Despite rising economic inequality in the United States, lower-class Americans have yet to demand economic redistribution in overwhelming numbers. Analysis of the 2020 American National Election Study finds that right-partisan media use is associated with lower support for redistributive policies, and this relationship is strongest among individuals who identify as lower-class or Independent. We also found the relationship between right-partisan media use and taxing the rich was strongest among lower-class Republicans and upper-class Democrats. We discuss the potential for right-partisan media to breed system-justifying beliefs and shape opposition to economic redistribution among those who might benefit most from such policies.
AchenC. H.BartelsL. M. (2017). Democracy for realists: Why elections do not produce responsive government. Princeton University Press.
2.
AhlerD. J.SoodG. (2018). The parties in our heads: Misperceptions about party composition and their consequences. The Journal of Politics, 80(3), 964–981. https://doi.org/10.1086/697253
3.
AshokV.KuziemkoI.WashingtonE. (2015, September1). Support for redistribution in an age of rising inequality: New stylized facts and some tentative explanations. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://www.nber.org/papers/w21529
4.
BanfieldE. C.DownsA. (1958). An economic theory of democracy. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 2(3), 324. https://doi.org/10.2307/2109186
5.
BellA. M.DeSanteC. D.GiftT.SmithC. W. (2022). Entering the “foxhole”: Partisan media priming and the application of racial justice in America. Research & Politics, 9(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/20531680221137136
6.
BenklerY.FarisR.RobertsH. (2018). Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford University Press.
7.
BoyerM. M.LechelerS.AalderingL. (2024). Don’t throw the frame out with the bathwater: How episodic news frames can prevent identity-motivated reasoning. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 101(4), 933–954. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990221097057
8.
BullockH. E. (2017). Social class and policy preferences: Implications for economic inequality and interclass relations. Current Opinion in Psychology, 18, 141–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.021
9.
CarterT. J.FergusonM. J.HassinR. R. (2011). Implicit nationalism as system justification: The case of the United States of America. Social Cognition, 29(3), 341–359. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.3.341
10.
CavailléC.TrumpK. S. (2015). The two facets of social policy preferences. The Journal of Politics, 77(1), 146–160. https://doi.org/10.1086/678312
11.
CorreaT. (2009). Does class matter? The effect of social class on journalists’ ethical decision making. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(3), 654–672. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020912324
12.
CulpepperP. D.ShandlerR.JungJ. H.LeeT. (2024). “The economy is rigged”: Inequality narratives, fairness, and support for redistribution in six countries. Comparative Political Studies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140241252072
13.
DiasN.LelkesY. (2021). The nature of affective polarization: Disentangling policy disagreement from partisan identity. American Journal of Political Science, 66(3), 775–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12628
14.
DietzeP.CraigM. A. (2020). Framing economic inequality and policy as group disadvantages (versus group advantages) spurs support for action. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-00988-4
DiMaggioA. (2020). Rebellion in America: Citizen uprisings, the news media, and the politics of plutocracy. Routledge.
17.
DoosjeB.SpearsR.EllemersN. (2002). Social identity as both cause and effect: The development of group identification in response to anticipated and actual changes in the intergroup status hierarchy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165054
DurhamM. G. (1999). Girls, media, and the negotiation of sexuality: A study of race, class, and gender in adolescent peer groups. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 76(2), 193–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909907600202
20.
EnnsP. K.KellstedtP. M.McAvoyG. E. (2012). The Consequences of partisanship in economic perceptions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(2), 287–310. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs016
21.
EppD. A.JenningsJ. T. (2021). Inequality, media frames, and public support for welfare. Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(3), 629–653. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa043
22.
FernándezJ. J.Jaime-CastilloA. M. (2017). The institutional foundation of social class differences in pro-redistribution attitudes: A cross-national analysis, 1985–2010. Social Forces, 96(3), 1009–1038. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sox068
23.
FreelonD.MarwickA.KreissD. (2020). False equivalencies: Online activism from left to right. Science, 369(6508), 1197–1201. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb2428
24.
