News Media Effects on Policy Priorities: A Second-Level Agenda-Setting Analysis of Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Projects in Myanmar

Abstract

This study investigates the impact of the media’s secondary agenda-setting on public perception and policy priorities regarding the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects in Myanmar from to 2011–2024. Three hypotheses (Hs) were examined: H1 posits that media coverage aligns with public and policy perspectives; H2 proposes that media emphasis on specific attributes influences their prominence in public opinion and policymaking; and H3 suggests that public opinion mediates the relationship between media coverage and policy priorities, indicating an indirect media influence on policymaking. This study employed a cross-sectional research design, utilizing both quantitative content analysis and survey methodologies. The content comprises the analysis of two news outlets’ coverage (n = 144), surveys with 385 respondents (n = 385), and in-depth interviews with 30 participants (n = 30), and the findings revealed a significant positive correlation between media coverage and public opinion and policy priorities (r = 0.86, r = 0.81, respectively). SEM path analysis reveals that the media agenda indirectly shapes the policy agenda through the public agenda, with an indirect effect path coefficient of 0.718, highlighting the media’s role in policymaking processes. This is evidenced by a significant correlation between media coverage and public opinion (p < 0.05), and a strong direct association between public opinion and policy priorities (p < 0.05). This study extends the agenda-setting theory by empirically demonstrating the media’s indirect effect on policy formation in global infrastructure projects within a developing Southeast Asian country. Future studies should examine the evolution of media patterns across different administrations, including the current one. The results also suggest examining the broader media portrayal of governance issues and conducting extensive research on the media’s impact on public opinion.

1. Introduction

Since McCombs and Shaw’s foundational research on the 1972 U.S. presidential election, agenda-setting theory has become a pivotal area of study in communication and journalism. It is widely recognized that, in the age of mass media, agenda-setting serves as a powerful mechanism for shaping public opinion through the media’s focused coverage of certain topics. Over time, the concept of agenda-setting has evolved, broadening from its initial focus on media effects on public perception (first level) to including the salience of specific attributes associated with issues or objects (second level) and, in some cases, its influences on policy attitudes among political elites. Over time, the concept of agenda-setting has evolved, broadening from its initial focus on media effects on public perception (first level) to the salience of specific attributes associated with issues or objects (second level). Second-level agenda-setting theory provides a framework to examine how media attributes shape public agenda, which, in turn, can influence the policy agenda. Scholars have increasingly examined the relationship between media coverage and the policy agendas of governments, political figures, and interest groups (Cook et al., 1983; Jamieson & Van Belle, 2018; Protess & McCombs, 2016; Soroka, 2002). However, much of this research has focused on political subjects such as electoral campaigns and candidate representations.

This study shifts its focus from traditional political topics by investigating a major international economic project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Specifically, it explored the role of media coverage in shaping public opinion and influencing policy priorities in Myanmar, a key participant in the BRI. This study seeks to understand how the media’s portrayal of the BRI in Myanmar is linked to the country’s government’s policy decisions, with public opinion acting as the mediating factor. On the other hand, this study explores the media’s agenda-setting impact on policy formation, emphasizing its indirect effect on public opinion and subsequent policy priorities. Utilizing second-level agenda-setting theory, this study investigates how media attributes influence public perception and policymaking. This study concentrates on the media’s impact on public opinion and policy development, excluding reciprocal influences between the government and media and the role of journalists.

The research findings align with Rogers et al.’s (1993) assertion that media, public, and policy agendas are interconnected, providing fresh empirical evidence of the agenda-setting process (Rogers et al., 1993) in the context of global infrastructure development projects. Therefore, this study explores the agenda-setting effects by investigating how the media influences public opinion regarding BRI-related issues and subsequently impacts the policy agenda. Unlike previous studies on agenda-setting effects, this study employed a novel methodological approach to examine the interrelationships between media, public, and policy agendas concerning global infrastructure development initiatives (Oo & Dai, 2024).

The core concept of this study originates from unexpected policy shifts in Myanmar’s handling of Chinese megaprojects, notably the 2011 suspension of the Myitsone Dam project during the Thein Sein-led government. It is widely believed that such policy changes were influenced by public sentiment shaped by the media, following its deregulation in 2011. Communication from former President Thein Sein to parliament concerning the suspension of the Myitsone Dam project has demonstrated that the decision to halt the project was influenced by public opinion. This correspondence confirms that the change in policy regarding the suspension of the Myitsone Dam was a result of sentiment expressed by the people (Oo et al., 2024). These events prompted subsequent Myanmar administrations to progressively alter their stance on foreign investments, particularly those originating in China, as evidenced by the 2017 reassessment of the Kyaukphyu Port Project. These events coincided with the relaxation of Myanmar’s media restrictions introduced in 2011, leading some domestic stakeholders to surmise that external factors, notably media influence, shaped public opinion. Consequently, this necessitated an examination of whether media influence, through its impact on public perception, affected policy priorities regarding foreign investments, specifically China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects in Myanmar (Oo & Dai, 2024). Concerning this issue, existing research has shown that second-level agenda-setting theory is the most suitable framework for examining the interconnections between media, public, and policy agendas.

Despite extensive global research on agenda-setting effects (Ireri, 2009; Kim et al., 2012; M. McCombs et al., 1997; Takeshita, 1993), there remains a notable gap in its application in Myanmar, particularly in the context of the BRI. Oo and Dai (2024) emphasized the necessity for future research to investigate the media’s influence on policy priorities and the interplay between media, public, and policy agendas concerning China’s BRI projects in Myanmar (Oo & Dai, 2024). While a significant body of research has examined BRI projects in Myanmar from various disciplinary angles (Gyi, 2019; Htwe, 2020; Jamilah & Novita, 2019; Khin Kyi & Xiang, 2020; Richard et al., 2022), there is a distinct lack of attention to the media’s role in shaping policy through agenda-setting. Given that the BRI aims to enhance connectivity and promote development across Asia, Europe, and Africa (Schulhof et al., 2022), coupled with limited research on media effects related to this initiative in Southeast Asia, this study is considered valuable. Conversely, this study also addresses a significant gap in the literature, given that the BRI represents the most extensive infrastructure project in history, with investments surpassing USD 8000 billion (Hurley et al., 2019).

Overall, this study contributes to the existing knowledge of agenda-setting theory and its applicability to global infrastructure development projects in Myanmar by examining the role of the media in the formation of the public agenda and policy decision-making. Consequently, the findings may also be beneficial for policymakers to gain a more comprehensive understanding of not only developing countries’ involvement in the BRI but also the significant role of news media in shaping public opinion that facilitates the successful implementation of BRI projects.

