This study examines how newspapers in Virginia and the Washington Post covered the 2013 gubernatorial campaign of Libertarian Robert Sarvis in their editorials. In addition to comparing coverage volume and type, the study analyzes how the newspapers responded to his exclusion from the televised gubernatorial debates. The study found that newspaper editorials treated Sarvis like other third-party candidates, but some supported his inclusion in the political debates.
AlexseevM.BennettW. L. (1995). For whom the gates open: News reporting and government source patterns in the United States, Great Britain, and Russia. Political Communication, 12(4), 395–412.
2.
AltschullH. (1995). Agents of power: The media and public policy. Longman PublishersUSA.
3.
AnsolabehereS.IyengarS. (1994). Of horseshoes and horse races: Experimental studies of the impact of poll results on electoral behavior. Political Communication, 11(4), 413–430.
BenoitW.BrazealL.AirneD. (2007). A functional analysis of televised U.S. senate and gubernatorial campaign debates. Argumentation and Advocacy, 44, 75–89.
8.
BenoitW.McKinneyM.StephensonM. (2002). Effects of watching primary debates in the 2000 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Communication, 52(2), 316–331.
9.
BenoitW.StephensonM. (2004). Effects of watching a presidential primary debate. Contemporary Argumentation & Debate, 25, 1–25.
10.
BerkowitzD. (1987). TV news sources and news channels: A study in agenda-building. Journalism Quarterly, 64(2), 508–513.
11.
BerkowitzD. (1992). Who sets the media agenda? The ability of policymakers to determine news decisions. In KennamerD. (Ed.), Public opinion, the press, and public policy (pp. 81–102). Praeger Publishers.
DvorakP. (2013, October15). Virginia is not for lover of either gubernatorial candidate. Washington Post, p. B1.
18.
Editor & Publisher. (2012). International data book: The encyclopedia of the newspaper industry, Book 1: Dailies (91st ed., pp. 319–325).
19.
EmeryM.EmeryE.RobertsN. (2000). The press and America: An interpretive history of the mass media (9th ed.) Allyn & Bacon.
20.
EntmanR. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 163–173.
21.
EntmanR.RojeckiA. (1993). Freezing out the public: Elite and media framing of the U.S. anti-nuclear movement. Political Communication, 10(2), 155–173.
22.
FrankS.WagnerS. (1999). We shocked the world: A case study of Jesse Ventura’s election as governor of Minnesota. Harcourt College Publishers.
23.
FrithR. (2005, May26–30). Flexing their political muscle: Newspaper coverage of Jesse Ventura’s and Arnold Schwarzenegger’s gubernatorial campaigns [Conference paper]. International Communication Association, New York.
24.
FunkhouserR. (1973). The issues of the sixties: An exploratory study in the dynamics of public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(1), 62–75.
25.
GansH. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Time. Vintage Books.
26.
GeerJ. (1988). The effects of presidential debates on the electorate’s preferences for candidates. American Politics Quarterly, 16(4), 486–501.
HallS. (1977). Culture, the media and the “ideological effect.” In CurranJ.GurevitchM.WoollacottJ. (eds) Mass communication and society (pp. 315–348). Edward Arnold Publishers Ltd.
33.
HallockS. (2006). Editorial and opinion: The dwindling marketplace of ideas in today’s news. Praeger Publishers.
34.
HermanE.ChomskyN. (2002). Manufacturing consent: The political economy of mass media. Pantheon Books.
JoslynR. (1984). Mass media and elections. Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.
46.
KatzE.FeldmanJ. (1962). The debates in the light of research: A survey of surveys. In KrausS. (Ed.), The great debates (pp. 173–223). Indiana University Press.
47.
KesslerL. (1984). The dissident press: Alternative journalism in American History (The Sage CommTEXT Series, 13). SAGE.
48.
KirchJ. (2013). News coverage different for third-party candidates. Newspaper Research Journal, 34(4), 40–53.
KirchJ. (2016). Virginia's invisible candidate: News coverage of the Virginia 2013 gubernatorial campaign. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 40(2), 162–178.
51.
KovachB.RosenstielT. (2001). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. Three Rivers Press.
52.
KrausS. (2000). Televised presidential debates and public policy (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
53.
