This research assesses whether conflict-laden news coverage affects public perceptions of political institutions and political elites in general. Particularly, is conflict-oriented television news coverage of politics contributing to negative evaluations of political institutions and their leaders? We present evidence from an experiment designed to address this question. Our experiment is constructed around media coverage of the State of the Union Address. We control for the source of news (CNN), and examine how CNN’s Crossfire and Inside Politics’ coverage and analyses of the State of the Union Address influenced the attitudes and perceptions of viewers. We find that conflict-laden television coverage decreases public evaluations of political institutions, trust in leadership, and overall support for political parties and the system as a whole. Our findings have implications for public opinion in an era of increased abundance of high-conflict cable news talk shows that turn the political process into a contact sport.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Shanto Iyengar. 1995. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink & Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.
2.
Bennett, Lance W.2005. News: The Politics of Illusion,6th ed.New York: Longman.
3.
Cappella, Joseph N., and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. 1997. Spiral of Cynicism: The Press and the Public Good. New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
Campbell, Donald T., and Julian C. Stanley. 1963. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
5.
Cohen, Jeffrey E.1995. “Presidential Rhetoric and the Public Agenda.”American Journal of Political Science39: 87-107.
6.
Collins, Scott. 2004. Crazy Like a FOX: The Inside Story of How Fox News Beat CNN. New York: Penguin.
7.
Crick, Bernard. 1992. In Defense of Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
8.
Durr, Robert H., John B. Gilmour, and Christina Wolbrecht. 1997. “Explaining Congressional Approval.”American Journal of Political Science41 (1): 175-207.
9.
Fallows, James. 1996. Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy. New York: Vintage.
10.
Fox, Richard L., and Robert W. Van Sickel. 2001. Tabloid Justice: Criminal Justice in an Age of Media Frenzy. Boulder, CO: Rienner Press.
11.
Hetherington, Marc J.2005. Why Trust Matters. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
12.
Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes Toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. 2001a. “Process Preferences and American Politics: What the People Want Government To Be.”American Political Science Review95: 145-153.
14.
Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse., eds. 2001b. What is it About Government that Americans Dislike?Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. 2002. Stealth Democracy: Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press
16.
King, David C., Joseph S. Nye, Jr., and Phillip D. Zelikow (Eds.) 1997. Why People Don’t Trust Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17.
Lee, Tien-Tsung. 2005. “Media Effects on Political Disengagement Revisited: A Multiple-Media Approach.”Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly82(2): 416-433.
18.
Morris, Jonathan S. 2002. “The New Media and the Dramatization of American Politics.” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.
19.
Morris, Jonathan S.2004. “The Effects of Dramatized Political News on Public Opinion.”The American Review of Politics25: 321-343.
20.
Morris, Jonathan S., and Peter L. Francia. 2005. “From Network News to Cable Commentary: The Evolution of Television Coverage of Party Conventions.” Paper presented at the State of the Parties Conference, Akron
21.
Moy, Patricia, and Michael Pfau. 2000. With Malice Toward All? The Media and Public Confidence in Democratic Institutions. Westport, CT: Praeger.
22.
Moy, Patricia, Michael Pfau, and LeeAnn Kahlor. 1999. “Media Use and Public Confidence in Democratic Institutions.”Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media43 (2): 137-158.
23.
Mutz, Diana C., and R. Andrew Holbrook. 2003. “Televised Political Conflict: Nemesis or Necessity?” Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April 3-6, Chicago.
24.
Mutz, Diana C., and Byron Reeves. 2005. “The New Videomalaise: Effects of Televised Incivility on Political Trust.”American Political Science Review99: 1-16.
25.
Patterson, Thomas E.1993. Out of Order. New York: Vintage.
26.
Patterson, Thomas E.2002. The Vanishing Voter: Public Involvement in an Age of Cynicism. New York: Knoft.
27.
Pew Research Center. 2004a. “Cable and Internet Loom Large in Fragmented Political Universe.” Research report released January 11, 2004, www.people-press.org/reports.
28.
Pew Research Center. 2004b. “News Audiences Increasingly Politicized.” Research report released June 8, 2004, www.peoplepress.org/reports.
29.
Putnam, Robert D.2000. Bowling Along. New York: Simon & Schuster.
30.
Sabato, Larry J.1993. Feeding Frenzy: How Attack Journalism Has Transformed American Politics. New York: Free Press.
31.
Sears, David O.1986. “College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influences of a Narrow Data Base on Social Psychology’s View of Human Nature.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology51 (3): 515-530.
32.
West, Darrell M.2001. The Rise and Fall of the Media Establishment. New York: St. Martin’s.
