514415

research-article2014
JMQXXX10.1177/1077699013514415Journalism & Mass Communication QuarterlyDenham

Agenda Setting and Sports

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
2014, Vol. 91(1) 17­–37
Intermedia Attribute © 2014 AEJMC
Reprints and permissions:
Agenda Setting in the New sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1077699013514415
York Times: The Case of jmcq.sagepub.com

Animal Abuse in U.S. Horse

Racing

Bryan E. Denham1

Abstract
In 2012, the New York Times published a series of reports addressing doping and fatal
breakdowns in U.S. horse racing. This study examines the extent to which the Times
transferred the salience of certain story attributes to news media at the regional and
national levels. Reports appearing after the Times began its investigation were more
likely to mention (1) an injured or deceased horse, (2) equine drug use, and (3) a
trainer suspension or other disciplinary action. The study concludes that, in addition
to transferring object salience, the Times also may affect how news organizations
characterize issues and events.

Keywords
agenda setting, communication effects, print media, content analysis, media and
society

For stakeholders in U.S. horse racing, March 2012 proved a tumultuous month. On the
fourteenth, after a third horse died during the production of Luck, an HBO drama about
the seedier aspects of the horse-racing industry, the movie network canceled plans to
film a second season.1 Less than two weeks later, on March 25, both the New York
Times and the Los Angeles Times published reports addressing the prevalence of dop-
ing, animal injuries, and fatal breakdowns in the sport. In the Los Angeles newspaper,

1Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA

Corresponding Author:
Bryan E. Denham, Department of Communication Studies, Clemson University, 412 Strode Tower,
Clemson, SC 29634, USA.
Email: bdenham@clemson.edu

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

18 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Zarembo2 studied animal-death frequencies at California racetracks, and in the New

York Times, a team of reporters3 examined data from more than 150,000 races, analyz-
ing it alongside injury reports, drug-test results, and interviews with experts. The
6,300-word New York Times exposé, headlined “Mangled Horses, Maimed Jockeys,”
characterized horse racing as an industry “mired in a culture of drugs and lax regula-
tion and a fatal breakdown rate that remains far worse than in most of the world.”4 On
average, the Times reported, 24 horses die each week on U.S. racetracks; some break
down during competition, while others sustain fatal injuries in practice sessions.
“Coming so soon after the much-publicized ‘Luck’ cancellation,” Beyer noted in the
Washington Post,5 “the New York Times article made a stunning impact.”
In fact, throughout 2012, the New York Times published a series of investigative
reports, news articles, and editorials addressing problems in U.S. horse racing. Given
the journalistic prominence of the Times as well as the depth and breadth of its horse-
racing coverage, the current study examined its influence in 2012 on the content of
other news outlets. The study anticipated that attributes stressed in the Times’ reporting—
injured and deceased horses, equine drug use, and trainer suspensions and disciplinary
actions—would increase in both print and broadcast media. Print media included the
Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, and broadcast out-
lets included CNN, NBC, and NPR. In addition, because the initial investigation in the
Times focused heavily on quarter-horse racing in New Mexico, identifying the state as
home to five of the six most dangerous racetracks in the United States, the study also
analyzed content in the largest daily newspaper there, the Albuquerque Journal.

Conceptual Framework
Research in agenda setting examines the extent to which news media transfer object
salience to mass audiences.6 While the media may not tell audiences exactly what to
think, the theory suggests, they do tell audiences what to think about regarding unob-
trusive issues. Second-level, or attribute, agenda setting suggests that in addition to the
transfer of object salience, news media also stand to transfer the salience of object
attributes, in effect telling audiences how to think about items in the news.7 The cur-
rent study considers the transfer of attribute salience in the context of intermedia
agenda setting, whereby prominent news organizations stand to influence the content
of other news outlets.8 In the United States, the New York Times is perhaps the most
influential news organization, assuming what McCombs described as

a role now so institutionalized that the Associated Press alerts its members each day to
the agenda of stories scheduled for the next morning’s front page of the Times. It is the
appearance on the front page of the Times that frequently legitimates a topic as
newsworthy.9

Indeed, previous studies of intermedia agenda-setting processes have identified the

impact of the New York Times on the content of both newspapers and television news
broadcasts.10 Golan, for instance, observed the influence of Times international news
on the content agendas of the ABC, CBS, and NBC network news programs.11 In a

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 19

study examining new media and potential changes in news dynamics, Meraz found the
Times and Washington Post to maintain their status as popular sources of news on
political blogs.12 Earlier, Reese and Danielian found TV news programs take cues
from the Times—especially its front page—in coverage of the war on drugs.13 But as
McCombs observed in a research review,14 studies addressing intermedia agenda-set-
ting processes have focused largely on object agendas in news about politics and pub-
lic affairs.15 He thus posed a fundamental research question: “Does this pattern hold
for attribute agendas?”16 In moving toward a response, the current study examines the
transfer of attribute salience from the New York Times to regional and national news
outlets. By focusing on sports journalism, as opposed to issues and events in political
communication, the study examines intermedia influences from a different
perspective.17
In addition to research addressing intermedia agenda setting, the current study is
supported by scholarship focusing on the norms and routines of news professionals.18
Studies in these areas reveal that journalists working at competing news organizations
tend to validate story selection and other news decisions by monitoring content at rival
news outlets.19 Doing so assists journalists in reducing the inherent uncertainties
involved in the selection of news stories. In fact, given the presence of major news
outlets on the Internet, journalists can cross-check information more rapidly than
ever,20 and one of the most frequently monitored news outlets is the New York Times.21
Still, as scholars have observed, one irony of the Internet age is that copious amounts
of information have done little to reduce homogeneity in news content.22
Despite content homogeneity, the current study observes the potential for individ-
ual differences in audience effects, noting the centrality of need for orientation as a
construct in agenda-setting research. Conceptually, need for orientation—the need to
be informed and educated about issues in the news—is defined by relevance and
uncertainty, as McCombs explained, “Low relevance defines a low need for orienta-
tion; high relevance and low uncertainty, a moderate need for orientation; and high
relevance and uncertainty, a high need for orientation.”23 Although need for orienta-
tion has focused primarily on news audiences, the current study observes its relevance
to news agencies and individual journalists, who may or may not be familiar with, or
have an interest in, the topic at hand.

