Abstract
Whether financial news may contribute to market panics is not an innocent question. A positive answer is easily used as a legitimation to limit the freedom of financial journalists. Long-term effects of news are moreover inconsistent with the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), which maintains that new information gives immediately rise to a new equilibrium. The EMH is under discussion, however, as a result of the transformation of financial markets and of financial journalism due to new economic thoughts, new communication theories, high-frequency trading and high-frequency sentiment analysis. As a case study of a market panic we show the impact of US news, UK news and Dutch news on three Dutch banks during the financial crisis of 2007-9. To avoid market panics, financial journalists may strive for greater transparency, not only on asset prices and corporate philosophies, but also on network dependencies in the worldwide financial markets. © The Author(s) 2013.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 271-291 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Journalism |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 10 Feb 2013 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Feb 2013 |
Bibliographical note
This article belongs to the Special Issue: Journalism and the Financial CrisisUN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities -
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver