Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- We Interrupt This Newscast
- 1 A Prologue: What This Book Is For
- 2 The Knowledge Base
- 3 “I-Teams” and “Eye Candy”: The Reality of Local TV News
- 4 The Myths That Dominate Local TV News: The X-Structure and the Fallacy of the Hook-and-Hold Method of TV News
- 5 The Magic Formula: How to Make TV That Viewers Will Watch
- 6 Steps to Better Coverage
- 7 Putting It All into Action: Techniques for Changing Newsroom Cultures
- 8 The Road Ahead: The Future of Local TV News
- Appendix A Design Team Members
- Appendix B Quality Grading Criteria and Value Codes
- Appendix C Content Analysis Intercoder Reliability Analyses
- Appendix D Sample of Local TV News Stations
- Appendix E 2005 Follow-up Study
- Notes
- References
- Index
Appendix C - Content Analysis Intercoder Reliability Analyses
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- We Interrupt This Newscast
- 1 A Prologue: What This Book Is For
- 2 The Knowledge Base
- 3 “I-Teams” and “Eye Candy”: The Reality of Local TV News
- 4 The Myths That Dominate Local TV News: The X-Structure and the Fallacy of the Hook-and-Hold Method of TV News
- 5 The Magic Formula: How to Make TV That Viewers Will Watch
- 6 Steps to Better Coverage
- 7 Putting It All into Action: Techniques for Changing Newsroom Cultures
- 8 The Road Ahead: The Future of Local TV News
- Appendix A Design Team Members
- Appendix B Quality Grading Criteria and Value Codes
- Appendix C Content Analysis Intercoder Reliability Analyses
- Appendix D Sample of Local TV News Stations
- Appendix E 2005 Follow-up Study
- Notes
- References
- Index
Summary
1998. One coder was designated as the control coder and worked off-site for the duration of the project. At the completion of the general coding process, the three on-site coders, working alone and without access to the control coder's work, recoded one-sixth of the broadcasts completed by the control coder. Daily scores were found to be reliable within ±0.79 points per day, as per the comparative daily broadcast scores.
1999. For this project, the principal coding team comprised six people, who were trained as a group. One coder was designated as the control coder and worked off-site for the duration of the project. At the completion of the general coding process, the on-site coders, working alone and without access to the control coder's work, recoded 40% of the broadcasts completed by the control coder. Daily scores were found to be reliable within ±0.59 points per day, as per the comparative daily broadcast scores of general coders versus the control coder.
2000. For this project, the principal coding team comprised four individuals, who were trained as a group. One coder was designated as the control coder and worked off-site for the duration of the project. At the completion of the general coding process, the on-site coders, working alone and without access to the control coder's work, recoded 40% of the broadcasts completed by the control coder.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- We Interrupt This NewscastHow to Improve Local News and Win Ratings, Too, pp. 196 - 197Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007