Journalism & Mass

Communication
Quarterly
http://jmq.sagepub.com/

Agenda Setting and Agenda Melding in an Age of Horizontal and Vertical

Media: A New Theoretical Lens for Virtual Brand Communities
Matthew W. Ragas and Marilyn S. Roberts
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 2009 86: 45
DOI: 10.1177/107769900908600104
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://jmq.sagepub.com/content/86/1/45

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Education in Journalism & Mass Communication

Additional services and information for Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly can be found
at:
Email Alerts: http://jmq.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions: http://jmq.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Mar 1, 2009

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

What is This?

AGENDA
SETTINGAND AGENDA
MELDING
IN A N AGEOF HORIZONTAL
AND VERTICAL
MEDIA:
A NEWTHEORETICAL
LENS
FOR VIRTUAL
BRANDCOMMUNITIES
By Matthew W. Ragas and Marilyn S . Roberts
This study tests agenda-setting the0y and the agenda-rnelding hypothesis in the context of brand actors and virtual brand communities. The
aggregate attribute agendas of brand-controlled communications, news
media content, and a virtual brand community are analyzed. The results
indicate a positive relationship between the brand agenda and brand
community agenda, and an unexpected negative relationship between the
media agenda and brand community agenda. In terms of agenda melding, the data indicate that the brand community, when divided by various demographic measures into subgroups, reflects attribute agendas
that remain similar to the aggregate brand community agenda.
The widespread adoption of personalized time-shifting devices,
like the iPod and TiVo, and the explosion of new media choices threaten
to turn the mass communication industry on its head. These technological tectonic shifts result in the further splintering and decline of
audiences in the once dominant vertical media, namely daily newspapers, broadcast television, and terrestrial radio. The erosion of audiences attentive to vertical media, basically free or nominally priced
media that attempt to address the entire public in a top-down fashion,
has resulted in scholars and practitioners investing more time in evaluating the fast-growing, but more complex, horizontal media.2These
premium-priced media, such as cable networks and satellite radio, are
generally geared toward serving the needs of more specialized interest
groups.
At the intersection of vertical and horizontal media, a new class of
media, called virtual brand communities, has emerged. Thanks to their
location on the Web, these communities are generally globally accessible
and often free like vertical media, but, like horizontal media, these communities serve specialized interest groups. These communities are
sprouting up at a time when there are signs that the public finds tradiMatthew W. Ragas is a Ph.D. student in the College of Iournalism and Communications
at the University of Florida, and Marilyn S. Roberts is dean and professor in the College
of Communication and Media Sciences at Zayed University, United Arab Emirates.

AGENDA
SETTING A N D AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

J&MC ~ ~ ~ , . t ~ i ~
vol. 86,No. I
Spring 2009
45-64
02009 AEJMC

45

tional brand-controlled communications to be di~ruptive.~

Therefore, in a
world in which brands create value by engaging in dialogues with their
customers, rather than monologues, these communities are growing in
importance.
Viewed under this context, a new theoretical lens for evaluating the
interplay or intermedia influence among brands, brand communities, and
the horizontal and vertical media seems warranted. Instead of engaging
in theory building from scratch, the researchers believe an effective lens
for evaluating the future may come from revisiting past knowledge and
seeing how it may be applied in new ways. This logic points to the timetested mass communications theory of agenda setting and its conceptual
offspring, the agenda-melding hypothesis.
Agenda Melding. Over the past four decades, since the publication
of the seminal Chapel Hill study4the agenda-setting tradition has broadened consistently its scope and ~ O C U S However,
.~
agenda settings theoretical core has remained consistent: the transfer of salience from one agenda to another.jAgenda melding represents a relatively recent addition to
the literature. Agenda melding focuses on the personal agendas of individuals vis-B-vis their community and group affiliation^."^ The agendamelding hypothesis posits when individuals join groups, they meld
their individual agendas with the agendas of the group.8 Groups and
communities represent a collected agenda of issues and one joins a
group by adopting an agenda.9While agenda melding marks a departure from traditional agenda setting, the transfer of salience remains at its
theoretical core and provides parsimony.O
Agenda-setting research has traditionally focused on what the public
learnsfrom the media. Shaw et al. view first-level (objects or issues) and
second-level (attributes) agenda setting as part of a larger and ongoing
social learning process called agenda melding. In a desire to avoid social
dissonance and isolation, individuals feel a need to join groups. They satisfy this need for orientation through media of connections and, ultimately, in a drive to belong, they learn and adopt the agenda of the
group.I2Shaw and his colleague^'^ define groups as collectionsof people
based on some shared values, attitudes, or opinions that individuals join.
Purpose of Study. While agenda melding is provocative, there has
been to date only limited empirical testing of this hypothesis. The goal of
this exploratory study is to evaluate some of the assumptions put forth by
the initial agenda-melding 1iterat~re.l~
Specifically, this study explores the
transfer of brand attribute saliency among an aggregate media agenda,
aggregate brand agenda, aggregate brand community agenda, and its
subgroups. Chipotle Mexican Grill, a fast growing U.S.-based restaurant
chain with a cult-likefollowing, is the brand that will be used to explore
these relationship^.'^ The Wall Street Journal has called Chipotle
arguably.. .the countrys most successful fast-food chain in recent
years.16

Literature
Review
46

Theoretical Underpinnings of Agenda Melding. In addition to

drawing from the agenda-setting literature, specifically Weavers workI7
on the contingent condition of need for orientation, agenda melding
JOURNALISM

