How do emerging technologies that erode governments’ near-monopolies on intelligence information affect public support for leaders and their foreign policies? Technologies—like imagery satellites—that were once the domain of state governments are now increasingly available to commercial and private actors. As a result, non-government entities can now exercise the disclosure decision, publicly divulging information whose release was once controlled by states. We argue that non-government entities with access to these technologies serve as alternative information sources that can verify government claims or reveal activities governments have not previously acknowledged. Using original survey experiments we find that commercial satellite imagery can serve as an informational cue that shifts public opinion, and, depending on its content, either attenuates or bolsters the effect of similar cues from government sources. The findings advance debates over secrecy in international relations and on the effect of emerging technologies in the security domain.
AdaySeanLivingstonSteven. 2009. “NGOs as Intelligence Agencies: The Empowerment of Transnational Advocacy Networks and the Media by Commercial Remote Sensing in the Case of the Iranian Nuclear Program.” Geoforum40 (4): 514–22.
2.
AldrichJohnGelpiChristopherFeaverPeterReiflerJasonSharpKristin Thompson. 2006. “Foreign Policy and the Electoral Connection.” Annual Review of Political Science9 (1): 477–502.
3.
AldrichJohnSullivanJohn L.BorgidaEugene. 1989. “Foreign Affairs and Issue Voting: Do Presidential Candidates ‘Waltz Before a Blind Audience?’” The American Political Science Review83 (1): 123–41.
4.
AnandSowmyaKrosnickJon. 2003. “The Impact of Attitudes toward Foreign Policy Goals on Public Preferences among Presidential Candidates: A Study of Issue Publics and the Attentive Public in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election.” Presidential Studies Quarterly33 (1): 31–71.
5.
AronowPeterBaronJonathonPinsonLauren. 2019. “A Note on Dropping Experimental Subjects Who Fail a Manipulation Check.” Political Analysis27 (4): 572–89.
BaumMatthew. 2003. Soft News Goes to War: Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy in the New Media Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8.
BaumMatthewPotterPhilip B. K.. 2008. “The Relationships between Mass Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis.” Annual Review of Political Science11 (1): 39–65.
9.
BaumMatthewPotterPhilip B. K.. 2019. “Media, Public Opinion, and Foreign Policy in the Age of Social Media.” The Journal of Politics81 (2): 747–56.
10.
BerinskyAdam. 2009. In Time of War: Understanding American Public Opinion from World War II to Iraq. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
BoudreauCherylMacKenzieScott. 2014. “Informing the Electorate? How Party Cues and Policy Information Affect Public Opinion about Initiatives.” American Journal of Political Science58 (1): 48–62.
BullockJohn. 2011. “Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate.” The American Political Science Review105 (3): 496–515.
18.
BusbyJoshuaKafuraCraigMontenJonathanTamaJordan. 2020. “Multilateralism and the Use of Force: Experimental Evidence on the Views of Foreign Policy Elites.” Foreign Policy Analysis16 (1): 118–29.
19.
CarnegieAllisonCarsonAustin. 2018. “The Spotlight’s Harsh Glare: Rethinking Publicity and International Order.” International Organization72 (3): 627–57.
20.
CarnegieAllisonCarsonAustin. 2019. “The Disclosure Dilemma: Nuclear Intelligence and International Organizations.” American Journal of Political Science63 (2): 269–85.
21.
CarpenterDanielKrauseGeorge. 2012. “Reputation and Public Administration.” Public Administration Review72 (1): 26–32.
22.
CarsonAustin. 2018. Secret Wars: Covert Conflict in International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
23.
CarsonAustinYarhi-MiloKeren. 2017. “Covert Communication: The Intelligibility and Credibility of Signaling in Secret.” Security Studies26 (1): 124–56.
24.
ChapmanTerrence. 2007. “International Security Institutions, Domestic Politics, and Institutional Legitimacy.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution51 (1): 134–66.
25.
ChapmanTerrence. 2009. “Audience Beliefs and International Organization Legitimacy.” International Organization63 (4): 733–64.
26.
ChapmanTerrenceReiterDan. 2004. “The United Nations Security Council and the Rally ‘Round the Flag Effect.” The Journal of Conflict Resolution48 (6): 886–909.
27.
CoppockAlexanderMcClellanOliver. 2019. “Validating the Demographic, Political, Psychological, and Experimental Results Obtained from a New Source of Online Survey Respondents.” Research & Politics6 (1): 1–14.
28.
DobbsMichael. 2008. One MInute to Midnight: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and Castro on the Brink of Nuclear War. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
GelpiChristopherGriecoJoseph. 2015. “Competency Costs in Foreign Affairs: Presidential Performance in International Conflicts and Domestic Legislative Success, 1953–2001.” American Journal of Political Science59 (2): 440–56.
35.
GerberAlanGreenDonald. 2012. Field Experiments: Design, Analysis, and Interpretation. New York: W. W. Norton.
36.
GolbyJamesFeaverPeterDroppKyle. 2018. “Elite Military Cues and Public Opinion about the Use of Military Force.” Armed Forces & Society44 (1): 44–71.
GriecoJosephGelpiChristopherReiflerJasonFeaverPeter. 2011. “Let’s Get a Second Opinion: International Institutions and American Public Support for War.” International Studies Quarterly55 (2): 563–83.
