Castro’s victory: An assessment of New York Times coverage of the 1959 Cuban Revolution

Abstract

This research applies framing theory and basic quantitative content methods to analyze the New York Times coverage of the 1959 Cuban Revolution, in order to examine assertions that New York Times stories contributed to Fidel Castro’s victory. Specifically, the study analyzes datelines, bylines, types of sources and story framing in all the stories about Cuba published on the front page of the New York Times between January 1, 1957, and December 31, 1962. The findings of this research contest long-held claims that the New York Times stories, in particular those written by reporter Herbert L. Matthews, contributed to the success of the Cuban Revolution. Matthews’s three-part front-page scoop in 1957 introduced Castro and the bearded Cuban revolutionaries to the world, but his stories and subsequent New York Times coverage are unlikely to have been decisive in Castro’s overthrow of the Batista regime. This study argues instead that the New York Times coverage of the 1959 Cuban Revolution was written through an aspirational lens, much like the stories about other major political revolutions written by U.S. foreign correspondents, and that stories played an important inter-media agenda-setting role, as evident from the many news organizations that covered the revolution after Matthews’ scoop.

Keywords

framing New York Times Fidel Castro Cuba revolutions inter-media agenda setting foreign correspondents

Introduction

On February 24, 1957, the New York Times published a front-page story written by Herbert L. Matthews, confirming that Fidel Castro was, contrary to previous reports, still alive “and fighting hard and successfully in the rugged, almost impenetrable fastness of the Sierra Maestra” in southeastern Cuba. The above-the-fold story, the first in a three-part series, was accompanied by a photo of Castro holding a rifle. Below the photo was an image of Castro’s signature, along with a location and date—“Sierra Maestra Febrero 17 de 1957.” The stories were a scoop for Matthews and the New York Times, serving to disprove repeated claims by then Cuban President Fulgencio Batista that Castro had been killed, and his guerilla group, the 26th of July Movement, destroyed. Matthews’s February 24 story put Fidel Castro on the international stage. Almost 2 years later, on January 1, 1959, Castro and his guerillas marched triumphantly into Havana, having led a revolution that culminated in the fall of the Batista government.

At the time, Matthews’s stories and the New York Times were criticized by many U.S. politicians, including the U.S. ambassador to Cuba, Earl E.T. Smith (Ratliff, 1987), and by the anticommunist press in the U.S. Writing in The American Legion Magazine, Wm F. Buckley, Jr. argued that Matthews “did more than any other single man to bring Fidel Castro to power” (Buckley, 1961, p. 18). This claim from Buckley, founding editor of the conservative National Review editorial magazine, reflected the prevailing position of the post-World War II conservative movement, of which he was a leading figure (Bogus, 2011). Considered to be one of the most influential 20th-century American newspaper columnists (Avalon et al., 2011) Buckley’s criticism of Matthews and the New York Times was rooted in ideological disapproval. Subsequent scholarship on news reporting of the 1959 Cuban Revolution also singled out the New York Times coverage as significant in Castro’s early military successes against then-President Batista: Matthews’s New York Times stories “played an important role in advancing Castro’s cause” (Ratliff, 1987, p. 2), by portraying Castro and his 26th of July movement very sympathetically. News that Castro was alive, contrary to Batista government claims that its troops had killed Castro and thus suppressed an insurgency, made clear to the Cuban people that a political revolution was still underway, and moreover that Batista’s claims were false. Such information in an active revolution can provide a tactical advantage, or disadvantage, for either side, and can influence public opinion.

Wallach (1987) argues that Castro manipulated American journalists who reported on the activities of his 26th of July Movement during 1957 and 1958. These journalists were then rewarded for their reporting according to Teel (2015) who cites as evidence Castro’s presentation of gold medals to 13 American correspondents at an event at the Cuban Embassy, during Castro’s visit to Washington, D.C., in April 1959. Each medal was inscribed with the reporter’s name and the words “To our American Friend with Gratitude” (Teel, 2015, p. 3). The list included correspondents from the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times, Time and Life Magazine, the Reader’s Digest and the Washington Post. Prominent among these were Robert Taber and photographer Wendell Hoffman, who had broadcast a CBS News’s half-hour program, Rebels of the Sierra Maestra: The Story of Cuba’s Jungle Fighters, in May 1957, affirming Matthews’s scoop that Castro was alive (DePalma, 2006). According to these scholars and critics, the stories produced by these correspondents in 1957 and 1958, not only “repeated and amplified Castro’s promises to restore Cuba’s democracy,” but the “reporting by American foreign correspondents misinformed the public and misled Congress and policymakers, with lasting consequences” (Teel, 2015, p. xiii).

The trend of ascribing outsized responsibility to Matthews for Castro’s success is tempered by other scholars who note that, despite Matthews’s favorable coverage, his articles “were not Fidelismo propaganda pieces” (Welch, 1984, p. 3). Former New York Times reporter, Anthony DePalma (2006) observed in his book The Man Who Invented Fidel: Castro, Cuba, and Herbert L. Matthews, (the title of which is derived from Matthews’s own words) that Matthews’s articles, while factually accurate and fawning toward Castro, “were not the reason Castro triumphed” (p. 281). What Matthews’s stories did do was to serve as “the Cuban Revolution’s ideological letter of presentation to US public opinion” (Rojas, 2016, p. 33), and allowed Matthews to create for “North Americans the legend of Castro, the hero of the mountains, ‘of extraordinary eloquence, a powerful six-footer, olive skinned, full-faced, with a shapely beard’” (Thomas, 1977, p. 919). However, criticisms about Matthews’s coverage frequently miss that news coverage of the Cuban Revolution did not just focus on its charismatic leader.