6 MASSC O M M U N l C A T r O N QUARTERLY

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

draws upon several other established social science perspectives. These

sources include Festingers theory of cognitive dissonance,18Maslows
hierarchy of needs,19 Noelle-Neumanns spiral of silence,2oand Chaffee
and McDevitts disequilibration hypothesis.21
Shaw et aLZ2describe agenda melding as a theory of social dissonance in reference to Festinger~~~
theory of cognitive dissonance in
which individuals seek out information that supports their views and
avoid information that conflicts with their views. In a related vein,
Maslows hierarchy of needs positions family and group affiliation as
one of an individuals basic needs after food and safety needs had been
fulfilled. Similarly, Noelle-Neumanns spiral of silence argues that people so strongly want to be part of a group, and seek to avoid isolation,
that they will either adopt the views of the dominant group or they will
fall silent. Finally, Chaffee and M~Devitts~~
disequilibration hypothesis
states that individuals will attempt to avoid information that could
greatly alter their views and place them in a state of dissonance.
Weaver and other agenda-setting scholars work on need for orientation explains why individuals are more interested in certain issues
than others, depending on the level of uncertainty and perceived interest in the issue to them. Need for orientation is based on the psychological assumption that individuals who are in an unfamiliar situation will
be uncomfortable until they orient themselves.26Generally, the greater
an individuals need for orientation on an issue, the more likely the individual is to learn the media agenda on the issue.27
Demassification, Fragmentation, and Agenda Melding. Shaw and
his colleaguesargue that evolution of media and technology creates a more
fertile environment for the melding of a wider range of group and individual
While traditionally groups were formed around general
topics and geographically bound, new media encourage the formation of
specialized communities that are non-geographicallyb o ~ n d . 2 ~
As evidence of the decline in the importance of broad, geographically-based groups, Putnam30has documented the declining participation in local community groups, such as bowling leagues. Declining
membership rolls also can be found in geographically-oriented civic
groups.31At the same time, recent decades have witnessed the rise of
specialized, non-geographically based groups formed around brands.
Examples of these brand communities include Harley Owner Groups
(HOG), Mac User Groups (MUGS),and European car
Political Candidates as Brands in Agenda Setting. Stern33notes
that scholars have applied a variety of definitions to the concept of
brand. These varied definitions can result in semantic confusion. For
the purposes of this study, brand is defined as what resides in the minds
of individuals about a product or a service.34This definition demonstrates congruency with the idea of the pictures in our heads asserted
by Walter Lippmann, the intellectual father of agenda setting.35
Similarly, the seminal marketing concept of positioning focuses on
how marketers use communication to position the product in the mind
of the prospect. This process involves increasing the saliency of particular brand attribute^.^^
AGENDA
SETTINGAND AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

While previous studies have focused on the role of political advertisements in agenda setting,37the study of the agenda-setting effect of
brand-controlled communications has largely been absent from the literature. M c C o m b ~noted
~ ~ that the object or issue agendas in agenda setting
need not be only public agendas or media agendas. The objects could be
a set of political candidates, competing brands of consumer goods, or
whatever.
Building on this logic, brands may not be new to agenda setting
after all. Competing candidates in a political campaign may be thought of
not only as objects, but as competing brands in the marketplace. Candidates
are judged on votes and brands generally on sales, but both candidates
and brands attempt to set agendas and make particular issues and attributes more salient to their customers or voters. Starting with the original
agenda-setting study of undecided voters during the 1968 U.S. presidential election,39there is a history in this research tradition of exploring the
transfer of salience among agendas during campaigns. If candidates are
viewed as brands, then brands have indeed been part of agenda setting
since day one.
Looking beyond agenda-setting research, the idea of treating political candidates and groups as brands has recently received scholarly attention. Garrett and Smith40have studied how ideological groups, such as the
National Rifle Association and the Sierra Club, attempt to create a distinctive brand name in the minds of potential members. Scamme1141
focused on the role of branding in politics, specificallythe rebranding
of Tony Blair in the 2005 U.K. General Election. Finally, P a s ~ t tprovided
i~~
the following perspective on brands as candidates: The classical ideological voter is like a consumer with a long-term commitment to an established brand, which therefore must only reinforce its unique identity with
the voter.
Brand Community and Agenda Setting. Muniz and O G ~ i n nde~~
fine the concept of brand community as a specialized, non-geographically bound community based on a structured set of social relations among
admirers of a brand. The initial brand community research centered on
three brand communities (Ford Bronco, Apple Macintosh, and Saab) in
which Muniz and O G ~ i n n
found
~ ~ that brand consumption could bring
individuals together to form a consciousness of kind. McAlexander,
Schouten and Koenig5 similarly define brand community as a social
aggregation of brand users and their relationships to the brand itself as a
repository of meaning.
While the concept of brand community is new to the agenda-setting
literature, the concept of community and the study of community public
opinion has long been a subject of the tradition. Tracing back to 1981,46
the public agenda in agenda-setting research has been described as the
perceived community agenda. Agenda-setting literature is filled with discussions of community issues and agendas47and the consensus-building
role of the media. However, community has traditionally been defined as
a geographically-based construct, while a virtual brand community is
non-geographically based and forms around a brand, not a particular
place.

48

JOURNALISM

6. MASSCOMMUNICATION QUARTERLY

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

About Chipotle Mexican Grill. Founded in 1993by entrepreneur

Steve Ells in a cramped 850-square-foot space near the University of
Denver campus,8Chipotle Mexican Grill has grown rapidly into the
third-highest-grossing fast-casual chain in the United States.49As of
year-end 2007, Chipotle operated over 700 restaurants in thirty-three
states and the District of Columbia.5O It has increased its annual samestore sales, a measure of the health of a retail business, at a double digit
rate for almost a decade.51Chipotles winning formula is an affordable
and focused menu of tacos, burritos, and salads using fresh ingredients
and classic cooking methods served in an enjoyable a t m ~ s p h e r e . ~ ~
Since 2002, Chipotle has operated under a strategy it calls Food
With Integrity which focuses on using ingredients that are grown or
raised with respect for the environment, animals and people who grow
or raise the food.53Chipotle today serves more naturally raised meat
than any other restaurant company in the
This Food with
Integrity mantra remains at the core of Chipotles communications
In 2006, Chipotle ranked as a top-forty brand on Interbrands
2006 Readers Choice poll in the category of US. and Canadian brands.
This poll measures brand impact as determined by its voters.56
Hypotheses and Research Questions. Several hundred studies
have affirmed the agenda-setting hypothesis that the media can
enhance the saliency of objects in the public mind.57Therefore, the following hypothesis is submitted:
H1: The salience of brand attributes on the aggregate
media agenda would be positively associated with salience
of brand attributes on the aggregate brand community
agenda.