2. Second-Level Agenda Setting

This study focuses on the second-level agenda-setting effects of the media, particularly the relationship between media coverage and policy priorities in Myanmar, with respect to BRI projects and public opinion as the intervening variables. Media have the power to influence public opinion by directing attention to or away from an event, issue, or individual. As a result, certain topics or figures may be prioritized over others, depending on how they are perceived as relevant or significant. Therefore, the media have an agenda-setting function, and the results of this have a profound impact on the individual, political, economic, social, and intellectual landscapes of a nation (Shaw, 1979).

First-level agenda-setting focuses on the salience of issues or objects, whereas second-level agenda-setting focuses on the salience of the specific attributes associated with issues or objects. The first level informs the audience what to think about (issues salience) and the second level tells them how to think about it (attribute salience). In other words, the media’s role in shaping what people think and feel is greater than in deciding what issues to consider (M. E. McCombs & Shaw, 1972). Research has demonstrated that media can shape public opinion by emphasizing certain aspects of an issue while downplaying others, thus providing a particular perspective. The concept of second-level agenda-setting suggests that media coverage can direct audience attention towards the specific features of an issue, thereby influencing how it is perceived (Weaver et al., 2004). At the second level, each issue or object is presented with a range of attributes that help explain the entire object to the audience (Carroll & McCombs, 2003; Craft & Wanta, 2004). The media also selects these attributes to shape public focus and interpretation, whether they are related to political figures, policy matters, or commercial brands (M. McCombs, 1995). Generally, the second level of agenda-setting is the most sensitive to substantive and affective attributes (M. McCombs et al., 1997) as well as cognitive attributes (Golan & Wanta, 2001) in determining the public evaluations of candidates and issues.

In recent years, scholars have turned their attention to examining the correlation between the public perception of objects or issues and their portrayal in media coverage as well as their influence on policymaking. Studies have shown the growing influence of agenda-setting, wherein media representation, public opinion, and policy attitudes are closely linked (Rogers et al., 1993). Early empirical insights into media influence on both the public and policymakers were provided by Cook et al. (1983) in their study “Media and Agenda Setting: effects on the public, interest group leaders, policymakers, and policy”. Previous studies have demonstrated the influence of media coverage on policy decisions, suggesting that media’s ability to set an agenda significantly shapes public sentiment and policy formulation. Policymakers frequently rely on media outlets to gauge public opinion and to inform their decision-making processes. Soroka (2002) builds on this to examine agenda-setting dynamics in Canada from 1985 to 1995 (Soroka, 2002). His study showed that various issues (inflation, environmental concerns, and national debt) follow different agenda-setting patterns depending on exposure to real-world events and media coverage. Soroka (2002) found that media, public opinion, and policymakers are differently connected to one another depending on the issue, which demonstrates how media coverage influences public discourse and policy choices differently across issues.

Tan and Weaver (2010) also studied the effect of media bias on the formation of public opinion and policy liberalism in the U.S. between 1956 and 2004 (Tan & Weaver, 2010). They find a correlation between media bias, shifts in public opinion, and subsequent policy outcomes. The media’s role in shaping policy debates is also emphasized. Wolfe et al. (2013) extended this line of research by investigating the complexities of media policy relationships (Wolfe et al., 2013). Although they acknowledge the gap between media and policy agenda-setting studies, they also state that media can influence policy through issue attributes, coverage prominence, and interaction between traditional and digital media.

Taken together, these investigations highlight the pivotal influence of the media in molding public sentiment and governmental priorities through second-level agenda-setting effects. This also illustrates how the prominence of issue attributes guides societal discourse on matters related to policy concerns.

3. The BRI Projects in Myanmar

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), introduced by President Xi Jinping in 2013, comprises two main components, namely the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (Malik, 2020), both aimed at enhancing the connectivity between China and ASEAN nations. This initiative was originally called the One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative and has since been referred to as the BRI. The strategic location between China and India made Myanmar a critical participant, presenting itself as a vital link between South and Southeast Asia. Myanmar saw a huge increase in Chinese investment, particularly through the China–Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC) proposed in 2007. For instance, capital inflows grew from USD 481 million to USD 1.3 billion between 2017 and 2018 (Kobayashi & King, 2022). In 2020, 33 agreements related to the CMEC were signed when President Xi Jinping visited Myanmar, marking 70 years of diplomatic relations (Li, 2020).

The scale of these developments has led scholars and media to provide divergent views on the BRI’s impact on Myanmar. However, scholars, such as Lenskyi (2020) and Htwe (2020) argue for economic benefits, including better infrastructure and enhanced regional connectivity. However, there are concerns regarding environmental degradation, debt sustainability, and geopolitical risks (Kobayashi & King, 2022). Debates have been fueled by these differing views on the broader implications of the BRI for Myanmar and the region. For example, Lenskyi (2020) argues that CMEC’s successful implementation would enable China to expand its strategic influence in the Indo-Pacific region and help Myanmar’s economic development (Lenskyi, 2020). According to Htwe (2020), job creation and regional integration bring benefits, but public concern continues to be generated by long-term risks related to debt and environmental damage (Htwe, 2020).

Kobayashi and King (2022), however, take a more negative view of the social and environmental impact of BRI projects in Myanmar, namely land appropriation, displacement of livelihoods, and the rise in labor migration (Kobayashi & King, 2022). Shattuck (2018) also critiques China’s investments, which they argue have become dependent on geopolitical interests. These concerns have also been exacerbated by media coverage, which often draws attention to factors such as rising debt, environmental degradation, and lack of transparency in how projects are carried out (Shattuck, 2018). Oo et al. (2024) found that local media often focuses on the public fear of land grabs, the unequal distribution of benefits, and potential job losses to amplify the broader fear of China’s influence in Myanmar (Oo et al., 2024). Several scholars have proposed measures to improve the implementation and perception of the BRI projects in Myanmar. Taidong (2019) recommends that environmental and social impacts be thoroughly assessed, financing options be diversified, and transparency be increased (Taidong, 2019). Teo et al. (2019) suggested that with concerted policy actions between China and host countries, the BRI could set global norms for managing environmental impacts (Teo et al., 2019). However, public opinion in Myanmar remains divided. As Khin Kyi and Xiang (2020) note, many Myanmar still see the BRI as an opportunity to develop the economy, create jobs, improve infrastructure, and strengthen relations with China (Khin Kyi & Xiang, 2020).

This study identified four primary issues (groups) related to BRI projects in Myanmar: “economic impact and Chinese loans”, “environmental and social impact”, “governance, transparency and coordination”, and “geopolitical and strategic considerations.”