Overview of the New York Times Investigation

In 2012, New York Times reporters Walt Bogdanich, Joe Drape, and colleagues con-
ducted an in-depth analysis of horse racing in the United States, producing three major
investigative pieces: “Mangled Horses, Maimed Jockeys,” on March 25;24 “Big
Purses, Sore Horses, and Death,” on April 30;25 and “At Racetrack, Economic
Pressures Overpower Veterinarians’ Oath,” on September 22.26 Regarding the first
investigative report, the front page of the March 25, 2012, Sunday Times27 featured a
color photograph of a fallen horse on a New Mexico racetrack. Inside the main section,
a second photo showed the same horse partially hidden behind a makeshift barrier, the
cutline reading “After the 2-year-old Teller All Gone broke a leg at Ruidoso Downs
last fall and was euthanized, his body was dumped in a junkyard next to an old

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

20 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Table 1.  Select Headlines from the New York Times, March 25 to September 22, 2012.

Headline Date
Mangled Horses, Maimed Jockeysa March 25, 2012
Horses to the Slaughterb March 27, 2012
Big Purses, Sore Horses, and Deatha April 30, 2012
Racehorses Neglected by Charity, Suit Says May 4, 2012
After the Best Race of His Life, a Horse’s Death May 15, 2012
The Sport of Kings and Drugsb May 19, 2012
Trainer Accused of Doping in 675 Harness Races May 25, 2012
Uncontrolled Sport May Not Warrant Triple Crown Glory May 28, 2012
A Drug Family in the Winner’s Circle June 13, 2012
Stronger Medicine for What Ails Horse Racingb June 17, 2012
Turning to Frog for Illegal Aid in Horse Races June 20, 2012
Calls for Strict Discipline on Doping of Racehorses July 13, 2012
A Promise to Avoid Race-Day Drugs July 20, 2012
Deadly End for Horse That Tested Positive for Painkiller August 18, 2012
Top Horse in Accident at Saratoga August 19, 2012
Run to Death at Racetracksb August 24, 2012
At Racetrack, Economic Pressures Overpower Veterinarians’ Oatha September 22, 2012
aDenotes a major investigative report.
bDenotes New York Times editorial.

toilet.”28 In addition to the dramatic photographs, as well as content addressing fatal

breakdowns and drug abuse in the “sport of kings,” the March 25 report also focused
on catastrophic injuries sustained by jockeys. Some of the individuals featured had
been thrown from horses only to be trampled by other animals and, in some cases, left
paralyzed.
As indicated in Table 1, which contains a sample of New York Times headlines
from 2012, the Times editorial board reacted quickly to the March 25 investigative
report. In a March 27 editorial headlined “Horses to the Slaughter,”29 the board
lamented “the stimulants, steroids, pain medications, anti-inflammatories and other
chemicals used to enhance performance and mask injuries” in what was once the top
spectator sport in the United States.
On April 30, 2012, approximately one month after its initial exposé appeared, the
Times published a second investigative report.30 This article focused on increased
purse sizes, the result of racetracks adding casinos to their facilities. According to the
report, “racino” profits had made it possible, if not routine, for a purse to exceed the
value of any one horse in a racing event; consequently, owners and trainers had been
provided with what Drape et al. described as “dangerous incentives to run sore, tired
or otherwise unfit horses in pursuit of that big score.”31 News sources spoke of the
greed they had witnessed among owners and trainers in pursuit of handsome prizes,
and Times reporters discussed what this greed meant for racehorses.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 21

In the spring and summer months of 2012, racing commissions in multiple states
began to assess medication thresholds for thoroughbred horses. In fact, a June 17
Times editorial, “Stronger Medicine for What Ails Horse Racing,”32 focused on the
state of Kentucky, which had proposed changes in the administration of Lasix, a
diuretic used to prevent nose bleeds in thoroughbreds. A similar report focused on
New Mexico,33 whose racing commission voted to adopt more stringent policies for
equine drug use and more severe penalties for rule violators.
Nevertheless, in an August 2012 editorial “Run to Death at Racetracks,”34 the
Times again criticized the horse-racing industry and its “easy culture of doping and
toothless enforcement of penalties against trainers.”
Finally, on September 22, 2012, a third investigative report appeared in the
Times.35 This time the newspaper targeted veterinarians and their relationships with
trainers, who often serve as proxies for owners. As the Times reported, veterinarians
who appear unwilling to prescribe painkillers and the performance-enhancing drugs
trainers recommend tend to find themselves lacking clients, as trainers may persuade
owners to seek animal doctors who are more liberal with prescriptions.
In sum, the New York Times 2012 investigation of horse racing characterized the
sport as poorly regulated and compromised by doping. Journalists suggested that drug
use had become ubiquitous as a result of purse sizes that greatly exceeded the value of
the racehorses used in their pursuit. In many cases, poorly conditioned or previously
injured horses received shots of powerful painkillers to run, and when breakdowns
occurred as a result of fatigue or poor conditioning, horses—and jockeys—were
quickly dispatched and replaced.

Hypotheses
The current study examined whether object attributes emphasized in the New York
Times investigation of horse racing appeared increasingly manifest in news texts
elsewhere. Based on the literature on attribute and intermedia agenda setting, as well
as the norms and routines of working journalists, the study advanced the following
central hypotheses:

H1: Reports in national news outlets appearing after the New York Times began its
investigation of U.S. horse racing will (a) contain significantly more references to
horse injuries and deaths, (b) contain significantly more references to equine drug
use, and (c) contain significantly more references to suspensions and disciplinary
actions taken against one or more individuals associated with horse racing.
H2: Reports in the Albuquerque Journal appearing after the New York Times
began its investigation of U.S. horse racing will (a) contain significantly more
references to horse injuries and deaths, (b) contain significantly more references
to equine drug use, and (c) contain significantly more references to suspensions
and disciplinary actions taken against one or more individuals associated with
horse racing.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

22 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Method
Sample
To examine potential shifts in press coverage of horse racing, this study analyzed con-
tent in 699 news reports from six national news outlets, as well as sixty-seven reports
from a regional daily newspaper. Collected from the Nexis database with the search
term “horse racing,” national news reports had to focus on some aspect of the sport and
had to be published between January 1, 2011, and November 15, 2012. This time
frame accommodated news coverage surrounding the 2011 and 2012 Triple Crown
and Breeders Cup seasons, respectively, and also yielded a comparable number of
news reports for two periods of analysis. National newspaper reports came from the
Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, and the Washington Post, as these outlets are
among the most widely circulated newspapers in the United States and are also proxi-
mate to major horse-racing facilities and racing events. Broadcast reports came from
CNN, NBC, and NPR, each of which reaches a national audience and makes tran-
scripts available through Nexis. In all, the Los Angeles Times accounted for 169
(24.2%) of the 699 reports, with the New York Times accounting for 320 (45.8%) and
the Washington Post 106 (15.2%). CNN accounted for 56 (8.0%) of the 699 reports,
with NBC accounting for 27 (3.9%) and NPR 21 (3.0%). As indicated, an additional
67 reports came from the Albuquerque Journal, the largest daily newspaper in New
Mexico. Items were gathered from the newspaper website.36

Content Variables
With the individual news report serving as the unit of analysis, reports published
before March 14, 2012, were classified as Period 1, and articles published on or after
March 14 were categorized as Period 2. These dates reflected the point at which the
New York Times coverage of problems in horse racing began to appear, moving from
news of the Luck cancellation into lengthier investigative reports and news articles
about racing events.
Variables specified the media outlet from which a report originated, whether an
item was a news report or an editorial, and whether it mentioned Luck. Regarding issue
attributes (i.e., characteristics of objects in the news), all reports were coded for
whether they mentioned an injured or deceased horse, the use of one or more equine
drugs, and a suspension or other disciplinary measure taken against one or more indi-
viduals associated with horse racing.37 Again, the expectation was that news copy
prior to the New York Times investigation would be less likely to mention equine drug
use, for instance, because the Times had not increased the salience of that attribute
among other news outlets.

