Public Opinion Issues in Agenda-Setting Theory: An Analytical Study of the “Kalam Al-Nas” Program on Al-Sharqiya TV for the Period from February 24, 2024, to July 2, 2024

Prepared by the researche  :  Rasha Mohammed Naji  – Al ayen iraqi university

Democratic Arabic Center

Journal of Media Studies : Thirty-first Issue – May 2025

A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin

:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link

https://democraticac.de/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/%D9%85%D8%AC%D9%84%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B9%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%AF%D9%8A-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AB%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AB%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A3%D9%8A%D8%A7%D8%B1-%E2%80%93-%D9%85%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%88-2025.pdf

Abstract

The topic of public opinion issues in agenda-setting theory holds significant importance at both academic and scientific levels. Given the diversity of public issues and their numerous demands, understanding how to prioritize public interests has become essential as it involves complex processes. This raises a critical question: who sets these priorities—is it the public, the media, or the nature of the issue itself? Answering this question requires precision, as well as determining whether there is alignment between the public’s agenda and the media’s agenda. To what extent can media influence public priorities and alter the ranking and importance of issues? Conversely, can the public determine the media’s agenda? This research is descriptive and employs an analytical survey method, relying on both quantitative and qualitative content analysis to examine issues of “Public Issuesin specialized Arabic-language television programs. The research focuses on the “Kalam Al-Nas” program, analyzing episodes aired from February 24, 2024, to July 2, 2024.   A random sample of 17 episodes from the program, broadcasted on Al-Sharqiya TV channel, was selected for analysis.

Introduction

Various factors influence the ranking of media topics within programming schedules, based on allocated time slots for the medium and the importance of issues to the audience. The selection or arrangement is deliberate, depending on factors like space, format, and diverse methods of highlighting issues that lead the media to prioritize certain topics over others in presenting them to the audience. No media outlet can determine a single level of importance, as topics and news vary in significance, whether in public or private political matters. Therefore, it has become necessary for the media to organize the presentation of issues in a way that indicates the relative importance of one issue compared to another. The media chooses the order that suits and reflects its stance toward these issues. This process is known as agenda-setting or prioritization of interest, involving several decisions related to the media’s editorial policies, technical systems, and production processes. News is organized in formats according to its importance, proximity to the audience and medium, recency, severity, and impact on the media’s audience. Scholars and researchers have observed how agendas are arranged for the audience, noting agreement between the importance ranking set by the public and that set by the media. Questions arise about whether the media’s ranking influences the audience’s perception of importance. This study explores these questions through various hypotheses, some suggesting that the way the media presents content with frequent exposure and persuasive appeals can cause the audience to prioritize one issue over another. Others argue that the audience’s interests, proximity to the issue, and its relevance determine the media’s priorities. Ultimately, the media’s main goal is to attract and retain audience interest amid intense competition among media outlets for success and reach.

Chapter 1: Research Methodology

1. 1. Research Problem

   The research problem is centered around the main question: How are public issues prioritized according to agenda-setting theory in the “Kalam Al-Nas” program?

2. 2. Research Importance:

   Given the widespread interest in public issues and the diversity of societal groups, each with distinct needs and changing priorities based on surrounding conditions, it is essential to understand the public’s priorities and who determines them.

3. 3. Research Questions

   The study raises several sub-questions:

1. What are the main issues of public interest?
2. Who prioritizes public issues?
3. What factors influence the public’s prioritization?

4. 4. Research Objectives:
5. Identify the main issues that are of public interest.
6. Determine who organizes issues according to public priorities.
7. Investigate the factors influencing public prioritization.

5.Research Population and Sample;

   The original research population comprises the “Kalam Al-Nas” program aired on Al-Sharqiya TV, analyzing its content both in form and substance. The researcher analyzed 17randomly selected episodes.

6.Research Type and Methodology:

   This descriptive research focuses on characterizing the nature and features of a particular community. The researcher used both descriptive and analytical survey methods suitable for the study, aligning with its goals.

7.Research Tools

   The researcher designed a content analysis form to collect and categorize primary data and information, focusing on the explicit content presented in the “Kalam Al-Nas” program.

