Abstract
Debate over the extent to which the mass media serves elite interests or, alternatively, plays a powerful role in shaping political outcomes has been dogged by dichotomous and one-sided claims. Some attribute enormous power to the news media (the so-called CNN effect) while others claim the media `manufactures consent' for elite policy preferences. This article reviews existing theories of media-state relations, in particular the work of Daniel Hallin and Lance Bennett, and highlights theoretical and empirical shortcomings in the manufacturing consent thesis. The article then outlines two models, a model of media influence and Gadi Wolfsfeld's `political contest model', that serve to reconcile contrasting claims over the power of the news media. The model of media influence is then applied to the Vietnam War in order to reconcile contrasting claims (Hallin vs David Culbert) regarding the role of the media during this conflict. It is argued that the two models, taken together, provide a starting point for a two-way understanding of the direction of influence between media and the state that builds upon, rather than rejects, existing theoretical accounts.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