39.
GuardinoMattHayesDanny. 2018. “Foreign Voices, Party Cues, and U.S. Public Opinion about Military Action.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research30 (3): 504–16.
40.
GuisingerAlexandraSaundersElizabeth. 2017. “Mapping the Boundaries of Elite Cues: How Elites Shape Mass Opinion across International Issues.” International Studies Quarterly61 (2): 425–41.
41.
HafeezKhalidZhangYanBingMalakNaila. 2002. “Determining Key Capabilities of a Firm Using Analytic Hierarchy Process.” International Journal of Production Economics76:39–51.
42.
HahlOliverKimMinjaeSivanEzra Zuckerman. 2018. “The Authentic Appeal of the Lying Demagogue: Proclaiming the Deeper Truth about Political Illegitimacy.” American Sociological Review83 (1): 1–33.
43.
HallexMatthewCottomTravis. 2020. “Proliferated Commercial Satellite Constellations: Implications for National Security.” Joint Forces Quarterly97 (July): 20–29.
44.
HetheringtonMarc. 1998. “The Political Relevance of Political Trust.” The American Political Science Review92 (4): 791–808.
45.
HolstiOle. 2004. Public Opinion and American Foreign Policy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
46.
HorowitzMichael. 2016. “Public Opinion and the Politics of the Killer Robots Debate.” Research & Politics3 (1): 1–8.
47.
HydeSusan. 2015. “Experiments in International Relations: Lab, Survey, and Field.” Annual Review of Political Science18 (1): 403–24.
48.
JervisRobert. 2017. How Statesmen Think: The Psychology of International Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
JosephMichaelPoznanskyMichael. 2018. “Media Technology, Covert Action, and the Politics of Exposure.” Journal of Peace Research55 (3): 320–35.
51.
JostTylerKertzerJoshua. 2019. “Armies and Influence: Public Deference to Foreign Policy Elites.” Unpublished Working Paper, 68.
52.
KeckMargaretSikkinkKathryn. 1998. Activists beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
53.
KrepsSarah. 2020. Social Media and International Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
54.
KrepsSarahRoblinStephen. 2019. “Treatment Format and External Validity in International Relations Experiments.” International Interactions45 (3): 576–94.
55.
KrosnickJon. 1990. “Government Policy and Citizen Passion: A Study of Issue Publics in Contemporary America.” Political Behavior12 (1): 59–92.
56.
LenzGabriel. 2012. Follow the Leader? How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Performance and Policies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
57.
LevenduskyMatthewHorowitzMichael. 2012. “When Backing Down Is the Right Decision: Partisanship, New Information, and Audience Costs.” The Journal of Politics74 (2): 323–38.
58.
LeviMargaretStokerLaura. 2000. “Political Trust and Trustworthiness.” Annual Review of Political Science3 (1): 475–507.
McGannJames. 2020. “2019 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report.” TTCSP Global Go To Think Tank Index Reports. Philadelphia, PA: Think Tanks and Civil Societies Program, The Lauder Institute, The University of Pennsylvania.
61.
McManusRoseanneYarhi-MiloKeren. 2017. “The Logic of ‘Offstage’ Signaling: Domestic Politics, Regime Type, and Major Power-protégé Relations.” International Organization71 (4): 701–33.
PerkinsChrisDodgeMartin. 2009. “Satellite Imagery and the Spectacle of Secret Spaces.” Geoforum40 (4): 546–60.
64.
PetersRichardCovelloVincentMcCallumDavid. 1997. “The Determinants of Trust and Credibility in Environmental Risk Communication: An Empirical Study.” Risk Analysis17 (1): 43–54.
SlickStephenBusbyJoshuaBurnsKingsley. 2019. Public Attitudes on US Intelligence: Annual Poll Reflects Bipartisan Confidence Despite Presidential Antagonism. Chicago: Chicago Council on Global Affairs.
73.
SnyderJackBorghardErica. 2011. “The Cost of Empty Threats: A Penny, Not a Pound.” American Political Science Review105 (3): 437–56.
74.
Swire-Thompson, Briony, Ullrich Ecker, Stephan Lewandowsky, and Adam Berinsky. 2020. “They Might Be a Liar But They’re My Liar: Source Evaluation and the Prevalence of Misinformation.” Political Psychology41 (1): 21–34.
75.
ThompsonAlexander. 2006. “Coercion through IOs: The Security Council and the Logic of Information Transmission.” International Organization60 (1): 1–34.
76.
TomzMichaelWeeksJessica. 2020. “Public Opinion and Foreign Electoral Intervention.” American Political Science Review114 (3): 856–73.
77.
TomzMichaelWeeksJessicaYarhi-MiloKeren. 2020. “Public Opinion and Decisions about Military Force in Democracies.” International Organization74 (1): 119–43.
WalshJames IgoeSchulzkeMarcus. 2018. Drones and Support for the Use of Force. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
80.
WathenC. NadineBurkellJacquelyn. 2002. “Believe It or Not: Factors Influencing Credibility on the Web.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology53 (2): 134–44.
81.
WilsonElizabethSherrellDaniel. 1993. “Source Effects in Communication and Persuasion Research: A Meta-Analysis of Effect Size.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science21 (2): 101.
82.
ZallerJohn. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
