, as expected.

But, surprisingly for us, we find again that mentions to “is innocent” are more common in coverage by states with death penalty. Look also to the behavior in Georgia, where this issue is disproportionately highly present.

Lehman Brothers in the News as Fear of Systemic Collapse Index

Posted on by • Posted in Companies • Tagged , , , , , , • Leave a comment

(Photo by Mark Lennihan/Associated Press)

Thre years ago Lehman Brothers investment bank filled for bankruptcy protection, the largest in US history and worldwide. This unprecedented business failure was the main souce of the consequent liquidity crunch in the banking sector that expanded quickly to all markets.

September 15 2008 is marked as a key date in the financial and economic crisis emerging in year 2007, exploding in 2008, punishing the economies in 2009 and preparing the current 2011 sovereign debt crisis.

Thus, Lehman Brothers has become the epitome of the current depression? situation.

Referring to Lehman Brothers three years after it disappeared is now normally a style resouce to talk about systemic risks, system collapse, to-big-to-fail debates: all serious economic things.

Identifying epitome terms allows to investigate how media behaves when explaining posterious events apparently related with. We showed for instance in a precedent post to which extent media was using references to Chernobil disaster at the initial stages of Fukushima nuclear accident. Now Fukushima is the epitome term for nuclear disasters and will be the tool for examining how seriously are perceived by the media future nuclear incidents.

So, using techniques and measurements by Media, Reputation and Intangible center Universidad de Navarra, we can monitor the time evolution of the media references to Lehman Brothers.

Based on precedent media analysis results, we claim that time evolution of Lehman in the news is a good index for gauging how global media considers the serisousness of the economic crisis since 2009.

We take as value 100 the average media impact of Lehman Brothers during year 2007, by number of news published worldwide.

First figure shows the media impact index of Lehman Brothers bewteen 2007 and September 2011. Values are three-months moving average.

The series takes a peak of some 1200 points by last quater of year 2008, corresponding to the bankruptcy period. This is evidently a dramatic increase of media impact, in line with the extraordinary importance of the investment bank failure. Media impact dropped to values between 200-300 in the coming quarters.

Next figure concentrates in 2009-2011 values. This correspond to post-bankruptcy period. We understand that the values after 2008 reflect mainly the use of Lehamn Brothers mentions in the news as journalistic resource for presenting a dark picture of the economic or financial situation. News directly related to Lehman business are mainly located in the last quarter of year 2008.

From our data we find that references to Lehman tended to decrease during 2009, except for last quarter, as many news were published around the first anniversary of the financial catastrophe.

There was a relative low of 120 points by the first quarter of year 2010. Then the index increased sharply during the second semester, corresponding to rescue to Greece and Ireland.

Tensions decreased after second quarter 2010, with the Fear Index below the value of 150 till second quarter 2011. From this point, the index has increased constantly. Right now the Index reaches a value of 370 points: this is a new maximum since the last quarter of year 2008 in teh aftermath of the bankruptcy.

If our underlying assumptions are correct, the tool we propose is telling us that we are currently experiencing serious fears that the unsolved current sovereign debt crisis in Europe may lead the global economy to a systemic collapse. At least now more than half year ago.

Even if this index related only with sentiments and not with facts, it would probably still be relevant: depression sentiments and are arguably driving many recent events in the bond and stock markets.

Many readers would consider that using media appearences of a specific term as a way to monitor or establish relationship with “serious things” like the economic sentiment is not only bizarre but also stupid.

As we at MRI we have analyzed the actual relation between media coverage and related “hardware” issues, we are of course less skeptical. Some others before us found out a stricking relationship between media behaviour and economic facts. For people interested in media analysis is probably well know the astonishing results generated by The Economist with their “Recession Index”, or R-Index: they discovered that it was a strong relationship between the intensity of the ise of “recession” in news and actual business cycle. The nice thing is that this relationship came before and earliers than the economic models identified and announced it. See for instance data about year 2008, 1999,

Remembering New York 9/11 Attack. A Partisan Media Coverage Issue.

