�ݺ�ߣ

 Look at trends in news coverage of elections,
esp. those documented by Thomas Patterson
(looked at trends toward “infotainment”).
 Look at alternative explanations for these
trends, including those by John Zaller.

trivial and negative

Politicians love this book!

1. Positive to Negative Coverage

3. Descriptive to Interpretive Coverage

4. Trivial Coverage: Policy issues to reporters’ issues

1474
1450
1300
1150
788 805
1000
850
700
550
400
250
100
1992 1996 2000

 Note : Based on 772 stories from August 31, 1992 to November 2, 1992; 483 stories from September 2, 1996 to November 4,
1996; 462 stories from September 4, 2000 to November 6, 2000 from the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news.
 Data: Center For Media And Public Affairs/Brookings

THE SHRINKING SOUNDBITE on network television

2000 (9/4-11/5) 7.8

1996 (9/2-11/4)
8.2

1992 (9/7-11/3)
8.4

1988 (9/5-11/7)
9.8

0 2 4 6 8 10
Seconds

 Note: Based on 589 stories from September 5, 1988 to November 7, 1988 ; 728 stories from September 7, 1992 to November
3, 1992; 483 stories from September 2, 1996 to November 4, 1996; 462 stories from September 4, 2000 to November 6,
2000 from the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news.

Horse Race as Percent of Total Campaign Coverage, Last 2 Mos,
‘92 to 2000

90%
80%
70%
60% 2000 Horse Race
50%
1996 Horse Race
40%
30% 1992 Horse Race
20%
10%
0%
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9
k

k

k

k

k

k

k

k

k
ee

ee

ee

ee

ee

ee

ee

ee

ee
W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

W

 Note: Horse Race stories focus on who’s ahead, who’s behind, and candidate election strategies. Statistics on the percent of stories
based on total number of election stories from that particular news organization. Based on 772 stories from August 31, 1992 to
November 2, 1992; 483 stories from September 2, 1996 to November 4, 1996; 462 stories from September 4, 2000 to November 6, 2000
from the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news.


475 news coverage of elections 2012 up

Patterson: Source of Trends in News
Coverage of Presidential Primaries

 Change in party nominating rules in late 60s:
 More primaries and longer campaign
  down with parties, up with journalists,
candidates
 Journalistic values vs. Voters’ or Candidates’
values or behavior
 A popular explanation among candidates

 W. Bush:
 Ignored the “filter,” the fourth estate.
 News management strategies (later).
 Obama: sees as two overarching problems:
 coverage that focuses on political winners and losers
rather than substance;
 and a “false balance,” in which two opposing sides are
given equal weight regardless of the facts.
 Mr. Obama prefers small sit-downs with columnists, including The
Wall Street Journal’s Peggy Noonan, The Washington Post’s E. J.
Dionne and Ruth Marcus, and The New York Times’s David Brooks
 Mr. Obama has said the lack of an effective narrative has been one of
his administration’s biggest missteps.

Early Coverage of the 2008 Presidential Campaign
(October 29, 2007):
What the public SAYS it wants

What Topics the Public Wants Covered
More Less
Candidates’ position on issues 77% 17
Candidate debates 57% 32
Candidates’ personal backgrounds and experiences 55% 36

The candidates who are not front runners 55% 37

Sources of candidates’ campaign money 55% 35

Which candidate in leading in the latest polls 42% 45

Source: Pew Research Center for People and the Press
September 28 – October 1, 2007

 “Horse race” coverage
 Politics is a game of winners and losers, not a serious debate over
ideas and issues
 Campaign strategies, tactics, victories, and blunders are the focus of
coverage
 Early primary victories build “momentum”
▪ Coverage of Iowa and New Hampshire races is far out of proportion to
their relative delegate share
▪ States compete to position their primaries & caucuses earlier in the
season
 Focus on candidate character and image
 Personality flaws are fair game
 Parties become less important

 Why do media produce such large amounts of horse-race
coverage in their election coverage?
 Organizational forces?
 Market forces?
▪ Campaigns as sporting events?
▪ Issues less interesting?
 Journalistic response to candidate manipulation?
 2000: Study of reader attention to different topical chapters
on a CD ROM programmed to enable “usage tracking;” 187
participants returned usage data.
 First cut of tracking data: People read stories earlier in the
CD. Need to remove this artificial influence on usage data.

Patterson: Consequences of Trivial & Negative
Coverage

Negative Views of Government and Politicians

No! says Larry Sabato in Feeding Frenzy.

Evolution of news media coverage of politics

1. Lapdog journalism (1941-1966): reporting that served and
reinforced the political establishment: FDR, JFK.
2. Watchdog (1966-1974) scrutinized and checked the
behavior of political elites by undertaking independent
investigations into statements made by public officials:
LBJ, RMN.
3. Junkyard dog (1974 to present): reporting that is often and
harsh, aggressive, intrusive, where feeding frenzies flourish
and gossip reaches print: WJC.