4. Theoretical Framework

Traditionally, agenda-setting models in media studies have focused on the relationship between media coverage and public sentiment, often without directly addressing policy formation (M. McCombs, 1997). Although much research has concentrated on how media and public agendas interact, there is considerable evidence that both public and media agendas also influence policy development. Specifically, agenda-setting theory encompasses three interconnected processes: media, public, and policy agendas (Dearing & Rogers, 1996; Rogers & Dearing, 1988). Media agenda-setting focuses on the factors that determine issue selection within the media, treating the media’s issue agenda as the dependent variable. By contrast, public agenda-setting examines how media coverage shapes the public’s perceptions of issue importance, while policy agenda-setting explores the extent to which media and public opinion influence government priorities (Rogers et al., 1993). Collectively, these three components form the core structure of the agenda-setting theory. Notably, Dearing and Rogers (1996) and Rogers and Dearing (1988) observed that although most research highlights the causal relationship between the media and the public agenda, media and public agendas can also impact policy (Dearing & Rogers, 1996; Rogers & Dearing, 1988).

Kosicki (1993) argues that studying these three dimensions of agenda-setting in isolation provides an incomplete understanding of media influence (Kosicki, 1993). Instead, he proposes an integrated approach that captures the dynamic interplay between media sources, journalists, the public, and policymakers. By connecting these perspectives, a more comprehensive model of media influence emerged. Building on Kosicki’s integrated model, this study adopted a process-based agenda-setting framework, breaking the process into three phases: inputs, processes, and outcomes. Media content, as input, sets the public agenda. The process phase involves the media shaping public opinion by emphasizing specific issues that subsequently influence the policy agenda. However, in some cases, the media and policy agendas are aligned (Entman, 1993), whereas in others, they are not. Within this framework, policymakers often respond to media-driven public opinion, whereas some resist external influence (Perse & Lambe, 2016). In many cases, policymakers also use the media’s agenda as a proxy for public opinion, assuming that the media’s portrayals of what is happening in society (or the world) reflect the public’s concerns (Van Aelst, 2014). Consequently, the media help define policymakers’ perceptions of which problems are most pressing. This means that the media’s capacity to focus on certain topics by highlighting the salience of issue attributes has a large impact on which issues become part of the government’s policy agenda. Media goes beyond simply disseminating information and leads to public perceptions of the importance of an issue (Iyengar & Kinder, 2010). The media not only provides factual information but also helps to set the public perception of issue importance.

Consequently, the media’s emphasis on certain aspects of issues indirectly shapes policy decisions by influencing public opinion. This study is based on the premise that the media shapes policy priorities surrounding the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects in Myanmar by influencing public discourse. Using second-level agenda-setting theory, this research treats BRI projects as a central issue, analyzing various issue attributes to examine the relationships and potential causal links between media, public, and policy agendas.

Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual model of the extended agenda-setting framework derived from second-level agenda setting. The blue dashed lines connect the media agenda (MA), public agenda (PA), and policy agenda (PAD), highlighting the correlations between media coverage, public opinion, and policymaking. The left-black arrow from MA to PA shows the effect of media on public opinion, whereas the straight arrow from PA to PAD indicates how public opinion shapes policymakers’ decisions. The right arrow from MA to PAD is slightly blurred, reflecting that media attributes may align with policy considerations, suggesting a potential direct influence of media on policymaking likely to happen. The central premise of this conceptual model is that MA exerts an indirect influence on PAD through its effect on PA, which in turn affects PAD. The indirect relationship between MA and PAD mediated by PA is illustrated by the black arrows in the model.

Although the media have considerable power in shaping public and policy agendas, its influence has limitations. To enter the public agenda, an issue must resonate with the public regardless of the amount of media coverage (M. McCombs, 1997). Although the media can highlight certain issues or topics, the public’s interpretation ultimately determines their significance. However, continuous media attention to specific issues can gradually increase their importance in public discourse (Carroll & McCombs, 2003), which may then influence policy decisions. Generally, this sequence commences with news outlets highlighting a specific matter by emphasizing certain aspects that subsequently influences and molds public sentiment over time. As public opinion crystallizes, these issues can make their way into policy agendas. Thus, such attributive content is most effective when the issue attributes match the public interpretation of the media’s coverage. In this context, the second-level agenda-setting approach is valuable for analyzing how media outlets portray the attributes of BRI initiatives in Myanmar.

This study aimed to compare and evaluate the mediating hypotheses linked to the influence of the media on both public perception and policy priorities. In addition, the study employs second-level agenda-setting theory intended to examine the impact of media coverage on public opinion and policy priorities. Therefore, it has excluded broader aspects beyond the agenda-setting framework, such as Myanmar’s media landscape, governmental influence on the media, and journalists’ diverse roles.

5. Hypotheses

This study encompasses two primary aims: first, to analyze the relationship between media, public, and policy agendas concerning BRI initiatives in Myanmar, and second, to explore how the media agenda influences policy agenda through the intermediary of public opinion. This study employs a second-level agenda-setting framework to investigate this relationship and proposes three hypotheses.

Hypothesis 1.

The issues attributed to the BRI projects in Myanmar highlighted in media coverage are perceived by the populace and emphasized by Myanmar policymakers.

According to M. E. McCombs and Shaw (1972), the media not only influences the subjects of public discourse, known as first-level agenda setting but also shapes the manner in which individuals conceptualize these issues, referred to as second-level agenda setting, through the emphasis placed on specific attributes of the issues (M. E. McCombs & Shaw, 1972). Acting on seminal work in agenda-setting theory, this study locates frames within media coverage that highlight these attributes compared with public perceptions and policy priorities. Drawing from Entman’s (1993) framing concept, the media emphasizes public attention on specific aspects of issues (Entman, 1993), which in turn influences both public discourse and the policy agenda (Rogers & Dearing, 1988).

Hypothesis 2.

There is a positive correlation between issue attributes in media coverage and the salience of public opinion and policy priorities regarding BRI projects in Myanmar.

The hypotheses presented here move forward from the idea that the media influences public and policy priorities in that it assigns different weights to issue attributes. This hypothesis is tested by examining the relationship between media coverage, public opinion, and policy priorities on BRI project-related issues, focusing on the aspects of the issue emphasized by the media on BRI projects in Myanmar. This hypothesis also examines the relationship between issue attributes in the media and public and policy agendas (Tan & Weaver, 2010) and the role of media in political discourse (Wanta et al., 2004).

Hypothesis 3.

The media agenda of news outlets exerts an influence on the policy agenda of the Burmese government regarding BRI projects, mediated through the public agenda.

This hypothesis investigates the directionality of the causal link between media coverage and policy priorities mediated by public opinion on BRI projects in Myanmar. Second-level agenda-setting theory states that media not only influences public perceptions but also indirectly affects policymaking by impacting public opinion that applies pressure on policymakers (Dearing & Rogers, 1996). Therefore, this study examines the indirect effect of the news media on Myanmar’s policy priorities regarding BRI initiatives. It contends that coverage in media outlets generates public pressure, which in turn prompts policymakers to focus on issues highlighted by the media (Soroka, 2002).