Agenda-setting studies have previously demonstrated an agendasetting effect among political ads, public opinion, and the
However, prior research has not explored agenda setting involving
brand actors and brand communities in a non-political setting. Therefore,
the following hypothesis is submitted:
H2: The salience of brand attributes on the aggregate
brand agenda would be positively associated with the
salience of brand attributes on the aggregate brand community agenda.
Shaw et al. argue that one joins the community by finding a
medium of connection and learning the issue saliencies of the communit^."^^ These media of connections could range from mass media to
interpersonal sources. Unlike in traditional agenda setting, Shaw et a1.6O
postulate that this connection is often other people rather than the mass
media.
According to McCombs,61at the focal point of agenda setting is
the achievement of consensus on the most salient issues by the public.
Shaw and Martin62found that increased exposure to the media among
AGENDA
SETTING

AND

AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

49

FIGURE 1
A p i d a Sctfiri<qarid AScwda Mcddiiig

&3
Brand Agenda

iri

a Brarid Corvrriunify

Aggrqate
Brand Commiinlty

Transfer of
anribrttc ralicnce

MOS1 PHOkIINENT
BRAND .qri HIBIITES

MOST IMPORTAVT
B R U " ATTRIBI'TES

Adapted from Maxwell E. McCombs, Seffirig fhc A p i t l a : Tlrc Muss Mcdin orid Public Opiriiori (Malden,
MA: Policy Press, 2006), 5.

demographic subgroups of the population resulted in increased agreement on the most salient issues across these subgroups as a whole. Shaw
et aLh' sum u p agenda melding's consensus-building aspect as "the agenda of important issues of very different people merges when those people
are exposed to a set of common issues." Does this aspect of agenda melding hold true when applied to the subgroups of a brand community?
To further explore the above assumptions as they may apply to
agenda melding in a brand community setting, the following research
questions are submitted:
RQ1: Which media of connection had the greatest perceived influence on individuals joining the brand community?
RQ2: Do the subgroups (based on demographics) of the
brand community reflect agendas that are similar to the aggregate brand community agenda?
RQ3: Do factors such as time spent as a member of the
brand community, frequency of exposure to the brand, and
frequency of telling others about the brand impact the level of
association among the subgroup agendas and the aggregate
brand agenda?

Figure 1 illustrates a hypothesized model of the possible interplay

among the aggregate brand agenda, comprised of brand-controlled communications, and the aggregate brand community agenda, comprised of
subgroup agendas "melding."

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

The researchers first content analyzed Chipotles mission and Method

value statement to determine the eight most salient brand attributes.
Next, the brand agenda was compiled by content analyzing all ads
(radio and billboard) available on the Chipotle corporate Web site for
these brand attributes, as well as all news releases issued by Chipotle
over a one-year period for these same attributes. For the media agenda,
news articles appearing in newspapers in Chipotles major geographic
markets over the same one-year period were content analyzed for these
identical attributes. Finally, the brand community agenda was determined by survey responses from the members of the ChipotleFan.com
virtual brand community. Consistent with prior research, salience was
determined by the frequency of attribute mentions in the content analyzed.
The Aggregate Brand Agenda. Chun and D a v i e ~
found
~ ~ that companies use the mission and value statements on their Web sites to position their brand in the minds of customers. According to Baetz and
Bart,65the customer is the most frequently mentioned stakeholder in
the mission statement, and one of the more important uses of a mission
statement is seen as ensuring that the interests of key external stakeholders ( e g , customers) are not ignored. Mission and value statements
are not without their criticism. Mullane noted that, like any tool, these
statements, when used incorrectly, become basically useless. M a i ~ ~ ~
provided Enron Corporations values-laden mission statement as an
example of a brand that did not practice what it preached.
An attraction to selecting Chipotle as the brand for this study is
that its most salient brand attributes have remained largely consistent
since its founding in 1993. Chipotle founder Steven Ells remains the
chief executive. Chipotles mission and value statement are contained in
two documents called Steves Vision and Manifesto. Both documents are available on Chipotles Web site. In the vocabulary of agenda
setting, these documents encapsulate the values or attributes that the
brand holds most salient.
Chipotles mission and value statement is arguably not that different from a newspaper publishing its agenda on the editorial pages.
For example, Brewer and McCombs68analyzed how a daily newspaper proposed eight community-related issues in an editorial at the
start of a year. Over the course of the year, the newspaper concentrated
its coverage on these issues. A rank-order of these issues was determined through a content analysis of the newspapers coverage of these
issues. The researchers identified a transfer of salience between the
community agenda of coverage and the ensuing local government agenda.69
Leveraging the two-step community agenda measurement framework outlined in the Brewer and McCombs study,70the aggregate brand
agenda for Chipotle was initially determined by conducting a content
analysis of the Steves Vision and Manifesto documents (see Figure
2). This analysis resulted in an unranked list of core brand attributes or
values. These attributes are as follows: convenience/ service, personalAGENDA
SETTING

AND

AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

51

FIGURE 2
Aggregate Brand Agenda Model

Aggregnte Brand Agenda

(Ranked Brand Attributes)

Mlssion & Vahe Statement

(Unranked Brand Attributes)

Advrldscments

News ~ k m e r

Brand-Controlled Communicatlons

ized order, value for money, food taste, quality /natural ingredients,
enjoyable atmosphere, social responsibility, and promotions.
Rank-order of these attributes was ascertained through a content
analysis of Chipotles ads and news releases for a year-long period ending one day before the survey started. The analyzed news releases and ads
were downloaded from the Press Releases and Ads sections,respectively, of the Chipotle Web site. The unit of analysis is each ad and news release.
A total of 40 ads (27 radio ads and 13 billboard ads) and 21 news releases
were analyzed (see Table 1).Using the same list of brand attributes, releases
and ads could be coded for the presence of multiple attributes.
The Aggregate Brand Community Agenda. The aggregate brand
community agenda was determined by an online survey. Since the brand
community agenda represents the agenda of existing Chipotle brand loyalists, the survey was conducted with members of ChipotleFan.com, the
largest, non-corporate-sponsored Chipotle fan Web site. Survey questions
were pre-tested with a small group of Chipotle loyalists. The survey was
administered over a ten-day period in February and March 2008, yielding
a total of 837 respondents. Multiple responses from the same respondent
were not allowed by the survey tool.
Agenda-setting scholars have utilized a variety of survey methods
for measuring public agenda saliency.71These methods have included
open-ended questions, such as the Gallup Polls classic Most Important
Problem (MIP) que~tion,~
as well as varying types of salience scales.73
This study used a variation of the open-ended MIP question.
Specifically, ChipotleFan.com members were surveyed for the Most
Important Reason (MIR) why they choose to dine at Chipotle.
Respondents were allowed to provide u p to three MIRs. These 1,877
open-ended responses were coded into the same attributes that comprise
the brand and media agendas.
The Aggregate Media Agenda. A preliminary search of the Dow
Jones Factiva database utilizing only elite newspapers as the sources for
comprising the media agenda resulted in only a handful of relevant arti-