 Advances in media technology:
 Instantaneous transmission
 24-hour news stations
 Internet
 More women in the press corps
 Competitive pressures increased
 Watergate and Vietnam (Wood-Stein coverage)
 Change in culture, audience tastes
 Conclusion: From his condemnatory tone, Sabato still
largely blames the media for dysfunctional coverage,
but at least he (unlike Patterson) doesn’t want to return
to the days of lapdog coverage.

Consequences of News Coverage!!!

1. Causal analysis
2. Near-exclusive focus on one actor as source of a dysfunctional system

Journalists

Candidates Voters

A more realistic model of news coverage?
3 streets, all 2-way.

Journalists

Candidates Voters

Zaller, A Theory of Media Politics

The conflicting goals of 3 actors that influence news
coverage of elections:

 Voters: “Don’t waste my time!” “Tell me only what I need to know!”
(based on “rational ignorance”)

 Candidates: (Use journalists to) “Get Our Story Out.”

 Journalists: Maximize their "voice" in the news (i.e., autonomy vs.
stenographer).


 Given the goals of voters, how can we explain
coverage of:
 Horse-race?
 Conflict vs. consensus?
 Relative lack of issue coverage?


 Given the goals of journalists versus candidates,
how can we explain negative coverage—especially
press-initiated negative coverage?


Zaller’s measure of press-initiated versus Patterson’s measure, which
includes all negativity from any source, including the opposition candidate.

Zaller’s measure


Looks like a clear-cut case of political bias? But wait!


Harry Truman's 1948 Campaign Tour
Whistle Stop

Campaigns have changed drastically. Candidates want to control
their message completely. Events now are completely scripted,
Conservatives angry at Romney’s
managed and controlled. controlling of Ryan’s message.

 Assignment due before class, Tuesday Oct. 2
 Extra credit attendance, Oct. 2:
 James Gibson, Judicial Elections, Courtroom, Law
School, 4 pm.
 Midterm Oct. 9
 Review questions posted Oct. 2

Message control
 Candidate cancels major rally or event in order to avoid demonstrators
(positive).
 Candidate refuses to debate major party opponent (positive).
 Candidate responds to specific opponent attacks, excluding debates
(negative).
 Candidate takes questions from group or individual, where questioner(s) have
been screened or selected by the candidate himself. (Includes friendly talk
show.) (positive).
 Candidate engages in exchange -- that is, back-and-forth discussion -- with
demonstrators or hecklers in crowd (negative).
Crowd exposure.
 Rally or speech in unfriendly territory, e.g., Clinton addresses VFW Convention
during draft controversy (negative).
 Rally in controlled setting; audience screened or selected by campaign.
(positive).
Willingness to debate
 Candidate refuses to debate with major party opponent. Positive.

Interview access
 Press conference for national press (negative).
 "Press availability;" i.e.,, candidate meets informally with group of reporters
(negative).
 On his own initiative, candidate engages in light, non-substantive banter with
reporters (negative).
Interview restrictions
 No one in the campaign will respond to queries about sensitive issue, including press
secretary. (positive).
 In response to queries from reporters about sensitive issue, the candidate or press
secretary issues statement, but no one will verbally respond to questions. (positive).
 Candidate has interview with selected print journalist(s) with restrictions on content.
(positive).
 Candidate refuses request from traveling journalists for press conference (positive).
Media exclusion
 Any public or quasi-public event from which reporters are excluded, e.g. fund-raisers.
(positive).
 Campaign creates impediments to reporting of news (e.g., party workers hold up signs
to block picture-taking). (positive).

 In Chicago, Mitt Romney regaled wealthy donors with a boyhood
memory of volunteering to clean up a litter-strewn football field, the kind
of humanizing tale he typically avoids on the campaign trail.
 In Palm Beach, Fla., he walked contributors through a list of the federal
agencies he planned to shut down or combine, a level of specificity he
had not offered to voters.
 At a fund-raiser in Wilson, Wyo., he heaped praise on former Vice
President Dick Cheney, aligning himself with an unpopular Republican
presidency in a way he is loath to do in public.


Mystery solved! What looked like partisan bias in press criticism is more
likely press chafing at Republican candidates’ stricter news management.


What causes what? Zaller finds that, for the most part, candidates’ attempts to “manage”
the press “caused” the press to respond with more negative, press-initiated coverage.

Candidates’
News
Management

Press-
Initiated
Negativity

�ݺ�ߣ

475 news coverage of elections 2012 up

More Related Content

475 news coverage of elections 2012 up