GarandJ. C.XuP.DavisB. C. (2017). Immigration attitudes and support for the welfare state in the American mass public. American Journal of Political Science, 61(1), 146–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12233
25.
GorenP.FedericoC. M.KittilsonM. C. (2009). Source cues, partisan identities, and political value expression. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00402.x
HawkinsC. B.NosekB. A. (2012). Motivated independence? Implicit party identity predicts political judgments among self-proclaimed independents. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(11), 1437–1452. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212452313
28.
HoeweJ.BrownellK. C.WiemerE. C. (2020). The role and impact of Fox News. In D. Caughey (Ed.), The forum (Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 367–388). De Gruyter.
IyengarS. (1994). Is anyone responsible?: How television frames political issues. University of Chicago Press.
31.
JonesJ. P. (2012). Fox News and the performance of ideology. Cinema Journal, 51(4), 178–185.
32.
JostJ. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 263–314. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12297
33.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x
34.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
35.
JostJ. T.LiviatanI.Van Der ToornJ.LedgerwoodA.MandisodzaA.NosekB. A. (2011). System justification: How do we know it’s motivated?. In D. R. Bobocel, A. C. Kay, M. P. Zanna, & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The psychology of justice and legitimacy (pp. 173–203). Psychology Press.
36.
JunS.ChowR. M.van der VeenA. M.BleichE. (2022). Chronic frames of social inequality: How mainstream media frame race, gender, and wealth inequality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(21), e2110712119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2110712119
37.
JutelO. (2016). The liberal field of journalism and the political—The New York Times, Fox News and the Tea Party. Journalism, 17(8), 1129–1145. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884915599949
38.
KayA. C.JostJ. T.YoungS. (2005). Victim derogation and victim enhancement as alternate routes to system justification. Psychological Science, 16(3), 240–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00810.x
39.
KendallD. E. (2011). Framing class: Media representations of wealth and poverty in America. Rowman & Littlefield.
40.
KimE. (2022). Entertaining beliefs in economic mobility. American Journal of Political Science, 67(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12702
41.
KreissD.LawrenceR. G.McGregorS. C. (2020). Political identity ownership: Symbolic contests to represent members of the public. Social Media + Society, 6(2), 2056305120926495.
42.
LevenduskyM. S. (2013a). Why do partisan media polarize viewers?American Journal of Political Science, 57(3), 611–623. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12008
LoisG.PetkanopoulouK. (2023). Explaining inequality tolerance in the lab: Effects of political efficacy and prospects of mobility on collective demand for redistribution. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 15872. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-42715-9
45.
ManzaJ.CrowleyN. (2017). Working class hero? Interrogating the social bases of the rise of Donald Trump. In D. Caughey (Ed.), The forum (Vol. 15, No. 1, pp. 3–28). De Gruyter.
46.
McCallL.KenworthyL. (2009). Americans’ social policy preferences in the era of rising inequality. Perspectives on Politics, 7(3), 459–484. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592709990818
47.
McDonaldL. E.MorgaineK. (2016). Progressive and conservative “freedom” through the lens of FOX and MSNBC. SAGE Open, 6(3), 215824401666371. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016663717
48.
McNameeS. J. (2009). The meritocracy myth. Rowman & Littlefield.
MorganJ.KellyN. J. (2017). Social patterns of inequality, partisan competition, and Latin American support for redistribution. The Journal of Politics, 79(1), 193–209. https://doi.org/10.1086/687412
51.
OatesS. (2021). War propaganda and the patriotic model of the news in the 21st Century. Journalism & Communication Monographs, 23(4), 329–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/15226379211050690
52.
OwuamalamC. K.CaricatiL.SpearsR.RubinM.MarinucciM.FerrariA. (2023). Further evidence that system justification amongst the disadvantaged is positively related to superordinate group identification. Acta Psychologica, 232, 103813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103813
53.
OwuamalamC. K.RubinM.SpearsR. (2019). Revisiting 25 years of system motivation explanation for system justification from the perspective of social identity model of system attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 362–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12285
54.