Statistical Analyses
Given (1) categorical time periods and news outlets, as well as (2) frequencies of text
occurrences, chi-square analysis examined bivariate statistical relationships at the

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 23

national and regional levels, testing for independence. While bivariate analyses
included the phi coefficient, binary logistic regression analyses provided more robust
indicators of association at the national level,38 testing the effects of time period and
news organization on mentions of an injured or deceased horse, the use of one or more
equine drugs, and a suspension or disciplinary measure taken against one or more
individuals associated with horse racing.
For comparative purposes, initial regression analyses included only the New York
Times, and subsequent analyses included all national news outlets.39 This approach
allowed the study to examine whether the Times coverage changed from the first
period to the second, providing a rationale for examining the extent to which coverage
in other news outlets also changed, mirroring the Times. In addition, to provide chron-
ological insights into attribute salience transfer, regression analyses were followed by
visual displays of attribute references during the second period, after the triggering
events of March 2012. Correlations between Times distributions and the aggregate
distributions of other outlets were included.

Results
Descriptive Statistics
The study of national news outlets included 699 reports, 342 (48.9%) of which came
from the period prior to March 14. Overall, 188 (26.9%) of 699 reports mentioned an
injury or the death of a horse, 121 (17.3%) mentioned drug use, and 140 (20.0%) men-
tioned a suspension or disciplinary action taken against an individual associated with
horse racing. Of 357 reports published on or after March 14, 2012, 17 (4.8%) made an
overt reference to Luck, and most of those mentions came in the immediate aftermath
of the cancellation. Ten editorials appeared in the sample, nine after March 14.

Bivariate Analyses
Tables 2 and 3 display six sets of cross-tabulations, with the two periods serving as
column categories in each set. Cross-tabs in the first row of the tables address refer-
ences to an injured or a deceased horse, those in the second row pertain to drug use,
and those in the third row address suspensions and disciplinary actions.40

Injured and deceased horses.  Of 342 reports in Period 1, 74 (21.6%) mentioned an

injured or deceased horse, compared with 114 (31.9%) of 357 reports in Period 2.
These differences were significant in an aggregate cross-tabulation, χ2(1, n = 699)
= 9.416, p < .01, Φ = −.116, and lent support to H1a. Regarding the Los Angeles
Times, Table 2 indicates that among articles published prior to March 14, 13
(17.8%) mentioned an injured or deceased horse, while among articles published in
the second period, 32 (33.3%) made such a reference. Differences were significant,
χ2(1, n = 169) = 5.116, p < .05, Φ = −.174. In the New York Times, among articles
published in Period 1 (n = 177), 38 (21.5%) mentioned an injured or deceased
horse, while in articles published during Period 2 (n = 143), 52 (36.4%) made such

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

24 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Table 2.  Cross-Tabulations for Print Content Variables.

Los Angeles Washington Albuquerque

Times New York Times Post Journal
  Period Period Period Period Period Period Period Period
Attributes 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
Horse injury or death % 17.8 33.3* 21.5 36.4** 37.0 26.9 3.2 61.1***
  n 73 96 177 143 54 52 31 36
Drug use %  0 24.0 13.6 29.4*** 11.1 26.9* 6.5 55.6***
  n 73 96 177 143 54 52 31 36
Suspension %  9.6 16.7 16.9 32.9*** 14.8 30.8* 9.7 63.9***
  n 73 96 177 143 54 52 31 36

Note. Chi-square is not computed for zero-count cells.

*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Table 3.  Cross-Tabulations for Broadcast Content Variables.

CNN NBC NPR Aggregate

  Period Period Period Period Period Period Period Period
Attributes 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1
Horse injury %  0 15.4 16.7 26.7 11.1 50.0 7.9 24.2*
or death
  n 17 39 12 15 09 12 38 66
Drug use %  0 7.7  0 20.0 11.1 41.7 2.6 16.7*
  n 17 39 12 15 09 12 38 66
Suspension %  0 15.4  0 33.3  0 41.7  0 24.2
  n 17 39 12 15 09 12 38 66

Note. Chi-square is not computed for zero-count cells.

*p < .05.

a reference. Differences across periods were again significant, χ2(1, n = 320) =

8.681, p < .01, Φ = −.165. In the Washington Post, significant differences did not
emerge, χ2(1, n = 106) = 1.244, p = ns, Φ = −.108. Finally, because cross-tabula-
tions for individual broadcast outlets contained multiple cells with zero observa-
tions, an aggregate cross-tab examined bivariate relationships. While 3 (7.9%) of
38 reports appearing before March 14 referenced an injured or deceased horse, 16
(24.2%) of 66 reports appearing in Period 2 made such a reference, resulting in a
significant increase across the two periods, χ2(1, n = 104) = 4.316, p < .05, Φ =
−.204. In addition to a significant overall effect, then, references to an injured or
deceased horse increased at significant levels in three of the four cases examined.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 25

Drug use in horse racing.  Of 342 reports in Period 1, 31 (9.1%) mentioned drug use in
horse racing, compared with 90 (25.2%) of 357 reports in Period 2. These differences
were significant in an aggregate cross-tabulation, χ2(1, n = 699) = 31.811, p < .001,
Φ = −.213, and lent support to H1b. In the Los Angeles Times, among articles pub-
lished prior to March 14 (n = 73), no horse-racing reports mentioned drug use, while
among articles published in Period 2 (n = 96), 23 (24.0%) made such a reference.
While differences were pronounced, chi-square was not computed because of the
zero-count cell. In the New York Times, among articles published in Period 1 (n = 177),
24 (13.6%) mentioned drug use, compared with 42 (29.4%) of 143 reports published
in Period 2, resulting in a significant difference, χ2(1, n = 320) = 12.079, p < .001, Φ =
−.194. In the Washington Post, of 54 reports published during Period 1, 6 (11.1%)
mentioned drug use, compared with 14 (26.9%) of 52 articles published in the second
period, also resulting in a significant difference, χ2(1, n = 106) = 4.327, p < .05, Φ =
−.202. Finally, among aggregated broadcast reports, while 1 (2.6%) of 38 reports
appearing before March 14 mentioned drug use, 11 (16.7%) of 66 reports appearing in
Period 2 made such a reference, resulting in a significant difference across the two
periods, χ2(1, n = 104) = 4.654, p < .05, Φ = −.212. Thus, in addition to an overall
effect, references to drug use increased significantly in three of the four cases exam-
ined, and mentions in the Los Angeles Times would almost certainly have proven sta-
tistically significant as well.