An analysis of stories published in the Los Angeles Times, the Associated Press (AP), the Chicago Tribune, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times in January 1959 found that news stories included: coverage of social and political unrest, violence perpetrated by Castro’s revolutionaries and repercussions of the revolution for U.S. businesses (Dell’Orto, 2013). Using framing theory and quantitative content methods, this study examines the significance ascribed to Matthews’s New York Times stories as having advanced Castro’s revolution, and finds that the narrative that Matthews’s reporting supported Castro, contrary to American geopolitical interests, is overstated. This research draws attention to data that show the bulk of New York Times stories were written by other New York Times reporters who covered Castro and the Cuban Revolution. In addition, many news organizations subsequently sent reporters to Cuba to interview Castro, to report on the nascent revolution, after Matthews’s front-page scoop, serving as evidence to support that Matthews’s stories fulfilled an inter-media agenda-setting role. And last, this research highlights the similarities between criticism of Matthews and comparable criticisms of other reporters who covered foreign revolutions, and, importantly, the consistency between the New York Times coverage of the Cuban Revolution, and the U.S. government’s response to the Cuban Revolution in the early days of the Castro government.

Framing Theory

News media are unable to cover all aspects of news events, so reporters and editors select which events to cover and decide how to narrate stories, in a process that requires picking a “central organizing idea that provides meaning” (Gamson & Modigliani, 1989, p. 143). In this process, journalists frame news by selecting “some aspects of a perceived reality and making them more salient so as to promote a particular problem definition and causal interpretation, moral evaluation and/or treatment for the item described” (Entman, 1993, p. 52). This process of frame-building emerges from journalistic practices and cultures internal to news organizations (de Vreese, 2005; Shoemaker & Reese, 1996), as well as from the interaction between news reporters and their sources (Gans, 1979; Tuchman, 1978). Journalists use news frames to simplify, and to structure the narrative flow of news events (Norris, 1997). In this process, certain facts and events are selected and prioritized over others, and this results in the promotion of a particular interpretation (Entman, 1993). News coverage then, is the result of journalists’ interpretation of real-world events, in which “frames are the structures underlying the depictions that the public reads, hears and watches” (Hall Jamieson and Waldman (2003, p. xii). This interpretation holds true too, for journalists who are foreign correspondents, with frames facilitating a contextual understanding of news content for listeners, readers and viewers.

This study uses Iyengar’s (1991) long-standing framing categories, episodic and thematic frames, which sought to explain how news media frame news stories. Episodic news stories present complex issues by relying on anecdotal evidence, focusing attention on individual actors. Thematically framed news stories provide a larger context or analysis for the audience to apprehend news events. Iyengar observed that “very few stories were exclusively thematic or episodic,” but did “tilt clearly” toward thematic or episodic (p. 145).

In addition, this study uses a set of “content analytic indicators” derived from Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000, p. 94) quantitative framing analysis of Dutch print and television news, which identified five generic news frames: conflict, human interest, morality, attribution of responsibility and economic consequences. The attribution of responsibility frame was the most commonly used, followed in order of frequency by the conflict, economic consequences, human interest and morality frames. The responsibility frame presents an issue that attributes responsibility to an individual, a group or a government. The conflict frame emphasizes conflict between individuals, groups or institutions. The economic consequences frame presents the issue or problem in terms of the economic consequences it will have on an individual, group, institution or country. The human-interest frame puts a human face on the issue or problem. And the morality frame presents the issue or problem from a religious or moral perspective. This study adds an additional issue-specific frame, the “political consequences” frame, by modifying Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) economic consequences frame. The political consequences frame presents the issue or problem in terms of the political consequences it will have on an individual, group, institution or country.

This study makes contributions to the existing scholarship on framing in news stories about revolutions. In addition to using two framing typologies—Iyengar (1991) and Semetko and Valkenburg (2000)—this study incorporates datelines, bylines and sources as additional variables to provide a broader context of how the New York Times framed the 1959 Cuban Revolution. The addition of variables the datelines, bylines and sources supplement the framing theory and framing analysis.

Cuban Revolution: Notable Events Between 1956 and 1962

The most notable event in 1956 occurred in December when Fidel and Raul Castro, along with Argentine doctor Ernesto “Che” Guevara, and 79 other members of the 26th of July Movement landed the cabin cruiser Granma in the Oriente province. The landing did not go well and many of the guerillas were killed by the Batista government forces. The survivors established a base deep in the Sierra Maestra mountains. Fidel and Raul Castro and members of the 26th of July Movement relocated to Mexico after they were released from prison in 1955 under a general amnesty, for their role in the failed attack on the Moncada Army Barracks in Santiago de Cuba on July 26, 1953.

In February 1957, Herbert Matthews interviewed Castro and published a series of three front-page stories about Castro. In 1958, Castro and the 26th of July Movement intensified their efforts to overthrow the Batista government. President Eisenhower also announced an arms embargo against Cuba and President Batista (Franklin, 1997). This guerilla phase of the Cuban revolution moved very quickly and lasted 2 years (Ruiz, 1968).

On January 1, 1959, Castro and his revolutionary forces took control over Havana, and Batista’s soldiers surrendered. The U.S. government responded to the Cuban Revolution cautiously, even while it recognized the new Cuban government (Chomsky et al., 2003). Declassified State Department correspondence published in Foreign Relations of the United States showed a memorandum written by the Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs’ Special Assistant in February 1959 that the “U.S. Objectives in Cuba, for the present, may be summarized as strengthening the moderating and stabilizing influences on Castro and the Cuban government” (Chomsky et al., 2003, p. 531). In April 1959, the American Society of Newspaper Editors invited now-Premier Castro to speak at its convention.

In 1960, Cuba expropriated 70,000 acres of property owned by American sugar companies, resulting in protests by the U.S. government, which Cuba rejected (Franklin, 1997). In March 1960, President Eisenhower approved CIA training of anti-Castro Cuban agents to invade the island. By May 1960, Cuba reestablished diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union.

In January 1961, the U.S. government broke diplomatic ties with Cuba. Tad Szulc published a story in the New York Times about a plan to invade Cuba, which happened 2 weeks later as the Bay of Pigs invasion. Castro declared victory over the failed attempt to overthrow his government. In December 1961, Castro declared himself a Marxist-Leninist.

In October 1962, the Cuban Missile Crisis unfolded, with the U.S. and Soviet Union engaged in a nuclear stand-off after a U.S. spy plane photographed Soviet ballistic missile facilities in Cuba. In 1963, President Kennedy authorized a new program for internal rebellion against Castro, and tightened the embargo and blockade against Cuba.

