In this article, the author researches the coverage of the U.S. and Russian presidential campaigns of 2012 in terms of media endarkenment, a process of media influence that ultimately shrinks the potential for a vibrant public sphere where informed citizens debate crucial issues. Using the works of Herman and Chomsky as well as McQuail, the study reveals the methodology of a process of media influence (intended or unintended) by which both the intellectual level of the viewers and the number of informed citizens decrease. A textual analysis of election coverage by national TV channels of both countries uncovers some of the different forms that media endarkenment takes, including the construction of a false reality, intimidation, and simplification.
AltheideD. L. (1997). The news media, the problem frame, and the production of fear. Sociological Quarterly, 38, 647–668.
3.
AltheideD. L. (2002). Creating fear: News and the construction of crisis. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
4.
ApthekerH. (n.d.). Walter Lippmann and democracy [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.walterlippmann.com/aptheker-on-lippmann.html (Reprinted from History and reality, pp. 49–72, by LippmannW., 1955, New York, NY: Cameron Associates)
5.
BertrandI.HughesP. (2005). Media research methods: Audiences, institutions, texts. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
6.
BesovaA. A.CooleyS. C. (2009). Foreign news and public opinion: Attribute agenda-setting theory revisited. Ecquid Novi: African Journalism Studies, 30(2), 219–242.
7.
BrockD.Rabin-HavtA. (2012). Fox effect (Vol. 330). New York, NY: Anchor Books.
8.
CadeR. B.CadeR. A. (1979). The relationship between mass media and voter behavior: A case study. FSC Journal, 7(2), 28–36.
9.
CappellaJ. N.JamiesonK. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
EisingerR. M.VeenstraL. R.KoehnJ. P. (2007). What media bias? Conservative and liberal labeling in major US newspapers. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(1), 17–36.
19.
EllulJ. (1973). Propaganda: The formation of men’s attitudes. New York: Vintage Books.
20.
EntmanR. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
HermanE. S.ChomskyN. (1988). Manufacturing consent. New York: Pantheon Books.
33.
InglehartR. (1979). Political action: The impact of values, cognitive level and social background. In BarnesS. H.KaaseM. (Eds.), Political action: Mass participation in five western democracies (pp. 343–380). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
KimS.-H.CarvalhoJ. P.DavisA. G. (2010). Talking about poverty: News framing of who is responsible for causing and fixing the problem. J&MC Quarterly, 87(3/4), 563–581.
36.
KlaehnJ. (2002). A critical review and assessment of Herman and Chomsky’s ‘propaganda model.’European Journal of Communication, 17(2), 147–182.
37.
KlingemannH.-D. (1979). The background of ideological conceptualization. In BarnesS. H.KaaseM. (Eds.), Political action: Mass participation in five western democracies (pp. 255–278). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
38.
KnobelB.SandersJ. (2012). Samizdat 2.0: The Dymovsky case and the use of streaming video as a political tool in contemporary Russia. International Journal of E-Politics, 3(1), 26–41.
39.
KolodzyJ. (2012). Practicing convergence journalism: An introduction to cross-media storytelling. New York, NY: Routledge.
40.
Laozi. (1997). Tao te ching (Unabridged ed.) (LeggeJ., Trans.). Mineola, NY: Dover.
41.
Laozi. (2006). Tao te ching. Minneapolis, MN: Filiquarian.
LuntP.LivingstoneS. (2013). Media studies’ fascination with the concept of the public sphere: Critical reflections and emerging debates. Media, Culture & Society, 31(1), 87–96.
44.
McQuailD. (2005). McQuail’s mass communication theory (5th ed.). London: SAGE.
45.
McQuailD. (2010). McQuail’s mass communication theory (6th ed.). London: SAGE.
NewhagenJ. E. (1998). TV news images that induce anger, fear, and disgust: Effects on approach-avoidance and memory. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(2), 265–276.
RuizC.DomingoD.MicóJ. L.Díaz-NociJ.MesoK.MasipP. (2011). Public sphere 2.0? The democratic qualities of citizen debates in online newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(4), 463–487.
57.
ScheufeleD. A.ShanahanJ.KimS.-H. (2002). Who cares about local politics? Media influences on local political involvement, issue awareness, and attitude strength. J&MC Quarterly, 79(2), 427–444.
58.
SemetkoH. A.ValkenburgP. M. (2000). Framing European politics: A content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication, 50(2), 93–109.
59.
TannenD. (1993). Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
VerbaS.NieN. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
62.
VerstraetenH. (1996). The media and the transformation of the public sphere: A contribution for a critical political economy of the public sphere. European Journal of Communication, 11(3), 347–370.
63.
YoungJ. R. (2003). The role of fear in agenda setting by television news. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1673–1695.