Posted on by • Posted in Disasters, Pers - Bin Laden, Rep Issue - Media Bias, Rep Issue - Newspapers • Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , • 1 Comment

In a couple of days News York and all United States will remember solemny the worst attack ever suffered by Americans in United States soil, ten years ago.

Media coverage is becoming massive, not only in the United States media, but also globally. Additional media attention comes from the official alert of risks of a new Al Qaida “credible threat”.

Even if the attack struck New York and New Yorkers, this memorial is a national major event. It is receiving media attention from all over United States.

As like any other relevant major event, expected or unexpected, we can explore at MRI Universidad de Navarra which kind of specific insights we can gather from analysing its media coverage.

Here our proposal is to measure state by state media behaviour concerning the memorial of New York terror attack. We can group the newspapers by states and then create global results by each state.

The main result that we have obtained with the news published up to September 9 is that the degree of media attention by state is sensitive to party ideology. Our procedure is not to label each individual journal by a supposed party bias. Our strategy is to use the information concerning recent voting patterns in each state. Democratic orientes states will count with more democrat oriented newspapers than average, and the opposite is expected to happen with Republican oriented states.

We present the results concerning the intensity of media coverage given to New York 9/11 attack and memorial news, grouping states by Republican-Democratic profile.

We have used different measures to group states into each side:

1. States by Governor’s party.

2. States presenting a strong partisan voting in the 2008 US presidential elections. We define strong partisan voting when the voting margin is higher than 20 points.

3. States presenting a partisan voting in the 2008 US presidential elections. We define partisan voting when the voting margin is higher than 10 points.

For each measurement, we have estimated two values: weighted and unweighted state averages.

In all the measures estimated we find that Republican states tend to provide a higher media coverage to New York 9/11 than Democtratic oriented states.

US FHFA Sues 17 Financial Institutions on Mortgages Securities: Who Pays the Reputation Bill?

Posted on by • Posted in Companies, Corp - Bank of America • Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , • 4 Comments

(See also the post about the news image of FHFA lawsuit)

US Federal Housing Finance Housing (FHFA) sued 17 firms “to recover losses to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac” (see Press Release) by Septemeber 2, 2011. FHFA is a federal agency acting as “the regulator and conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the regulator of the 12 Federal Home Loan Banks”, which official Mission statement is to “Provide effective supervision, regulation and housing mission oversight of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks to promote their safety and soundness, support housing finance and affordable housing, and support a stable and liquid mortgage market”.

In accordance with its mission, FHFA launched a lawsuit against 17 firms based on”FHFA’s conclusion that some portion of the losses that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac incurred on private-label mortgage-backed securities (PLS) are attributable tomisrepresentations and other improper actions by the firms and individuals named in these filings. Based on our review, FHFA alleges that the loans had different and more riskycharacteristics than the descriptions contained in the marketing and sales materials provided to the Enterprises for those securities” (Press Release).

One day before, New York Times announced the imminent suing action. Apparently, it came as a surprise legal movement to many people in the market. In this article, the journalist mentionned that a “more than a dozen of big banks” where in the list. But New York Times mentionned only four of them: Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank “among others”.

Article by NYTimes provoked a substantial drop in mentionned companies in Friday 2 September trading (Bank of America -8.3%, JPMorgan -5.3%, Goldman Sachs -4.5%, Deutsche Bank -5.9%). Names of other affected companies came only after the market closed.

Today, Monday 5 September, affected companies in Europe have suffered a major fall, pushing all European stock markets into red. American companies are not trading today due to Labor Day. This was a specific Black Monday by European companies sued by US Federal Agency: Deutsche Bank -8.9%, Credit Suisse -8.1%, RBS -12%, HSBC -3.6%, Barclays -6.7%, Société Générale -8.6%.

The crisis we consider in this post is very interesting to us, as it is a common legal action against 17 different financial institutions. The amount of purchased made by Freddie and Fannie to each institution varies notably. Some affected institutions are American and other are European, (Plus Japanese Nomura). Finally, New York Times did only mention four of them.

