Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
36 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is Lance Bennett’s indexing hypothesis?
|
Media coverage is representative and mirrors the debate going on between policy elites. The views that are represented are proportionately represented in the news coverage. If 50% of policy elites are in favor of an issue, 50% of media time will be dedicated to that side. Etc.
|
|
|
Under what circumstances is the “indexing hypothesis” most evident?
|
Indexing hypothesis is most evident when the discussion in question among the news media and the government is about domestic policy. Reason being, there are more debates concerning domestic policy as opposed to foreign policy; as a result, there is also more debates in the news regarding domestic policy. There is less debate concerning foreign policy; thus, the coverage in the news media regarding foreign policy are more uniformed and contain less debates. Furthermore higher quality news sources (NY times, Washington Times) index more closely than lower quality news because higher quality news contains less random information
|
|
|
What was Zaller and Chiu’s refinement of the indexing hypothesis?
|
There are different policy elites who get coverage over the course of a conflict. For example war, in the beginning stages, most of the decisions will happen in the executive branch and so coverage will be indexed to the debate in the executive branch since the presidnet has the most ability to shape the event.. As the war continues, congress will take a bigger and bigger role, as they decide on the funding of the war, hold hearings, etc. At that point, coverage will be indexed to the debate in Congress. Towards the end of conflict, when it’s time to evaluate the effectiveness of the policy coverage will be indexed towards the pundits in the media and public opinions for analysis.to the debate happening among analysts in the media. This refinement is significant because Bennet’s “indexing” hypothesis identified an undifferentiated “elite” and Zaller and Chiu identified them and suggested that it’s not just an indexing of all elties and that it changed depending on the nature of the conflict and the stage it is at.
|
|
|
What is the simple muckraking model?
|
From media to public to policymakers to policy outcome. Basically journalists conduct investigative journalism on a problem ot expose it. The public, performing their democratic duty, read on that problem and realize that in fact it is a problem and they want it fixed. So they complain to the policy makers to fix that problem. Policymakers therefore take the initiative to satisfy the public’s uproar and what comes out for this is a policy outcome.
|
|
|
What is the leaping muckraking model?
|
Leaping muckraking model is exactly what the name is, it leaps over, or skips one or more steps. For example policymakers can in fact create a policy to fix the problem without it even being published in the media. This is done when they realize journalists are conducting investigative research and conducting interviews. Another version of leaping muckraking model is when policymakers create a policy immediately after the problem is broadcasted and published to the public, the policymakers take action before public opinion on the issue changes to identify the problem the journalists exposed.
|
|
|
What are some of the narratives that journalists use when reporting on presidents?
|
Some of the narratives used by journalists when reporting on the president are the he is the leader and always leads our nation. He is the Chief of Sate as in he goes abroad and represents the American people. He is our Healer, like during crises like 9/11. He is First Family, like showing them working on their garden. Finally he is Commander-in-Chief, he is the leader of our troops.
|
|
|
What are the communication patterns of “Old Way” presidents, according to Tulis?
|
“Old Way” presidents include those from Washington to Teddy Roosevelt. The communication patterns of these presidents included almost no public speaking. Even the state of the union address at the time wasn’t done publicly, the president would just write it out and sent it to Congress. When the presidents did speak, their tone was measured. They spoke in legalistic language, and talked about constitutional issues. The presidents also never made any party appeals and they didn’t take a very strong stance on policy debates.
|
|
|
Why does Tulis categorize Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt as a “Middle Way” president?
|
“Middle Way” presidents came in at the end of the 19th century, and it brought along the ideas of news as a big business
|
|
|
What are the communication patterns of “New Way” presidents, according to Tulis?
|
By the 20th century we had “New Way” presidents and the negotiation between press and president became a permanent feature. Thus institutional mechanisms were designed to address changed. This included the White House Press Secretary, the Washington Press Corps, and The office of Communications. The communication patters of these “New Way” presidents included much more public speaking, as we see now presidents do it all the time. The language used to be legalistic, but now the more you talk like an average guy the better off you are. Also different from “old way” presidents, new way presidents make much more party appeals and policy appeals. This subverts rather than facilitates Congress’ deliberative function.
|
|
|
What are the institutional components that presidents use to help them in the negotiation of the content of the news?
|
Institutional components that presidents use to help them in negotiation of the content of the news are the white house press secretary and white house press corp (the group of reporters and journalists assigned to the white house “beat”) as well as the entire executive branch of government which sets up broad policies for communication strategies – effective in coming up with the message of the day.