KrippendorffK. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Lessons from election day. (2013, November6). The Virginian-Pilot, p. B.8.
56.
Libertarian Robert Sarvis for governor. (2013, November3). Register & Bee. Editorial Page.
57.
LichtensteinA. (1982). Differences in impact between local and national televised political candidates’ debates. The Western Journal of Speech Communication, 46(3), 291–298.
58.
LutherC. A.MillerM. M. (2005). Framing of the 2003 U.S.-Iraq war demonstrations: An analysis of news and partisan texts. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(1), 78–96.
59.
MADness. (2013, September27). Richmond Times-dispatch, p. A.10.
60.
MagarianG. (1992). Fighting exclusion from televised presidential debates: Minor-party candidates’ standing to challenge sponsoring organizations’ tax-exempt status. Michigan Law Review, 90(4), 838–885.
McCombsM. (2004). Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion. Polity Press.
63.
McCombsM. (2005). A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies, 6(4), 543–557.
64.
McCombsM.ShawD. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(3), 176–187.
65.
McKinneyM.WarnerB. (2013). Do presidential debates matter? Examining a decade of campaign debate effects. Argumentation and Advocacy, 49(2), 238–258.
66.
McLeodD.HertogJ. (1992). The manufacture of “public opinion” by reporters: Informal cues for public perceptions and protest groups. Discourse & Society, 3(3), 259–275.
67.
McLeodJ.BeckerL.ByrnesJ. (1974). Another look at the agenda-setting function of the press. Communications Research, 1(2), 131–165.
68.
McManusJ. (1992). Serving the public and serving the market: A conflict of interest?Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 7(4), 196–208.
69.
MeyrowitzJ. (1995). The problem of getting on the media agenda: A case study in competing logics of campaign coverage. In KendellK. (Ed.), Presidential campaign discourse: Strategic communication problems (pp. 35–67). State University of New York Press.
70.
Mr. Cuccinelli’s liberal editing. (2013, September27). Washington Post, p. A.24.
71.
MullinixK. (2015). Presidential debates, partisan motivations, and political interest. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 45(2), 270–288.
72.
Neville-ShepardR. (2019). Containing the third-party voter in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 43(3), 272–292.
73.
Not beanbag. (2013, October10). Richmond Times-Dispatch, A10.
Sarvis’ perspective won’t be heard. (2013, October24). Roanoke Times, p. A.14.
95.
SchudsonM. (2018). Why journalism still matters. Polity Press.
96.
ShawD. (1999). A study of presidential campaign event effects from 1952 to 1992. Journal of Politics, 61(2), 387–422.
97.
ShawD.McCombsM. (1977). The emergence of American political issues: The agenda setting function of the press. West Publishing Co.
98.
Short takes. (2013, October12). Roanoke Times, p. A.13.
99.
SifryM. (2003). Spoiling for a fight: Third-party politics in America. Routledge.
100.
SigalL. (1973). Reporters and officials: The organization and politics of newsmaking. D.C. Heath and Company.
101.
SigalL. (1986). Sources make the news. In ManoffR.SchudsonM. (Eds.), Reading the News. Pantheon Books, pp. 9–37.
102.
SmithC. (1993). News sources and power elites in news coverage of the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Journalism Quarterly, 70(2), 393–403.
103.
SmithJ. (2010). Editorial pages and the marketplace of ideas: A quantitative content analysis of three metropolitan newspapers [Thesis]. Utah State University.
104.
SonY. J.WeaverD. (2006). Another look at what moves public opinion: Media agenda setting and polls in the 2000 U.S. election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18(2), 174–197.
105.
StempelG. (1969). The prestige press meets the third-party challenge. Journalism Quarterly, 46(4), 699–706.
106.
StempelG.WindhauserJ. (1984). The prestige press revisited: Coverage of the 1980 presidential campaign. Journalism Quarterly, 61(1), 49–55.
107.
The election forgetting, by the election forgot. (2013, October20). Richmond Times-Dispatch. Opinion Section.
108.
This is a mistake. (2013, October19). The Virginian-Pilot, p. B.6.
109.
TuchmanG. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. The Free Press.
110.
Unwasted. (2013, October4). Richmond Times-Dispatch, p. A.12.
