These reports reflect the conceptual foundations of this study, where we assume the type of international relations (1. confrontation, 2. cooperation, 3. Dependency, and 4. independence) shapes the political discourse toward the 2024 U.S. presidential election. The same assumption applies to the type of “newspaper-political parallelism,” which also classifies media-political parallelism into four types (1. high parallelism, where newspaper strongly aligned with the state and advocate its ideology 2. low parallelism, where a newspaper reflects balanced or mixed alignment with different entities including the state, opposition parties and other political bodies 3. No parallelism, where a newspaper serves against the official ideology of the state and advocate opposition parties and/ or other political bodies and, 4. Independent/neutral media performance, in which a newspaper is not aligned to either the state, opposition parties other political/ideological bodies. It is politically apathetic/passive and prioritizes presenting a neutral or independent discourse. For indicators measuring the four-point scale, please review the training manual and the codebook.

No, these “four-point scales” though rooted in the existing literature of both the intersection of international relations and international communication in one hand, and media and politics on the other, they are developed by the founder of the project and its LPI to measure the two independent variables. They have not been applied before, making this project conceptually unprecedented.

They must be submitted and approved by the advisory Board and a specialized committee before the pilot study begins.

No. because the reports identify the two main independent variables that predict the type of political discourse presented by the newspaper(s) you analyze.

Please see the attached conceptual notes developed by the LPI and reviewed by a specialized committee. The current submitted reports are well – written, however, they lack standardization in structure,

documentation, format, length, and depth in addition to the personals details. Accordingly, teams that have already submitted their reports are kindly requested to revise and resubmit their original reports.

As part of comparative international research, standardization is necessary, comparability is anchored on standardization. In addition, you and your colleagues will rely on these reports to write the methodology, literature review, and findings’ discussion sections in upcoming publications.

While the specialized committee and the AB will review the reports jointly, the ultimate responsibility lies with the Principal Investigator and co-authors. Once uploaded to the project’s website, these reports will serve as an independent authenticated source of information for scholars worldwide.

Media-political parallelism is structurally rooted in macro-level factors such as level of press freedom and independence of news media, the nature of the political system and its leniency to authoritarianism or democracy. It is also assessed through key attributes of the news media, such as editorial policies, journalistic practices, and professionalism (mezzo level). Additionally, journalists’ autonomy and their perceptions of political influence and pressure (micro level) play a crucial role in identifying the extent of media-political parallelism within the participating state. As a scholar and expert, you are the only one qualified to write this report, classifying the degree of alignment between the newspaper(s) you have selected and the state. As such, you may need to review some relevant literature and consult some experienced scholars and journalists before finalizing the report.

Without this contrast, testing the hypothesis would not be possible.

In such cases, it is important to select two newspapers that are not similar or identical, even if they all fall within the alignment or non-alignment spectrum with the state. This will help capture a range of discourses

and provide a more comprehensive analysis. The variation could be attributed to non-political factors, such as the level of professionalism or popularity versus quality of content among others.

No. once you select the relevant type from the “four-point scale”, it should remain consistent throughout the analysis period; even if some newspaper content does not fully align with the chosen type and even certain political policies contradict the dominant form of selected international relations. This is normal.

International relations often involve a mix of types across economic, political, cultural, military, and diplomatic dimensions. However, there is usually one dominant type that best represents the mainstream determining the political discourse of the newspaper(s) under investigation. While you should document this complexity in your report, you must ultimately conclude by selecting only one type out of the “four- point scale”. The type plays a greater role in shaping the political discourse on the U.S. presidential election.

The pilot study is a prerequisite step in any content analysis to ensure the reliability of the codebook. In this study, two independent coders have to analyze all journalistic content over a seven-day period, from September 1 to September 7, 2024. To confirm reliability, their coding must achieve an agreement level of at least 85%. Given that the study involves two newspapers, each coder will analyze the content of the two newspapers independently, without collaboration.

No, the pilot study is not a waste of time. If the minimum level of agreement is met, this phase will not be repeated. However, if the agreement criterion is not met, additional training between the two coders will be necessary before repeating the pilot study until reliability is achieved.

Dr. Abdel-Salam G. Abdel-Salam, Associate Professor of Statistics at Qatar University, and member of AB and his colleague, Mr. Nader Mohamed, the Managing Director, will manage the process. Your task is to analyze all election-related content using the provided Google Form, submitting each piece individually. Dr. Abdel-Salam and Mr. Nader will transfer the entries into SPSS, examine the reliability, and inform you of the test result.

No, only the quantitative analysis will undergo the reliability test.

Analyzing evidences attached to eight categories of the codebook ensure that CDA results are grounded in the textual analysis, not in the personal intuitions, which help in increasing agreement among different analysts.

Aggregating them would not help in measuring the influential sources of news and opinions that shape the agenda and discourse of local newspapers. It would also fail to assess the relative weight of any news source be it international or local in this process.

Broader categories would undergo the risk of reductionism that lead to overlooking the variety of issues discussed. It also fails to discriminate the emphasis given to specific issues by specific newspapers at specific states at specific times. Furthermore, subjectivity is more likely to arise when dealing with broader issues than with more narrowly defined ones and thus less reliability is likely exist with broader categories than with specific ones.

Adding a fifth option, “multidimensional,” would create a broad, catch-all category that risks being too vague for meaningful analysis. This addition would compromise the scale’s ability to differentiate effectively, leading to a non-discriminating measurement. Moreover, many analysts may choose this option, ultimately weakening the analytical depth and precision of the results.

Done

This point was intensively discussed during the first session, where a vote was conducted and the majority supported the proposed option. In the second session, the majority opposed adding “both,” preferring to keep the sequence unchanged. However, the analysis of “reactive” and “proactive” discourse for opinionated content will be conducted in all cases, regardless of whether “both” is included in this filter question. To simplify the process, I have decided to add “both,” which requires rephrasing filter question 17 and removing filter question 25, as reflected in the updated copy.

It is imperative to distinguish between political discourse that originates outside the state and is merely republished by the local newspaper versus discourse that is developed and published by the local newspaper itself. Please refer to the “training manual” for a more in-depth analysis of how reactive discourse differs from proactive discourse. By linking both types of discourse to variations in international relations and political parallelism, we can generate a spectrum of data analysis that contributes to theory building, offering new insights into the interplay of constructs and variables that have not been systematically examined in the existing literature.

Nationalism has various meanings, some of which relate to the construction of national identity and its perceived superiority over other nations to foster national pride. However, CDA studies primarily focus on the negative aspects of nationalism, particularly when it is used to justify domination, unequal power relations, and social or political inequality. Please consider both perspectives.

Done.

Done.

Done

Done

Done

It has been included under the issue labeled “Between-nation conflicts, including border disputes,” as there are various border conflicts worldwide.

Done

CDA be it reactive or proactive cannot properly done without evidences. They reflect underlying ideological structures, power relations, and discursive strategies. Meanwhile, evidences as previously mentioned ensure that the CDA is grounded on text analysis rather than personal intuition.

Two paragraphs ranges from 350 to 450 words.

This is normal; what is considered abnormal is deviating from the core or central idea of the journalistic content.

A fourth training session will take place after the submission of the two reports if needed.

Done

Adding more teams would enrich the cross-national comparative dimensions. All new teams will undergo similar training sessions ensuring understanding of the entire project and codebook. The current teams are attached to avoid inviting additional teams from the same countries.