Suspensions and disciplinary actions.  Of 342 reports in Period 1, 45 (13.2%) mentioned

a suspension or disciplinary action, compared with 95 (26.6%) of 357 reports in Period
2. These differences were significant in an aggregate cross-tabulation, χ2(1, n = 699) =
19.736, p < .001, Φ = −.168, and lent support to H1c. In the Los Angeles Times, among
articles published prior to March 14 (n = 73), 7 (9.6%) mentioned a suspension or
disciplinary action taken against one or more individuals associated with horse racing,
compared with 16 (16.7%) of 96 reports published in Period 2; differences were not
significant, χ2(1, n = 169) = 1.767, p = ns, Φ = −.102. In the New York Times, among
articles published in Period 1 (n = 177), 30 (16.9%) mentioned a suspension or disci-
plinary action, compared with 47 (32.9%) of 143 reports published in Period 2, result-
ing in a significant difference, χ2(1, n = 320) = 10.968, p < .001, Φ = −.185. Among
articles published in the Washington Post during Period 1 (n = 54), 8 (14.8%) men-
tioned a suspension or disciplinary action, compared with 16 (30.8%) of 52 articles
published in the second period, also resulting in a significant difference, χ2(1, n = 106)
= 3.850, p < .05, Φ = −.191. Finally, among aggregated broadcast reports, none men-
tioned a suspension or disciplinary action in the first period, while 16 (24.2%) of 66
reports appearing in the second period made such a reference. Thus, in addition to an
overall effect, references to drug use increased significantly in two of the four cases
and would almost certainly have done so in the case of aggregate broadcast reports.

Albuquerque Journal.  Beginning with descriptive statistics, the study of this newspaper
included 67 reports, 31 (46.3%) of which came from Period 1. Overall, 23 (34.3%) of

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

26 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Table 4.  Binary Logistic Regression Analyses for New York Times Content.
Injured or deceased horse −2 log likelihood Cox & Snell’s R2 Nagelkerke’s R2

371.584 .027 .038

Factors B SE Wald statistic df Significance Exp(B)

Period 0.737 0.252  8.529 1 ** 2.090

Constant 0.560 0.174 10.363 1 *** 1.750
−2 log
Equine drug use likelihood Cox & Snell’s R2 Nagelkerke’s R2

  313.651 .037 .058

Factors B SE Wald statistic df Significance Exp(B)

Period 0.975 0.286 11.604 1 *** 2.651

Constant 0.877 0.184 22.839 1 *** 2.405
−2 log
Suspension/disciplinary action likelihood Cox & Snell’s R2 Nagelkerke’s R2

  342.203 .034 .050

Factors B SE Wald statistic df Significance Exp(B)

Period 0.875 0.268 10.660 1 *** 2.399

Constant 0.714 0.178 16.094 1 *** 2.043

Note. The period on or after March 14 served as the reference category.

**p < .01. ***p < .001.

the 67 reports mentioned an injury or the death of a horse, with 22 (95.6%) of the 23
coming in Period 2. Differences across periods were significant, χ2(1, n = 67) = 24.757,
p < .001, Φ = −.608, and lent support to H2a. Regarding equine drugs, 22 (32.8%) of
67 articles contained at least one reference, with 20 (90.9%) of the 22 reports appear-
ing in Period 2. Differences were again significant, χ2(1, n = 67) = 18.211, p < .001,
Φ = −.521, and lent support to H2b. Concerning suspensions and disciplinary actions,
26 (38.8%) of 67 reports contained at least one mention, with 23 (88.5%) of the 26
coming in Period 2. Again, differences were significant, χ2(1, n = 67) = 20.614, p < .001,
Φ = −.555, and lent support to H2c.

Regression Analyses
Two sets of binary logistic regression analyses tested the effects of time period and
news organization on each of the three attribute types. For comparative purposes, the
first set of regressions included the New York Times only, and the second set included
all news organizations in the study. As indicated in Table 4, the first set proved con-
sistent with the cross-tabulations, indicating that in the New York Times, the odds of
articles published on or after March 14 mentioning an injured or deceased horse were
2.090 times the odds of articles in Period 1 making such a mention. For equine drug

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 27

Table 5.  Binary Logistic Regression Analyses.

Injured or deceased horse −2 log likelihood Cox & Snell’s R2 Nagelkerke’s R2

796.599 .025 .036

Wald
Factors B SE statistic df Significance Exp(B)

Period 0.591 0.176 11.210 1 *** 1.805

News organization 7.284 3 ns  
  Los Angeles Times 0.148 0.217 0.469 1 ns 1.160
  Washington Post −0.165 0.245 0.456 1 ns 0.848
 Broadcast 0.677 0.287 5.585 1 * 1.969
Constant 1.091 0.100 118.269 1 *** 2.977
Cox & Snell’s
Equine drug use −2 log likelihood R2 Nagelkerke’s R2

  598.746 .063 .104

Wald
Factors B SE statistic df Significance Exp(B)

Period 1.336 0.229 34.080 1 *** 3.804

News organization 11.517 3 **  
  Los Angeles Times 0.684 0.272 6.337 1 * 1.989
  Washington Post 0.178 0.294 0.367 1 ns 1.195
 Broadcast 0.956 0.345 7.650 1 ** 2.600
Constant 1.861 0.133 195.459 1 *** 6.428
Suspension/disciplinary action −2 log likelihood Cox & Snell’s R2 Nagelkerke’s R2

  665.608 .048 .076

Wald
Factors B SE statistic df Significance Exp(B)

Period 0.986 0.205 23.222 1 *** 2.679

News organization 13.479 3 **  
  Los Angeles Times 0.840 0.265 10.016 1 ** 2.317
  Washington Post 0.127 0.272 0.217 1 ns 1.135
 Broadcast 0.753 0.309 5.956 1 * 2.124
Constant 1.589 0.118 181.643 1 *** 4.899

Note. The New York Times and the period on or after March 14 served as referent categories. ns = not significant.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

use, the odds ratio moved to 2.651, and for suspensions and disciplinary actions, the
odds ratio equaled 2.399.
As Table 5 indicates, analyses including all news organizations lent support to the
first set of hypotheses; that is, the odds of articles published on or after March 14 men-
tioning an injured or deceased horse were 1.805 times the odds of articles in Period 1
making such a mention. For equine drug use, the odds ratio moved to 3.804, and for
suspensions and disciplinary actions, the odds ratio equaled 2.679.41

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

28 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

All Mentions NYT Mentions Other Mentions

Figure 1.  Percentages of cumulative attribute mentions, injured and deceased horses, March
to November 2012. NYT = New York Times.