Institutional components that the presidents use to help them in the navigation of the content of the news are the white house press secretary (Washington press corps) as well as the office of communications which develope broad communication strategies as well as the entire exective branch of governemnt. The Washington pres corps is the groupof reporters and journalist assinged to the white hosue by the various media outlets across teh country and around the world. Their jobs are to basically report on the daily activities of the white house. Phile also says the white house press corps are the beats The press secretary is involvoed with the communication with them. The Office of Communication setup strategies to go ahead and communicate with the public effectivly. For example, whatever the message of the day is for national security, they setup a unified response or reply so that everyone in the exectuive branch responds the same. |
|
|
What does Kernell mean by “Going Public”?
|
Presidents don’t subscribe to bargaining model. The president goes public “outside strategy” in appealing directly to others or public in trying to force the congress to act. In 1960 going public was much easier as TV was always covering the president’s speech as there were only 3 networks and people had only three choice which were showing the president’s speech now they had no choice but to watch it now a days is different people have so many choice just with a remote controller they switch what they want. Going public was the president’s strategy if the congress did not accept what the president wants he would go public and try people to get involved what he wanted to get through and the public would force the congress to act. also it has a constrain on going public which showed that the president is weak and he can’t get his message through or can’t control congress and even if u fail it would generate resentment in congress being now against the president and the more you go public the less effect will be. For example your fist tome going public will have more effect than after 7 times going public as it loses its effect.
Direct appeals to others (e.g., attentive public, voters) in order to force Congress into passing preferred legislation. Going Public was easier in the 1960s , All three networks carried broadcast on same feed, No “instant” analysis, opposition response Recent research suggests that with the rise of cable television: Citizens are less interested in politics- Easier to tune the president out.- Diminish capacity to command attention |
|
|
Why does “Going Public” contradict Neustadt’s “bargaining model”?
|
Neustadt’s “bargaining model is an inside job. Neustadts said that presidential power is the power to persuade. In the bargaining model, presidnets must rely on bargaining, int hat they must convince people that what you want them to do is in their best interests. Going public howerever is an outside strategy. Going public is using an outside strategy of appeals to accomplish goals. The president makes direct appeals tot he attentive public and voters so that he can force Congress into passing his preferred legislation. Going public these days is a much harder task than it was in the 60s because the president cant command the airwaves like he/she used to be able to, when there were fewer channels. It subverts the deliberative process and goes against what congress is supposed to be doing. It is more like a threat than a mutually advantageous bargain.
|
|
|
What are some of the limits associated with “Going Public?”
|
The effectiveness of going public decreases with increased use of that option. An overuse of this option makes the president look weak. It works at first but using it often creates less potency. Also if the president fails it will create resentment in Congress.
|
|
|
Why is the negotiation over the verbal content of the news different than the negotiation over the visual content of the news?
|
When it comes to verbal content of the news, politicians and journalists don’t come to an agreement. Politicians want journalists to be transcribers and want the journalists to convey information without interpretation. Journalists don’t want to be manipulated or used because its bad for business and bad for their profession. Journalists want to include their own analysis and don’t want to be told what to say. They want to make their own contributions and have their own voice. For example they don’t just wnat to repon on what’s happening, they wan’t to report why its happening and what’s below the surface This is for verbal imagery.
For visual images, they both want good pictures so they agree over what should be broadcasted. For Journalists good visuals are beneficial economically. Good visuals means more viewer cause visuals are exiting. Also good visuals make the people, the visuals are put in to look good. Politicians subsidize the production of news by paying for the spectacle and journalists are more than happy to take advantage of that effort. For politicians good visuals equals good coverage, for example the flag factory has good visuals and enhanced his public image. They creat ecertain visuals. Also they believe those visuals will help them in temrs of public opinion and elections. They things certain images will help them politically and in approval ratings When it comes to the verbal content of the news their interests collide, when it comes to the visual contents their interests cohere |
|
|
What is the standard approach that political scientists use to assess the impact of media coverage on elections?
