Abstract
This study examines Clinton/Lewinsky scandal coverage from an agenda-setting perspective—while polls show morality is important to the public, why wasn't Clinton and Lewinsky's relationship? We argue that it was a case of compelling arguments, where the media's choice of attributes negatively affected the public's salience of the story. The “sex scandal/adultery?” attribute was used most often, was of low relevance, and we speculate that because of its high use in the beginning, persisted in people's minds, influencing the way they viewed continuing coverage of the scandal. Finally, ramifications of Clinton/Lewinsky coverage on the 2000 presidential election are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.