In terms of individual news organizations, the regression models in Table 5 show

that while mentions in the Washington Post tended toward patterns observed in the
Times—that is, exponentiated beta values were close to 1.0—texts from the Los
Angeles Times and the aggregated broadcasts were significantly more likely to con-
tain mentions of equine drugs and suspensions and disciplinary actions on or after
March 14. These patterns reflect the dearth of Period 1 reports mentioning those
attributes; after the New York Times began to investigate horse racing, mentions
increased significantly.

Visual Representations of Attribute References

To this point, statistical analyses have addressed attribute mentions before and after
the New York Times began its investigation of horse racing in the United States. Having
established differences across time periods, the study now reviews visual displays of
attribute references in the second period. Shown in monthly increments, the three lines
in the figures represent attribute references in (1) all news outlets examined, (2) the
New York Times, and (3) all outlets except the Times, from March to November 2012.
Figure 1 pertains to 114 news reports referencing an injured or deceased horse in
Period 2. The figure reveals that, of those 114 reports, 12 (10.5%) appeared in March,
7 (6.1%) appeared in April, 26 (22.8%) appeared in May, 33 (28.9%) appeared in
June, and so forth. Figure 1 thus illustrates the percent of cumulative references
across time, providing an indication of when news organizations mentioned specific

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 29

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
All Mentions NYT Mentions Other Mentions

Figure 2.  Percentages of cumulative attribute mentions, equine drug use, March to
November 2012. NYT = New York Times.

attributes. As Figure 1 indicates, in addition to overall mentions, the two lines repre-
senting New York Times references as well as mentions in all other news outlets mir-
rored overall reporting patterns.42 Content in the Times correlated with content in
other news outlets at .812 (p < .01).
Figure 2 shows that references to equine drug use increased markedly in May 2012
and continued into June, before declining in the summer months and into the fall.
Outlets other than the New York Times showed slightly more dramatic increases and
decreases in attribute references, with the Times sustaining mentions of drug use from
July through September 2012. In the figure, content in the Times and content in other
outlets correlated at .841 (p < .01).
Figure 3, which displays percentage references to suspensions and disciplinary
actions, resembles the first two figures. As a percentage of total mentions, attribute
references increased markedly in May 2012, with somewhat lower levels in June.
From July through November, references were comparably infrequent, although the
New York Times did reference attributes at slightly higher levels for a longer period
of time. The correlation between content in the Times and other news outlets was .939
(p < .001).

Discussion
While studies in agenda setting have examined the transfer of attribute salience, as
well as intermedia content influences, few analyses have examined the processes

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

30 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
All Mentions NYT Mentions Other Mentions

Figure 3.  Percentages of cumulative attribute mentions, suspensions and disciplinary

actions, March to November 2012. NYT = New York Times.

simultaneously, and even fewer have focused on topics apart from politics and public
affairs. In the context of sports journalism, the current study found quantitative direc-
tionalities in support of intermedia attribute agenda setting, with print and broadcast
news media mentioning injured and deceased horses, equine drug use, and trainer
suspensions and disciplinary actions more frequently following the news events of
March 2012. In addition, visual displays indicated that object attributes stressed in the
Times tended to appear in other outlets at similar points in time throughout the second
period. Recognizing the inherent limitations of a single study, then, the current research
offers some evidence that a prominent news organization can transfer attribute salience
to other outlets.
At the national level, intermedia agenda-setting effects appeared most pronounced
in broadcast news, which revealed almost no attribute observations prior to the Times
coverage. This finding may reflect a higher need for orientation on the part of broad-
cast journalists, who generally have fewer opportunities to report on horse-racing
events and issues connected to the sport. When data for this research were gathered,
the Los Angeles Times, New York Times, and Washington Post each had beat writers
assigned to horse racing, with the New York Times employing two recognized experts
in Walt Bogdanich and Joe Drape, in addition to a reporting team assisting the two
journalists. On occasion, Bogdanich and Drape actually served as news sources them-
selves; one such instance came on May 10, 2012, when the Times reporters appeared
on the NPR program “Fresh Air”43 to discuss their ongoing investigation.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 31

Although journalists at competing news organizations such as the Los Angeles

Times and the Washington Post may have been reluctant to cite the New York Times
investigation, they did acknowledge its impact on occasion. As an example, writing in
the Los Angeles Times, Jaime Goldberg noted that “the issue of drug use in horse rac-
ing has received renewed attention after an investigation by the New York Times that
found trainers in the United States had been caught illegally drugging horses 3,800
times since 2009.”44 In addition, news magazines such as Time and Newsweek, as well
as other publications such as The Atlantic, cited the Times investigation in reports
about drug use in horse racing.45 Sports journalists also followed the investigative
series, with writers at ESPN and Sports Illustrated citing the Times investigation in
online commentaries. As an example, writer Paul Moran opined on ESPN.com,
“Hopefully, for the sake of quarter horses everywhere, the Times series will inspire an
effective reform movement in New Mexico and elsewhere in the bush-track nether-
world.”46 Reporting for Sports Illustrated online (SI.com), Tim Layden cited a “damn-
ing piece” about trainer Doug O’Neill published two days earlier in the New York
Times.47
At the regional level, the Albuquerque Journal reacted quickly to the first Times
report, on March 25, with New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez calling for a full
investigation of quarter-horse racing there.48 As with television journalists at the
national level, reporters at the Albuquerque newspaper may have had a comparably
strong need for orientation about a relatively unobtrusive issue. The New York Times
had directed national attention to the state, and articles referencing the March 25 Times
report appeared in the Albuquerque newspaper on March 27, 28, and 29, as well as
April 2.49 The headline for the March 27 report, “Horse Racing in N.M. under Fire,”50
captured the essence of coverage in the Journal.
But if the New York Times plays a significant role in defining issues and news
events, then accuracy and balance in its reporting are of paramount importance. As
Pritchard has noted,51 public officials often use press coverage of an issue as a surro-
gate for public opinion, and with the homogeneous content that may result from inter-
media agenda-setting processes may come the possibility that a given policy action
will worsen a situation, rather than improve it. News reports tend to be steeped in
dominant conceptions of moral behavior, with individuals who have behaved in an
immoral or socially unacceptable manner “trotted out” to contextualize reports. In the
case of horse racing, trainers who had been linked to doping and equine drug use
appeared in the news throughout 2012, their behaviors represented as reckless and
injurious to the animals in their care. But just as differences exist across thoroughbred
and quarter-horse racing, not all equine drugs have the same potency or effect. While
it may be desirable to create a racing environment free of Lasix, for instance, is it ethi-
cal to force racehorses to go “cold turkey,” potentially causing nose bleeds and endan-
gering the animals instead of protecting them with a more measured approach?
Rhetorically, mass-communicated demands and promises to “clean house” may stim-
ulate or satisfy individuals emotionally, but they also may lead to counterproductive
policies.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