The New York Times Reporters and the Cuban Revolution

Although Herbert L. Matthews received the most attention for his stories about the Cuban Revolution with his front-page scoop in February 1957 that Castro was alive, other New York Times reporters also wrote numerous stories about the Cuban Revolution in the period covered by this study. Notable among these reporters are R. Hart Phillips and Tad Szulc.

Beginning in the early 1930s, the New York Times was the only major news organization with a full-time foreign correspondent in Cuba (Phillips, 1959). From 1937 to until she left Cuba in 1961, R. Hart Phillips served as the New York Times bureau chief in Cuba, covering the span of Fidel Castro’s rise to power. In January 1957, after Phillips confirmed that Castro was alive—contrary to false news disseminated by the Batista government that its armed forces had killed Castro and many rebels in his group—she contacted Herbert L. Matthews, who then flew from New York to Cuba and met with Castro for an interview in the Sierra Maestra (DePalma, 2016).

Herbert L. Matthews was a member of the New York Times editorial board, having written most of the editorials on Latin America. Prior to that, Matthews worked as a foreign correspondent who had covered the Spanish Civil War and the Italian invasion of Abyssinia (Ethiopia), and also reported from Rome, London and India (Saxon, 1977). Matthews would go on to develop a close relationship with Castro after his first interview, and although he was a self-acknowledged champion of the Cuban Revolution, he was convinced that his relationship with Fidel Castro gave him a greater understanding of revolution (Welch, 1984). Matthews also believed firmly that “Castro would make his revolution without going the way of dictatorship and, ultimately, Communism” (Matthews, 1969, p. 113).

Tad Szulz served as the New York Times foreign correspondent since 1953 and reported from Brazil, Spain, Venezuela and Eastern Europe. He was also responsible for breaking the story about the CIA-supported Bay of Pigs invasion by anti-Castro Cuban exiles who were based in Miami (Lewis, 2001).

Literature Review: Reporting Revolutions

In the post-World War I world through to the Cold War era, American newspapers were authorities on global affairs, satisfying a public demand for international information and explanations of America’s involvement in the world (Hardt, 2002). Foreign correspondents fulfilled a crucial function of informing the American public about foreign lands and global events and were also able to influence American public opinion about foreign countries (Wu & Hamilton, 2004). American foreign news tends to focus on crises and conflict (de Vreese, 2005; MacDougall, 1982; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000), interprets events through the lens of U.S. policy interests (Hamilton & Lawrence, 2010) and is influenced by government and government policy (Bennett, 1990; Entman, 1991).

The New York Times, as an acknowledged paper of record, enjoyed prominent status in its coverage of international affairs (Denham, 1997; Talese, 1981). While expansive in its coverage of types of news stories, the selection for what is covered is based on audience appeal and news values, and prominent among these are stories about wars, coups d’état, violent protests and revolutions (Gans, 1979). While the New York Times has been exceptional in its history of international news coverage, it represents an outlier news organization, “rather than what researchers have used as ‘a newspaper of record’” (Hamilton & Tworek, 2023, p. 660). This exceptional status explains in part why the New York Times not only shapes thinking of foreign policymakers (Dell’Orto, 2013) but also influences the international news coverage of U.S. network news coverage through inter-media agenda setting (Golan, 2006; McCombs, 2014). Inter-media agenda-setting theory addresses the role media organizations have on each other. This typically happens when a media organization publishes a story or stories, and other media follow suit and emulate the original story or stories in their coverage (Du, 2013).

Studies have shown that the news reports and analyses foreign correspondents provide can affect U.S. foreign policy (Entman, 2004; Perlmutter, 1998), shape the thinking of policymakers (Dell’Orto, 2013), serve as sources for foreign policy decision-makers (Bayulgen & Arbatli, 2013; Merrill, 1995) and can reflect and extend U.S. foreign policy (Herman & Chomsky, 1988; Schiller, 1973). The tendency of foreign news is to support government policies, evident in how “the media usually accept official designations of who are friends and enemies of the United States” (Graber & Dunaway, 2015, p. 260). The media, in general, have an enormous effect on accelerating, in crisis situations, U.S. foreign policy decisions and processes (Auerbach & Bloch-Elkon, 2005), otherwise known as the so-called CNN effect (Robinson, 1999).

In one of the earliest studies of foreign news coverage, “A Test of the News,” Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz (1920) conducted a comprehensive content analysis of the New York Times coverage of the Russian Revolution (1917–1920). The study examined stories written over a 3-year period and established that the news about Russia was more about what reporters wished to see, rather than the outcome of professional journalism. Lippman and Merz (1920) concluded that “The news as a whole is dominated by the hopes of the men who compose the news organization” (p. 3). Under challenging conditions of conflict, foreign correspondents seek to establish and report the truth as best they can, but journalistic objectivity might well be unattainable by journalists who act “on their own understanding of the world” (Hardt, 2002, p. 32).

For example, U.S. newspaper reporting of the French Revolution (1789–1799), and journalist Edgar Snow’s coverage of the Chinese Communist Revolution (which culminated in the establishment of the People’s Republic in 1949) reflected a “hope and fear” lens (Hamilton, 1988). Similarly, Rodgers (2020), found that British newspaper coverage of the revolution in Petrograd in 1917 contained widespread expressions of optimism about the best outcome.

During the Mexican Revolution (1910–1920), American reporters John Reed and George F. Weeks used conventional reporting techniques in their stories, in addition to including personal accounts of their experiences during the revolution, they also framed their coverage of Villa, Venustiano Carranza (a leader in the revolution who became president) and the Mexican people favorably (Swennes, 2006). Weeks eventually became a publicist for Carranza. James Creelman’s interview with Mexican President Porfirio Diaz was not only a scoop for him in Pearson’s Magazine but also “spurred the Mexican Revolution,” in a similar manner that war correspondent John Reed’s stories in Metropolitan Magazine “helped create the mythic image of Francisco “Pancho” Villa, revolutionary leader (Smith, 2003, p. 2).