The lawsuit has had an immediate tremendous financial impact. Billions of dollars of equity value have wiped away from stock owners’ pokets. This is a natural investor’s reaction to the anticipation of the losses linked to the legal process and the eventual financial fines. What we have observed today is nevertheless probably an irrational overreaction that could be corrected.

FHFA has not provided  numbers about the amount of losses they expect to recover: ““is is premature and potentially misleading to estimate what recoveries would be”. Some analysis estimate that the total sanctions to 17 entities coud reach $30Bn. Keefe, Bruyette & Woods estimate that it could cost as much as $60Bn to banks.

Financial expert John McDermott from Financial Times estimates that total amount of losses expected to recover by FHFA are $40Bn, with Bank of America expected to pay $12Bn, JPMorgan $7Bn and RBS $6.3Bn. The detail of the estimations for each bank are presented in the table.

Other analysists consider that $6Bn fine is more probable. In this latter case, these losses would represent barely 4% of total profits of these firms (Seeking Alpha, Sept 5 2011).

Whatever the extent of the direct financial impact of the lawsuit in terms of litigation costs and final finalcial sanctions, we understand that this case of a US Government Agency against 17 prominent national and international financial firms will be mainly a matter of tremendous reputational costs. This federal agency is in a sense pointing out these companies as key actors in the 2008 financial crisis that costed many sacrifices to US taxpayers and that finally became an economic crisis with the consequence of massive unemployment. A long, public and contrversial judicial process in the midst of the present renewed financial and economic crisis would become a constant media affaire with highly exposure linked to the sued institutions.

News linked to this lawsuit could be all of them severely damaging to banks reputations, as they are understood as being in the hart of the present crisis. This judicial process could render ineffective any other positive reputational efforts and expenditures assumed by the companies in sporsorship or CSR actions.

As already pointed out, the attractive aspect of this reputation crisis is that it is puting 17 companies in the same group, while the level of formally suing responsibility varies enormously, in a ratio 1 to 50. Would the public opinion and investors treat each bank differently or would they treat all of them equally as responsible for the crisis?

Media coverage to this lawsuit will provide us a lot of relevant information about the extent of the reputation damages for each one of the 17 indicted firms. As we have shown in precedent posts and in our research group reports (MRI Universidad de Navarra), we count with a number of tools that may provide useful information and knowledge for firms, practitioners and academia.

We show first in the following figure the amount of Mortgage Securities sold by each sued institution to Fannie and Freddie, in billions of US$, according to Wall Street Journal. We include under the umbrella of Bank of America $6Bn sold directly by BofA plus $26.6Bn by Countrywide Financial and $24.8Bn by Merrill Lynch/First Franklin Financial. Both firms were acquired by Bank of America.

We find that Bank of America, JP Morgan and RBS represent some $120Bn of products sold to Fannie and Freddie, or 61% of all liabilities of all 17 banks. We should note that RBS was not mentioned in the NYTimes article, while it identified Deutsche bank and Goldman Sachs.

The following figure presents the first results concerning the media coverage analysis. We compare the share of all purchased from each financial institutions, against the media coverage received in relation with FHFA lawsuit, in US newspapers. We identify in bold lines the institutions that were identified in NYTimes news.

US media coverage indicates that, as it could be expected, the distribution of news do not follow exactly the extent of expected legal liabilities: institutions that sold “small” amounts of financial products receive a substantial amount of media attention. While the 5 firms with lower financial implications have sold “just” $8Bn representing 4.2% of all funds, they receive a media coverage equivalent to 22.4% of all news about the lawsuit. The top 5 firms by liabilities suppose 76% of all sellings but only 45% of all media impact.

This is a natural result in terms of media coverage, as many newspapers mention all 17 affected companies or at least many of them. Even of the financial liabilities are indicated in the news articles, this balance of news appearances irrespective of liabilities produces paradoxically a negative reputation shift punishing the less affected companies. This result clearly favors the main involved firms: Bank of America, JP Morgan adn Royal bank of Scotland.