Chapter 2: Public Issues in Agenda-Setting Theory

1. Concept of Agenda-Setting Theory

   The study of mass communication effects has been a primary concern in communication theories over the past decades, a concern likely to continue growing as media becomes a dominant global force. It is therefore logical to examine the impacts of this power, its limits, and whether they are positive or negative, overt or covert. Researchers have sought to answer these and other questions related to media influence. Among these influences is what is known as the “media’s function in setting public priorities ([1]).” Agenda-setting theory explains and describes how media can influence public agendas, suggesting a relationship between the issues highlighted by the media and increased public interest in those issues. In 1959, Kurt Lang and Gladys *Lang proposed the idea of agenda-setting, stating, “The media strongly direct attention to specific issues, shaping public perceptions of political leadership and consistently indicating what individuals should think about and how they should feel about it ([2]).” Bernard Cohen further emphasized this in 1963, stating that while media might not always succeed in telling the public what to think, it is remarkably successful in telling them what to think about([3]).

   When a specific event or issue receives repeated coverage, it influences public opinion in prioritizing the most important topics. This theory is based on several assumptions([4]).

   – Media does not reflect reality but shapes and constructs it.

   – Media focuses on a limited number of issues, affecting public perception by making them believe these are the most important matters.

2. 2. Importance of Agenda-Setting Theory

   In the 1970s, researchers increasingly conducted media studies testing various communication theories and hypotheses. The central question was: *Does media attention to specific content lead to increased public interest in that content?* Through observing scientific efforts in agenda-setting studies, it became evident that “media, by emphasizing certain issues and neglecting others, influences public opinion.” ([5])

In 1972, Anthony Downs* developed the “issue attention cycle,” a significant advancement in agenda-setting theory that studies issue prioritization as it relates to public and media agendas. Downs argues that the essence of issue attention lies in the interaction between mass communication patterns and public engagement. Public interest in different issues fluctuates daily, leading to varying levels of attention in the public and media agendas Patterns of mass communication through media and the public’s attention to various issues change daily—sometimes stable, sometimes rising dramatically. The competition between issues for attention leads to differences and variations in their position on the public agenda, whether for the audience or the media, fluctuating between rising, declining, or renewing. This indicates that some aspects of agenda-setting have not been fully explored by the theory.

Scholars have differing views on the issue-attention cycle. Some see it merely as a model like other media models, while others regard it as a scientific theory comparable to other communication theories. Generally, all agenda-setting research is based on the correlation between the ranking provided by the audience from their perspective, as determined through methodological survey studies, and the ranking by the media through analysis. Based on the results of this relationship, which most studies confirm as positive, the important issue for the audience becomes the focus of the media. The media may highlight an issue and its circumstances unknown to the audience, thus setting the audience’s priorities. However, the media cannot impose interest in an issue unless the audience is aware and conscious of it and its implications.([6])

Here, the media’s role is evident in using emotional and rational appeals or even frightening the audience by highlighting the seriousness of the topic, enabling the audience to make choices based on their priorities. The agenda-setting theory is significant in directing or shaping attention, pointing to the media’s role in setting the audience’s agenda. The strength of the topics and issues presented by the media lies not only in persuasion but also in guiding attention and clarifying the inherent benefits of understanding a particular issue([7])..

3. 3. How Issues are Organized in Public Priorities:

   Researchers have conducted extensive studies on media agendas and their impact on public priorities, but they have largely overlooked a critical question: How are media agendas organized, and what influences these changes([8])? The answer lies in real-world events and the media’s coverage of them, which often appears seamless. However, numerous studies have shown that media coverage is not closely linked to real-world events. Instead, several factors determine what makes an issue newsworthy:

The organization of issues is a reciprocal process between the citizen, the government, and the media. There are two approaches that explain this relationship as outlined by Lang and Lang([9]):

1. 1. The First Approach: This approach adopts the gatekeeper perspective, which holds that the media have a significant role and power in monitoring events. The selective attention given by the media often results in incomplete and biased coverage, influenced by the audience’s perception. This emphasizes the strength of the media.
2. 2. The Second Approach: This view considers the media as agents for the audience, who are members of society. The media monitor the public’s needs for understanding public issues and potential solutions. These needs dictate the media’s focus and, in turn, influence the public’s attention to various issues.