6. Materials and Methods

In the absence of survey records, such as Gallup’s poll in the United States, and the lack of archived data from the Myanmar government on foreign investments, including BRI projects, this study employed a cross-sectional design, ensuring data validity and reliability across three distinct data collection methods: content analysis of the media agenda (MA), surveys of the public agenda (PA), and in-depth interviews with the policy agenda (PAD) (Fakis et al., 2014; Frels & Onwuegbuzie, 2013; Indulska et al., 2012; White et al., 2006). In terms of methodology, this research utilized quantitative content analysis to gather and quantify data from news articles and in-depth interviews. Additionally, an online survey was conducted to obtain information from the respondents. Based on these hypotheses, MA was the independent variable, PA was the mediating variable, and PAD was the dependent variable.

The key challenge of the research design was to ensure the alignment of the three data collection methods. All content analyses, online surveys, and in-depth interviews were conducted using carefully defined contexts, timeframes, demographics, and questionnaires. The major difficulty in this study was the lack of time-series data on public attitudes and policy priorities related to the BRI projects in Myanmar. Another aspect of this research involves employing qualitative interview data for quantitative content analysis, with the aim of determining the media agenda. This resulted in alignment with existing sectional information, ensuring that the sectional data corresponded with the aims of the study. Content analysis was employed to collect data on the media agenda from two international news sources, spanning 2011 to 2024. The survey and interview questionnaires were carefully designed to ensure alignment with the context used in the content analysis and to collect reliable data for both public and policy agendas. For example, using the surveys, we asked people, ‘What were the main concerns about the BRI projects over the years?’ We also asked interview participants: ‘What do you think are the most important policy priorities of the successive governments with regard to the BRI projects between 2011 and 2024?’

Descriptive methods were used to assess the degree of alignment between MA, PA, and PAD, whereas inferential statistical methods were used to explore correlations between agendas (Myers & Sirois, 2014). In addition, structural equation modeling (SEM) with path analysis was conducted to assess the indirect effects of MA on PAD mediated by PA and the causal relationship between them (Kline, 2018). Given previous studies (Gyi, 2019; Htwe, 2020; Jamilah & Novita, 2019; Khin Kyi & Xiang, 2020; Richard et al., 2022), particularly in the recent study on media effects (Oo & Dai, 2024), the study defines ten specific attributes as the substantive attributes of the four core issues related to BRI projects: “debt concern”, “economic development”, “infrastructure development”, “environmental concern”, “local concern”, “lack of transparency”, “lack of coordination”, “Chinese interest”, “regional connectivity”, and “Paukphaw relations”.

These attributes were mapped to four key issues (groups): “economic impact and Chinese loan”, “environmental and social impact”, “governance, transparency and coordination”, and “geopolitical and strategic considerations”. Given that this was a cross-sectional study, ensuring consistency across the three agendas was essential. Core questions across surveys and interviews focused on themes such as: “What concerns or impresses you about the BRI projects being implemented in Myanmar?” and “How do you evaluate the progress of BRI project implementation in Myanmar?”

Employing different sample sizes for MA (n= 144), PA (n = 385), and PAD (n= 30), this study employed a pairwise Spearman’s rho analysis to examine the strength and direction of the linear relationship between the continuous variables with the value of correlation coefficient “r” (Lee Rodgers & Nicewander, 1988). The value of r ranges between -1 and 1, and r = 1 indicates “a perfect positive linear relationship”, while r = −1 is considered “a perfect negative linear relationship” and r = 0 represents “no linear relationship between the variables” (Cohen, 2013).

The study also used SEM path analysis to examine the direct and indirect structural relationships between the three agendas (MA, PA, and PAD). In the analysis, three agendas (MA, PA, and PAD) were treated as observed variables, ten attributes were treated as manifest variables, and four issues were created as latent variables. In the path analysis, model efficacy was assessed using several key metrics. A chi-square (χ²) test compares the observed to expected covariance matrices, and an adequate fit is indicated when the p-value is >0.05; however, the chi-square test is sensitive to the sample size (Kline, 2018). Model fit, according to the population and the model complexity, was evaluated using the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) with values smaller than 0.05, which were considered excellent (Steiger, 1990). The proposed model was compared to a null model using the comparative fit index (CFI), which is interpreted as adequate with values higher than 0.95; smaller samples require higher values (Bentler, 1990). This structure takes into account model complexity, with scores above 0.95 being strong (Tucker & Lewis, 1973). The standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) of discrepancies between the observed and predicted correlation measure values was below 0.08, indicating an adequate fit. In the overall analysis, the media agenda (MA) functions as an independent variable (IV), while the public agenda (PA) serves as both an IV and a dependent variable (DV), and the policy agenda is utilized as a DV. R software (version 4.3.1) with RStudio (version 2024.09.1+394) as the integrated development environment was used for the analysis. The dataset used for this study, which forms the basis of all analyses, is provided in the Supplementary Materials (S1).

6.1. Content Analysis

Quantitative content analysis is a venerable method in communication research that enables us to quantify what people say in communication in systematic ways that essentially utilize situations inherent to explicit content (De Sola Pool & Berelson, 1952). Krippendorff (1989) states that it “enables to reveal previously unsuspected patterns in unstructured text on a large scale by converting qualitative elements of the analysis into units of numerical data necessary for the replication and validation of claims made about properties of discursive contexts” (Krippendorff, 1989).

We chose Radio Free Asia (RFA) and Voice of America (VOA) for two main reasons: large-scale global dissemination with high credibility among Myanmar audiences and their permanent focus on the situation in Burma, including political and economic aspects, as well as China’s investments. Established in 1996, RFA has millions of followers via its social media channels on Facebook, while listeners can access news via satellite broadcasting, shortwave radio, and the terrestrial web in nine languages. “VOA” is an international broadcaster seen by a global audience of some 236 million people in more than 40 language services (including Burmese).