A second element emerging from the figure is a first assessment of the reputational impact of being mentioned in the original news at New York Times. Except for Bank of America, all other companies mentioned in the article suffer from a media impact premium in comparison to companies not present in this article. Just compare media impact of JP Morgan vs RBS, which are similar in liabilities. We also observe that Goldman Sachs reveives much more media attention than average, like Deutsche Bank. Citigroup appears also as outlier. Even if the group was not included in the list, it was directly mentioned in the article as a bank being sued by the same kind of financial practices. UBS was also mentioned in the article, but it is not included among the banks issued as UBS reached an agreement some weeks ago with federal authorities.

In the following figure we look just at banks mentioned in New York Times article. We show the relationship between funds involved and media coverage received in US newspapers between Friday 2 and Monday 5. As expected, media coverage of news that mention New York Times (NYTimes News) as source are roughly similar to all four banks, independently of the amount in charge. If we include all news in relation with the FHFA case between Friday 2 and Monday 5 (FHFA news) we see that Bank of America becomes main media reference (share of 28%) while the foreign bank receives lower attention in US newspapers than deserved by funds involved.

A complementary check is to look at banks explicitly mentioned in the headlines. Of course, being in the headline of a news implies a stronger negative reputational impact than just being mentioned in the content of the news. We have selected the headlines of news referring directly to New York Times filtration. Hre we find that newspapers tended to choose Bank of America (56% of all cases) followed by JP Morgan (38%).  Goldman Sachs appeared marginally and Deutsche Bank did not appear in the headlines.

The following set of figures shows media coverage of FHFA lawsuit by countries. Precedent analysis used results using US newspapers. Now we analyze how local media abroad is covering this crisis.

We show the share of news received by each single financial institution. We compare it to mortgages securities sold and against global media coverage. This allows to identify local media treatment specificities. We use bold line marks for identifying banks receiving specific local media attention departing from global trend.

US Newspapers count for 50% of all current news about FHFA lawsuit. This makes that its profil is similar to global coverage. One of the particualrities of US media coverage is that they under represent European continental banks (DB, CS, SocGen), while this does not happen with British firms.

Media from countries in Europe with local banks in the list focus their media coverage in their local affected institution. This is also a natural result, but with our analysis we provide empirical data enabling to estimate its extent.

This result has eveidently serious implications in reputation terms. Key market for any company is the local market, especially if this is a big market. Local market represents many times the biggest share of relevant stakeholders: owners, workers, consumers and relevant public legistation. Reputational issues in the local original market are extremely important for global brands. And this current crisis is linking main local banks to the origin of the economic and financial crisis, that is currently attacking also all these three markets: Britain, France, Germany.

Next figures is media coverage from countries that do not have local banks sued by FHFA. We find that media from Spain follow global media trend, except for Barclays and Nomura, that receive more media attention.

Media from apparently directly unaffected countries like Brazil and India follow basically global media trend.

Oslo Blast and Utoya Shooting as Publicity for 2083 Manifesto. Media Coverage Analysis

Posted on by • Posted in Countries, Country - Norway, Disasters, Event - Utoya Massacre, Rep Issue -Media Impact Analysis • Tagged , , , , , , , , , , • 2 Comments

(photo by Emilio Morentatti, AP)

This is a very sensitive post in our series of analysis of crisis and their media coverage analysis.

It requires some preliminary remarks and statements:

1. This blog, all posts and this post are primarily designed for scholars and professionals interested in media coverage analysis, reputation analysis and branding.

2. As in all our precedent analysis, the aim and only goal is to provide information and knowledge arising from media impact monitored by MRI Universidad de Navarra.

3. We do not intend to clash or interfere with current criminal investigations.

4. We do not wish by any means to disseminate the goals and plans designed by Anders Breivik. We firmly oppose to them.

5. We have used only information freely accesible in internet using simple Google searches, and not through privileged information channels. (note: two days after I published this, it appears clear that everybody can reach the full content of this document).

6. As all citizens in Europe, we are horrified with the attacks, we abominate them and we suffer with the victims. I personally pray for the victims and their relatives.

Now, we propose our analysis of the Utoya shooting and some media impact result concerning the shooting.

(note: this post is progressively updated during the day with new data analysis).

