Presidential debates traditionally attract millions of viewers and heavy press coverage. There is much evidence that the media interpretation of these events is influential even for people who have viewed the debates themselves. This study examines the 1996 evening news coverage and postdebate specials of ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN, exploring the way television journalists constructed the candidates' debate goals and expectations, their rhetorical strategies, and the effects of the debate.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Germond, J. W. (1996, October 17). Dole's last stand doesn't live up to its advance billing. Baltimore Sun, in Albany Times-Union, p. A-6.
2.
Hellweg, S. A. , Pfau, M., & Brydon, S. R. (1992). Televised presidential debates. New York: Praeger.
3.
Herbst, S. (1993). How opinion polling has shaped American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Kendall, K. E. (1993). Public speaking in the presidential primaries through media eyes. American Behavioral Scientist, 37(4), 240-241.
5.
Lang, G. E. , & Lang, K. (1984). Politics and television re-viewed. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
6.
Lemert, J. B. , Elliott, W. R., Rosenberg, W. L., & Bernstein, J. M. (1996). The politics of disenchantment: Bush, Clinton, Perot and the press. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
7.
Meyrowitz, J. (1995). The problem of getting on the media agenda: A case study in competing logics of campaign coverage. In K. E. Kendall (Ed.), Presidential campaign discourse: Strategic communication problems (pp. 35-67). Albany: State University of New York Press.
8.
Mitchell, A. (1996, October 15). Clinton campaign finds harmony after a swift exit by Morris. The New York Times, p. A25.
9.
Owen, D. (1995). The debate challenge: Candidate strategies in the new media age. In K. E. Kendall (Ed.), Presidential campaign discourse: Strategic communication problems (pp. 135-155). Albany: State University of New York Press.
10.
Patterson, T. E. (1980). The mass media election: How Americans choose their president. New York: Praeger.
11.
Rosenstiel, T. (1993). Strange bedfellows: How television and the presidential candidates changed American politics, 1992. New York: Hyperion.
12.
Schroeder, A. (1996, Fall). Watching between the lines: Presidential debates as television. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 1, 57-75.
13.
Shapiro, W. (1996, October 11-13). “With all due respect,” these debates are dull. USA Today, p. 4A.
14.
Steeper, F. T. (1980). Public response to Gerald Ford's statements on Eastern Europe in the second debate. In G. F. Bishop, R. G. Meadow, & M. Jackson-Beeck (Eds.), The presidential debates: Media, electoral, and policy perspectives (pp. 81-101). New York: Praeger.
15.
Trent, J. D. , & Friedenberg, R. V. (1995). Political campaign communication: Principles and practices (3rd ed.). Westport, CN: Praeger.
16.
Trent, J. D. , & Trent, J. S. (1995). The incumbent and his challengers: The problem of adapting to prevailing conditions. In K. E. Kendall (Ed.), Presidential campaign discourse: Strategic communication problems (pp. 69-92). Albany: State University of New York Press.