No doubt, covering revolutions is inherently difficult, since “revolutions are chaotic with fast-moving events and highly partisan, dubious, and untested sources, leaving journalists enormous leeway for imposing their own hope and fear” (Cole and Hamilton, 2008, p. 40). Reporting from conflict zones, allow for, or oblige reporters to present an eye-witness perspective and their interpretation of events on the ground. It is challenging to fact check and verify information, given the chaos around them and the claims made by different sides in a conflict. Thus, foreign correspondents’ perspectives and who they decide to trust as sources can influence how a story is subsequently framed. For example, Hickman and Trapp (1998) analyzed the New York Times coverage before, during and after the 1989 Romanian Revolution, and found that reporters relied more on the use of inference and judgment to report on the revolution during the revolution, but shifted to quoted inference and judgment after the revolution. The study concluded that the shift in the use of inference and judgment resulted in a narrative shift away from “post-Cold War American journalism” tropes (p. 405). Sources in stories are fundamental to the resulting framing of the issue, and previous literature on news framing on issues of foreign policy and national security shows that mainstream media rely heavily on government officials to frame the news (Lawrence, 2009). In their analysis of coverage of the 2013 Syrian government’s use of chemical weapons on its own citizens, Cozma and Kozman (2018) found that American foreign correspondence reflected viewpoints from Washington, compared with stories by Lebanese foreign correspondents which cited more international sources. Similarly, in political news framing, government officials are the most prevalent of sources in these stories (Bennett, 2007; Entman, 2004).

How foreign correspondents frame stories about events in other countries not only influences foreign policy but also impacts how readers perceive and understand these events. In terms of audience responses to framing, using Iyengar’s framing theory, Gross (2008) found that episodic framing was more emotionally engaging, while stories framed as thematic tend to be more persuasive.

Research Questions

Using the theoretical approach of this research the following research questions were addressed.

RQ1:

How are stories about the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro framed in terms of episodic and thematic news frames? This question uses Iyengar’s (1991) typology.

RQ2:

How are stories about the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro framed with regard to specific news frames? This question uses Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) typology.

RQ3:

What is the affiliation of sources quoted in front-page stories about the Cuban Revolution?

RQ4:

Which reporter’s bylines appear most frequently on the front page?

RQ5:

What datelines were most frequent on front-page stories?

Method

As a research technique in early mass communication research, content analysis was used to objectively, systematically and quantitatively describe manifest content of communication (Berelson, 1971; Lippmann & Merz, 1920). Lippman and Merz’s “Test of the News” study of the New York Times coverage of the 1917 Russian Revolution was the first substantive qualitative content research method on foreign news, and was a critical reaction to news coverage of an expanded U.S. presence in foreign countries (Hardt, 2002). Subsequent communication research over the decades has refined content analyses procedures with the purpose of explaining the latent meaning of communication content in addition to the manifest content (Krippendorff, 1980; Mitchell, 1967; Stacks & Salwen, 2014; Wimmer & Dominick, 2014). This research examines the manifest content (bylines, datelines, types of sources) and latent meaning (frames and framing categories) in stories about the 1959 Cuban Revolution in the New York Times. Front-page stories from the New York Times were selected because newspapers generally feature stories about war, elections and international diplomacy on the front page (Wolfe et al., 2009). The front page of the New York Times is where the most important news of the day is placed, in order of importance (Rosenthal, 2004).

The data for this research were sourced from the online New York Times database using ProQuest. The terms “Cuba” and “Castro” were used in a Boolean search to identify all articles about Cuba and Fidel Castro that appeared on the front page of the New York Times between January 1, 1956, and December 31, 1962. After eliminating duplicates and stories that were not primarily about Fidel Castro or the Cuban Revolution, the search produced a total of 660 stories.

The unit of analysis for this study is the news story. A coding sheet was created to collate the following information for each of the 660 stories: byline, dateline and affiliation of each source in each story. Source affiliation categories were generated by coding a random sample of 10 stories from each year. This analysis generated at least two dozen types of affiliation. To make the data more meaningful, common or overlapping categories were folded into a broader category. For example, sources identified by the affiliations, State Department, U.S. president and U.S. government, were grouped into the coding category, “U.S. sources.” Sources identified in the stories as Castro government, Fidel Castro, 26th of July Movement were grouped into the coding category “Cuba sources.” Cuba sources in this category were separated into Cuba under Castro and Cuba under Batista to distinguish between pre- and post-1959 Cuba. The framing categories included: conflict, economic or political consequences for the United States, economic or political consequences for Cuba, responsibility, human interest and morality.

Two independent coders first coded each story using Iyengar’s (1991) episodic versus thematic framing typology. If a story tilted clearly toward thematic or episodic, it was coded as such. Next, the coders coded each story using Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) content analytic indicators framing typology. An intercoder reliability test was performed on a sample of 10% of the 660 stories. The percentage agreement for the variable episodic versus thematic framing was 87. The percentage agreement for content analytic indicators framing typology ranged between 79 and 95.

Results

RQ1: How Are Stories the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro Framed in Terms of Iyengar’s (1991) Episodic and Thematic Framing Typology?

An overwhelming percentage of the 660 stories, 82%, were framed as episodic (see Table 1). Stories framed as episodic direct the audience to attribute responsibility or blame to individual actors, while thematic stories attribute responsibility at a macro level, to governments and society (Iyengar, 1991). The guerilla phase of the Cuban Revolution (roughly 1957–1959) involved many incidences of armed conflict between members of the 26th of July Movement and Batista government forces. These stories reflected a largely episodic frame, focusing on individual actors and their actions.

Table 1

Episodic Versus Thematic Framing of Cuba Front-Page Stories in the New York Times, 1957 to 1962

Framing categories	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	Total	%
Episodic	6	21	63	83	102	130	138	543	82
Thematic	0	4	8	23	27	29	26	117	18
Total	6	25	71	106	129	159	164	660	100

Conflict and violence continued into the early years of the Castro government, providing further opportunities for episodic framing. In 1960, Anti-Castro Cubans took up arms against the new government in Cuba, the Castro government expropriated properties owned by U.S. companies and President Eisenhower granted secret approval to the CIA to organize and train Cuban exiles to overthrow the new government, and to assassinate Raul and Fidel Castro. In 1961, major moments of conflict were reported through largely episodic frames: the unsuccessful Bay of Pigs invasion, the U.S. embargo against Cuba, Cuba’s new alliance and relations with the Soviet Union and the ensuing Cuban Missile Crisis.

