The authors investigate whether the news media and the tone of actual ads aired during a political campaign influence people’s perceptions of campaign ad tone. Using data on the content of political advertising, local television news coverage, and local newspaper coverage in nine races in five midwestern states in 2006, the authors discover that perceptions of ad tone respond to both exposure to advertising and exposure to local news media. Both positive and negative advertising drive tone perceptions, and the impact of ad coverage depends not on its volume or mentions of tone but on whether that coverage is framed strategically or not.
AnsolabehereStephenIyengarShanto. 1995. Going negative: How campaign advertising shrinks and polarizes the electorate. New York: Free Press.
2.
AnsolabehereStephenIyengarShantoValentinoNicholas. 1994. Does attack advertising demobilize the electorate?American Political Science Review88:829-38.
3.
BartelsLarry. 1988. Presidential primaries and the dynamics of public choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
BriansCraig LeonardWattenbergMartin P.1996. Campaign issue knowledge and salience: Comparing reception from TV commercials, TV news and newspapers. American Journal of Political Science40:172-93.
5.
CappellaJoseph N.JamiesonKathleen Hall. 1996. News frames, political cynicism, and media cynicism. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science546:71-84.
6.
CappellaJoseph N.JamiesonKathleen Hall. 1997. The spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York: Oxford University Press.
7.
CraigStephen C.KaneJames G.2000. Winning and losing, sour grapes, and negative ads: The impact of election campaigns on political support. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
8.
CraigStephen C.KaneJames G.GainousJason. 2005. Issue-related learning in a gubernatorial campaign: A panel study. Political Communication22:483-503.
9.
CriglerAnnJustMarionBeltTodd. 2002. The three faces of negative campaigning: The democratic implications of attack ads, cynical news, and fear arousing messages. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston.
10.
de VreeseClaes H.2004. The effects of strategic news on political cynicism, issue evaluations, and policy support: A two-wave experiment. Mass Communication and Society7:191-214.
11.
de VreeseClaes H.2005. The spiral of cynicism reconsidered. European Journal of Communication20:283-301.
12.
de VreeseClaes H.BoomgaardenH. G.2003. Valenced news frames and public support for the EU: Linking content analysis and experimental data. Communications3:361-81.
13.
de VreeseClaes H.SemetkoHolli A.2002. Strategic campaign coverage, public opinion, and mobilization in a referendum. Communication Research29:615-41.
14.
DruckmanJames N.2001. The implications of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior23:225-56.
15.
FowlerErika FranklinRidoutTravis N.2009. Local television and newspaper coverage of political advertising. Political Communication26:119-36.
16.
FranzMichael M.FreedmanPaul B.GoldsteinKenneth M.RidoutTravis N.2007. Campaign advertising and American democracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
17.
FreedmanPaulFranzMichaelGoldsteinKenneth. 2004. Campaign advertising and democratic citizenship. American Journal of Political Science48:723-41.
18.
FreedmanPaulGoldsteinKen. 1999. Measuring media exposure and the effects of negative campaign ads. American Journal of Political Science43:1189-1208.
19.
GoldsteinKenFreedmanPaul. 2000. New evidence for new arguments: Money and advertising in the 1996 Senate elections. Journal of Politics62:1087-1108.
20.
IyengarShanto. 1994. Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
IyengarShantoKinderDonald R.1987. News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
22.
JacksonRobert A.MondakJeffrey J.HuckfeltRobert. 2009. Examining the possible corrosive impact of negative advertising on citizens’ attitudes toward politics. Political Research Quarterly62:55-69.
23.
JaspersonAmy E.FanDavid P.2004. The news as molder of campaign ad effects. International Journal of Public Opinion Research16:417-36.
24.
JustMarion R.CriglerAnn N.AlgerDean E.CookTimothy E.KernMontagueWestDarrell M.1996. Crosstalk: Citizens, candidates and the media in a presidential campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
JustMarion R.CriglerAnn N.BuhrTami. 1999. Voice, substance, and cynicism in presidential campaign media. Political Communication16:25-44.
26.
KahnKim FridkinKenneyPatrick J.2004. No holds barred: Negativity in U.S. Senate campaigns. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
27.
LauRichard L.1985. Two explanations for negativity effects in political behavior. American Journal of Political Science29:119-38.
28.
