Issues and Democratic Primaries 2004

What Influences the News Coverage that Candidates Receive on Issues?
A Look at Same-Sex Marriage Coverage in the 2004 Presidential Election

Background

Influence of the Press
Many different theories exist explaining the power of the media and their potential to skew or influence what and who gets the most coverage on a specific day. Many academics ascribe themselves to the framing theory that is eloquently described in the White House Project as, “what media communication scholars call an agenda setting effect in that they designate certain issues as important and others as secondary and unimportant” (White House Project, 2001). In support of this school of though, journalists, editors and media moguls fundamentally do maintain the ability to set an agenda for candidates and the American public. The Project further argues that “the press plays a major role in suggesting important topics for audiences to think about and for how long to think about them” (White House Project, 2001). Through slanted and selective coverage of stories, the press is more than capable of subtly setting the agenda of the country. They have in their hands the capability to decide what stories should air and for how long. This argument is at the root of liberal’s concerns about Fox News and conservative’s argument against CNN. Livingston and Bennett refer to the press as a “gatekeeper” that has the power to act in a gate like a regulatory manner in determining what makes the final cut and what stays in the editing room (Livingston and Bennet). Basically, media elites screen and select all news stories before they fall into the hands of the ordinary public. However, having the ability to shape and mold the national agenda is not irrefutable evidence that indicts media outlets on the charge of agenda setting. The question arises; have any scholars or pundits found irrefutable evidence of agenda setting?

The White House Project goes on to claim that it has found such definitive evidence. The study catalogued the number of women compared to men who were guests on Sunday political talk shows. The results suggest that women are seriously underrepresented and are not given the same number of appearances when compared to those of men. Women do not even meet the already low percentage of women holding elected positions. According to the author, the media’s choice of guests has the power “to confer power and authority upon those chosen as speakers on national issues” (White House Project). The Project concludes that agenda setting does take place, inflicting serious damage on the image of women. By reaffirming the stereotype that men have more expertise and authority in politics, a self fulfilling prophecy is born and women are left at a huge disadvantage when trying to further involve themselves in national affairs.

The White House Project’s method of study and conclusions stand the test of scrutiny. Little doubt remains that women are underrepresented on Sunday political talk shows. Problems arise however when people begin making implications and causal claims with that information. Some would argue that the lack of representation is a mere unintentional coincidence. Others claim that a conscious effort exists among males to protect the male dominated status quo. These conclusions are all irrelevant for this research project. Instead, the reader should note that it has been established that the media is very powerful and does in some ways manipulate or skew reality. The White House Project does not satisfy the question; do media elites attempt to set the agenda in elections and primaries and if so, how successful are they?

Influence of Government Officials
Some stand in staunch opposition to the argument that the press has incredible amounts of power in setting the agenda. In fact, some like Lance Bennett claim that the media is the one who is left practically powerless. According to this indexing school of thought, rather than setting the agenda, the media end up falling right into the hands of government and reaffirm the government’s agenda. Reporters tend to rely on regular news beats and government sources, hence becoming the tools of government. Bennett uses the example of the Iran-Contra scandal and concludes that “the media seemed content to allow the government to investigate itself, assess the importance of the problem, define the solution, and pronounce the denouement of the story” (Bennett). In the eyes of Bennett and his followers, a press founded on an indexing mentality disregards public opinion and allows for government manipulation. His proposed solution is more independent journalism that holds the government in check and ends what he would call a viscous cycle of manipulation (Bennett).

John Zaller and Dennis Chiu conducted a study during the Cold War whereby they gauged and quantified the angles and views which the media and Congress held. There results proved to be very significant, uncovering a direct correlation between the two (Zaller and Chiu). They claim to have found irrefutable evidence that government officials are successful in creating and perpetuating a cycle of media indexing.

The arguments made by advocates of indexing have validity, especially when in regards to foreign policy, national crises, and a highly staffed and powerful White House. By their nature such circumstances lend themselves to government manipulation. When dealing with actions overseas and imminent threats it seems to be the trend that government officials have significantly more control in filtering and shaping press coverage due to the secrecy and importance of the subjects. Yet it remains to be seen whether they have as much sway when dealing with domestic social issues like gay marriage. Moreover, the Whitehouse and Congress are entire political entities that often coordinate their message very effectively (Sellers), while a candidate in a primary is only one man or woman. Despite all of the arguments made from those who subscribe to the indexing school of though, it remains unclear if a primary candidate has that same power and authority in setting the news agenda during the Presidential primaries on an issue as unique as gay marriage.

Influence of Events
Some scholars have looked beyond the traditional roles of government officials and shifted their attention toward outside events that are not caused by the media or government officials. John Zaller coined the burglar alarm media frenzy theory and warns of the trend toward soft news. Yet, Zallar makes the case that when outrageous events do occur, the media descend with such fury and intensity that they inform the public at nausea and hold parties accountable (Zaller). However, Zaller only mentions scandal and soft driven news stories in reference to media frenzies. Zaller goes wrong by not extending his argument to other ways in which events make news that are not necessarily laced in scandal. Unexpected court rulings similar to the one in Massachusetts seemed to cause a media frenzy despite the lack of scandal. Perhaps there is another category for events caused by the judicial branch’s interpretations of the law. These interpretations are certainly outside the control of the media and government officials. Especially with the presence of judicial activism, these decisions have the power and potential to cause media frenzies as well.

By Jack Hubbard

© Davidson College, 2004, Department of Political Science, Davidson College, Davidson, NC 28035
Send comments, questions, and suggestions to Patrick Sellers
Created: 4/27/2004. Last updated: 5/2/2004.