These media outlets could wield influence among the vast population and further cultivate regional opinion. This study focused on news coverage related to key Chinese BRI projects, including the “China–Myanmar Economic Corridor (CMEC)”, the “Kyaukphyu deep-sea port”, the “Special Economic Zones (SEZs)”, and other major infrastructure projects between “2011 and 2024”. The units of analysis consisted of “editorials, analyses, and review articles” from both the RFA and VOA. A total of 144 articles were randomly selected for analysis, comprising 71 from RFA and 73 from VOA. The coding process was conducted by two coders who were postgraduate students in media and communication, following a detailed coding manual. The content was analyzed using ten key attributes related to BRI projects: “debt concern”, “economic development”, “infrastructure development”, “environmental concerns”, “local concerns”, “lack of transparency”, “lack of coordination”, “Chinese interest”, “regional connectivity”, and “Paukphaw relations”. A “pretest” of the coding process was conducted on 30% of the sampled articles (25 from each outlet) to ensure “inter-coder reliability”, yielding an average reliability coefficient of “0.85”, which is within the accepted range for such analyses (Lovejoy et al., 2016). Data from the first coder were used for the analysis, and 143 articles yielded a total of “1236” frames, with RFA contributing “523” attributes (41.5%) and VOA contributing “713” frames (58.4%).

6.2. Online Survey

The implementation of the “agenda-setting theory” is one of the strongest indicators that still relies on surveys for measuring public opinion over time, appearing prominently in influential scholarly research (Golan & Wanta, 2001; M. McCombs, 1995; M. E. McCombs & Shaw, 1972; Takeshita, 1993). The advantages of using online surveys over classical survey methods include lower cost, faster turnaround time, and more flexibility in terms of the design of the survey form and data collection (Evans & Mathur, 2005). These surveys are particularly useful in reaching large, diverse, and geographically dispersed populations which may be difficult to reach using traditional means (Granello & Wheaton, 2004). Accordingly, this study adopted an online survey to examine public perceptions of BRI projects in Myanmar. Online surveys were conducted from 1 March to 29 April 2024.

An online survey was built around “ten key attributes” linked to four core issues related to BRI projects in Myanmar. Before disseminating the final survey, a “pilot test” encompassing 50 participants was conducted to verify question clarity and reliability. The survey involved using the “Likert scale” and “multiple-choice” answers as well as “close- and open-ended questions” to ensure the responses were extensive. A 385-person sample out of a target population of 300,000, intended to be representative of the national confidence interval, would produce a survey with approximately a ±5% margin of error (Krejcie & Morgan, 1970). Stratified random sampling was used to represent different sociodemographic groups, such as urban, rural, and city dwellers, covering a wide range of genders, education levels, and places. This ensured that the results were representative of a larger population. These included questions that aimed to uncover what worried respondents about the projects and how they believed the implementation was progressing. These included questions like “What worries or impresses you of the BRI projects in Myanmar?” and question the “How do you think about BRI progress in Myanmar?” The purpose was to capture both the substantive and affective elements of BRI projects. In the questionnaires, ten attributes in content analysis, including “debt concern”, “economic development”, “infrastructure development”, “environmental concerns”, “local concerns”, “lack of transparency”, “lack of coordination”, “Chinese interest”, “regional connectivity”, and “Paukphaw relations”, were primarily incorporated, and the respondent’s demographic characteristics, such as gender, location, and habits, served as independent variables, whilst their attitudes towards the BRI projects, categorized as negative, neutral, and positive, functioned as dependent variables.

In the post-piloting phase, modifications were made to the questionnaire items for better understanding and to ensure that the questions were asked according to the aim. After the last distribution, 385 individuals completed the survey from 410 respondents who belonged to the valid sample units. The exclusion criterion was incomplete or invalid responses. One of the difficult features in designing the survey was to ask questions that reflected not only a specific timeframe (2011–2024) but also the main issues related to BRI projects in Myanmar identified prior to content analysis. “Over the years, what are your top BRI-related issues?” was added to ensure consistency across the data collection methods.

6.3. In-Depth Interview

Quantitative content analysis has a high level of model processing, which makes it useful in analyzing “documents” and “interview transcripts”, where coding is used for pattern recognition based on the techniques described above. This technique, which is used in conjunction with coding approaches to discover patterns and relationships within data, can be applied to different paradigms of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods research (White et al., 2006). Fakis et al. (2014) noted that using quantitative methods with qualitative interview data can strengthen the robustness of research by providing systematic access to complex real-world events (Fakis et al., 2014). This synthesis is the basis for evaluating qualitative interviews and subsequently enables the triangulation of both the direct and indirect effects of media and policy (Frels & Onwuegbuzie, 2013). Therefore, this study selected 30 participants for “in-depth interviews”, including 15 government officials, 8 scholars, and 7 business professionals with extensive knowledge or experience with BRI projects in Myanmar. The selection of these participants was purposeful and guided by their expertise, which allowed the interviews to be rich and analytical in terms of policy dimensions concerning BRI projects. These interviewees were incentivized and encouraged to engage actively and give due importance to the questions. The questionnaire was constructed around the frames previously used in similar studies on media and public agendas, structured as a matrix, and consisted of semi-structured, closed-, and open-ended questions.

These questions were designed to align with the longitudinal analysis of the media agenda, focusing specifically on the policy priorities of successive governments concerning BRI projects during the period 2011–2024. A significant challenge in conducting these interviews was selecting the most appropriate participants and designing a questionnaire that effectively covered the relevant timeframe (2011–2024). Identifying ten attributes, key questions were included: “What factors have shaped the policy agenda of successive governments regarding BRI projects over the past years?” and “How do you assess the policies developed by successive governments regarding BRI projects in Myanmar?”

The interviews were conducted at venues and at times convenient for the participants, with each interview lasting between 10 and 15 min. The interviews were recorded and transcribed and the transcripts were coded by two coders. The same coding process used in the content analysis phase was applied to interview data. The coders were provided with a coding book and coding sheets to quantify the ten frames assigned to the four core issues of the BRI projects, as defined in the content analysis. Before starting the coding process, an inter-coder reliability pretest was conducted on 30% of the sample (10 transcripts). Pretest average inter-coder reliability coefficients of 0.85 fell in the acceptable range between 0.75 and 0.85 for these assessments (Lovejoy et al., 2016). Regarding the coding of the 30 transcripts: there were 446 frames across the attributes and their four corresponding issues.

7. Results

This study examined the relationship between media coverage, public opinion, and policy priorities regarding BRI projects in Myanmar. We draw on the empirical foundations of our analysis, such as RFA and VOA (media agenda, MA); public online surveys (public agenda, PA); and in-depth interviews with policymakers, scholars, and businessmen, to provide additional insights into policy community thinking (policy agenda, PAD). The dataset supporting all analyses and tables presented in this section is available in the Supplementary Materials (S1).

Table 1. Issues attributes of the BRI projects in media coverage, public opinion, and policy priorities.