So, what determines the media’s agenda? Van Kersbergen([10]) identified several mechanisms that influence the level of attention the media give to different issues, which include the following:

1. Selectively focusing on unusual angles of minor issues, making them intriguing and attention-grabbing.
2. Extensive coverage of prominent and extraordinary events, emphasizing details that captivate the audience, especially in sensitive topics.
3. The media adapts to the flow of issues, often stopping coverage when events become repetitive.
4. Fabricating events or staging situations to make them newsworthy, such as protests and sit-ins.
5. Presenting events devoid of values in a way that grants them newsworthiness.

   These mechanisms vary depending on the complexity and significance of the issues. The more significant and unusual the event, the greater the coverage it receives.

4.Steps for Prioritizing Issues Based on Their Type

YYagid and Deuze aim to study agenda-setting effects, particularly whether they occur more quickly in straightforward or abstract issues. Researchers predicted that the public would struggle to understand abstract issues, as media plays a vital role in simplifying them and reducing ambiguity. Additionally, media controls the prioritization of issues, increasing the likelihood of agenda-setting effects. The study concluded that media can shape the public’s agenda, especially regarding abstract issues, highlighting the importance of this aspect in media effect studies^([11])   .

Many studies have been conducted on the public to understand how issues are prioritized, what the public’s priorities are, and who determines them. Exposure is a key factor in determining the importance of an issue, as the intensity of exposure plays a role in prioritizing difficult or abstract issues. But how does exposure and its intensity affect the acceptance of such issues and their inclusion in the priority list? Several factors and steps can alter the public’s issue prioritization([12]):

1. The media spotlight certain events and issues that are close to society.
2. Some issues require more coverage and greater space to attract attention and become public priorities.
3. Framing events and issues in a way that gives them meaning, making them easier to understand.
4. The language used by the media can affect the public’s perception of the issue.
5. Many media outlets link attention-grabbing events with recognizable secondary symbols in the political landscape, as people often need a foundation to take a stance on an issue.
6. The building of the agenda and the public’s prioritization increases when trusted individuals or opinion leaders discuss the issue.

These are some key and complex steps in distinguishing between issues, how they are covered, and the extent to which they can be understood through coverage.

5.Factors Influencing Agenda-Setting

Agenda-setting or prioritizing public issues does not have an equal impact on all individuals. Certain factors help connect transmitted information to individuals and reduce their confusion in choosing one issue over another([13]):

• m edia Personnel Influence: Personal traits and skills of media workers affect message delivery.
• Routine Factors: Time allocation, exposure intensity, storytelling skills, and credible sources shape media content.
• Institutional Influence: Profit motives of media organizations can impact content significantly.
• External Influence: Pressure from interest groups, staged events, and government regulations affect media content.
• Ideological Influence: Media content must align with societal norms and community ideologies.
• Diverse Audience Needs: Different demographics prioritize various issues, influencing media focus.
• Dynamic Agenda Concept: Agenda-setting evolves with audiences, reflecting long-term societal values.
• Agenda-Setting vs. Direct Influence: Agenda-setting highlights or downplays issues rather than directly persuading.
• Competing Influences: Personal experiences and social factors can challenge media’s agenda-setting power.
• Media Focus and Public Attention: Greater media emphasis on issues increases public focus on those topics.

The media play a crucial role in shaping the audience’s attention, guiding it by prioritizing issues according to the organization’s policies. Media outlets use all available persuasive tools to create awareness and inform the public, leading to an understanding aligned with the outlet’s agenda. However, media success in educating and influencing the public is not always guaranteed; they excel more at guiding what the audience thinks about rather than how they think([14]).

6.Stages of Issue Attention According to Agenda-Setting

Anthony Downs suggested five stages of public and media attention to issues([15]):

1-Pre-Problem Stage: The issue starts to emerge but lacks enough public attention due to limited media coverage.

