how news media coverage and voter persuasion shape campaign agendas

290 Pages·2008·1.15 MB·English

THE SPINNING MESSAGE: HOW NEWS MEDIA
COVERAGE AND VOTER PERSUASION SHAPE
CAMPAIGN AGENDAS
DISSERTATION
Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the
Graduate School of The Ohio State University
By
Corwin D. Smidt, M.A.
* * * * *
The Ohio State University
2008
Dissertation Committee: Approved by
Professor Paul A. Beck, Adviser
Professor Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier
Adviser
Professor Kathleen M. McGraw
Political Science Graduate
Program
(cid:13)c Copyright by
Corwin D. Smidt
2008
ABSTRACT
A prominent avenue of the political campaign’s influence on voters is through
the nature of its issue content. Political science research has shown that the issues
discussed by the candidates and the news media are more likely to become voter
priorities, have a greater influence on voting behavior, and also shape what issues
candidates address after they are elected. As such, scholars now argue campaigns are
less a debate over issues than a fight over what issues to debate. However, despite
their prominent influence, theoretical attempts to explain how campaign agendas
develop are few, and those that do exist lack firm empirical support.
I seek to clarify how campaign agendas develop by examining how the agendas
of candidates, the news media, and voters interact during campaigns. I offer a new
perspective of campaign agenda formation that focuses on two attributes of these
interactions. First, I suggest that the news media’s greater credibility and pervasive-
ness give them a greater ability to influence voter agendas. Additionally, I argue that
news media issue coverage, combined with persuasive candidate rhetoric, can also
shape voter evaluations on such issues, especially among swing voters.
Iconsequentlyarguethatcandidateneedstopersuadevotersareanunder-emphasized
component of campaign strategy and that an agenda-setting strategy also has costly
consequences for candidate efforts at persuasion. Instead of agenda-setting, candi-
dates form their agendas in response to the news media’s issue attention in order to
ii
shape news coverage and prevent harmful persuasive environments. By making their
case on those issues featured within news media coverage, candidates attempt to win
over swing voters on such highly salient issues.
I test the theory in three parts of this dissertation. I provide the first known
test of reciprocal agenda dynamics and show how the national news media drove
candidates and the voters to focus on a select group of issues during the 2000 presi-
dential campaign. I then demonstrate that Bush and Gore’s rhetorical responses to
the news media’s agenda were influential in shaping voter opinions. Finally, I expand
the analysis to Senate campaigns of 2000 and 2004 and demonstrate how candidates
increasingly focus on issues as they gain coverage within the news media. Both of the
theory’s expectations are supported, as the news media show a prominent influence
on candidate and voter agendas.
On the whole, this persuasion-based theory of campaign agenda formation pro-
vides a new and much needed perspective on how the goals and abilities of the news
media and candidates interact to create the rhetorical dynamics we observe within
political campaigns. The theory applies the known moderators of agenda setting and
persuasion within the political behavior literature to derive a better understanding
of the influence, incentives, and behavior of candidates and the news media.
iii
To Melissa, my wife, who has been a constant source of inspiration and joy in my
life and to my parents, Corwin and Marilyn, who have always been proud and
supportive of me no matter what.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I should first thank the Department of Political Science at Ohio State University
for giving me the opportunity to develop into a professional academic these past
years. Throughout my time here, I have been blessed with an invigorating academic
and social environment, supportive faculty and staff, and wonderful financial support.
Part of my financial support came from the graduate school in the form of a first and
fifth year University Fellowship. These two years were a great help in getting me to
embrace graduate school and in getting me through this dissertation, and for this I
owe a lot of thanks. Ohio State is an outstanding academic institution to which I will
forever be indebted.
My graduate school experience at Ohio State could not have been better. For
this, I would first like to thank my dissertation committee members, all of whom have
demonstrated what it means to be a scholar. Paul Beck has been a great mentor and
dissertation adviser. From the outset, he has been very receptive to and supportive
of the idea of this dissertation. He has never ceased to be accommodating, patient,
and understanding as this project has developed. During many critical junctures,
he has offered insightful and supportive feedback that has challenged and motivated
this project even further. He has also provided me with additional financial support
through work on CNEP, for which I am very grateful.
v
Janet Box-Steffensmeier and Kathleen McGraw also deserve a great deal of thanks
for their efforts. Jan never ceases to be a source of encouragement and motivation.
She has provided me with numerous beneficial learning opportunities and collabo-
rative projects and is also responsible for my PRISM fellowship and attendance at
methodology conferences. These were both great opportunities from which I really
benefitted. Likewise, Kathleen McGraw has been a great help throughout my time
here at Ohio State. I especially benefitted from her instruction and guidance in my
early years here. Furthermore, I would also like to thank Lawrence Baum, Dean Lacy,
Craig Volden, Herb Weisberg, and Alan Wiseman who have each made this program
a wonderful learning experience for me.
I am also grateful for having attended graduate school with such a great group
of fellow students. While I was enriched by many individuals during my time here, I
especially would like to thank Roman Ivanchenko, Brandon Bartels, Samuel DeCanio,
and Jim DeLaet. All four spurred me to work harder, showed me new ideas and
perspectives in political science, challenged me to enhance the relevance and strength
of my theoretical arguments, and, most importantly, were great friends along the way.
I was very lucky to have been raised in a supportive and loving family. As college
teachers, both my mom and dad gave me valuable perspectives on education and
life. They inspired me to work hard, appreciate the responsibility of being a college
educator, and never stopped giving me support in my efforts. My sister also was a
great academic role model in my life. Of course, their greatest contribution was in
teaching and helping me to grow as a person. I have no doubt that I would not have
gotten to this point if not for them.
vi
Finally, I would especially like to thank my wife Melissa. This dissertation is
as much a product of my work as it is of sacrifices she has made. She has never
ceased to amaze and inspire me with the amount of pride and joy she has in my
accomplishments. I would never have gotten through graduate school without her
love and support, and for that I am eternally grateful.
vii
VITA
September 21, 1979 .........................Born, Grand Rapids, MI
2002 ........................................B.A., Political Science, Calvin College
2002-2003 .................................. University Fellow, The Ohio State Uni-
versity
2003-2005 .................................. Graduate Research and Teaching As-
sistant, The Ohio State University
2005 ........................................M.A., Political Science
2005-2006 .................................. Graduate Instructor, The Ohio State
University
2006-2007 .................................. University Fellow, The Ohio State Uni-
versity
2007-present ................................Graduate Research Assistant, The
Ohio State University
FIELDS OF STUDY
Major Field: Political Science
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
Dedication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
Vita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xii
List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xiv
Chapters:
1. Perspectives on Campaign Agendas and Agenda Setting . . . . . . . . . 1
Current Research on Campaign Agendas: Theory and Evidence . . . . . 3
Agenda-Setting Incentives and Theories of Candidate Issue Attention 4
The Forces Shaping News Media Agendas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
The Known Effects of Campaign Agendas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Clarifying the Confounded . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
The Need for a New Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Agenda-Setting Influences, Persuasion, and Campaign Agenda For-
mation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Outline of Dissertation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2. A Persuasion-Based Theory of Campaign Agenda Formation . . . . . . . 30
News Media Advantages in Pervasiveness and Credibility . . . . . . . . . 31
Consequences for Candidate Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Persuasion as a Candidate Motivator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
ix