Issues and Attributes	Media Coverage		Public Opinion		Policy Priorities
	%	Rank	%	Rank	%	Rank
Economic impact and Chinese loans
(1) Debt concern	2.9	10	2.9	10	4.8	10
(2) Economic development	12.4	3	12.4	3	12.8	3
(3) Infrastructure development	11.1	5	10.8	5	12.3	4
Environmental and social impacts
(1) Environmental concern	6.1	8	8.7	6	10	6
(2) Local concern	15.4	2	13	2	13.5	2
Governance, transparency, and coordination
(1) Transparency in negotiation	10.7	6	11.4	4	11.2	5
(2) Necessary for coordination	11.7	4	9.2	7	8.4	8
Geopolitical and strategic considerations
(1) China’s strategic interest	20.1	1	13.6	1	14.8	1
(2) Regional connectivity	6.5	7	8.2	9	5.8	9
(3) Paukphaw relations	3.1	9	9.8	8	6.4	7

presents a comparison of the percentages and rankings of the key issue attributes across media, public, and policy agendas. The findings indicated a substantial alignment between these three agendas regarding certain key issues. For example, “China’s strategic interest”, under the broader issue of “geopolitical and strategic considerations”, is ranked first among all three agendas. Media coverage hypothesizes that this attribute is 20.1%, while it appears to be similar in public (13.6%) and policy (14.8%) perception. This consistency reflects the shared recognition of the geopolitical importance of China’s involvement in Myanmar’s BRI projects. “Economic development”, tied to the issue of “economic impacts and Chinese loans”, is another attribute that shows alignment. It was ranked third across all three agendas, with media coverage at 12.4%, public opinion at 12.4%, and policy perspectives at 12.8%. This near-identical weighting across agendas underscores the centrality of economic development in the discourse surrounding the BRI projects.

However, discrepancies arise in “governance, transparency, and coordination”. Specifically, the attribute of “lack of transparency” is ranked differently across the agendas, being sixth in the media agenda (10.7%), fourth in the public agenda (11.4%), and fifth in the policy agenda (11.2%). “Lack of coordination” shows even greater variation, ranked fourth in the media (11.7%) but lower in the public (seventh, at 9.2%) and policy (eighth, at 8.4%) agendas. These differences suggest that while governance issues are highlighted by the media, the public and policymakers do not perceive them as equally urgent.

Table 2. Correlations between media, public, and policy agendas.

	Media Agenda (MA)		Public Agenda (PA)		Policy Agenda (PAD)
	r	p-Value	r	p-Value	r	p-Value
Media Agenda (MA)	1.0000	NA	0.8667	0.0012	0.8182	0.0038
Public Agenda (PA)	0.8667	0.0012	1.0000	NA	0.9758	0.000001
Policy Agenda (PAD)	0.8182	0.0038	0.9758	0.00001	1.0000	NA

presents the correlation analysis, which reveals a strong positive relationship between media and public agendas. This analysis revealed a strong positive correlation (r = 0.8667, p = 0.0012) between the media agenda (MA) and public agenda (PA), which was statistically significant at p < 0.05. This indicates a considerable alignment between media-highlighted issues and public perception, suggesting that media coverage significantly influences public opinion. Additionally, a robust correlation (r = 0.8182, p = 0.0038, statistically significant at p < 0.05) was observed between the media agenda (MA) and policy agenda (PAD), emphasizing the media’s impact on shaping governmental policy priorities, particularly concerning BRI projects in Myanmar. These substantial correlations underscore the media’s pivotal role in molding both public perception and policymaking regarding BRI initiatives in Myanmar. Moreover, an exceptionally strong positive correlation (r = 0.9758, p = 0.00001) was found between the public agenda (PA) and policy agenda (PDA), indicating a near-perfect alignment between public concerns and policymaking priorities. This suggests that public discourse heavily informs governmental decisions, reinforcing the interplay between public sentiment and policy actions, especially on controversial matters such as land appropriation and foreign investment projects.

Notable correlations among the media agenda (MA), public agenda (PA), and policy agenda (PAD) accentuate the media’s critical function in shaping societal discourse and governmental priorities. Media focus directly impacts the perceptions of both the public and policymakers, with the robust PA-PAD correlation indicating that public opinion has a considerable influence over policy decisions. In other words, the strong link between media reporting and public sentiment with press-highlighted issues often dominates public discourse and influences government policies on foreign investments, including BRI projects.

Grounded in “second-level agenda-setting theory”, media shapes public opinion by emphasizing the salience of specific attributes of issues or objects. These shifts in public opinion mediate the relationship between the media agenda and policy agenda. The path analysis (SEM) model is the best-suited analytical method for examining the mediating role of public opinion in linking media coverage to policymaking, testing whether public opinion mediates the relationship between the media agenda and the policy agenda, and indicating an indirect pathway through which media influences governmental policymaking.

Table 3. Model fit statistics.

Fit Statistic	Value	Criteria for Good Fit	Interpretation
Chi-square	0.333	p > 0.05	Good fit p = 0.564
RMSEA	0.001	<0.05	Excellent fit
CFI	1	>0.95	Perfect fit
TLI	1.02	>0.95	Excellent fit
SRMR	0.002	<0.08	Excellent fit

presents the model fit statistics that substantiate the robustness of the path analysis (SEM) and corroborate the hypothesized relationships by examining whether public opinion functions as a mediator between media coverage and policy priorities. The model exhibited an exceptional fit, with a chi-square value that was not significant (p = 0.564), suggesting no notable disparity between the proposed model and the observed data, thus supporting the model’s suitability for elucidating relationships among variables. The RMSEA (root mean square error of approximation) value of 0.001, well below the threshold of 0.05, indicates minimal approximation error and affirms the model’s good fit with the population data. A comparative fit index (CFI) value of 1.00 denotes a perfect fit, verifying that the hypothesized model explains the observed data nearly flawlessly compared to a null model. A Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) value of 1.02, surpassing the recommended 0.95 threshold, further validates the robustness of the model. The slightly elevated value (>1.0) reflects strong congruence between the hypothesized and observed data. An SRMR (standardized root mean square residual) of 0.002, considerably below the 0.08 threshold, underscores minimal residual differences between observed and predicted correlations.

Collectively, these findings confirm that the hypothesized path analysis (SEM) model is well defined, aligns with the observed data, and provides a robust foundation for interpreting the path analysis results presented in

Table 4. Path estimates (direct and indirect effects) vs. variance estimates.

		Estimate	St. Error	z-Value	p-Value	Std. LV	Std. All
Path	Public Agenda~Media Agenda	0.842	0.062		0.001	0.842	0.949
Path	Policy Agenda~Public Agenda	0.928	0.027		0.001	0.928	0.992
Indirect Effect	(PDA~PA~MA)	0.781	-		-	-	-
Variance	Public Agenda	3.761	1.189	3.162	0.002	3.761	0.099
Variance	Policy Agenda	0.551	0.174	3.162	0.002	0.551	0.017

Note: The indirect effect (PAD~MA via PA) is calculated as the product of the path coefficients.