RQ2: How Are Stories About the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro Framed With Regard to Specific News Frames as Used by Semetko and Valkenburg (2000)?

The category conflict accounted for 44% of the 660 stories (see Table 2). This finding aligns with Semetko and Valkenburg’s (2000) analysis of Dutch national news coverage of the meetings of the head of European Union countries to discuss a monetary union, in which the conflict frame was the second most commonly used frame, after the responsibility frame. The conflict frame is also the most frequent frame in foreign news coverage (de Vreese, 2005; Hamdy & Gomaa, 2012). The results also align with research on the framing of conflicts. Cozma and Kozman (2018) found that elite newspapers in the United States and Lebanon relied heavily on a conflict frame in coverage of the 2013 Syrian crisis.

Table 2

Framing Categories of Front-Page Stories in the New York Times, 1957 to 1962

Framing categories	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	Total	%
Conflict	6	21	48	46	44	91	36	292	44
Economic/political consequence: United States	0	0	0	0	64	48	71	183	28
Responsibility	0	0	6	26	8	4	52	96	15
Economic/Political consequence: Cuba	0	0	11	27	9	10	0	57	9
Human interest	0	4	4	5	0	5	5	23	4
Morality	0	0	2	2	4	1	0	9	1
Total	6	25	71	106	129	159	164	660	100

The next most frequent framing category, the political or economic consequences for the U.S. frame, accounted for 28% of the 660 front-page stories. This represents a significant proportion of the stories about the Cuban Revolution being framed in terms of revolutions impact on the U.S. political system and the U.S. economy. This finding does not support assertions that the New York Times coverage was favorable to Castro, and makes sense when looking at what events were transpiring in Cuba during this period. The years 1960 and 1962 account for the most frequent occurrence of this framing category. In 1960, it became apparent that the historical relationship between the United States and Cuba had changed fundamentally since the Spanish-American War (1898). Castro begins to assert Cuban independence, both economic and political, and aligns Cuba with the Soviet Union. These actions resulted in significant economic and political consequences for the United States. The United States lost all its economic assets in Cuba, as well as influence and control of the Cuban government. The political consequences for the United States were most apparent in 1962, when the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the world to the brink of a nuclear catastrophe, a defining moment in the Cold War. In contrast, the framing category focusing on political or economic consequences for Cuba accounts for 9% of the stories, with almost 50% of the frames occurring in 1959, the first year of the revolution, a period during which the Castro government implemented massive political and economic reforms.

The responsibility frame is the third most frequent frame, accounting for 15% of the front-page stories. More than half of the occurrences of the responsibility frame appeared in 1962, with the responsibility for the solution or cause being attributed to Fidel Castro, the Cuban government or the Soviet Union, primarily in the context of the Cold War and the Cuban Missile Crises.

The human-interest frame accounts for 4% of the stories. In this framing category, stories emphasize personal vignettes and individuals or groups are impacted by issues or problems. Stories that tended to be framed as human interest highlighted the disruptive impacts of the revolution on Cubans’ everyday lives. The morality frame, the least prevalent frame at 1%, was most evident in stories where sources included the Catholic Church in Cuba, or the United Nations Secretary General U Thant.

RQ3: What Is the Affiliation of Sources Quoted in Front-Page Stories About the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro?

The analysis of sources quoted shows that about a third (34%) of the sources quoted were officials from the U.S. government, and just under a third (30%) were officials of the Castro government (see Table 3). Other official sources include the Batista government (6%) and the Soviet Union (5%). Almost 75% of the sources in the 660 front-page stories were government officials. This result supports Cozma and Kozman’s (2018) finding that U.S. government sources are also dominant in coverage about international political conflicts. In general, research has found that media tend to rely on official sources (Bennett, 1990; Cook, 1998; Gans, 1979; Sigal, 1973).

Table 3

Sources Quoted in Cuba Front-Page Stories in the New York Times, 1957 to 1962

Sources:	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	TOT	%
United States: State Department, U.S. president, U.S. government	0	3	21	76	76	43	55	274	34
Cuba: Castro government, Fidel Castro, 26th July Movement	0	1	21	15	55	42	109	243	30
Cuba: Batista government	6	15	26	5	0	0	0	52	6
USSR: Government, Premier	0	0		0	8	0	31	39	5
Stories with no sources named	0	0	7	10	10	9	1	37	5
Informed sources, reliable sources, qualified sources, well-informed diplomats	0	0	5	0	3	0	26	34	4
United Nations: Secretary General U Thant	0	0	0	0	5	0	22	27	3
United States: Non-government/civilian/s	0	0	0	0	6	13	3	22	3
Cuba: Anti-Castro Rebels	0	0	0	0	0	8	14	22	3
Anonymous	0	9	7	4	2	0	0	22	3
Cuba: Catholic Church	0	1	2	1	6	4	0	14	2
China: Government, leader	0	2	0	1	0	0	8	11	1
Cuba: Non-government/civilian/s	0	0	0	0	1	1	7	9	1
Other	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	3	0
TOTAL	9	31	89	112	172	120	276	809

RQ4: Which Reporter’s Bylines Appear Most Frequently on the Front Page?

Of the 660 front-page stories, New York Times Havana bureau chief, Ruby Hart Phillips, accounts for 27% of the stories (see Table 4). Tad Szulc’s byline appears in 12% of the stories, and 7% of the stories have an AP byline. Approximately 4% (27) of stories did not have a byline. New York Times reporter Herbert L. Matthews’s byline appears on 10 stories, accounting for approximately 1.5% of the 660 stories. A tabulation of inside pages of the New York Times found Matthews’s byline on 20 stories during the period 1957 to 1962. In contrast, Ruby Hart Phillips’s byline appears 284 times in inside-page stories about Cuba, the Cuban Revolution and Fidel Castro. This supplemental analysis further supports the finding that Matthews had an equally small presence on the inside pages of the New York Times as he did on the front page. Matthews’s front-page stories, however, did influence subsequent reporting by other news organizations, affirming Golan’s (2006) conclusion that the New York Times fulfills an inter-media agenda-setting role. Two months after Matthews’s stories were published, CBS News sent reporter Robert Taber and a news crew to interview Castro for a CBS documentary film. Journalists from at least a dozen news organizations travel to Cuba to report on the nascent Cuban Revolution. Among the American news organizations were reporters from the Chicago Tribune, Time and Life Magazines, the Chicago Sun Times, Toledo Blade and the Washington Post (Teel, 2015).

