The Iowa Caucus has been the first chance for voters to voice their choice for president since 1976, and every 4 years since the nation’s attention has turned to Iowa in the months leading up to the election. The campaigning in Iowa starts early, very early, and voters are inundated with news coverage, political advertising, and candidate visits. The winners of the Iowa Caucus may not always win the nomination, but losing in Iowa can end a campaign. Given that Iowa voters have such an important role in the nomination process, this essay examines their exposure to political news and opinions of the candidates leading up to caucus night. A state-wide phone survey of 12,000 Iowans conducted in November 2015 and January 2016 reveal gender and political party differences in where Iowans get their political news, and related differences in the leadership, honesty, and compassion leading candidates were perceived to be by Iowa Caucus–goers.
AdayS.DevittJ. (2001). Style over substance: Newspaper coverage of Elizabeth Dole’s Presidential bid. Harvard Journal of Press/Politics, 6(2), 52-73.
2.
BanwartM. C.BystromD. G.RobertsonT. (2003). From the primary to the general election: A comparative analysis of candidate media coverage in mixed-gender 2000 races for governor and U.S. Senate. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 658-676.
BennettW. L. (2015). News: The politics of illusion (9th ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5.
BlighM. C.SchlehoferM. M.CasadB. J.GaffneyA. M. (2011). Competent enough, but would you vote for her? Gender stereotypes and media influences on perceptions of women politicians. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42, 560-597.
6.
BradenM. (1996). Women politicians and the media. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
7.
BystromD. (2010). Advertising, web sites, and media coverage: Gender and communication along the campaign trail. In CarrollS. J.FoxR. L. (Eds.), Gender and elections (pp. 239-262). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
8.
BystromD. G. (2016). American women and political campaigns: Communication between candidates, voters, and the media. In BenoitW. L. (Ed.), Praeger handbook of political campaigning in the United States: Messaging, voters, and theories (Vol. 2, pp. 67-90). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
9.
BystromD.BanwartM. C.KaidL. L.RobertsonT. A. (2004). Gender and candidate communication: Videostyle, webstyle, and newstyle. New York, NY: Routledge.
10.
BystromD.DimitrovaD. V. (2014). Migraines, marriage, and mascara: Media coverage of Michele Bachmann in the 2012 Republican Presidential Campaign. American Behavioral Scientist, 58, 169-182.
11.
CarlinD. B.WinfreyK. L. (2009). Have you come a long way, baby? Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, and sexism in 2008 campaign coverage. Communication Studies, 60, 326-343.
12.
ChaffeeS.FrankS. (1996). How Americans get political information: Print versus broadcast news. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 48-58.
13.
ChaffeeS. H.ZhaoX.LeshnerG. (1994). Political knowledge and the campaign media of 1992. Communication Research, 21, 305-324
14.
DeFleurM. L.DavenportL.CroninM.DeFleurM. (1992). Audience recall of news stories presented by newspaper, computer, television and radio. Journalism Quarterly, 69, 1010-1022.
15.
DrewD.WeaverD. H. (2006). Voter learning and interest in the 2004 Presidential election: Did the media matter?Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83, 25-53.
16.
EntmanR. M. (2010). Media framing biases and political power: Explaining slant in news of campaign 2008. Journalism, 11, 389-408.
17.
DruckmanJ. N. (2005). Media matter: How newspapers and television news cover campaigns and influence voters. Political Communication, 22(4), 463-481.
18.
EvelandW. P.Jr.DunwoodyS. (2001). User control and structural isomorphism or disorientation and cognitive load? Learning from the web versus print. Communication Research, 28, 48-78.
19.
EvelandW. P.Jr.DunwoodyS. (2002). An investigation of elaboration and selective scanning as mediators of learning from the web versus print. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 34-53.
20.
EvelandW. P.Jr.SeoM.MartonK. (2002). Learning from the news in campaign 2000: An experimental comparison of TV news, newspapers, and online news. Media Psychology, 4, 353-378.
21.
FalkE. (2010). Women for president: Media bias in nine campaigns (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
22.
FurnhamA.GunterB.GreenA. (1990). Remembering science: The recall of factual information as a function of the presentation mode. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 4, 203-212.
23.
GardettoD. C. (1997). Hillary Rodham Clinton, symbolic gender politics, and the New York Times: January–November 1992. Political Communication, 14, 225-240.
HansenG. J.BenoitW. L. (2007). Communication forms as predictors of issue knowledge in presidential campaigns: A meta-analytic assessment. Mass Communication and Society, 10, 189-210.
27.