52

JOURNALISM

& MASSCOMMUNICATION
QUARTERLY

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

TABLE 1
Aggregate Brand Agenda for the Chipotle Mexican Grill Brand:
Attribute Frequencies (and Ranks)
Radio Ads (Rank)

Billboard Ads (Rank) News Releases (Rank) Total (Rank)

Taste
Value
Ingredients
Atmosphere
Convenience
Social Responsibility
Personalized
Promotions
Total N

73

31

44

148

cles. A more detailed search was deemed necessary. As of year-end 2007,

Chipotle operated more than 700 restaurants in thirty-three states. As
evidenced on the Chipotle site, it clusters its locations around eightyfive geographic markets. With this in mind, each market was matched
against Editor G. Publisher's listings for the paid, daily newspapers in
these markets. After accounting for multiple newspapers in select markets, a total of 106 newspapers was identified.
Dow Jones Factiva database searches for each of these newspapers
for articles about Chipotle were conducted for a year-long period ending the day before the survey started. Ten of these newspapers were not
found in the Factiva database. Five of these ten newspapers were indentified in the Lexis /Nexis database, but searches yielded no additional
relevant articles.
These parameters produced a total of 97 articles in 36 newspapers
(see Table 3). The unit of analysis was each article. The article could be
coded for the presence of multiple attributes.
A randomly selected subsample (10%of the total) of news articles,
adslnews releases, and survey responses was analyzed by a second
coder to assess reliability. Inter-coder reliability for the articles was .96
using H ~ l s t i ' sformula
~~
and .91 using Scott's pi. Reliability for the
ads /news releases was .97 and .94 and for the survey responses was .97
and .92, respectively.
Data Analysis Strutegy. The statistical test utilized for comparing
the various agendas of attributes was Spearman's rho correlations.Since
this study is exploratory, this approach is appropriate for identifying
relationships among agendas and helping to set the stage for future
agenda-melding research. However, these correlations cannot demonstrate causality and represent only an opening gambit of evidence of
agenda-setting and agenda-melding effects involving brand actors.
The public opinion survey, representing the Chipotle brand community agenda, contained 837 respondents. Eighty-two percent were
AGENDA
S E ~ I N AND
G AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

Results
53

TABLE 2
Aggregate and Subgroup Brand Community Agendas for the Chipotle Mexican Grill Brand:
Attribute Frequencies (and Ranks)
Once Every Once Every
Oncea
SixMonths Three
orLess
Months
Month
(Rank)
(Rank)
(Rank)

Several
limesa
Month
(Rank)

Oncea
Week
(Rank)

Several
Tiesa
Week
(Rank)

Total
(Rank)

102(1)
55 (3)
59 (2)
17(5)
34 (4)
4 (6)
3 (7)
3 (7)

751 (1)
330 (2)
315 (3)
103 (5)
259 (4)
24 (7)
82 (6)
13 (8)

Taste
Value
Ingredients
Atmosphere
Convenience
Social Responsibility
Personalized
Promotions

19(1)
9 (2)
8 (3)
2 (6)
7(4)
0
3 (5)
0

80(1)
31 (3)
29 (4)
10 (6)
32 (2)
1(7)
13 (5)
3 (8)

136(1)
60 (2)
58 (3)
15 (6)
55 (4)
4 (7)
17(5)
2 (8)

226(1)

188(1)

92(2)
72 (4)
34 (5)
76 (3)
9 (7)
22 (6)
1(8)

83 (3)
89 (2)
25 (5)
55 (4)
6 (7)
24 (6)
4 (8)

Total N

48

199

347

532

474

277

1,877

Caucasian (n = 691), 64% ( n = 537) were female, and nearly 53% ( n = 442)
were under the age of 25. Sixty-six percent ( n = 556)were single and never
married. Fifty-six percent ( n = 471) had been Chipotle customers for at
least three years. Nearly 69% ( n = 574) dine at a Chipotle restaurant at
least several times a month. Seventy-nine percent ( n = 661) had told five
or more people about Chipotle.
H1 predicted that a positive relationship exists between the salience
of attributes on the aggregate media agenda and the aggregate brand
community agenda. This hypothesis was not supported. When examining
the news releases and ads individually, the data show a moderate positive
relationship between the media agenda and news releases (rs = 0.52, p =
0.10), but an unexpected negative relationship was observed among the
ads and the media agenda.
H2 predicted that a positive relationship exists between the salience
of attributes on the aggregate brand agenda and the aggregate brand community agenda. The data provided moderate support for this hypothesis
(rs= 0.67, p i0.05). Interestingly, the ads demonstrated a stronger relationship (rs = 0.59, p = 0.06) with the brand community agenda than the news
releases.
Table 4 shows the relationships among the aggregate media agenda,
aggregate brand community agenda, aggregate brand agenda, and ads
and news releases individually.
RQ1 asked which "media of connection" had the greatest influence
on individuals joining the brand community. Respondents were asked to
evaluate each of the following media utilizing a 5-point, Likert-like scale
scored from 1 (no influence) to 5 (strong influence): friends/family, neighbors / colleagues, advertisements, newspaper / magazine articles and
blogs/Web site reviews. To aid in analysis, three factors (ads, articles, and
blogs/ Web site reviews) were collapsed into a new variable named "mass

54

~ O U R N A L I S MG. MASSCOMMUNICATION
QUARTERLY
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

TABLE 3
Aggregate Media Agenda for the Chipotle Mexican Grill Brand:
Attribute Frequencies (and Ranks)
Newspaper