Table 4

Bylines on Cuba Front-Page Stories in the New York Times, 1957 to 1962

Reporter byline	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	Total
R. Hart Phillips	3	10	10	72	53	25	4	177
Special	1	3	34	8	17	16	18	97
Tad Szulc	0	0	0	7	14	28	31	80
Associated Press (AP)	0	0	5	0	4	15	20	44
E.W. Kenworthy	0	0	0	4	11	8	7	30
No byline	0	2	5	1	6	8	5	27
Max Frankel	0	1	0	0	6	1	11	19
Peter Kihss	0	0	9	3	2	4	0	18
United Press Intl. (UPI)	1	1	0	0	1	3	12	18
Thomas J. Hamilton	0	0	0	0	0	1	14	15
Seymour Topping	0	0	0	0	1	2	8	11
Herbert L. Matthews	1	6	0	3	0	0	0	10
Sam Pope Brewer	0	0	0	0	0	7	2	9
Richard Eder	0	0	0	0	0	7	0	7
Juan de Onis	0	0	0	0	0	4	3	7
Harrison Salisbury	0	0	0	0	4	2	0	6
Russell Baker	0	1	1	1	1	1	0	5
Homer Bigart	0	0	5	0	0	0	0	5
Milton Bracker	0	0	0	0	0	2	3	5
Arthur J. Olsen	0	0	0	0	0	0	5	5
Lindesay Parrott	0	0	0	1	0	4	0	5
Jack Raymond	0	0	1	0	0	0	4	5
Reporters with 4 or fewer bylines	0	1	1	6	9	21	17	55
Total	6	24	70	100	120	138	147	660

RQ5: What Datelines Were Most Frequent on Front-Page Stories?

The analysis found that 47% of the 660 front-page stories had Cuba as a dateline and 37% had a U.S. dateline (See Table 5). Most notable is the pattern that emerges when looking at the data over time. For the years 1956 to 1960, more than 75% of the stories had datelines in Cuba. In 1961 and 1962, the datelines shift to predominantly U.S. datelines, where significantly fewer stories about Cuba have Cuban datelines. This is in part a result of fewer American reporters in Cuba.

Table 5

Datelines on Cuba Front-Page stories in the New York Times, 1957 to 1962

Story dateline	1956	1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	Total
Havana, Guantanamo Bay	5	21	57	81	77	47	25	313
Washington DC, Miami, New York/United Nations	0	1	10	15	26	87	107	246
No dateline	1	3	3	6	17	17	7	54
Three or fewer datelines	0	0	1	4	5	4	10	24
Moscow	0	0	0	0	4	2	11	17
Uruguay	0	0	0	0	0	2	4	6
Total	6	25	71	106	129	159	164	660

Conclusion

This study contributes to the body of scholarship on U.S. foreign correspondents’ reportage of revolutions. First, this study demonstrates that critiques that the New York Times and its foreign correspondent Herbert L. Matthews contributed to the triumph of the 1959 Cuban Revolution are overstated. Matthews’s stories reporting that Castro was alive and organizing a revolution against the Batista dictatorship was based on factual information he had gathered in the course of his reporting, and, like many other U.S. foreign correspondents who covered revolutions, were written through a lens of hopeful expectations for a democratic revolution.

Other U.S. foreign correspondents were also critiqued for how they covered revolutions. Edgar Snow covered the Chinese Communist Revolution through a hope and fear lens (Hamilton, 1988), and British newspaper coverage of the revolution in Petrograd in 1917 was filled with expressions of optimism about a best outcome (Rodgers, 2020). U.S. reporter John Reed was said to have been responsible for creating a mythic image of Francisco “Pancho” Villa during the Mexican Revolution (Smith, 2003). Matthews was thus not unique in his stories about the Cuban Revolution.

Second, despite the fact that their bylines appeared more frequently on front-page stories, the reporting of New York Times bureau chief, R. Hart. Phillips and correspondent Tad Szulc were not criticized to the extent that Matthews was. Phillips may have written many additional dispatches with no byline because she did not believe that Castro’s rebellion would succeed, and thought it best for a reporter to fly to Cuba and do the interview and leave the country (DePalma, 2016). Matthews’s byline appeared on seven front stories (and nine inside-page stories) between January 1956 and December 1958, the immediate period before Castro and his rebel forces oust the Batista government on January 1, 1959. It is unlikely that Matthews’s 16 news stories supported the Cuban Revolution and Castro’s subsequent rise to power. For comparison, during the 1956 to 1958 period, 90 stories about Castro and Cuba ran on the front page of the New York Times, and 291 stories ran on the inside pages. Among the bylines attributed to these stories were bureau chief R. Hart Phillips, the AP, Peter Kihss, Homer Bigart or the byline “Special to the New York Times.”

Third, while Matthews’s stories about Castro were factual but fawning toward Castro (DePalma, 2006), his optimism and hopes were at the time similar to the stated position of the U.S. government. In declassified U.S. State Department documents officials wrote in a memorandum in February 1959, that “U.S. Objectives in Cuba, for the present may be summarized as strengthening the moderating and stabilizing influences on Castro and the Cuban government” (Chomsky et al., 2003, p. 531).

For the bulk of the stories, written between 1959 and 1962, two-thirds of which were written by Phillips and Szulc, the “conflict” and “economic or political consequences for the U.S.” dominate. These findings, in addition to the finding that 34% of the sources in the stories were U.S. government officials, offer enough evidence to support the conclusion that the stories largely reflected U.S.-centric interpretation of the Cuban Revolution. Considering the sources, the conflict frame—emphasizing the conflict between individuals, groups or institutions—was particularly apt as the combat between Castro and the 26th of July Movement versus Batista morphed into a Cold War-driven conflict between the Castro government (and by proxy the Soviet government) and the U.S. government.