.

Table 4 presents the calculated path coefficients, variance estimates, and indirect effects that elucidate the interrelated connections among the media agenda (MA), public agenda (PA), and policy agenda (PAD). These findings robustly support the theoretical model rooted in second-level agenda-setting theory and illuminate the processes by which the media impacts policymaking. Regarding direct effects, the path coefficient was 0.842, with a standard error of 0.062 and a statistically significant p-value (p = 0.001). This outcome reveals a robust, positive relationship between media coverage and public opinion, affirming the media’s considerable influence on shaping public perception. The standardized coefficient (Std. All = 0.949) suggests that nearly 95% of the variation in the public agenda is accounted for by the media agenda, underscoring its pivotal role in influencing public sentiment. Conversely, the path coefficient was 0.928, with a standard error of 0.027 and a statistically significant p-value (p = 0.001). This result establishes an exceptionally strong, positive relationship between public opinion and policy priorities, emphasizing the significance of public sentiment in influencing policymaking decisions. The standardized coefficient (Std. All = 0.992) highlights the near-perfect explanatory power of the public agenda on the policy agenda.

Correspondingly, the indirect effect of the media agenda on policy agenda, mediated by the public agenda, is determined as the product of the two direct path coefficients: “Indirect Effect: 0.842 × 0.928 = 0.781”. This substantial indirect effect corroborates the mediating function of the public agenda, demonstrating how the media indirectly shapes policy priorities through its influence on public opinion. The prevalence of the indirect pathway aligns with the theoretical framework that posits public opinion is a crucial intermediary between media coverage and policymaking. Concerning the variance for the public agenda, the variance estimate was 3.761, with a standard error of 1.189 and a z-value of 3.162 (p = 0.002), indicating that the media agenda significantly explains the variation in the public agenda. Regarding variance for the policy agenda, the variance estimate is 0.551, with a standard error of 0.174 and a z-value of 3.162 (p = 0.002), confirming that the public agenda accounts for a significant proportion of the variation in the policy agenda.

The results elucidate the intricate connections between the media, public sentiment, and policy formulation. Key inferences include the following: data confirm that public opinion mediates the influence of the media on policy decisions, with a significant indirect effect (0.781) showing the media’s impact on policy priorities through public perceptions. The strong path coefficient (0.842) from the media agenda to the public agenda highlights the media’s role in shaping public views on policy, consistent with the second-level agenda-setting theory, which suggests that media attributes salience to issues and influences public priorities. The strong path coefficient (0.928) from the public agenda to the policy agenda illustrates the crucial role of public opinion in guiding policy decisions, indicating that policymakers respond more to public sentiment than to direct media coverage.

The indirect pathway (media agenda → public agenda → policy agenda) emphasizes the media’s cascading influence on policymaking, supporting the theory that the media’s impact on governance is amplified through public opinion. Regarding the BRI projects, the results underscore the importance of media narratives in shaping public perceptions, which, in turn, affect policymaking domestically and internationally. Stakeholders and policymakers in the BRI should recognize how media coverage influences public sentiment and policy outcomes.

Accordingly, the results provide robust support for the conceptual model grounded in second-level agenda-setting theory. The strong fit of the path analysis (SEM) model, combined with the significant direct and indirect effects, highlights the media’s powerful role in shaping public opinion and influencing policymaking. These findings contribute to the growing body of literature on the agenda-setting theory by empirically demonstrating the mediating role of public opinion in translating media narratives into policy priorities.

8. Discussion

The findings of this study underscore the significant role that the media plays in shaping both public opinion and policy priorities regarding BRI projects in Myanmar. The dataset supporting all analyses and tables presented in this section is available in the Supplementary Materials (S1). The strong alignment between media coverage, public perceptions, and policy decisions indicates that the issues emphasized in media reports are not only absorbed by the public but also influence the direction of governmental decision-making (Kosicki, 1993). This is particularly evident in areas such as “China’s strategic interest”, which consistently ranks as the most salient issue across media, public, and policy agenda. This consensus reflects how central China’s geopolitical influence is perceived in Myanmar’s BRI projects, a finding that reinforces the media’s ability to elevate specific attributes of public and policy attention (Dearing & Rogers, 1996; Rogers & Dearing, 1988). The majority of participants in the in-depth interviews also corroborated this conclusion, acknowledging that “Myanmar’s strategic location, which connects South and Southeast Asia and provides access to the Bay of Bengal, incentivizes China to invest in the country for geopolitical reasons, a phenomenon frequently highlighted by news media.”

The analysis reveals critical disparities, particularly in terms of governance, transparency, and coordination. These discrepancies, as indicated by the different rankings of the attribute of “lack of transparency” across the three agendas, point to an area where media coverage might not fully align with public or policy priorities. Although transparency is a concern, its inconsistent ranking suggests that while the media draws attention to the issue, it may not resonate as strongly with the public or policymakers or that it is overshadowed by other pressing concerns, such as economic development or strategic interests. This misalignment indicates a potential gap in how governance-related concerns are communicated or perceived across these spheres, highlighting the need for targeted media coverage to bridge this gap. These discrepancies were observed across successive administrations. For instance, the Thein Sein government, failed to inform the local population when signing the Kyaukphu seaport project. The Aung San Suu Kyi administration did not implement an effective policy to address Kyaukphyu locals’ land-use concerns, despite the positive collaboration between the government and Chinese investors in project execution. During interviews, the government officials who participated indicated that successive administrations exhibited insufficient transparency and coordination with local populations in managing international investments in Myanmar, particularly regarding Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects, which exacerbated local concerns.

Nevertheless, the outcome of the correlation analysis supports the proposition that the media functions as a crucial factor in the agenda-setting process, indicating that the media influences not only the issues to which the public should attend (M. E. McCombs & Shaw, 1993) but also those that policymakers will deem significant. This influence is not just a simple transmission of information per se but also represents the specific attributes of issues that then become pervasive in public and policy discourses. The strength of the estimated media effects, as revealed by the path analysis, highlights the importance of public opinion as a mediator between media coverage and policy priorities. When the news emphasizes certain issues, the public will be concerned about them (second-level agenda setting—not only issue salience but also how to think about an issue) (Rogers & Dearing, 1988).

The good fit of the model, and hence a strong confirmation of the relationships found in this study, as shown by the fit indices, are also indicative of this. Therefore, the direct and indirect channels through which media coverage exerts an effect on public opinion and, in turn, policy actions provide a more detailed account of how media content affects set government agendas concerning international investments, including BRI projects. This is important because it illustrates the role of public opinion as a conduit for media effects to be translated into policy actions (Kosicki, 1993). For instance, during the Aung San Suu Kyi administration, RFA and VOA reports highlighted recurring land appropriation issues. Consequently, 20% of the 1514 acres taken from over 180 residents of Wha Thanang Pei Ward were reclassified as urban land and reallocated to Plot No. 159, Blok Nyunt Ward. This may emphasize that the agenda-setting effects of media should be considered as an indirect guide to policy decisions on how it presents issues in public discourse.