32 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

Limitations and Recommendations

This study examined object attributes before and after a pivotal news event, using chi-
square analysis and binary logistic regression to test relationships for independence
and association, respectively. While the study was conservatively designed, allowing
reporting patterns to emerge across nearly two years of coverage, agenda-setting
scholars often use techniques such as Granger causality and autoregressive integrated
moving average (ARIMA) for time-series analyses. Where appropriate, future analy-
ses of intermedia processes might incorporate these techniques. Analyses also might
focus on news outlets such as USA Today as well as sport-specific media.
The current research found that, in addition to the influence the Times appeared to
have on other news outlets, investigative reports addressing doping also impacted the
Times itself—that is, news coverage of horse racing and the content of its editorial
page both contained more references to issue attributes following the initial investiga-
tive report. This “intramedia” effect stands to reify the existence of a problem and
extend a narrative chronologically.52 As news organizations continue to develop topic-
specific blogs—the Times maintains a horse-racing blog, “The Rail”—relationships
between journalists and online audiences will warrant continued study, as industry
stakeholders often respond to news items via blog comment sections and interactions
with journalists. Following previous research,53 examining audience reactions to tradi-
tional print representations of the news, complete with dramatic photography “above
the fold,” might also be evaluated opposite online portrayals of the same events.

Acknowledgment
The author thanks the reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

Notes
 1. For HBO statement, see http://www.hbo.com/luck/index.html#/luck/talk/news/2012-
03-14-luck-ceases-future-production. For news coverage, see Scott Collins and Patrick
Kevin Day, “HBO Races to Ax ‘Luck,’” Los Angeles Times, March 15, 2012, sec. D,
p. 1; Dave Itzkoff, “After ‘Luck,’ a Post-Mortem Debate,” New York Times, March 16,
2012, sec. C, p. 1; Lisa de Moraes, “HBO Cancels ‘Luck’ after Death of a Third Horse,”
Washington Post, March 15, 2012, sec. C, p. 5.
  2. Alan Zarembo, “Santa Anita Leads in Track Deaths,” Los Angeles Times, March 25, 2012,
sec. A, p. 27.
  3. Walt Bogdanich, Joe Drape, Dara L. Miles, and Griffin Palmer, “Mangled Horses, Maimed
Jockeys,” New York Times, March 25, 2012, sec. A, p. 1.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 33

  4. Bogdanich et al., “Mangled Horses,” A1.

  5. Andrew Beyer, “As ‘Luck’ Runs Out, Horse Racing Needs Answers to Its Problems,”
Washington Post, March 27, 2012, sec. D, p. 2.
 6. Maxwell E. McCombs and Donald L. Shaw, “The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass
Media,” Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (summer 1972): 176-87.
  7. H. Denis Wu and Renita Coleman, “Advancing Agenda-Setting Theory: The Comparative
Strength of New Contingent Conditions on the Two Levels of Agenda-Setting Effects,”
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 86 (winter 2009): 775-89; Leslie A. Rill
and Corey B. Davis, “Testing the Second Level of Agenda Setting: Effects of News Frames
on Reader-Assigned Attributes of Hezbollah and Israel in the 2006 War in Lebanon,”
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 85 (autumn 2008): 609-24; Guy Golan,
Spiro K. Kiousis, and Misti L. McDaniel, “Second-Level Agenda Setting and Political
Advertising: Investigating the Transfer of Issue and Attribute Salience during the 2004
U.S. Presidential Election,” Journalism Studies 8 (3, 2007): 432-43; Joe Bob Hester
and Rhonda Gibson, “The Economy and Second-Level Agenda Setting: A Time-Series
Analysis of Economic News and Public Opinion about the Economy,” Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 89 (spring 2003): 73-91; Sei-Hill Kim, Dietram A. Scheufele,
and James Shanahan, “Think about It This Way: Attribute Agenda-Setting Function of the
Press and the Public’s Evaluation of a Local Issue,” Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly 79 (spring 2002): 7-25; Guy Golan and Wayne Wanta, “Second-Level Agenda-
Setting in the New Hampshire Primary: A Comparison of Coverage in Three Newspapers
and Public Perceptions of Candidates,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
78 (summer 2001): 247-59; Maxwell McCombs, Esteban Lopez-Escobar, and Juan P.
Llamas, “Setting the Agenda of Attributes in the 1996 Spanish General Election,” Journal
of Communication 50 (June 2000): 77-92; Esteban Lopez-Escobar, Juan Pablo Llamas,
Maxwell McCombs, and Frederico Rey Lennon, “Two Levels of Agenda Setting among
Advertising and News in the 1995 Spanish Elections,” Political Communication 15 (2,
1998): 225-38.
 8. Sharon Meraz, “Using Time Series Analysis to Measure Intermedia Agenda-Setting
Influence in Traditional Media and Political Blog Networks,” Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 88 (spring 2011): 176-94; Matthew W. Ragas and Spiro
Kiousis, “Intermedia Agenda Setting and Political Activism: MoveOn.org and the 2008
Presidential Election,” Mass Communication and Society 13 (November-December 2010):
560-83; Rens Vliegenthart and Stefaan Walgrave, “The Contingency of Intermedia Agenda
Setting: A Longitudinal Study in Belgium,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
85 (winter 2008): 860-77; Kaye D. Sweetser, Guy J. Golan, and Wayne Wanta, “Intermedia
Agenda Setting in Television, Advertising, and Blogs during the 2004 Election,” Mass
Communication and Society 11 (April-June 2008): 197-216; Jeongsub Lim, “A Cross-
Lagged Analysis of Agenda Setting among Online News Media,” Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 83 (summer 2006): 298-312; Byoungkwan Lee, Karen M.
Lancendorfer, and Ki Jung Lee, “Agenda Setting and the Internet: The Intermedia Influence
of Internet Bulletin Boards on Newspaper Coverage of the 2000 General Election in South
Korea,” Asian Journal of Communication 15 (1, 2005): 57-71; Gyotae Ku, Linda Lee
Kaid, and Michael Pfau, “The Impact of Web Site Campaigning on Traditional News
Media and Public Information Processing,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
80 (autumn 2003): 528-47; Thomas P. Boyle, “Intermedia Agenda Setting in the 1996
Presidential Election,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 78 (spring 2001):
26-44; Michael J. Breen, “A Cook, a Cardinal, His Priests, and the Press: Deviance as a
Trigger for Intermedia Agenda Setting,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

