Abstract
This article contributes to a more systematic understanding of the role of mainstream media in deliberative processes by analyzing how inclusive local newspapers are of diverse perspectives on the Terri Schiavo case. Using both Pearson's chi-square test and multinomial logistic regression, we assess how ownership, state political ideology, geographic location, and news format affect what ideas are included in the debate over whether Terri Schiavo's hydration and nutrition tubes should be removed as well as the tone with which these ideas are discussed. We find that mainstream newspapers are relatively inclusive of diverse ideas and perspectives-regardless of whether the newspaper is independently or corporately owned, the political leanings of the target audience, and the geographic location of the outlet. However, we also find that local newspapers do significantly differ from one another in terms of the frequency and tone with which they include diverse viewpoints. Our research suggests that local outlets downplay ideas that are likely to be regarded as controversial by their target audiences. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this research for understanding the role of media in deliberative democratic processes in the United States.