PayneB. K.Brown-IannuzziJ. L.HannayJ. W. (2017). Economic inequality increases risk-taking. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(18), 4643–4648. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1616453114
55.
PeckR. (2014). “You say rich, I say job creator”: How Fox News framed the great recession through the moral discourse of producerism. Media, Culture & Society, 36(4), 526–535. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443714527565
56.
PeckR. (2019). Fox populism: Branding conservatism as working class. Cambridge University Press.
57.
PikettyT. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press.
58.
PolitesG. L.KarahannaE. (2012). Shackled to the status quo: The inhibiting effects of incumbent system habit, switching costs, and inertia on new system acceptance. MIS Quarterly, 36, 21–42. https://doi/10.5555/2208955.2208958
59.
PowersK. E.RathbunB. C. (2023). When the rich get richer: Class, globalization, and the sociotropic determinants of populism. International Studies Quarterly, 67(4), sqad083. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqad083
SamuelsonW.ZeckhauserR. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 7–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00055564
62.
SandelM. J. (2020). The Tyranny of Merit: What’s become of the common good?Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
63.
SlothuusR.BisgaardM. (2020). How political parties shape public opinion in the real world. American Journal of Political Science, 65(4), 896–911. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12550
64.
SmithG.SearlesK. (2014). Who let the (attack) dogs out? New evidence for partisan media effects. Public Opinion Quarterly, 78(1), 71–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nft082
65.
SoltF.HuY.HudsonK.SongJ.YuD. E. (2016). Economic inequality and belief in meritocracy in the United States. Research & Politics, 3(4), 205316801667210. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168016672101
SpindeT.KreuterC.GaissmaierW.HamborgF.GippB.GieseH. (2021). Do you think it’s biased? How to ask for the perception of media bias. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL) (pp. 61–69). IEEE Xplore. https://doi.org/10.1109/JCDL52503.2021.00018
68.
StewartA. J.McCartyN.BrysonJ. J. (2020). Polarization under rising inequality and economic decline. Science Advances, 6(50), eabd4201. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd4201
69.
StewartA. J.PlotkinJ. B.McCartyN. (2021). Inequality, identity, and partisanship: How redistribution can stem the tide of mass polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(50), e2102140118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2102140118
70.
SuhayE.KlasnjaM.RiveroG. (2020). Ideology of affluence: Rich Americans’ explanations for inequality and attitudes toward redistribution. The Journal of Politics, 83(1), 367–380. https://doi.org/10.1086/709672
TripodiF. B. (2022). The propagandists’ playbook: How conservative elites manipulate search and threaten democracy. Yale University Press.
73.
Van BavelJ. J.PereiraA. (2018). The partisan brain: An identity-based model of political belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 213–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004
74.
Van der ToornJ.FeinbergM.JostJ. T.KayA. C.TylerT. R.WillerR.WilmuthC. (2014). A sense of powerlessness fosters system justification: Implications for the legitimation of authority, hierarchy, and government. Political Psychology, 36(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12183
75.
Van SwolL.LeeS.HutchinsR. (2022). The banality of extremism: The role of group dynamics and communication of norms in polarization on January 6. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 26(3), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000180
76.
Van ZoonenL. (2017). False consciousness and media effects. In P. Rössler, C. A. Hoffner, & E. A. van Zoonen (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects (pp. 1–19). Wiley‑Blackwell.
77.
VeenstraA. S.HossainM. D.LyonsB. A. (2014). Partisan media and discussion as enhancers of the belief gap. Mass Communication and Society, 17(6), 874–897. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2013.855791
78.
WinterN. J. G. (2006). Beyond welfare: Framing and the racialization of white opinion on social security. American Journal of Political Science, 50(2), 400–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00191.x
79.
ZampelliE. M.YenS. T. (2020). Individual attitudes toward government’s role in redistributing income in the United States: Analysis by ideological subgroups. The Journal of Economic Inequality, 19, 115–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10888-020-09462-7
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.