LauRichard L.SigelmanLeeRovnerIvy Brown. 2007. The effects of negative political campaigns: A meta-analytic reassessment. Journal of Politics69:1176-1209.
29.
LawrenceRegina G.2000. Game-framing the issues: Tracking the strategy frame in public policy news. Political Communication17:93-114.
30.
LeshnerGlennThorsonEsther. 2000. Overreporting voting: Campaign media public mood, and the vote. Political Communication17:263-78.
31.
McCombsMaxwell E.ShawDonald L.1972. The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly36:176-87.
32.
PattersonThomas E.1994. Out of order. New York: Vintage.
33.
PattersonThomas E.McClureRobert D.1976. The unseeing eye: The myth of television power in national elections. New York: Putnam.
34.
PfauMichaelLoudenAllan. 1994. Effectiveness of adwatch formats in deflecting political attack ads. Communication Research21:325-41.
35.
PrattoFeliciaJohnOliver P.1991. Automatic vigilance: The attention-grabbing power of negative social information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology61:380-91.
36.
RidoutTravis N.FranzMichaelGoldsteinKennethFreedmanPaul. 2002. Measuring the nature and effects of campaign advertising. Working paper, University of Wisconsin–Madison.
37.
RidoutTravisN.ShahDhavan V.GoldsteinKenneth M.FranzMichael M.2004. Evaluating measures of campaign advertising exposure on political learning. Political Behavior26:201-25.
38.
RidoutTravis N.SmithGlen R.2008. Free advertising: How the media amplify campaign messages. Political Research Quarterly61:598-608.
39.
RiversDouglas. 2006. Sample matching: Representative sampling from Internet panels. Polimetrix White Paper Series.
40.
RobinsonMichaelSheehanMargaret. 1983. Over the wire and on TV: CBS and UPI in campaign ’80. New York: Russell Sage.
41.
ScheufeleDietram A.TewksburyDavid. 2007. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication57:9-20.
42.
SchuckR. T.de VreeseClaes H.2006. Between risk and opportunity: News framing and its effects on public support for EU enlargement. European Journal of Communication21:5-32.
43.
ShawDaron R.1999. The effect of TV ads and candidate appearances on statewide presidential votes, 1988–96. American Political Science Review93:345-61.
44.
ShawDaron R.2006. The race to 270: The electoral college and the campaign strategies of 2000. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
45.
SidesJohn. 2001. What lies beneath: Campaign effects in the 1998 California gubernatorial race. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
46.
SidesJohnLipsitzKeenaGrossmanMatthewTrostChristine. 2005. Candidate attacks and voter aversion: The uncertain effects of negative campaigning. Working paper.
47.
SigelmanLeeBullockDavid. 1991. Candidates, Issues, Horse Races, and Hoopla:Presidential Campaign Coverage, 1888-1988. American Politics Research19(1): 5-32.
48.
SigelmanLeeKuglerMark. 2003. Why is research on the effects of negative campaigning so inconclusive? Understanding citizens’ perceptions of negativity. Journal of Politics65:142-60.
49.
SigelmanLeeVoetenErik. 2004. Messages sent, messages received? Attacks and impressions of negativity in the 2000 presidential campaign. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.
50.
StevensDaniel. 2008. Measuring exposure to political advertising in surveys. Political Behavior30:47-72.
51.
StraughanDulcieBleskeGlen L.ZhaoXinshu. 1996. Modeling format and source effects of an advocacy message. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly73: 135-46.
52.
ThorsonEstherOgnianovaEkaterinaCoyleJamesDentonFrank. 2000. Negative political ads and negative citizen orientations toward politics. Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising22:13-40.
53.
ValentinoNicholas A.BeckmannMatthewBuhrThomas A.2001. A spiral of cynicism for some: The contingent effects of campaign news frames on participation and confidence in government. Political Communication18:347-67.
54.
ValloneRobert P.RossLeeLepperMark R.1985. The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology49:577-85.
55.
WattenbergMartin P.BriansCraig Leonard. 1999. Negative campaign advertising: Demobilizer or mobilizer?American Political Science Review93:891-99.
56.
WestDarrell M.1994. Political advertising and news coverage in the 1992 California U.S. Senate campaigns. Journal of Politics56:1053-75.
57.
ZallerJohn. 1992. The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: 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.