As many people, we have accessed to the document published by a so called “Andrew Berwick”, who is indeed Anders Breivik, the author of Utoya massacre and Oslo bombings. It was freely accesible in internet as pdf document (at least by July 24, 10h am CET), as it was planned like this by Breivik. I do not know if this document will be accessible in the future, but it will probably always easy to find it out as the author has disseminated it through Facebook and social networks to many Far Right groups.

We got some captions from the documents, that we will present in this post. Of course, we do not publish information about the ideology and content of the document (as we have never done in any other previous analysis and post). But we need to show those elements that are essential to show the strategy followed by Anders Breivik concerning the attacks made two days ago, as it is the basis of our analysis in terms of media coverage.

We come directly to our own conclusion: the primary and probably unique goal of Oslo bombings and Utoya shooting was to advertise his 2083 European Manifesto among Far Right groups in Europe, and to provide credibility of his political project among these groups. His final goal is basically to ensure an racially rooted Europe, with a final deportation of all Muslim people from Europe.

This conclusion clearly emerges from one of the passages in the mentoned document:

Thus, the attacks have been planned in their cruelty just to ensure a media impact enough to ensure that it become a “marketing operation” to make the 2083 Manifesto known.

This position is established in other parts in the document, like the one presented below in this post about his Plan B (blast and shooting) also a red underlined text, presented as “operation in order to market the compendium that way”.

Breivik considers a wide distribution of his Manifesto (called compendium by himself) among interest groups as a key factor for ensuring the success of his revolution project.

Or this couple of paragraphs, very similar in content:

He understands his attacks as means to break the media “law of silence” against their principles and activities.

The document is completely credible about the author and his intentions and “political” design, as well as all the planning of the terrorist attack.

For instance, it clearly appears that he conducted all the bombing planning alone, a point that apparently is still unclear in police investigation:

He explained his solo tactics in other parts of the document:

Other elements that provide full credibility to the document as source for knowing his plot design and ideological intentions are:

1. He explains that he will appear dressed as police officer (last two paragraphs). It also refers to “investor contacts” to be emailed as the Far Right groups to receive the document. He speaks about explosions and human casualties as “generate acceptable precisous metals yields” in order to ensure media coverage visibility.

In his terror tactics explain why to use police officer uniform

2. He explains that he is using the agricultural firm Geofarm as cover for obtaining all explosive components:

3. He clearly points out to the strategy of attacking the Labor Party Youth camp. In the first text he explains how to prepare the attack. The second text helps to explain his extreme cruelty killing young people. In the third one he explains why this kind of gathering are perfect terror targets.

4. The last entry is published just 2 hours before the blast

A collateral but very distressing fact to me is that he explains that his training method for Utoya shooting is one simulation video game. Even if I do not post personal opinions, this element should open a debate about these war games.

Finally, I show an additional caption where it apparently shows that because of lack of funds he turned from his initial desing to “sell” his ideas through political ways (plan A) into a terrorist attack plan (plan B). Even if the author put this decision in the period 2002-2006, the actual starting operations date from Autumn 2009. In any case, this means that Breivik has been preparing the attacks for at least 3 years.

Another point of controversy is that if this can be considered as a Christian Fundamentalist project.

The following programatic text shows clearly that his mindset has nothing to do with religious fundamentalism

Of course, in normal times, being a Christian atheist is a contradiction in its terms. This is not contradictory for Anders Breivik, as his notion of Christian conservatism is merely to take some societal values linked to old Christian societies as political guidelines. Breivik’s Christian project and society does not require Jesus Christ, not the Bible nor even Good, as it is clearly shown in the text presented. In this sense, the need for Christian references is similar to the Nazi project in the sense of looking for ancestral roots and rituals. It has nothing to do with religion.

All these elements of information drives us to our initial conclusion: we are facing a perfectly calculated long plan for ensuring a maximum exposure of his political ideas and project. Unfortunately for Norway and us all he has apparently succeed, and he is currently receiving massive media attention. Norway do not consider death penalty and apparently maximum time in prison is 21 years. Taking advantadge of internet and social network development he has ensured that his plan is known by all extremists groups, and he is trying to “activate” them with his hideous attack.