2. 2. Alarmed Discovery and Enthusiastic Response: The public suddenly becomes aware of the issue due to a surge in related events and realizes the seriousness of the problem, leading to a strong response.
3. 3. Gradual Realization of the Cost of Problem Resolution: The public begins to understand that solving the issue requires significant sacrifices, leading to cautious optimism.
4. 4. Decline in Public Interest: Public interest wanes as the challenge of addressing the issue becomes more apparent, leading to disillusionment and withdrawal.
5. 5. Post-Problem Stage: Interest fades as new issues take precedence, although remnants of concern may linger.

For an issue to progress through these stages, it must meet three criteria([16]):

1. It should affect a minority, not the majority, of the population.
2. The measures to address it should benefit the majority.
3. The issue must be engaging and avoid prolonged media coverage without new developments.

7.Strengths and Weaknesses of Agenda-Setting Theory

1-Strengths:

Agenda-setting theory is a comprehensive framework for studying issues in detail, focusing on their cyclical stages. It enriches research through both analytical and field applications and intersects with framing theory to examine public interests. The theory supports interdisciplinary models for analyzing attention to issues, addressing both major topics and related sub-issues. This reflects a shift from the idea that “the media may not tell us what to think, but it tells us what to think about,” to a more nuanced understanding that “the media not only tells us what to think about but also how to think about it.” ([17])”

Journalists are key in setting the media agenda and generating public interest, as demonstrated by the Watergate scandal, which swayed voter preferences. The media shapes public perceptions by highlighting certain traits while downplaying others. Public relations professionals utilize agenda-setting theory to frame events strategically. This theory facilitates the analysis of the issue-attention cycle, showing that media acts as a spotlight influenced by vested interests, sometimes creating artificial events to distract from more pressing issues. Content analysis identifies media topics, while surveys gauge public priorities, indicating that agenda-setting is a deliberate process shaped by audience considerations ^([18]).

2 Weaknesses:

Agenda-setting theory faces several criticisms despite its strengths. Key critiques include the linear assumptions proposed by Downs, which some argue oversimplify the interaction of social issues. There’s also debate about interest levels during the post-issue stage, with some suggesting interest may remain higher than at the initial stage. The theory lacks clear scientific criteria for stage boundaries, leading to disagreements on the number of stages. Additionally, challenges in data collection, especially in developing countries, hinder research. The role of intermediary variables and the influence of different agendas are also inadequately addressed. Finally, the theory does not clarify the motivations behind media agenda-setting or establish standardized methods for measuring stages in the issue-attention cycle ([19]).

8: Advantages of Agenda-Setting Theory:

Agenda-setting theory stands out for its comprehensiveness and its grasp of diverse human issues and concerns([20]):

1. 1. It is distinguished as one of the interdisciplinary scientific frameworks, as evidenced by its research applications in various fields, including media, politics, society, and other areas of human and social studies.
2. 2. The theory is flexible, with its assumptions being adaptable and capable of development inthe criteria applied to the issues it addresses.
3. 3. It is applicable in various subfields of mass communication studies, such as journalism, public awareness campaigns, and more.
4. 4. The theory provides two scientific explanations for two key ideas or processes in its research assumptions: the idea of increasing attention, reaching a peak, and then declining and fading, and the idea of issue replacement between the agendas of the media and the public.
5. 5. It emphasizes the role of media professionals in influencing decisions to prioritize certain issues on government agendas. Additionally, it opens research opportunities in sociology, politics, and public relations.
6. 6. The theory is fertile ground for exploring diverse and even newly emerging fields, and it offers the possibility of organizing these areas within different life domains.

Agenda-setting is primarily characterized as a cognitive process known as accessibility, meaning that the repetition and prominence of issues covered by various media make them more likely to reach the public’s memory. In one study, when people were asked about the most important issues and challenges facing the country, the responses tended to be about the issues that were most accessible in memory, which usually were the ones heavily emphasized by the media. The impact of agenda-setting is not the result of receiving a single message or a limited number of messages; rather, it is the outcome of the accumulation of a vast number of messages, each with different content but all related to the main issue of concern to the audience.