The U.S. government’s initial position of caution and wait-and-see began to shift a few months into the first year of the Castro government. During a meeting attended by the U.S. ambassador to Cuba and other U.S. officials, a State Department memo written on September 18, 1959, makes a recommendation: “There are indications that if the Cuban Revolution is successful other countries in Latin America and perhaps elsewhere will use it as a model and we should decide whether or not we wish to have the Cuban Revolution succeed” (Chomsky et al., 2003, p. 531).

By January 1960, the U.S. government began what would become a decades-long campaign to remove Castro from power, with U.S.-supported assassination attempts on Fidel and Raul Castro. The minutes of a National Security Council meeting in DC on January 14, 1960, make clear the U.S. position on Cuba: “The approved program authorized us to support elements in Cuba opposed to the Castro Government while making Castro’s downfall seem to be the result of his own mistakes” (Chomsky et al., 2003, p. 531).

In conclusion, a holistic interpretation of the findings for bylines, datelines, framing categories and sources quoted, during the period 1956 to 1962, allows for the following conclusions. Two New York Times correspondents, R. Hart Phillips and Tad Szulc, were responsible for writing 40% of the front-page stories. The remaining stories included bylines from the AP, UPI and 40 individual bylines. The sources in the stories heavily favored U.S. government officials, especially after 1959. The stories were framed largely through a conflict frame, and economic and political consequences for the U.S. frame. This finding presents an alternative to the numerous critiques that Matthews’s stories were instrumental in the success of Castro’s revolution. Matthews’s February 1957 front-page scoop that Castro was alive, did indeed introduce Castro to the world, but the overwhelming majority of the front-page stories were written by Phillips, Szulc and reporters from the AP (7%). Matthews’s stories then served as an indirect benefit to Castro through the coverage by many other news organizations that sent reporters to Cuba in the wake of his scoop, coverage that Castro felt was beneficial to the revolution so much so that he presented medals to numerous reporters.

This study has several limitations. The study conducted a comprehensive content analysis of all stories about Cuba and Fidel Castro that appeared on the front pages of the New York Times. The study also tabulated bylines all stories about Cuba and Fidel Castro that appeared on the inside pages of the New York Times. Conducting a comprehensive content analysis of stories that appeared in the inside pages will provide additional data for analysis. In addition, future research could further expand the data set to include stories written by correspondents from other news organizations who were also in Cuba covering the revolution. These include the Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune, CBS News, Time and the AP. This follow-up analysis will allow for a comparison of how other major news organizations framed the 1959 Cuban Revolution.

Looking at the news stories from a more holistic perspective that includes bylines, datelines, frames and sources gives insight into an expanded scholarly understanding of Cuban revolution reporting beyond one where Herbert L. Matthews is singled out as a Castro booster.

References

Auerbach

Bloch-Elkon

(2005). Media framing and foreign policy: The elite press vis-à-vis US policy in Bosnia, 1992-95. Journal of Peace Research, 42(1), 83–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022343305049668

Avalon

Angelo

Louis

(2011). Deadline artists. America’s greatest newspaper columns. The Overlook Press.

Bayulgen

Arbatli

(2013). Cold War redux in US–Russia relations? The effects of US media framing and public opinion of the 2008 Russia–Georgia war. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 46(4), 513–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postcomstud.2013.08.003

Bennett

W. L.

(1990). Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication, 40(2), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02265.x

Bennett

W. L.

(2007). News: The politics of illusion (7th ed.). Longman.

Berelson

(1971). Content analysis in communication research. Hafner Publishing.

Bogus

(2011). William F. Buckley Jr. and the rise of American conservatism. Bloomsbury Press.

Buckley

W. F.

(1961, March). I got my job through the New York Times. How one man’s opinion, disseminated through an influential newspaper, helped put Castro in power. The American Legion, 70(3), 18–19. https://archive.legion.org/node/1942

Chomsky

Carr

Smorkaloff

P. M.

(2003). The U.S. government responds to revolution. Foreign relations of the United States. In Chomsky

Smorkaloff

P. M.

Carr

Kirk

Starn

(Eds.), The Cuba reader: History, culture, politics (pp. 530–535). Duke University Press.

10.

Cole

Hamilton

J. M.

(2008). Another test of the news: American partisan press coverage of the French Revolution. Journalism History, 34(1), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00947679.2008.12062754

11.

Cook

T. E.

(1998). Governing with the News: The news media as a political institution. The University of Chicago Press.

12.

Cozma

Kozman

(2018). The Syrian crisis in U.S. and Lebanese newspapers: A cross-national analysis. The International Communication Gazette, 80(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048517727217

13.

Dell’Orto

(2013). American journalism and international relations. Foreign correspondence from the early republic to the digital era. Cambridge University Press.

14.

Denham

B. E.

(1997). Anonymous attribution during two periods of military conflict: Using logistic regression to study veiled sources in American newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(3), 565–578. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909707400310

15.

DePalma

(2006). The man who invented Fidel: Castro, Cuba, and Herbert L. Matthews of the New York Times. Public Affairs.

16.

DePalma

(2016, November 26). How fake news created the myth of Fidel Castro as Latin Robin Hood. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/fake-news-myth-fidel-castro-robin-hood-525527

17.

de Vreese

C. H

. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal+ Document Design, 13(1), 51–61.

18.

Y. R.

(2013). Intermedia agenda-setting in the age of globalization: A multinational agenda-setting test. Global Media and Communication, 9(1), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742766512463038

19.

Entman

R. M.

(1991). Framing U.S. coverage of international news: Contrasts in narratives of the KAL and Iran Air incidents. Journal of Communication, 41(4), 6–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1991.tb02328.x

20.

Entman

R. M.

(1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

21.

Entman

R. M.

(2004). Projections of power. Framing news, public opinion, and U.S. foreign policy. The University of Chicago Press.

22.

Franklin

(1997). Cuba and the United States. A chronological history. Ocean Press.

23.

Gamson

W. A.

Modigliani

(1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. The American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1086/229213

24.

Gans

H. J.

(1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. Pantheon Books.

25.

