Politics and the media

Media effect

@@Wether one’s political view impacted by event itself or media coverage of said effect@@.

If media coverage, to what degree? how do we know? different levles of impacts?

Ex: 9/11 itself or its coverage?

A growing awakening

Bartels (80s): i$f no media effect, why pol staff cares so much$ (Nixon vs Kennedy)→ hard to decipher so need better theories about how ppl digest pol info and better social science

Experimental studies

==PB of control and external validity==: bc ==create specific conditions that may not exist outside, how valid are findings== in explaining actual real life example→ need to find balance

==Iyengar & kinder (87) News that Matters== → looked at american ppl’s interaction effect of race and PID with news

Findings= ==Agenda setting effect==: ==issues talked about by media influences how much ppl think they are important==, effect is ==not long lasting== if only exposed to it once

==Priming/framing effect==: way media calls attention to ways of seeing issue over another→ ==the way it is reported changes evaluative value==

==effect if exposed to it on long term short period== of time (20min/day over 20hrs once)

PID = ==filter on how we interpret news so news dont really change or impact PID==

Example of Canadians in Afg, more support if shown a picture of friendly soldier w/child than just armed soldier (-5%)→ can’t know if long effect

Nature and origins of mass opinion, John zaller (1992)

What is public opinion? do people have true preferences (sometimes, no opinion), shaped by 3 elements (info, exposure and predisposition)= not neutral

One of his conclusions: %%public opinion led by elite bc they shape framing, info environment and exposure%%

= %%more elite polarization, the more the masses will be polarized%%

Trimble and Sampert (2004)

Why care about $game frame in media$? can lead to $personalization, voter as by-stander, gendered, trivializes politics (infotainment) and disregards actual political/ideological standings on issues$

Their research = content analysis of headlines of traditional media (The Globe and Mail and the Post) = also use game frame → $assuming that if old media does it then new media will use it off the charts$

New media, better politics?

Markus Prior: political effects of ^^low to high choice media environment.^^

1970s = ^^low, audience consolidation^^, all = ^^same source^^ just more or less exposed, ^^less polarization bc fewer media sources^^ + more exposure overall

today= ^^high, audience fragmentation^^, with algorithm info is biased and partisan (^^echo chamber^^), ^^selected exposure^^, one can completely opt out of politic exposure.

Bartels (96) & Bittner (2007): Does political ignorance/knowledge matter?

Fact: levels of knowledge are lower than demo theory would require

Bartels = US, ignorant voter doesn’t make same decisions as if they were more knowledgeable

Bittner = CAN, interaction effect between knowledge and social group ID (religion, gender, race etc). Behaviour differs depending on knowledge but wether $bridging$ (knowledgeable Catholics on abortion to non Catholics) or ==amplifying== (knowledgeable women support C party way less than men) effect differs