The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings
Abstract
Over 30 years, a large body of research on what is often called ‘hard’ and ‘soft news’ has accumulated in communication studies. However, there is no consensus about what hard and soft news exactly is, or how it should be defined or measured. Moreover, the concept has not been clearly differentiated from or systematically related to concepts addressing very similar phenomena – tabloidization and ‘infotainment’. Consequently, the results of various studies are hard to compare and different scientific discourses on related issues remain unconnected. Against this backdrop, this article offers a conceptual analysis of the concept based on studies in English and other languages. We identify key dimensions of the concept and make suggestions for a standardized definition and multi-dimensional measurement of harder and softer news. In doing so, we propose to distinguish thematic, focus and style features as basic dimensions that – in their combination – make up harder and softer types of news.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Political communication in a high-choice media environment: a challenge for democracy?
Van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., de Vreese, C., Matthes, J., Hopmann, D., Salgado, S., Hubé, N., Stępińska, A., et al. (2017) · Annals of the International Communication Association · doi:10.1080/23808985.2017.1288551 · Cited by 974
Self-citationShifting the refugee narrative? An automated frame analysis of Europe’s 2015 refugee crisis
Greussing, E., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2017) · Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies · doi:10.1080/1369183x.2017.1282813 · Cited by 464
Misleading Online Content: Recognizing Clickbait as "False News"
Chen, Y., Conroy, N. J., & Rubin, V. L. (2015) · Proceedings of the 2015 ACM on Workshop on Multimodal Deception Detection · doi:10.1145/2823465.2823467 · Cited by 432
Broersma, M., & Graham, T. (2013) · Journalism Practice · doi:10.1080/17512786.2013.802481 · Cited by 311
Routledge Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology
(2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203483794 · Cited by 269
Metadata
- Authors
- Reinemann, C., Stanyer, J., Scherr, S., & Legnante, G.
- Venue
- Journalism
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-11-11
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 221-239
- ISSN
- 1464-8849 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-3001
- OpenAlex
- W2108603469
- Cited by
- 536
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 41.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1464884911427803
- The paper
- Reinemann, C., Stanyer, J., Scherr, S., & Legnante, G. (2012). Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427803
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