Media outlets, by extensively covering public matters, particularly in the context of agenda-setting, exert a strong influence in guiding individuals’ thoughts about what others are thinking and how they think. As a result, people tend to pay more attention to issues that receive widespread media coverage([21]).

Chapter Three: Audience Issues in the Agenda-Setting Theory in the ” Kalam Al-Nas ” Program 

Presentation and Interpretation of Research Results:

The researcher employed content analysis for the analytical study of the program “Kalam Al-Nas” by selecting a random sample of episodes aired between 24\2, 2024, to 2\7\ 2024 “Kalam Al-Nas,” which is broadcasted on Al-Sharqiya TV, is justified by the channel’s significant focus on audience issues and the program’s distinctiveness in terms of its topics and presentation style. The program discusses people’s issues through direct street interviews, capturing their concerns and struggles in a spontaneous manner. It involves meeting women from various Arab nationalities and understanding the circumstances surrounding each individual.

Based on these criteria, the researcher selected the “Together” program and calculated the number of episodes aired within the specified period, which amounted to 17 episodes, From February 24, 2024, to July 2, 2024. , over six months. This period falls within the research timeline, as shown in Table 1.

The main and subcategories in the research program (“What Was Said?”) and the main and subcategories of how the program was presented (“How Was It Said?”) were identified. The researcher calculated the frequencies, percentages, and rankings of these categories and interpreted the results according to the research methodology to achieve the study’s objectives, as highlighted in the research program.

The researcher identified several categories related to the content of communication (“What Was Said”) that include four main categories and their subcategories, as shown in the table:

First: Main Categories for Organizing Audience Priorities Identified in the Program

Table 1: Main Categories of Audience Issues and Their Priority Rankings Based on Interests in the “Kalam Al-Nas” Program

The table (1) highlights that economic issues dominate the public’s priorities across various aspects, such as unemployment and the lack of a sufficient monthly income to meet family needs. This was addressed in most of the episodes, appearing 75times with a percentage of 41.208%. Social issues, such as matters concerning widows, divorcees, and social security, come in second place with 60 occurrences and a percentage of 32.967%. Human rights issues, including children’s rights to education, access to books and free schooling, healthcare, and protection from work-related risks, as well as women’s rights, were mentioned 27 times, making up 14.835%. Health issues, particularly the shortage of chronic disease treatments in government hospitals, ranked fourth with 20 occurrences, representing 11%.

Second: The categories that organize the public’s priorities in the “Kalam Al-Nas” program (Table 2)

The table (2) reveals the emergence of four sub-categories, with the “Audience”

category ranking first, receiving 53 mentions, representing 84%. The “Issue” category came in second place with 23 mentions, followed by the “Media” category in third place with 8 mentions. This indicates the importance of the audience, followed by the type and relevance of the issue, in determining the public’s priorities.

Third: The factors contributing to the organization of the public’s priorities (Table 3).

The “Nature of the Issue” category ranked first, receiving 20 mentions with a

percentage of 35%. The “Frequency and Increased Media Coverage of the Issue” category ranked second with 15 mentions, representing 27%. The “Importance of the Issue to the Media and Funding Entities” category came third with 12 mentions, making up 21%. The “Recency of the Issue” category ranked fourth with 10 mentions, representing 17%. This indicates that the relevance of an issue to the audience plays a significant role; the closer it is to their reality, the more it captures their attention.

Conclusions

In light of the research findings, the following conclusions can be draw

Priority-setting research focuses on studying the reciprocal relationship between the public and the media in determining the priorities of economic, political, and social issues of interest to society. The theory assumes that the media cannot cover all topics and conflicts occurring in society with the same intensity. Therefore, those in charge of the media select specific topics and issues to emphasize, controlling their nature and content. These topics capture the public’s interest and provoke their emotions because they resonate with their concerns and aspirations, making them aware of, think about, and worry about these issues. Consequently, these topics become more significant to the public than other issues not highlighted by the media. The media directs attention to one issue over another, suggesting what individuals should think about, know, and feel. When the media allocates the majority of coverage time and space to a particular issue, that issue gains greater importance.