Articles

Seattle Times
The Oregonian
The Sacramento Bee
The Fresno Bee
The San Diego Union-Tribune
The Arizona Daily Star
The Salt Lake Tribune
The Deseret Morning News
Daily Camera
Denver Post
Rocky Mountain News
Omaha World-Herald
Columbia Daily Tribune
St. Louis Post Dispatch
The Star Tribune
Austin American-Statesman
The Capital Times
& Wisconsin State Journal
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Chicago Sun-Times
The Pantagraph
The News-Gazette
The Atlanta Journal
Constitution
The Tampa Tribune
The St. Petersburg Times
The Greensboro News
and Record
The Winston-Salem Journal
The Washington Post
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The Wall Street Journal
The Boston Globe
The Plain Dealer
The Blade
Dayton Daily News
Columbus Dispatch
The South Bend Tribune
Total

Taste
Value Ingredients Atmos- Conve- Social
(Rank) (Rank) (Rank) phere nience Respon(Rank) (Rank sibility
(Rank)

1
1

0
0
0
0
0

2
6

0
0
0
0

2
3
1

5
4
10
1
2
3

3
0
1
1

0
1
0

0
0
0
0
1
0

0
1
0
0
2
0
0

0
1
0
0
1

0
0
0
0
0

0
1
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
1
0

Personalized
(Rank)

Promotions
(Rank)

0
0
0
0
2
0
1
1
2
5
0
0
1

2
1
1
0

0
2

0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0
0
2

1
4
4
2
7
1
0
1
1
0

0
1
0
1
0
1

1
1
2
2
0
3

2
0
I
0
0

1
1
0
2
2

0
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0

0
0

0
0
2
0

0
0

0
0

0
1

0
0

0
1
0
0

0
1
2
2
0
0

0
0
0

1
1
0

0
0
0

1
1
1

1
1
0

0
1
1

0
0

1
1
1

1
2
4
8
1
3
1
3
1
3

0
0
0
3
0
1
0
1
1
0

0
0
2
2
0
1
0
0
1
0

1
0
2
5
0
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
2
5
0
1
1
0
1

0
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1

0
0
2
2
1
3
0
2
0
1

3
3
3
2
4

2
3

97

15 (5)

12 (7)

44(1)

0
1
2
1
1
0
0
0
1
9 (8)

0
23 (4)

29 ( 3 )

0
1

0
0

0
1
4
0

1
0

0
1
0
14 (6)

33 ( 2 )

media (Cronbachs alpha = 0.75). A paired-sample t-test found that

respondents perceived friends/family connections (M = 3.60, sd = 1.50)
as being significantly more influential (t(836)= 39.28, p < 0.001) in their
decision to join the brand community than mass media (M = 1.48, sd =
0.72). Another paired-sample t-test showed that respondents also perceived neighbors/colleagues (M = 2.32, sd = 1.45) as being more influential (t(836)= 17.24, p < 0.001) than mass-mediated sources.
RQ2 asked whether the aggregate brand community agenda,
when divided by various demographic measures into subgroups, comAGENDA
SETTINGAND AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

55

TABLE 4
Correlations among Media, Brand, Brand Community Agendas,
PR, and Ads of Attribute Salience
Aggregate
Brand
Agenda

Aggregate Brand Agenda

Aggregate Media Agenda
Aggregate Brand
Community Agenda
News Releases
Billboard and Radio Ads

Aggregate
Media
Agenda

Aggregate
Brand
Community
Agenda

1.00
-0.41
0.67 *

1.00
-0.26

1.00

0.24
0.93 **

0.52
-0.49

0.40
0.59

News
Releases

1.00
-0.01

Billboard
and
Radio
Ads

1.00

** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05

prised attribute agendas that were still similar to the brand community
agenda as a whole. Starting with income level, the data provided a very
robust positive relationship (rs = 0.98, p < 0.01) among the agendas of
brand community members who earned less than $20,000 a year (n = 271
respondents) and members who earned greater than $50,000 a year ( n =
280 respondents). Turning to education level, the data provided the same
strong relationship (us = 0.98, p < 0.01) among members with less than a
four-year degree ( n = 400) and those with a four-year degree or higher ( n
= 437).
Regarding age, the data showed the same results when dividing the
brand community members into age by subgroup and then correlating the
subgroup agendas of attributes. The agendas of members under the age of
25 ( n = 442) and members over 25 ( n = 395) yielded a very robust positive
relationship (rs = 0.98, p < 0.01). As for gender, correlating the brand community agenda by subgroups of males ( n = 537) and females (n = 300) also
yielded the same strong relationship (rs = 0.98, p < 0.01). Finally, when correlating the subgroup agendas by race, in this case Caucasians ( n = 691)
and non-Caucasians ( n = 146), there was also a strong relationship (rs =
0.93, p < 0.01).
RQ3 asked whether the time spent as a member of the virtual brand
community, the frequency of exposure to the brand, or the frequency of
telling others about the brand impacted the level of positive association
between the brand community subgroup agendas and the aggregate
brand agenda. A significantly stronger relationship with the brand agenda was observed among the subgroup who had told seven people or more
about Chipotle (r, = 0.69, p < 0.05), than the subgroup who had told two
people or less (rs = 0.56, p < 0.10). The data also revealed positive relationships with the brand agenda among the subgroup who had been customers for more than five years (rs = 0.98, p < 0.01) versus the subgroup
who had been customers for one year or less (rs = 0.92, p < 0.01).

56

J O U R N A L I S M6 MASS COMMUNICATION
OUARTERLY
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

TABLE 5
Correlations among Brand Community Subgroups and Aggregate Brand Agenda
of Attribute Salience
Frequency of Subgroup Dining at Chipotle
Once Every Six Months or Less
Once Every Three Months
Once a Month
Several Times a Month
Once a Week
Several Times a Week

Subgroup Agenda/ Aggregate Brand Agenda

0.55
0.42
0.56
0.59
0.72*

0.66*

* p < 0.05

Turning to the frequency of exposure to the brand, the brand community subgroups with higher exposure to the brand exhibited a somewhat stronger positive relationship with the brand agenda than the subgroups with lower exposure (see Table 5). For example, the only significant correlationsbetween the brand agenda and the subgroups were for
the subgroups that dined at Chipotle once a week (rs= 0.72, p < 0.05) and
several times a week (rs = 0.66, p < 0.05).