|
The Standard approach is instead of analyzing the visuals, the political scientists analyze the verbal content of the news. Basically treating television as the radio. They went through all the recordings and compared what people said during election time and the results. They wanted to see if the coverage influences the election outcome. Findings were inconclusive because they didn’t take into account visuals. You can’t treat TV like its radio because the visuals make an impact. For example you cant treat the GHW Bushes Flag Factory coverage without the visuals because the visuals are a key component to it and impact the people.
|
|
|
What is the difference between an implicit and explicit racial appeal, according to Tali Mendelberg?
|
Implicit racial appeals activate negative racial predispositions without actually making it clear that’s how you are doing it. You do this with pictures like the willie Horton ad. You see pictures of an imposing black man next to a sheepish white cop and that activates a predisposition and you equate that image and the feeling it carries with it with the politician, which in that case was Dukkakis. It is implicit because no verbals are used to convey the feelings. IT is done with pictures.
Example is “jews own the media” when Mark Sanchez said it. Implicit racial appeals are more powerful, doesn't go agains the norm of equality so doesn’t upset people. |
|
|
Why are implicit appeals effective?
|
Implicit racial appeals are effective because they activate negative reacial predispositions. Also it doesn’t go against the norms of racial equality and does not upset people. By simply showing a picture you avoid violating the norm
|
|
|
Why are explicit appeals ineffective?
|
It upsets people and goes agains the norms of equality. If someone makes a blatant racist remark, people will be upset by it and it will not stir negative racial appeal. For example if the Willie Horton ad flat out said a Black Man killed a man, it would upset people and not work well for Bush’s campaign. When you identify him as black you are making an issue of race.
|
|
|
Thinking in terms of the Memory-based information-processing model, what is the key insight Gussin derives from Dual Coding theory? Why might this insight be significant?
|
In regards to the Memory-based information processing model, visual information has higher probability of being over-sampled vs. Verbal information; so when people answer survey questions based on a random sampl eof the most accessible considerations, factors such as frequency, visual info, recency of activation and salience all increase accessibility.
There are two system for processing and storing information, the verbal system where information is stored as text and the visual system where information is stored as images. The systems are functionally distinct yet intricately interconnected. Activating information in one system can activate information stored in the other. Dual coded information is easier to retrieve from memory than information stored in one system. Insight from the DCT is that info stored visually is easier to retrieve from memory than info stored in text and that the use of both verbal and visual system helps retrieve one. It is easier to retrieve visual information than verbal. The visuals help retrieve the verbal |
|
|
What were the main findings in the Pen and Paper experiment?
|
The main findings in the Pen and Paper experiment are first, exposure to treatments (positive or negative images of President Bush) do not effect univalents since strong supporters will strongly approve of the president regardless of what and vice versa for strong opposers (the ceiling and floor effect). Second exposure to treatments affects people whore are ambivalent since people who are ambivalent don’t really choose a side regarding Bush as they have a stable number of positive and negative thoughts of President Bush in both front and back of their minds.
|
|
|
What were the main findings in the DVD experiment?
|
The main findings in the DVD experiment are that there are no significant statistical differenes on the univalent minds on their evaluations of Presidnet Bush when they are exposed to video with or without protestors. However, with regards to the ambivalents, the disapporvers report a lower evaluation when exposed to video with protestors relative to video without protestors. The hedgers report a higher evaluation when exposed to video with protestors relative to video without protestors. Lastley approvers report a much higher evaluation when exposed to video with protestors relative to video without protestors. To sum everything up: images can only push people where they already are interest in going.
Ambivalents predisposed to support President bush would give higher evaluation. Ambivalents predisposed to opposed President Bush would give lower evaluations and the Hedgers, the people in the middle, would give Higher evaluations |
|
|
Which kind of person is most likely to be influenced by exposure to visual appeals?
|
Ambivalents are most likely to be influence by exposure to visual appeals because they are not set in their ways, visuals can influence them one way or another. Visuals tend to stir considerations easier than verbals. Visuals are easier to access from memory than verbal information. So whether a visual is positive or negative it can stir an ambivalent one way or another. IN regards to the Memory-based information processing model, visual information has a high probability of being over-sampled vs. Verbal information. The images being among the things that get oversampled is the reason why in theory, visuals should affect ambivalents.
|
|
|
Which kind of person is least likely to be influenced by exposure to visual appeals?