The main hypothesis in most agenda-setting studies is the alignment between the agenda set by the media and the agenda of the public, indicating a positive correlation between the public’s interests and the media’s agenda. This highlights the role and importance of the media in shaping the public’s priorities in the same order the media gives to topics and issues. Four significant tests of these hypotheses have been conducted:

1. 1. The original study tested the core hypothesis that the way an event or issue is covered affects the public’s perception of its importance.
2. 2. Studies on the roles of media and psychological concepts, such as the need for adaptation, and the alignment between individual communication and mass communication.
3. 3. By the 1980s, agenda-setting research shifted from an independent variable to a dependent one, with this latter hypothesis being more complex as it describes and explains many correlative relationships between the hypotheses.

Despite the alignment between the public’s agenda and the media agenda, according to these hypotheses, other factors and interventions influence this agenda. Media coverage is affected by breaking news from sudden events or the escalation of conflicts and wars. The public’s agenda shifts during wartime, with many previously significant issues being neglected. Additionally, the systematic policies of different media institutions in scheduling their content, their financial capabilities, and their ability to provide media coverage play a role. Some institutions even create news by organizing events that attract media attention. Moreover, the impact of the audience on communicators is significant, as the media’s ability to shape public priorities is linked to the type of audience, particularly in terms of their education, political interests, and the surrounding circumstances.

1. Badri, A., & Osama, S.,.”Women and mass media: A critical ,1995.

2.analytical study of the portrayal of Sudanese women in printed

3.media”. Ahfad Journal,1999.

4.Scott, W, Psychological and social correlates of international,1965

5.images. international behavior, ed. Herbert c. Kelman.

6.Everbach, T.. The feminine culture of a women-led newspaper: an2008.

7.organizational study. paper presented at the annual meeting of the

8.International Communication Association, Sheraton New York,2000.

9.Gakahu, N., & Mukhongo.,. “Women’s pages’ in kenya’s newspapers: 2007.

10.implications for the country’s development. Gender and

11.Development Journal, Jhon, M, The image of women in American T.V commercials. new1980.

12.York: Long Press Distributors.

13.Rosengrer, K. , Advances in content analysis (U.S.A) 1981, .

14.Killer, W,  Myths of illusions. reality and gender differences. Paper1992.

15.presented at the annual meeting at the American alliance of health

16.Kraus, S., &, Dennis, D,The effects of mass communication on1976.

17.political behavior, University park: the Pennsylvania State

18.University Press.

19.Maryilan, G. The portrayal of women in newspapers: meta analysis ,2004.

20.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for

21.United Nations, Economic and social council, further actions 2000

22.initiatives to implement the beijing declaration and platform for

23.action, E\CN, 6, 2000, New York.

24.Whithey,W ,Mass media and social problems. New York: McGrawhill 1985 .

25.danielian, L.H., and s.d reese  . A closer look at intermedia influences on agenda setting:the cocaine issue of 1986.in p.j shoemaker,ed ., Communication campaigns about drugs: government, media, and the public,1989.

26.lang.G.E and klang , the battle for public opinion:the president.the press.and the polls during the press ,and during Watergate .new : columbia university pre1983,

27. Lang,k, and G. Lang , the mass media and voting in burdick and Brodbeck  American voting behaviour,. glencoe,lll: free press 1959

28.cohen, B.C,. The press and forgein policy. princeton,N.J princeton university press,1963,

29.Westley.B.H, what makes it change? journalist of communication, 1976 .

30.funkhouser, G.R trends in media coverage of the issues of thejournalist quarterly1960  ,

31.lang ,k, and G.E lang the unique perspective of television and it’s effect :A pilots study .in W. Schramm,ed. Mass communication,

32.university of illinois press ,1980

33. ⃰ _Yagade,A.,and D.M. dozier , The media agenda_setting effect of concrete versus abstract issues journalist Quarterly, 1990, .

34 Wanta, w.. and R.E,. Miller, of the public agenda: the president press public relationship paper presented at the annual meeting of the international communication1995.