In Myanmar’s BRI projects, while NGOs, academics, and politicians are believed to shape public opinion, the media play a crucial role in informing and influencing views. The media’s impact on public sentiment partially supports the notion that media influence affects policy decisions, as seen in the suspension of the Myitsone Dam project under Thein Sein and the reevaluation of Kyaukphyu initiatives under the NLD government. Policymakers and Chinese investors should consider this when implementing the BRI projects in other countries.

Nevertheless, as this study focuses on general trends in media coverage, public sentiment, and governmental policy priorities from 2011 to 2024, it is important to note that these patterns may fluctuate according to the ruling administration. The influence of media coverage on public opinion and its consequent impact on government policy decisions may have been more pronounced during the National League for Democracy (NLD) government than during the current State Administration Council (SAC) regime. Based on feedback from interviewees, while public sentiment remains relevant, it exerts less influence on the State Administration Council (SAC) government’s policymaking processes in comparison to the two previous administrations after 2011.

However, the gaps identified in “governance, transparency, and coordination”, while partly aligned with the total advice situation, provided some implicative evidence that some kinds of issues were most effectively reported (or not reported) to the media. These gaps may deprive the public and policymakers of important information about all dimensions of BRI projects, especially in areas where sustained accountability and coordination are crucial. Various media outlets have distinct agendas and approaches to the presentation of selected topics to their audiences. In this regard, the journalists who participated in the interview process disclosed that they had their own criteria for selecting topics and attributed them to their coverage of individuals, including matters related to Chinese projects. This finding corroborates the notion that there is a discrepancy between media coverage, public perceptions, and government policy priorities. To fill these gaps, future media attention may shift to governance as an area of greater reporting and update the public on the risk of transparency problems and disjointedness for massive infrastructure plans, such as those involved in the BRI.

Ultimately, the media has an important effect on the formation of public and policy agendas for BRI projects in Myanmar, but influence is shaped directly by public opinion. Although there is some convergence in many areas, such as political, economic, and strategic issues, disparities in governance and transparency are evident. Journalists covered most of these issues and featured more than a few special reports. However, the findings point to the importance of nuanced media coverage to avoid public debate and policy-focused attention from privileging some causes at the expense of others.

9. Conclusions

This study seeks to contribute to the literature on second-level agenda-setting with a focus on BRI projects in Myanmar, an area that has rarely been investigated in regard to communication. Previous studies have primarily examined electoral politics and policy topics in established democracies. Using the second-level agenda-setting theory, this study broadens its application to international development projects. The findings highlight media coverage and its substantial impact on shaping public opinion and policy priorities (primarily with reference to economic growth, infrastructure, and China’s strategic interests). They demonstrate that the effects of media not only determine issue salience, but also how key attributes are associated in public and policymakers’ minds—a question previously unanswered by the general literature on media influence on large-scale infrastructure projects, such as the BRI.

In their findings, the path analysis from this study indicated a shift in media influence away from the policy itself and towards an indirect effect via public opinion. The strong fit of the path analysis (SEM) model, combined with the significant direct and indirect effects, highlights the media’s powerful role in shaping public opinion and influencing policymaking. These findings contribute to the growing body of literature on the agenda-setting theory by empirically demonstrating the mediating role of public opinion in translating media narratives into policy priorities. This finding also highlights the role of public sentiment as an intervening variable between media portrayals and policy agenda setting. The media’s portrayal of events significantly influences what becomes acceptable in public discourse, as individuals often mirror or articulate the perspectives presented in news media. This influence subsequently creates pressure to determine government priority. This mediated effect is very strong in terms of the “economic and infrastructural development” issue, indirectly emphasizing that the media not only influences public investments at the mass level but also government investment decisions (Golan & Wanta, 2001).

However, this study also highlights areas where the media are largely absent from reporting, namely, issues of “environmental sustainability and governance transparency”, which are surprisingly less prominent in public and policy discourses. This underscores the importance of a more balanced and nuanced media portrayal to ensure that all necessary questions are asked about this ambitious initiative in both public and policy discourse. Policymakers should be aware of the media’s impact on public opinion and ensure that their policies balance the economic benefits for a country with potential future environmental and governance issues. This study has proven that second-level agenda-setting theory provides an appropriate tool to study policy issues in international development as it examines how mass media can shape public opinion, which could further affect context-specific policymaking.

The strong correlation between societal concerns and governmental priorities suggests a collaborative approach in which public opinion influences decision-making, particularly on issues such as foreign investments and BRI projects. This research emphasizes the media’s crucial role in shaping societal and governmental agendas for significant infrastructure projects such as the BRI in Myanmar. This study highlights the link between media reporting, public sentiment, and policy formulation, underscoring the importance of transparent and comprehensive policy procedures that address societal concerns and ensure responsible management of large-scale initiatives.

In conclusion, this study contributes to the existing knowledge in practical, theoretical, and methodological aspects based on three fundamental premises. First, it addresses the academic oversight of media influence, which may have led to the cessation of significant projects during various governmental periods in Myanmar coinciding with media deregulation. Second, it highlights the lack of studies on the effects of media (agenda-setting) effects on BRI projects in Myanmar, despite extensive literature on related aspects. Lastly, it notes insufficient research on media effects concerning global infrastructure initiatives such as the BRI in developing Southeast Asian countries.

Considering future research endeavors, this study has certain limitations. As its primary focus was to examine media effects on policy priorities mediated through public opinion regarding BRI projects through an empirical study of agenda-setting effects, this study does not address broader contextual factors, such as Myanmar’s media landscape, governmental influence on media, the multifaceted roles of journalists, or geopolitical considerations. The study also acknowledges limitations, including restricted access to comprehensive data due to political and logistical challenges in Myanmar, which elucidate areas for future research. In addition, as this study focuses on general trends in media coverage, public sentiment, and governmental policy priorities from 2011 to 2024, it is important to note that these patterns may fluctuate according to the ruling administration. Therefore, future research may focus on the temporal changes in media trends, comparing successive governments and incumbent administrations in democratic countries, as different regimes possess varying policy stances on international investments, which may render public attitudes influenced by the media less relevant. In future research, the study also should examine a broader array of media sources (e.g., local news) in addition to more contemporary or “hybrid” sources (e.g., social media), as such approaches could provide insight into the relative advantage of different types of platforms offering agenda setting and transfer among the public and between the public and political elites.