|
Univalents, because they are already set in their ways on how they feel, so they are not affected much by visual images. For univalents, when they encounter an argument that challenges what they believe in, it makes their beliefs stronger and they counterargue. Images are just like arguments
|
|
|
What are the potential implications of Gussin’s “Theory of Visual Appeals” for individuals who organize political protestors?
|
......
|
|
|
What is the CNN effect?
|
Media is driving everything, it assumes the process begins with media coverage
The CNN effect says that media coverage drives foreign policy, it shapes it with powerful images. When people see emotional images, they get moved by them and when the people are moved they express it through public opinion polls or push political elites to action. An example is The picture that got us into Somalia. |
|
|
In what way might the CNN effect have a positive impact on foreign policy making?
|
From a humanitarian standpoint, it argues that a rich country should help a poor one. The CNN effect brings these crises to light.
|
|
|
In what way might the CNN effect have a negative impact on foreign policy making?
|
Realist perspective says that the intervention should be rationally driven rather than emotionally driven. It can get us involved in places that don’t help.
|
|
|
What are some of the methodological problems associated with the study of the CNN Effect?
|
The problems with stuyding CNN effect is that it is very difficult on establishing a causal relationship between media coverage, shift in public opinion and change in public policy since it is hard to measure the effects each factor has on another if such a relationship exists. The assumption that foreign policy is driven by media and public opinion would be difficult to prove because policy elites would be reluctant to admit that their decisions are shaped by media influences.
Furthermore, this assumption goes against the indexing hypothesis which states that media coverage does not drive the policy. Instead they merely reflect the debates and attitudes among policy elites, so policy changes are actually driven by policy elites. One of the flaws in the CNN effect is trying to determine what causes media coverage. IN simple version, media coverage begins of its own volition. When you take into consideration Bennet’s “indexing hypothesis” or the propagandist model, which states policy elites are exerting the most influence, it is not clear that the media is driving the process, other things are driving media coverage |
|
|
When, according to Livingstone, is the CNN effect likely to have its greatest impact on foreign policy making?
|
When the elites are at the early stages on policy making, policy starts down at a lower level committee (not including congress)and continues moving up the ranks as policy evolves. If the media gets involved and the policy is not already at the top of the chain, sometimes the CNN effect can cause the policy to move up and skim some steps. Thus when policy elites are unsure about the policy, the CNN effect can have the biggest effect, it it has already been decided and the policy is in the later stages it will likely have minimal effect.
|
|
|
What are some of the characteristics of “soft news”?
|
It is entertainment combined with news, sometimes referred to as infotainment. More sensationalistic, personality centered, human interest stories and includes low quality information
|
|
|
How do Baum and Jamison differ from most scholars in their measure of news “quality”?
|
Baum and Jamison differ in that they measure news quality based on if a person is better able to perform their civic duty of voting correctly. Correctly as in matching their personal ideological preferences. As it pertains to soft news they claim that if a news source helps a person gain competence to vote correctly then news is of high quality even if it’s Ellen or the View.
They measure correctness by whether a person votes in accordance to their stated preferences. |
|
|
In what way can exposure to “soft news” have a “democratizing” effect, according to Baum and Jamison? Ignore hard news
|
Soft news has a democratizing effect because it helps us perform our democratic duties by increasing our voting competence. Soft news gets news to people who wouldn’t otherwise have it. Even Ellen and the View as long as it stirs debate and gets people talking/thinking they’ll be more politically inclined as a result.
|
|
|
What are the three most important findings in Groseclose and Milyo’s study of media bias?
|
1) Compared to the average voter, most media outlets are liberal
2) Compared to the average republican in congress, most media outlets are liberal 3) Compared to the average democrat in congress, most media outlets are conservative |
|
|
What is the “Hostile Media Phenomenon”?
|
People tend to view the media as more hostile to their position than they tend to be. Israel experiment. People who are pro israel thought the media was anti israel, vice versa. People who didn’t have an opinion saw it as unbiased.
|
|
|
In the study conducted by Vallone et al., what factors caused individuals to perceive the media as “hostile”?
|
......
|
|
|
What were the three important findings in Baum and Gussin article, “In the Eye of the Beholder”?
|
During the test, if the sybject thought the media outlet was biased, they thought the coverage was favorable to Kerry. If they thought it was conservative, they thought it was favorable to bush. If they had no opinion on the outlet, they thought it was neutral.
|