35.Klapper ,j.. the effects of mass communication .new york :free press 1960.

36. Gilberg s,.,c mccombs and D Nicholas the state of the Union address on the press  agenda journalism quarterly1980,
37. .• Gary T. Henry and Craig S. Gordon (2001) , Tracking Issue Attention: Specifying the Dynamics of the public Agenda, Public Opinion Quarterly,.
38. McComb, M., and G estrade , the news media and the pictures in our heads in Lyengar and R. reeevs eds.,do the media govern? politicians voters and reportersin 1997,
39. thousand oaks Calif :
40. Maxwell McCombs and jian-Hua Zhu ,Capacity, Diversity, and volatility of the puplic agenda, Public Opinion Quarterly, 1995.

41._Gilberg s,.,c mccombs and D  Nicholas , the state of the Union address on the press  agenda journalism quarterly 1980.

42. B. Guy Peters and Brian w. Hogwood), In Search of Issue-Attention Cyclre, Journal of. 1985.

_ Mccombs, M .E,setting the agenda for agenda-setting research an  assessment ~ the priority ideas and problems  wilhoit and H .de

 bock eds mass communication review yearbook, 2009

([1]) danielian, L.H., and s.d reese  . A closer look at intermedia influences on agenda setting:the cocaine issue of 1986.in p.j shoemaker,ed ., Communication campaigns about drugs: government, media, and the public,1989 ,pp 47—66

* lang.G.E and klang (1983).the battle for public opinion:the president.the press.and the polls during the press ,and during Watergate .new : columbia university pre

([2]).Mohamed Abdel Hamid, Media Theories and Influence Trends, 3rd edition (Cairo: Alam Al-Kutub, 2004), p. 341.

([3]) ang,k,  and G. Lang ,  the mass media and voting in burdick and Brodbeck  American voting behaviour,pp.217_235. glencoe,lll: free press 1959,  p.232.

([4]) cohen, B.C,. The press and forgein policy. princeton,N.J princeton university press,1963, p.13

([5]) ⁽Cohen,b.c.op.cit,p16.

. Anthony Downs is an American philosopher and economist, born on November 21, 1930, in Evanston, United States.

([6]). Ali Layla, previously cited source, p. 77.

([7]) Ahmed Zakaria Ahmed, Media Theories, (Al-Maktaba Al-Masriya Publishing House, 1995), p. 122.

([8])  Westley.B.H(1976) what makes it change? journalist of communication,  ,ppp26-43-47

([9]) lang ,k, and G.E lang the unique perspective of television and it’s effect :A pilots study .in W. Schramm,ed. Mass communication, university of illinois press ,1980,Pp. 544_560.

([10]) funkhouser, G.R trends in media coverage of the issues of the ’60s journalist quarterly,.50:57_53.

([11]) Wanta, w.. and R.E,. Miller, of the public agenda: the president press public relationship paper presented at the annual meeting of the international communication1995,p45

([12]) klapper,j.. the effects of mass communication.ew york :free press 1960 .p.8

([13]) Gilberg s,.,c mccombs and D  Nicholas the state of the Union address on the press  agenda journalism quarterly1980,p 57..

([14]). Mohamed Abdel Hamid, previously cited source, p. 345.

([15]) Anthony Downs (1972), Up And Down with Ecology: The Issue-Attention Cycle, The Public Internet, Vol. 28

([16])Gary T. Henry and Craig S. Gordon (2001) , Tracking Issue Attention: Specifying the Dynamics of the public Agenda, Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 65, No. 2

([17]) Maxwell McCombs and  jian-Hua Zhu (1995), Capacity, Diversity, and volatility of the puplic agenda, Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 59.

([18]) McComb, M.op..cit,p98.

([19]) Yagade,A.,and D.M. dozier ,op.cit,p51.

([20]) Mccombs, M .E,setting the agenda for agenda-setting research an  assessment  the priority ideas and problems  wilhoit and H .de   bock eds mass communication review yearbook,vol1981, pp. 209_211  Beverley hills calif sage.

([21]). Kamal Al-Haj, Media and Communication Theories, Syrian Virtual University, 2020, p. 141.