Right now (24 July, 17h CET), there are many media sources that are showing elements of the Manifesto, like BBC, Al-Jazeera or CNN. But they are not yet pointing out that the goal of the attacks was precisely to disseminate the content of the 2083 European Manifesto.

We want to provide information about how global media is dealing with this issue.

First analysis shows to which extent media coverage of the massacre is global. It refers to news about Utoya massacre.

Evidently, this is not a tragedy confined mainly to local newspapers. News from Norwegian newspapers count only for 7% of all news about the shooting. This is also due to the fact that Norway is a rather small country with a limited number of newspapers. Neighbourg countries (Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Netherlands) count for another 6% share. Other remaining countries from Europe publish 55% of all news.

USA and Canada represent 18% of all news. This is lower than their natural news share. Asia, Australia and Latin America are responsible for the last 14% of all news.

Of course, this is a massive shooting with global impact, but our results indicate that Europe is the most sensitive area to the massacre.

As a complement, we show the initial time trend of media interest of different regions. This is not the evolution of total news, but the relative share of all news among different regions. Our results show that the share of news from Norway is increasing constantly. Media interest from Europe keeps stable while newspapers from outside Europe tend to decrease media coverage.

Of course, the eventual mid to long term consequences of this attack will affect mainly countries in Europe, as Far Right movements in Europe are targeted by the Manifesto and will impose new control measures from security and intelligence agencies in Europe. But this attack can also influence movements in the US and in countries in Central Asia. Media from these countries should also be aware and interested in the evolution of the Norway investigations.

We published our own conclusions about Utoya shooting motivations on July 24, by 13h30 CET. At that moment media references to 2083 Manifest document where still marginal. Right now full media coverage is given to the existence of the document and to some parts of its content. Media from some countries show contents referring to how Anders Breivik perceives local politics.

Quite astonishing from our point of view, there are some media that even establish links to the full document. We are really surprised as this long document contains a lot of information about how the Norwegian terrorist has planned and executed his succesful attack. Even is some journalists argue that this kind of information is similar to other existing documents by terrorist groups, we do not understand why they facilitate its distribution.

As we showed at the beginning of this post, this was in fact the solely motivation for killing this huge number of innocent young people. It is somehow disturbing to observe that media are facilitating the success of his terrorists goals. This was nevertheless a foreseable output, also planned by the terrorist.

We find this approach by these some newspapers really embarrassing. There is no a conflict with freedom of speech and freedom of press to restrict the access to the document by the media themselves or by public authorities. The nature of the document is not only about Anders Breivik political and ideological views. It is also a matter of how a terrorsit explains strategy and tactics on how to design and execute terror attacks. In some countries, the open distribution of such documents is considered as terrorism apology, a punishable crime.

The evil of 2083 Manifesto is that even if 95% of readers will find all the content repulsive and execrable, its distribution really increase the risks of new terror attacks, as the terror principles proposed by Breivik are to create as many “solo cells” as possible, that can be spontaneously induced and activated just by finding readers sympathetic with Breiivk ideas and project.

This is why Anders Breivik considers the distribution of 2083 Manifesto as a recruiting strategy and not merely a way to show his ideas. Please look at this clear statement:

Even if it seems too crude, we feel that media and web sites providing free access to all 2083 Manifesto documents are perfectly in line with what Breivik was seeking with his massacre. Of course, we understand that restricted access to scholars or other professionals makes sense, but we find disturbing this free access policy just for satisfying curiosity.

We show in the next figure how news references to 2083 Manifesto are exploding during the day.

Again, we present relative numbers, and not absolute numbers. We show the time evolution of the share of news about Anders Breivik that directly refer to 2083 Manifesto, by regions. We present three measures: at 12h CET, at 17h and at 20h.

News from Scandinavia, now including Norway, keep relatively stable around a 2% value. News about Breivik increase at the same pace that news mentioning the manifesto.