34 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

74 (summer 1997): 348-56; Marilyn Roberts and Maxwell McCombs, “Agenda Setting
and Political Advertising: Origins of the News Agenda,” Political Communication 11
(3, 1994): 249-62; Tony Atwater, Frederick Fico, and Gary Pizante, “Reporting on the
State Legislature: A Case Study of Intermedia Agenda Setting,” Newspaper Research
Journal 8 (2, 1987): 53-61. See also Maria E. Len-Rios, Amanda Hinnant, Sun-A
Park, Glen T. Cameron, Cynthia M. Frisby, and Youngah Lee, “Health News Agenda
Building: Journalists’ Perceptions of the Role of Public Relations,” Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 86 (summer 2009): 315-31.
  9. Maxwell McCombs, Setting the Agenda (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 2004), 113. See also
Herbert J. Gans, Democracy and the News (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2003),
80; Spiro Kiousis, “Explicating Media Salience: A Factor Analysis of New York Times
Issue Coverage during the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election,” Journal of Communication 54
(March 2004): 71-87.
10. Stephen D. Reese and Lucig H. Danielian, “Intermedia Influence and the Drug Issue:
Converging on Cocaine,” in Communication Campaigns about Drugs: Government,
Media, and the Public, ed. Pamela J. Shoemaker (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum,
1989), 29-45; Lucig H. Danielian and Stephen D. Reese, “A Closer Look at Intermedia
Influences on Agenda Setting: The Cocaine Issue of 1986,” in Communication Campaigns
about Drugs: Government, Media, and the Public, ed. Pamela J. Shoemaker (Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1989), 47-66; McCombs, Setting the Agenda, 113; Guy Golan,
“Intermedia Agenda Setting and Global News Coverage,” Journalism Studies 7 (2, 2006):
323-33.
11. Golan, “Intermedia Agenda Setting and Global News Coverage.”
12. Sharon Meraz, “Is There an Elite Hold? Traditional Media to Social Media Agenda Setting
Influence in Blog Networks,” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14 (April
2009): 682-707. See also Marcus Messner and Marcia Watson Distaso, “The Source Cycle:
How Traditional Media and Weblogs Use Each Other as Sources,” Journalism Studies 9
(3, 2008): 447-63.
13. Reese and Danielian, “Intermedia Influence and the Drug Issue.”
14. Maxwell McCombs, “A Look at Agenda-Setting: Past, Present and Future,” Journalism
Studies 6 (4, 2005): 543-57.
15. In their analysis of agenda-setting research, Rogers and Dearing noted the tendency of
scholars to study “blockbuster” political issues and called for research on matters receiving
less attention. See Everett M. Rogers and James W. Dearing, “Agenda-Setting Research:
Where Has It Been, Where Is It Going?” in Communication Yearbook 11, ed. James
Anderson (Newbury Park, CA: SAGE, 1988), 555-94.
16. McCombs, “A Look at Agenda-Setting,” 549.
17. Although few, previous studies in sports journalism have examined the transfer of object
and attribute salience, focusing on issues such as the capacity of Sports Illustrated to build
media and policy agendas. See Bryan E. Denham, “Sports Illustrated, the Mainstream
Press, and the Enactment of Drug Policy in Major League Baseball: A Study in Agenda-
Building Theory,” Journalism: Theory, Practice and Criticism 5 (1, 2004): 51-68; Bryan E.
Denham, “Building the Agenda and Adjusting the Frame: How the Dramatic Revelations
of Lyle Alzado Impacted Mainstream Press Coverage of Anabolic Steroid Use,” Sociology
of Sport Journal 16 (1, 1999): 1-15. Studies have also addressed organizational efforts
to build news agendas. See Trent Seltzer and Stephen W. Dittmore, “Down, Set, Frame:
Second-Level Agenda Building and the NFL Carriage Dispute,” International Journal
of Sport Communication 2 (3, 2009): 340-59. Also see John A. Fortunato, The Ultimate

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 35

Assist: The Relationship and Broadcasting Strategies of the NBA and Television Networks
(Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 2001).
18. For overview, see Pamela J. Shoemaker and Stephen D. Reese, Mediating the Message:
Theories of Influence on Mass Media Content, 2nd ed. (White Plains, NY: Longman,
1996).
19. For discussion, see Wilson Lowrey, “Journalism Innovation and the Ecology of News
Production: Institutional Tendencies,” Journalism & Communication Monographs 14
(winter 2012): 219-20; Michael Schudson, The Sociology of News (NY: Norton, 2003),
109; W. Lance Bennett, News: The Politics of Illusion, 6th ed. (NY: Longman, 2005), 161;
John McManus, “How Local Television News Learns What Is News,” Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 67 (winter 1990): 672-83.
20. Pablo J. Boczkowski, News at Work: Imitation in an Age of Information Abundance
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010).
21. Doris A. Graber, Mass Media and American Politics, 8th ed. (Washington, DC: CQ Press,
2010), 39; Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Karlyn Kohrs Campbell, The Interplay of Influence,
5th ed. (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2001), 14; Herbert Gans, Deciding What’s News: A
Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Evening News, Newsweek, and Time (NY: Pantheon,
1979), 180.
22. Jae Kook Lee, “The Effect of the Internet on Homogeneity of the Media Agenda: A Test
of the Fragmentation Thesis,” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 84 (winter
2007): 745-60; Timothy E. Cook, “The News Media as a Political Institution: Looking
Backward and Looking Forward,” Political Communication 23 (2, 2006): 159-71; Robert
M. Entman, “Punctuating the Homogeneity of Institutionalized News: Abusing Prisoners
at Abu Ghraib versus Killing Civilians at Fallujah,” Political Communication 23 (2, 2006):
215-24. For discussion of homogeneity in the context of media consolidation, see Robert
G. Picard, “Media Concentration, Economics, and Regulation,” in The Politics of News
and the News of Politics, ed. Doris Graber, Denis McQuail, and Pippa Norris (Washington,
DC: CQ Press, 1998), 193-217; Ben H. Bagdikian, The Media Monopoly, 5th ed. (Boston,
MA: Beacon Press, 1997).
23. McCombs, “A Look at Agenda-Setting,” 547.
24. Bogdanich et al., “Mangled Horses.”
25. Joe Drape, Walt Bogdanich, Rebecca R. Ruiz, and Griffin Palmer, “Big Purses, Sore
Horses, and Death,” New York Times, April 30, 2012, sec. A, p. 1.
26. Walt Bogdanich, Joe Drape, and Rebecca R. Ruiz, “At Racetrack, Economic Pressures
Overpower Veterinarians’ Oath,” New York Times, September 22, 2012, sec. A, p. 1.
27. Bogdanich et al., “Mangled Horses,” A1.
28. Bogdanich et al., “Mangled Horses,” A21.
29. “Horses to the Slaughter,” New York Times, March 27, 2012, sec. A, p. 26.
30. Drape et al., “Big Purses, Sore Horses.”
31. Drape et al., “Big Purses, Sore Horses,” A1.
32. “Smarter Medicine for What Ails Horse Racing,” New York Times, June 17, 2012, sec. SR, p. 10.
33. Walt Bogdanich, “New Mexico Commission Limits Drug Use in Racing,” New York
Times, June 22, 2012, sec. B, p. 12.
34. “Run to Death at Racetracks,” New York Times, August 24, 2012, sec. A, p. 24.
35. Bogdanich, Drape, and Ruiz, “At Racetrack, Economic Pressures.”
36. See www.abqjournal.com.
37. Although coding decisions were largely objective, a group of graduate students examined
content in three sets of ten articles. Two groups agreed on 87 of 90 coding decisions, and