Golan

(2006). Inter-media agenda setting and global news coverage: Assessing the Influence of the New York Times on three network television evening news programs. Journalism Studies, 7(2), 323–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500533643

26.

Graber

D. A.

Dunaway

(2015). Mass media and American politics. CQ Press.

27.

Gross

(2008). Framing persuasive appeals: Episodic and thematic framing, emotional response, and policy opinion. Political Psychology, 29, 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00622.x

28.

Hall Jamieson

Waldman

. (2003). The press effect: Politicians, journalists and the stories that shape the political world. Oxford University Press.

29.

Hamdy

Gomaa

E. H.

(2012). Framing the Egyptian uprising in Arabic language newspapers and social media. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01637.x

30.

Hamilton

J. M.

(1988). Edgar Snow: A biography. Indiana University Press.

31.

Hamilton

J. M.

Lawrence

R. G.

(2010). Foreign correspondence. Journalism Studies, 11(5), 630–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2010.502787

32.

Hamilton

J. M.

Tworek

J. S.

(2023). Not all the news that’s fit to print: The New York Times as a research tool. Political Communication, 40(5), 660–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2208057

33.

Hardt

(2002). Reading the Russian Revolution: International communication research and the journalism of Lippmann and Merz. Mass Communication & Society, 5(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0501_3

34.

Herman

E. S.

Chomsky

(1988). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of the mass media. Pantheon Books.

35.

Hickman

Trapp

(1998). Reporting Romania: A content analysis of The New York Times coverage, 1985-1997. East European Quarterly, 32(3), 395.

36.

Iyengar

(1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. University of Chicago Press.

37.

Krippendorff

(1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage.

38.

Lawrence

R. G.

(2009). Researching political news framing: Established ground and new horizons. In D’Angelo

Kuypers

J. A.

(Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 265–285). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203864463

39.

Lewis

(2001, May 22). Tad Szulc, 74, Dies; Times correspondent who uncovered Bay of Pigs imbroglia. The New York Times, C17.

40.

Lippmann

Merz

(1920). A test of the news. The New Republic, 23(296), 1–42.

41.

MacDougall

(1982). Interpretive reporting. Macmillan.

42.

Matthews

H. L.

(1969). Castro. A political biography. Allen Lane.

43.

McCombs

(2014). Setting the agenda (2nd ed.). Polity Press.

44.

Merrill

J. C.

(1995). Global journalism: A survey of international communication (3rd ed.). Longman.

45.

Mitchell

R. E.

(1967). The use of content analysis for explanatory studies. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31(2), 230–241. https://doi.org/10.1086/267515

46.

Norris

(1997). Politics and the press: The news media and their influences. Lynne Rienner.

47.

Perlmutter

D. D.

(1998). Photojournalism and foreign policy: Icons of outrage in international crises. Praeger Publishers.

48.

Phillips

R.H

. (1959). Cuba, Island of paradox. McDowell, Obolensky.

49.

Ratliff

W. E.

(1987). The selling of Fidel Castro. The media and the Cuban Revolution. Transaction Books.

50.

Robinson

(1999). The CNN Effect: Can the news media drive foreign policy? Review of International Studies, 25(2), 301–309. https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/20097596

51.

Rodgers

(2020). Russia is all right: British newspaper reporting of the Russian Revolution of February 1917. Media History, 26(4), 424–436. https://doi.org/10.1080/13688804.2019.1634526

52.

Rojas

(2016). Hipsters and apparatchiks. In Rojas

Good

(Eds.), Fighting over Fidel. The New York intellectuals and the Cuban Revolution (pp. 1–61). Princeton University Press.

53.

Rosenthal

(2004, August 22). What belongs on the front page of The New York Times. The New York Times, 2.

54.

Ruiz

R. E.

(1968). Cuba: The making of a revolution. University of Massachusetts Press.

55.

Saxon

(1977, July 31). Newspaperman’s newspaperman: Far-ranging career assurance from Castro Mussolini Eviction order. The New York Times, 36.

56.

Schiller

H. I.

(1973). The mind managers. Beacon Press.

57.

Semetko

Valkenburg

(2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02843.x

58.

Shoemaker

P. J.

Reese

S. D.

(1996). Mediating the message. Theories of influence on mass media content. Longman Publishers.

59.

Sigal

. (1973). Reporters and officials: The organization and politics of newsmaking. D.C. Heath.

60.

Smith

M. M.

(2003). Gringo propagandist: George F. Weeks and the Mexican Revolution. Journalism History, 29(1), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00947679.2003.12062615

61.

Stacks

D. W.

Salwen

M. B.

(2014). An integrated approach to communication theory and research (2nd ed.). Taylor & Francis.

62.

Swennes

(2006). From reporters to revolutionaries: John Reed and George F. Weeks during the Mexican Revolution [Master’s thesis]. University of Georgia. http://getd.libs.uga.edu/pdfs/swennes_amanda_e_200605_ma.pdf

63.

Talese

(1981). The kingdom and the power. Ballantine.

64.

Teel

L. R.

(2015). Reporting the Cuban Revolution: How Castro manipulated American journalists. Louisiana State University Press.

65.

Thomas

(1977). The Cuban Revolution. Harper & Row.

66.

Tuchman

(1978). Making news. A study in the construction of reality. Free Press.

67.

Wallach

J. P.

(1987). Fidel Castro and the United States Press. In Ratliff

W. E.

(Ed.), The selling of Fidel Castro: The media and the Cuban Revolution (pp. 129–156). Transaction Books.

68.

Welch

R. E.

(1984). Herbert L. Matthews and the Cuban Revolution. The Historian, 47(1), 1–18. https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/24446681

69.

Wimmer

R. D.

Dominick

J. R.

(2014). Mass media research: An introduction (10th ed.). Cengage-Wadsworth.

70.

Wolfe

Boydstun

A. E.

Baumgartner

F. R.

(2009, April 2–5). Comparing topics of front-page and full-paper stories in the New York Times [Paper presentation]. Annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.

71.

H. D.

Hamilton

J. M.

(2004). US foreign correspondents: Changes and continuity at the turn of the century. Gazette, 66(6), 517–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016549204047574