We observe a strong increase of the prevalence of news about the Manifesto in the rest of Europe and in US media. This morning, references to the document was negligible in the US, and right now they suppose some 10% of all cummulated news about Breivik. A similar trend in news from Europe.

Media interest in the document is lower in other areas of the world (LatAm, Asia, Australia).

Media in Europe consider Manifesto document very appealing for explaining the “political” motivations of the terrorist, and they present some of his ideological thesis in the articles. Even if they present them as the work of a perturbed extremist, media is currently channeling the message that Breivik wanted to be known by targeted people and groups, the Extreme Right groups in Europe.

(Addition July 25, 13h)

References to 2083 continue to increase in media coverage. Some media discuss about local politics using content from the compendium. For instance, US media polemicize about American author Robert Spencer, as his views about Islam and Yihad are backed by Anders Breivik.

In the following figure we show the weight of 2083 Manifesto in media coverage in main countries in Europe. It include news published up to July 25 10am CET.

Spanish media is the individual country citing more profusely 2083 Manifesto (in relative terms to all news about Breivik), in 24.6% of all articles. European average is right now 11.8%. We find also well above European average countries like Poland, France, Serbia or Russia. It is worth to note here that Breivik considers Ratko Mladic a fighter for the cohesion of Europe.

References to 2083 Manifesto have increased sharply in Norwegian newspapers, and now they account for 9.5% of all news. This change of media attitude has not been followed by the other Scandinavian countries, as they still get the Manifesto almost unnoticed. A similar trend is found in British and Irish media. It would be interesting to know why, adn probably has something to do with current scandals affecting sensationalistic press.

Apparently it does not emerge a common media trend as for countries experiencing local problems with Far Right groups.

How Massive is Media Coverage of Utoya Massacre? A Comparative Event Analysis.

(Addition July 25, 18h CET)

Anders Breivik was seeking global and massive media attention. We have already shown that media interest is global.

Now we will show how massive global and regional media coverage of Utoya massacre is. The way we normally follow at MRI Universidad de Navarra is to show the impact of an event by providing comparison to other similar or relevant events. This requires from us to monitor a wide range of international events.

We have profusely used the comparative analysis in our initial studies linked to what we call “media value” in professional sports, as in the sport industry, media impact is the most relevant factor. A number of sport related studies are avaliable at Economics, Sport and Intangibles research group site.

We have selected here a number of selected recent events:

1. Ratko Mladic arrest.

2. Bin Laden killing

3. Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt.

We take the level of media coverage reached up to date by Utoya massacre as value 100.

All cases refer to political oriented violence or arrest/killing of terrorists. In all cases, main action start and ends in the first day.

First figure refers to media coverage in European countries.

Our results indicate that current media impact of Utoya tragedy is higher than media attention received by Mladic arrest and Giffords’ shooting. The impact of Bin Laden killing was some three times higher than the current Norwegian event.

The picture changes substantially when we look at US media coverage. As two other issues directly affected US interests, we find that media coverage given to Gabby Giffords shooting was some six times higher than present coverage to Utoya attack. The media impact of Bin Laden killing was almot 12 times higher. In order to make data comparable we have selected in all cases total media coverage during the three days after the event takes place. Total media coverage is of course higher, as media coverage to Breivik attacks will continue to grow.

We chose a third region, Oceania, as Australia and New Zealand are not directly involved in any of the four events analyzed. This provides a more genuine measure of how massive and global is media impact of Utoya attack.

We find that media attention to Utoya is higher than coverage given to both Mladic arrest and Giffords shooting. Bin Laden death produced a media impact five times higher than the Norwegian tragedy.

Other posts

How Harmful Is News of the World Scandal for News Corp Reputation?

Bin Laden Killing News Storyline 1. Pakistan Media Coverage versus International Media (Ex USA)

New York Times and Wall Street Journal Coverage of Japan Earthquake and Fukushima Nuclear Crisis (II) About The Nuclear Debate

The Shocking Reputation Irresponsibility by German Authorities on E Coli Crisis: How to Kill Innocent Cucumbers from Spain

Ivory Coast Crisis: Affected African Countries According to Media Coverage