This study analyzed the relationships among brand-controlled

communications, opinions of virtual brand community members, and
news media content for brand attribute saliency, using the theoretical
lenses of agenda setting and agenda melding. This research probed for
signs of melding among subgroups and the aggregate brand community and brand agendas.
The researchers hypothesized traditional agenda-setting effects
among the media agenda and the brand community agenda, and agenda-melding effects among the brand agenda and the brand community
agenda. The findings were mixed. Support was found for a positive relationship between the attributes on the brand agenda and the brand community agenda (rs = 0.67, p < 0.05). An unexpected negative relationship
was found between the media agenda and the brand community agenda. While this negative correlation was surprising, the contingent condition of need for ~ r i e n t a t i o n helps
~ ~ shed some light on this finding.
The subjects in the original Chapel Hill agenda-setting study76identified
themselves as likely voters who were undecided on their candidate, and
thus were seeking orientation from the media on the issues. On the other
hand, the subjects in this study, Chipotle brand community members,
logically have little or no need for orientation from the media on
Chipotles most salient brand attributes. These individuals have likely
decided on the brand and its salient attributes. Another potential explanation for the negative correlation may be due to the relatively limited
amount of traditional news coverage (97 newspaper articles) during the
AGENDA
SETTINGA N D AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

Discussion

57

sample period, resulting in less opportunity for exposure to the media

agenda. Further, recent research by Coleman and McCombs indicates that
the younger generation (those aged 18 to 34) uses traditional media, such
as newspapers, significantly less than older generation^.^^ The majority of
respondents to the Chipotle survey were under the age of 25.
Nevertheless, Coleman and McCombs also found that this differential
media use among generations did not eliminate the agenda-setting
Turning to agenda-melding effects, the data revealed that the brand
community, when divided by various demographic measures into subgroups, reflects agendas that were still very similar to the brand community agenda in aggregate. When the brand community was divided into
subgroups by income, education, age, gender, and race, all subgroups
yielded very significant correlations with the aggregate brand community agenda. These results tentatively support the agenda-melding concept
that when individuals join groups, even though these individuals may
have different backgrounds, they tend to "meld their agendas with the
overall agenda of the group, in this case, the most salient brand attributes
as perceived by the community.
Extrapolating findings from agenda-setting research that social consensus on issues grows with increased media exposure,79this study questioned if consensus between subgroup attribute agendas and the aggregate brand agenda may grow with increased exposure to the brand. The
results indicate that subgroups with high exposure to the brand had a
somewhat higher correlation with the aggregate brand agenda than subgroups with lower exposure. Using this measure, the only significant correlations were with the ardent subgroups who dined at Chipotle once a
week (r, = 0.72, p < 0.05) and several times a week (rs = 0.66, p < 0.05).
Unlike traditional agenda setting, which has been mass media-driven, the agenda-melding hypothesis asserts that people, rather than mass
media, may be the dominant media of connection for joining groups.8o
The results of this study support this logic. Chipotle brand loyalists indicated that interpersonal connections, rather than mass mediated connections, had the greatest perceived influence on their decisions to join the
community. A promising path for future research may be to explore the
agenda-melding process specifically in the context of viral marketing and
word-of-mouth marketing. In essence, once brands have "set the agenda"
among brand loyalists, how can they then get these loyalists to "share the
agenda" beyond the community?
This study contributes to agenda-setting theory and the agendamelding hypothesis in several ways. First, it demonstrates yet another
area within mass communication scholarship in which the agenda-setting
process may be usefully applied. For agenda melding, this study marks
one of the initial empirical investigations into this hypothesis. In addition,
this study extends theory by introducing non-political, brand actors into
the agenda-setting landscape and builds on recent efforts to integrate
multi-prong communication efforts into a combined agenda measure.81
For practitioners, this research demonstrates the relationship between the
attributes emphasized in brand-controlled communication efforts and
brand loyalist perceptions.

58

~OURNALISM
G. MASSCOMMUNICATION
OUARTERLY
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

A limitation of this studys cross-sectional design is that causal

relationships cannot be determined. In addition, while a purposive sampling technique was appropriate for determining the community agenda, it is important these findings are not generalized to Chipotle customers as a whole. Future research should compare the perceptions
among current and prospective customers of a brands most salient attributes with brand-controlled communications and news media coverage.
By composing agendas for both current and prospective customers,
future research can detect if the media play a bigger role in influencing
attribute salience for prospective customers than current customers.
Such studies might also detect if certain brand attributes ranked high
with prospective customers, but not current customers and vice versa.
In conclusion, this study demonstrates that brand-controlled communications can serve as a conduit between the brand and the virtual
brand community members in influencing attribute saliency. As the
public increasingly seems to tune out traditional marketingE2practitioners may benefit from focusing more of their efforts on shaping the
agendas of their existing brand loyalists and then encouraging these
loyalists to share this brand agenda with the public.

NOTES
1.Donald L. Shaw, Bradley J. Hamm, and Thomas C. Terry,
Vertical Versus Horizontal Media, Military Review 86 (November
2006): 13-25; Donald L. Shaw, Thomas C. Terry, David M. Gercken, Chad
G. Carroll, and Bradley J. Hamm, Strategies in the Emerging Papyrus
Society:Agenda Setting, Agenda Cutting and Audience Agendamelding
in the New Century, Media Tenor Research Report 157 (2007): 108-14.
2. Shaw, Hamm, and Terry, Vertical Versus Horizontal Media;
Shaw et al., Strategies in the Emerging Papyrus Society: Agenda
Setting, Agenda Cutting and Audience Agendamelding in the New
Century.
3. See, for example, Brian Steinberg, Ads Keep Spreading, but are
Consumers Immune, Advertising Age, November 2007, 1-23.
4. Maxwell E. McCombs and Donald L. Shaw, The Agenda-Setting
Function of Mass Media, Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (summer 1972):
176-87.
5. Maxwell McCombs, A Look at Agenda-Setting: Past, Present,
and Future, Journalism Studies 6 (November 2005): 543-57; Maxwell
McCombs and Donald Shaw, The Evolution of Agenda-Setting
Research: Twenty-Five Years in the Marketplace of Ideas, Journal of
Communication 43 (June 1993): 58-67; David Weaver, Thoughts on
Agenda Setting, Framing and Priming, Journal of Communication 57
(March 2007): 142-47.
6.Maxwell E. McCombs, Setting the Agenda: The Mass Media and
Public Opinion (Malden, MA: Policy Press, 2006).
7. McCombs, Setting the Agenda, 142.
&Donald L. Shaw, Maxwell McCombs, David H. Weaver, and
AGENDA
SETTING

