294
R. Rosemary and D. Evensen
negative (Fig. 14.1). Conversely, six of the 16 possible types of efficacy information
for which we coded were not the focus of any article in our sample. The only theme
that was present to any meaningful extent in the global efficacy information was
negative external efficacy (24 articles—over half the global sample).
Discussion
Our content analysis examined how Serambi Indonesia (SI) reported on the issues
of environment and climate change in general, and AGV in particular, focusing on
use and valence of efficacy information for action to address the Aceh’s government
‘green’ initiative. The results reveal that SI afforded most attention to external efficacy
and response efficacy. Functionally, this means that SI was more likely to report on
the capacity of authoritative actors (government, policymakers, NGOs, religious, and
customary leaders) to act on environmental issues (local, national, and global level)
than to focus on efficacy of individuals or civil society groups, who could take action
to address the realities and risks of environmental challenges in Aceh.
The significant differences in valence between types of efficacy information has
practical implications—for example, it may suggest that SI journalists (and Indonesian journalists generally) should consider whether more self-efficacy and group
efficacy information can be given, and think about whether there are additional positive examples of response and external efficacy that can be provided. This empirical
finding corresponds with the work of Feldman et al. (2017), but adds the important
category of group efficacy—which could be particularly important for incentivising
action on climate change, due to always being positive in the sample of articles
we analysed here (although notably only in relation to local environment, and not
global).
The differences in authorship is a valuable finding, because it shows that targeting
a relatively small number of individuals working for a local newspaper such as SI
might be valuable in changing the tenor of the coverage. Analysis of the differences in
types of efficacy information provided by editors and non-editors shows similar levels
of self, external, and group efficacy information by both groups of writers, but that
editors offer notably more response efficacy information, which tends to be the most
negative (i.e. highest percentage of negative information of any form of efficacy).
Importantly, the more negative information from editors cannot be accounted for by
the difference between news and opinion articles, as there is no significant difference
in valence between those two article types.
The increased focus on environmental and ‘green’ issues in SI in 2017–2018 might
be due, at least in part, to this topic featuring prominently in the election campaign
In Aceh. Irwandi Yusuf was elected governor in the 2006 Aceh regional election;
after taking office in 2007, he quickly implemented the AGV. He left office in 2012,
but then ran again for governor in 2017. Political issues in relation to the election
become a substantial topic that SI covered heavily. In Irwandi’s campaign in 2017,
R. Rosemary and D. Evensen
negative (Fig. 14.1). Conversely, six of the 16 possible types of efficacy information
for which we coded were not the focus of any article in our sample. The only theme
that was present to any meaningful extent in the global efficacy information was
negative external efficacy (24 articles—over half the global sample).
Discussion
Our content analysis examined how Serambi Indonesia (SI) reported on the issues
of environment and climate change in general, and AGV in particular, focusing on
use and valence of efficacy information for action to address the Aceh’s government
‘green’ initiative. The results reveal that SI afforded most attention to external efficacy
and response efficacy. Functionally, this means that SI was more likely to report on
the capacity of authoritative actors (government, policymakers, NGOs, religious, and
customary leaders) to act on environmental issues (local, national, and global level)
than to focus on efficacy of individuals or civil society groups, who could take action
to address the realities and risks of environmental challenges in Aceh.
The significant differences in valence between types of efficacy information has
practical implications—for example, it may suggest that SI journalists (and Indonesian journalists generally) should consider whether more self-efficacy and group
efficacy information can be given, and think about whether there are additional positive examples of response and external efficacy that can be provided. This empirical
finding corresponds with the work of Feldman et al. (2017), but adds the important
category of group efficacy—which could be particularly important for incentivising
action on climate change, due to always being positive in the sample of articles
we analysed here (although notably only in relation to local environment, and not
global).
The differences in authorship is a valuable finding, because it shows that targeting
a relatively small number of individuals working for a local newspaper such as SI
might be valuable in changing the tenor of the coverage. Analysis of the differences in
types of efficacy information provided by editors and non-editors shows similar levels
of self, external, and group efficacy information by both groups of writers, but that
editors offer notably more response efficacy information, which tends to be the most
negative (i.e. highest percentage of negative information of any form of efficacy).
Importantly, the more negative information from editors cannot be accounted for by
the difference between news and opinion articles, as there is no significant difference
in valence between those two article types.
The increased focus on environmental and ‘green’ issues in SI in 2017–2018 might
be due, at least in part, to this topic featuring prominently in the election campaign
In Aceh. Irwandi Yusuf was elected governor in the 2006 Aceh regional election;
after taking office in 2007, he quickly implemented the AGV. He left office in 2012,
but then ran again for governor in 2017. Political issues in relation to the election
become a substantial topic that SI covered heavily. In Irwandi’s campaign in 2017,