HeldmanC.CarrollS. J.OlsonS. (2005). “She brought only a skirt”: Print media coverage of Elizabeth Dole’s bid for the Republican presidential nomination. Political Communication, 22, 315-335.
IyengarS. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
30.
IyengarS.HahnK. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39.
31.
KahnK. F. (1992). Does being male help? An investigation of the effects of candidate gender and campaign coverage on evaluations of U.S. Senate candidates. Journal of Politics, 54, 497-517.
32.
KahnK. F. (1994). The distorted mirror: Press coverage of women candidates for statewide office. Journal of Politics, 56, 154-173.
33.
KahnK. F.GoldenbergE. N. (1991). Women candidates in the news: An examination of gender differences in U.S. Senate campaign coverage. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 180-199.
34.
KeeterS. (1987). The illusion of intimacy: Television and the role of candidate personal qualities in voter choice. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 344-358.
35.
KenskiH. C. (1996). From agenda-setting to priming and framing: Reflections on theory and method. In. StuckyM. E. (Ed.), The theory and practice of political communication research (pp. 67-83). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
36.
KittilsonM. C.FridkinK. (2008). Gender, candidate portrayals and election campaigns: A comparative perspective. Politics & Gender, 4, 371-392.
37.
LeshnerG.McKeanM. L. (1997). Using TV news for political information on political knowledge and cynicism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 69-83.
38.
McCombsM.GhanemS. I. (2001). The convergence of agenda setting and framing. In ReeseS. D.GandyO. H.GrantA. E. (Eds.), Framing public life (pp. 67-81). London, England: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
McCombsM. E.ShawD. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176-187.
40.
McCombsM. E.ShawD. L. (1993). The evolution of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43(2), 58-67.
41.
McCombsM. E.ShawD. L.WeaverD. (1997). Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda setting theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42.
MillerM. K.PeakeJ. S. (2013). Press effects, public opinion, and gender: Coverage of Sarah Palin’s vice-presidential campaign. International Journal of Press/Politics, 18, 482-507.
43.
MillerM. K.PeakeJ. S.BoultonB. A. (2010). Testing the Saturday night live hypothesis: Fairness and bias in newspaper coverage of Hillary Clinton’s Presidential campaign. Politics & Gender, 6, 169-198.
RheeJ. W. (1997). Strategy and issue frames in election campaign coverage: A social cognitive account of framing effects. Journal of Communication, 47(3), 26-48.
48.
RobinsonJ. P.DavisD. K. (1990). Television news and the informed public: An information-processing approach. Journal of Communication, 40(3), 106-119.
49.
RogersE. M.DearingJ. W. (2007). Agenda-setting research: Where has it been, where is it going? In GraberD. A. (Ed.), Media power in politics (5th ed., pp. 19-35). Washington, DC: CQ Press.
50.
SteinK. F. (2009). The cleavage commotion: How the press covered Senator Clinton’s campaign. In SheckelsT. F. (Ed.), Cracked but not shattered: Hillary Rodham Clinton’s unsuccessful campaign for the presidency (pp. 173-187). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
51.
StroudN. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revising the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30, 341-366.
52.
StroudN. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60, 556-576.
53.
SundarS. S.NarayanS.ObregonR.UppalC. (1998). Does web advertising work? Memory for print vs. online media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 75, 822-835.
54.
TewksburyD.AlthausS. L. (2000). Differences in knowledge acquisition among readers of the paper and online versions of a national newspaper. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 457-479.
WeaverD. (1996). Media agenda-setting and elections: 1970s-1990s. In. PaletzD. L. (Ed.), Political communication research: Approaches, studies, and assessments (Vol. 2, pp. 211-224). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
57.
WeaverD. (2007). Thoughts on agenda setting, framing, and priming. Journal of Communication, 57, 142-147.
58.
WeaverD.DrewD. (2001). Voter learning and interest in the 2000 presidential election: Did the media matter?Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 787-798.
59.
WeaverD.McCombsM. E.ShawD. L. (2004). Agenda-setting research: Issues, attributes, and influences. In KaidL. L. (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 257-282). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60.
WittL.PagetK. M.MatthewsG. (1994). Running as a woman: Gender and power in American politics. New York, NY: Free Press.
61.
WoodallG. S.FridkinK. L. (2007). Shaping women’s chances: Stereotypes and the media. In HanL. C.HeldmanC. (Eds.), Rethinking Madam President: Are we aready for a woman in the White House (pp. 69-86). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
62.
ZhaoX.ChaffeeS. H. (1995). Campaign advertisements versus television as sources of political issue information. Public Opinion Quarterly, 59, 41-65.