AND

AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

59

Bradley J. Hamm, Individuals, Groups, and Agenda Melding: A Theory

of Social Dissonance, International Journal of Public Opinion Research 11
(spring 1999):2-24.
9. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance, 12.
10. McCombs, Setting the Agenda.
11. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance.
12. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance.
13. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance, 8.
14. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance; Donald Shaw, Bradley Hamm, and Diana Knott,
Technological Change, Agenda Challenge and Social Melding: Mass
Media Studies and the Four Ages of Place, Class, Mass and Space,
Journalism Studies 1 (February 2000): 57-79; Diana L. Knott, Framing to
Enhance Certainty (Orientation) and Commonality (Community):
Applying Agenda Melding to Strategic Communications (Ph.D. diss,
University of North Carolina, 2001); Donald L. Shaw, Robert L. Stevenson,
and Bradley J. Hamm, Agenda Setting Theory and Public Opinion
Studies in a Post-Mass Media Age (paper presented at the annual meeting of the World Association for Public Opinion Research, Rome Italy,
2001); Shaw, Hamm, and Terry, Vertical Versus Horizontal Media
15. Brianna Lange, Crazy About Chipotle, the Salt Lake Tribune,
March 6, 2008.
16. Janet Adamy, Burrito Chain Assembles a Winning Combo Ignoring Fast-Food Formula, Chipotle Promotes Service, Costly Natural
Ingredients, the Wall Street Journal, November 23, 2007, sec. B, p. 1.
17. David H. Weaver, Political Issues and Voter Need for
Orientation, in The Emergence of American Political Issues: The AgendaSetting Function of the Press, ed. Donald L. Shaw and Maxwell E.
McCombs (St. Paul, MN: West, 1977): 107-99; David H. Weaver,
Audience Need for Orientation and Media Efforts, Communication
Research 7 (July 1980): 361-76.
18. Leon Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, 1968).
19. Abraham Maslow, Theory of Human Motivation, Psychology
Review 50 (1943):370-96.
20. Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann, The Spiral of Silence: Public Opinion,
Opinion, Our Social Skin (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984).
21. Steven H. Chaffee and Michael McDevitt, Disequilibration:Human Development and the Shock of News, Mass Communication Review
24 (1997): 5-29.
22. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance, 3.
23. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance.
24. Noelle-Neumann, The Spiral of Silence.
25. Chaffee and McDevitt, Disequilibration: Human Development

60

JOURNALISM 6 M A S SCOMMUNICATION
QUARTERLY
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

and the Shock of News.

26. Maxwell McCombs and Amy Reynolds, News Influences on our
Pictures of the World, in Media Eflects: Advances in Theory and Research,
ed. J. Bryant and D. Zillman (NJ: Erlbaum, 2002): 1-18.
27. Weaver, Political Issues and Voter Need for Orientation; Weaver,
Audience Need for Orientation and Media Efforts.
28. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance.
29. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance.
30. Robert D. Putnam, Bowling Alone The Collapse and Revival of
American Community (NY Simon and Schuster, 2001).
31. Robert Wuthnow, Loose Connections: Joining Together in Americas
Fragmented Communities (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,
2002).
32. Rene Algesheimer, Utpal M. Dholakia, and Andreas Herrmann,
The Social Influence of Brand Community: Evidence from European Car
Clubs, Journal of Marketing 69 (July 2005): 19-34.
33. Barbara Stern, What Does Brand Mean? Historical-Analysis
Method and Construct Definition, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 34 (2006): 216-23.
34. Steve Hoeffler and Kevin Lane Keller, Building Brand Equity
Through Corporate Societal Marketing, Journal of Public Policy &
Marketing 21 (2002): 78-89; Kevin Lane Keller, Building Customer-Based
Brand Equity, Marketing Management 10 (July/August 2001): 14-19.
35. Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion (New York Harcourt, Brace and
Co., 1922).
36. A1 Ries and Jack Trout, Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2001). Interestingly, the concept of positioning was
introduced by Ries and Trout in a series of articles in Advertising Age in
1972, the same year that the Chapel Hill agenda-setting study by
McCombs and Shaw was published in Public Opinion Quarterly.
37. Shailendra Ghorpade, Agenda Setting: A Test of Advertisings
Neglected Function, Journal of Advertising Research 26 (August/
September 1986): 23-27; Marilyn Roberts and Maxwell McCombs,
Agenda Setting and Political Advertising: Origins of the News Agenda,
Political Communication 11 (July /September 1994): 249-62; Max Sutherland and John Galloway, Role of Advertising: Persuasion or Agenda
Setting, Journal of Advertising Research 21 (October 1981): 25-29.
38. Maxwell McCombs, Building Consensus: The News Medias
Agenda-Setting Roles, Political Communication 14 (October-December
1997):433-43.
39. McCombs and Shaw, The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass
Media.
40. Elizabeth Garrett and Daniel A. Smith, Veiled Political Actors and
Campaign Disclosure Laws in Direct Democracy, Election Law Journal 4
(December 2005): 295-328.
41. Margaret Scammell, Political Brands and Consumer Citizens: The
Rebranding of Tony Blair, The ANNALS of the American Academy of
AGENDA
SETTING
AND AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

61

Political and Social Science 611 (May 2007): 176-92.

