Page 187 - Communication and Citizenship Journalism and the Public Sphere

176 COMMUNICATION AND CITIZENSHIP

methodology of the two studies. While in-depth work is a necessary
complement to quantitative surveys, it is suggested below that current
research based on schema theory, while relevant, tends to reduce the
complexity of political understanding. For contrast, we point to the
active role of political subjects in reconstructing and making sense of
political information.
Second, in the discussion of findings, it is suggested that the
characteristics of political information-processing in the two countries
have implications for the definition of politics and of political
participation and efficacy. The public’s access to, use and understanding
of information have traditionally been seen as constitutive elements of a
public sphere. In comparing and contrasting the conceptualizations of
political issues in the two settings, the discussion identifies differences
between political cultures and considers changes for the organization of
political communication in each country.

METHODOLOGIES

The American case

The American study was conducted in November 1987, and consisted
of loosely structured, in-depth interviews about four political issues: the
Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), apartheid in South Africa, drug abuse
and Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) (Crigler et al.
1988). Twenty-eight people participated in the interviews: eleven men
and seventeen women. All were white and ranged in age from 18 to 75.
The interviews focused on the interviewee’s general understanding
of, opinions about, sources of information for and interest in the four
issues. The oral interviews were conducted with the intention of
‘empowering the respondent’ (Mishler 1986). Each interviewer had six
general questions to stimulate discussion and was instructed to probe
and follow up on ideas mentioned by the interviewee. The interviewers
sought to make the respondents feel as comfortable as possible by
conducting the interviews in a living-room setting, by offering
refreshments and by opening conversation on non-study related topics.
The interviews, which lasted from one to two hours, were tape-recorded
so that distracting note-taking was avoided. Upon completion, the
interviews were transcribed to aid in the analysis. As the richness of this
method lies, to a great extent, in the respondents’ own words, the analysis
entailed reading for themes that emerged from the data, rather than