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

36 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(1)

one group agreed on 86 of 90. Using Holsti’s formula, agreement levels equaled .97, .97
and .96, respectively. In all, coders agreed on 260 of 270 coding decisions (.96).
38. Data gathered from the Albuquerque Journal were analyzed exclusively with chi-square
analysis.
39. In terms of application, binary logistic regression is used when a dependent measure is
dichotomous, as in the case of a news report mentioning or not mentioning a given issue
attribute. Exponentiated regression parameter estimates yield odds ratios. See Bryan E.
Denham, “Advanced Categorical Statistics: Issues and Applications in Communication
Research,” Journal of Communication 52 (March 2002): 162-76.
40. The study observes recent discussions of familywise error rates in communication research.
See Daniel J. O’Keefe, “Against Familywise Alpha Adjustments,” Human Communication
Research 29 (July 2003): 431-47. Following O’Keefe, the current study does not compute
familywise error rates, but offers all information necessary to do so.
41. With the New York Times removed from analyses, the odds of articles published on or after
March 14 mentioning an injured or deceased horse were 1.57 times the odds of articles in
period one making such a mention. For equine drug use, the odds ratio moved to 7.17, and
for suspensions and disciplinary actions, the odds ratio equaled 3.12. References to doping,
in particular, thus increased markedly in news texts published on or after March 14.
42. Including separate lines for all outlets made the figure difficult to interpret. Therefore,
after ensuring that aggregated totals offered accurate representations of the data (i.e., that
combined data distributions did not result in ecological fallacies), three lines were included
in each figure. As units on the X-axis, the respective months allowed for variation (or lags)
within them.
43. Terry Gross, “Horse Racing: America’s Most Dangerous Game?” Fresh Air, National
Public Radio, May 10, 2012.
44. Jamie Goldberg, “Drugs Called a Threat to Horse Racing,” Los Angeles Times, July 13,
2012, sec. C, p. 3.
45. See Eliana Dockterman, “Frog Juice: Horse Racing’s New Doping Scandal,” Time, June 21,
2012, http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/21/frog-juice-horse-racings-new-doping-scan-
dal/ (accessed August 12, 2012); Daniel Stone, “Should Congress Police Horseracing?”
Newsweek, July 12, 2012, http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/12/should-
congress-police-horseracing.html (accessed August 12, 2012); Andrew Cohen, “The
Kentucky Derby and the Slow Death of Horse Racing,” The Atlantic, May 3, 2012, http://
www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/05/the-kentucky-derby-and-the-slow-
death-of-horse-racing/256621/ (accessed May 13, 2012). As Cohen noted, “The people
who have led the industry to the brink of irrelevance are the same ones who say today that
we should trust them to shape the sport’s future. That’s why the recent exposes in The New
York Times, by Joe Drape, Walt Bogdanich, Rebecca R. Ruiz, and Griffin Palmer, are so
powerful. It’s not that anyone in horse racing is shocked by the revelations. It’s that we’ve
known the grim truth all this time.”
46. Paul Moran, “A Sign of the Times,” ESPN.com, April 2, 2012, http://espn.go.com/espn/
print?id=7766140&type=story (accessed April 8, 2013).
47. Tim Layden, “Derby-Winning Trainer O’Neill Deals with Success and Suspicions,” SI.
com, May 12, 2012, http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/tim_layden/05/11/derby.
trainer. doug.oneill/index.html (accessed April 8, 2013). See also Tim Layden, “Inside
Horse Racing,” SI.com, June 3, 2012, http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/tim_
layden/05/11/derby.trainer.doug.oneill/ (accessed April 8, 2013).

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016

Denham 37

48. Bogdanich, “New Mexico Commission.”

49. Charles D. Brunt, “Horse Racing in N.M. under Fire,” Albuquerque Journal, March 27,
2012, sec. A, p. 1; Thomas J. Cole, “Slots and Safety at N.M. Tracks,” Albuquerque
Journal, March 28, 2012, sec. A, p. 1; “Raise the Stakes on N.M.’s Racing Industry,”
Albuquerque Journal, March 29, 2012, http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/03/29/
opinion/raise-the-stakes-on-nms-racing-industry.html (accessed June 28, 2012); Laura
Bonar, “Create a Safety Net for N.M.’s Equines,” Albuquerque Journal, April 2, 2012,
http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/04/02/opinion/create-a-safety-net-for-nms-
equines.html (accessed June 28, 2012).
50. Brunt, “Horse Racing in N.M. under Fire.”
51. David Pritchard, “The News Media and Public Policy Agendas,” in Public Opinion, the
Press, and Public Policy, ed. J. David Kennamer (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994), 103-12.
52. Breen, “A Cook, a Cardinal.”
53. David Tewksbury and Scott Althaus, “Differences in Knowledge Acquisition among
Readers of the Paper and Online Versions of a National Newspaper,” Journalism &
Mass Communication Quarterly 77 (autumn 2000): 457-79; Scott L. Althaus and David
Tewksbury, “Agenda Setting and the ‘New’ News: Patterns of Issue Importance among
Readers of the Paper and Online Versions of the New York Times,” Communication
Research 29 (April 2002): 180-207.

Downloaded from jmq.sagepub.com by guest on March 21, 2016