42. Eleonora Pasotti, Agenda, Trust and the Mobilization of
Consensus: The Rise and Fall of Leadership in Naples (paper presented
at the annual meeting of the Italian Political Science Association, Naples,
Italy, 2001).
43. Albert M. Muniz and Thomas C. OGuinn, Brand Community,
Journal of Consumer Research 27 (March 2001): 412-32.
44. Muniz and OGuinn, Brand Community, 413.
45. H. McAlexander, John W. Schouten, and Harold F. Koenig, Building Brand Community, Journal of Marketing 66 (January 2002): 38-54.
46. William F. DeGeorge, Conceptualization and Measurement of
Audience Agenda in Agenda-Setting Research, in Mass Communication
Review Yearbook, Volume 2, ed. G. Cleveland Wilhoit and Harold de Bock
(Sage, 1981), 219-24.
47. See, for example, McCombs, Building Consensus: The News
Medias Agenda-Setting Roles; Esteban Lopez-Escobar, Juan Pablo
Llamas, Maxwell McCombs, and Federico Rey Lemon, Two Levels of
Agenda Setting among Advertising and News in the 1995 Spanish
Elections, Political Communication 15 (April / June 1998):225.
48. Steve Ells, Fine Fast Food, Time, October 1, 2007, 170.
49. John Eligon, Where to Eat? A New Restaurant Genre Offers
Manhattan More Choices, the New York Times, January 13,2008,29.
50. Chipotle Mexican Grill, 2007 Form 10-K, available at http: / / secfilings.nasdaq.com / filingFrameset.asp?FileName=OOOll93125~2DO8~2
D0387640/o2Etxt&FilePath=~5C2008%5CO2~5C26~5C&CoName=CHIP
OTLE+MEXICAN+GRILL+INC&FormType=lO~2DK&RcvdDate~2~2F
26%2F2008&pdf= (accessed March 15,2008).
51. Adamy, Burrito Chain Assembles a Winning Combo.
52. Catherine Tsai, Burrito Chain Grows Under McDonalds
Umbrella, Associated Press, December 29, 2002.
53. Chipotle Mexican Grill, 2007 Form 10-K.
54. Ells, Fine Fast Food.
55. Marlene Parrish, Fresh and Fast Chipotle Mexican Grill Chain
Sets an Example by Buying Meat and Produce from Family Farms,
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, May 20, 2007, sec. E, p. 1.
56. Anthony Zumpano, Similar Search Results: Google Wins,
Brandchannel.com, November 4, 2007, http: / /www.brandchannel.com /
features-effect.asp?pf-id=352.
57. McCombs, A Look at Agenda-Setting: Past, Present, and Future.
58. Ghorpade, Agenda Setting: A Test of Advertisings Neglected
Function; Guy Golan, Spiro Kiousis, and Misti McDaniel, Second-Level
Agenda-Setting and Political Advertising: Investigating the Transfer of
Issue and Attribute Saliency during the 2004 Presidential Election,
Journalism Studies 8 (2007): 432-43; Roberts and McCombs, Agenda
Setting and Political Advertising: Origins of the News Agenda.
59. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance, 7.
60. Shaw et al., Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance.

62

JOURNALISM 6 M A S SCOMMUNICATION
QUARTERLY
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

61. McCombs, "Building Consensus: The News Media's AgendaSetting Roles."

62. Donald L. Shaw and Shannon E. Martin, "The Function of Mass
Media Agenda Setting," Journalism Quarterly 69 (winter 1992):902-20.
63. Shaw et al., "Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance," 4.
64.Rosa Chun and Gary Davies, "E-reputation: The Role of Mission
and Vision Statements in Positioning Strategy," Brand Management 8
(2001):315-33.
65. Mark Baetz and Christopher Bart, "Developing Mission Statements
Which Work," Long Range Planning 29 (August 1996):526-33.
66. John V. Mullane, "The Mission Statement is a Strategic Tool: When
Used Properly," Management Decision 40 (2002):448-55.
67. Elsie Maio, "Managing Brand in the New Stakeholder Environment," Journal of Business Ethics 44 (May 2003): 235-46.
68. Marcus Brewer and Maxwell McCombs, "Setting the Community
Agenda," Journalism b Mass Communication Quarterly 73 (spring 1996): 716.
69. Brewer and McCombs, "Setting the Community Agenda."
70. Brewer and McCombs, "Setting the Community Agenda."
71. McCombs, Setting the Agenda.
72. Maxwell McCombs and Jian-Hua Zhu, "Capacity, Diversity, and
Volatility of the Public Agenda," Public Opinion Quarterly 4 (winter 1995):
495-525.
73. Tai-Li Wang, "Agenda-Setting Online," Southwestern Mass Communication Journal 15 (2000): 59-70; Edna Einsiedel, Kandice Salomone,
and Frederick Schneider, "Crime: Effects of Media Exposure and Personal Experience on Issue Salience," Journalism Quarterly 61 (spring 1984):
131-36; Takeshita Toshio and Mikami Shunji, "How Did Mass Media
Influence the Voters' Choice in the 1993 General Election in Japan?:
A Study of Agenda-Setting,'' Keio Communication Review 17 (1995): 2741.
74. Ole Holsti, Content Analysis for the Social Sciences and Humanities
(MA: Addison Wesley: 1969).
75. Weaver, "Political Issues and Voter Need for Orientation"; Weaver,
"Audience Need for Orientation and Media Efforts."
76. McCombs and Shaw, "The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass
Media."
77. Renita Coleman and Maxwell McCombs, "The Young and Agenda-less? Exploring Age-Related Differences in Agenda Setting on the
Youngest Generation, Baby Boomers, and the Civic Generation,"
Journalism G. Mass Communication Quarterly 84 (autumn 2007): 495-508.
78. Coleman and McCombs, "The Young and Agenda-less?''
79. McCombs, "Building Consensus: The News Media's AgendaSetting Roles"; Shaw and Martin, "The Function of Mass Media Agenda
Setting."
80. Shaw et al., "Individuals, Groups and Agenda Melding: A Theory
of Social Dissonance," 2.
81. See, for example, Spiro Kiousis, Michael Mitrook, Christina
AGENDA
SETTING A N D AGENDA
MELDING
Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012

63

Popescu, Arlana Shields, and Trenton Seltzer, First- and Second-Level

Agenda Building and Agenda Setting: Terrorism, the President, and the
Media. (paper presented at the annual meeting of International
Communication Association, Dresden, Germany, 2007).
82. Steinberg, Ads Keep Spreading, but are Consumers Immune?

64

JOURNALISM

6 MASSCOMMUNICATION
QUARTERLY

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com at National School of Political on December 13, 2012