The Internet has become an important means by which members of Congress communicate with their constituents. Although a number of studies have examined the content and features of congressionalWeb sites, how members of Congress present themselves on theWeb has yet to be addressed. A content analysis of the images displayed on the home pages of 100 senators and 244 House members who served in the 107th Congress reveals two distinct presentations: an “insider” style and an “ outsider” style. The results vary, moreover, by chamber, seniority, gender, and race. Within each party, the most significant differences were by gender, with Democratic women the most likely to present themselves as outsiders and Republican women the most likely to present themselves as insiders.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adler, E. Scott, Chariti E. Gent, and Cary B. Overmeyer. 1998. “The Home Style Homepage: Legislator Use of theWorldWideWeb for Constituency Contact.” Legislative Studies Quarterly23(4): 585-596 .
2.
Advocacy Group. 2001. Online on the Hill:A Survey of Congressional Use of the Internet. Washington, DC: Advocacy Group .
3.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, James M. Snyder Jr., and Charles Stewart III. 2001. “Candidate Positioning in U.S. House Elections.” American Journal of Political Science45(1): 136-159 .
4.
Bainbridge, Katherine. 1999. Building Web Sites Constituents Will Use. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Project .
5.
Banwart, Mary Christine. 2002. “Videostyle andWebstyle in 2000: Comparing Gender Differences of Candidate Presentations in Political Advertising and on the Internet.” Ph.D diss., University of Oklahoma.
6.
Barone, Michael. 2001. The Almanac of American Politics 2002. Washington, DC: National Journal Group .
7.
Bimber, Bruce. 1999. “The Internet and Citizen Communication with Government: Does the Medium Matter?” Political Communication16: 409-428 .
8.
Bivings Group. 2002. The Internet’s Role in Political Campaigns:Utilization by Incumbent United StatesSenators and Representatives in 2002. Washington, DC: Bivings Group .
9.
Burrell, Barbara. 1994. A Woman’s Place Is in the House:Campaigning for Congress in the Feminist Era. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press .
10.
Bystrom, Diana. 1995. “Candidate Gender and the Presentation of Self: The Videostyles of Men and Women in US Senate Campaigns.” Ph.D diss., University of Oklahoma.
11.
Congress Online Project. 2002. Congress Online: Assessing and Improving Capitol Hill Web Sites. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Project .
12.
Dolan, Julie. 1997. “Support forWomen’s Interests in the 103rd Congress: The Distinct Impact of Congressional Women.” Women and Politics18(4): 81-94 .
13.
Erikson, Robert S., and Kent L. TedIn. 2001. American Public Opinion. New York: Addison-Wesley Longman .
14.
Erikson, Robert S., and Gerald C. Wright. 1997. “Voters, Candidates, and Issues in Congressional Elections.” In Congress Reconsidered, ed. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. 6th Edition. Washington, DC: C.Q. Press .
15.
Fenno, Richard F. 1978. Home Style. Boston: Little, Brown .
Herrnson, Paul S. 2000. Congressional Elections: Campaigning at Home and in Washington. 3rd Edition. Washington, DC: C.Q. Press .
20.
Hibbing, John R., and Elizabeth Theiss-Morse. 1995. Congress as Public Enemy: Public Attitudes toward American Political Institutions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press .
21.
Jacobson, Gary C. 2001. The Politics of Congressional Elections. 5th Edition. New York: Addison-Wesley .
22.
Johnson, Dennis W. 2001. Constituents and Your Web Site:What Citizens Want to See on Congressional Web Sites. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Project .
23.
Kahn, Kim FridkIn. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman:How Stereotypes Influence the Conduct and Consequences of Political Campaigns. New York: Columbia University Press .
24.
Krasno, Jonathan S. 1994. Challengers,Competition,and Reelection:Comparing Senate and House Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press .
25.
Larsen, Elena, and Lee Rainie. 2002. The Rise of the E-citizen: How People Use Government Agencies’ Web Sites. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project .
Mayhew,David.1974. Congress:The Electoral Connection. NewHaven,CT:Yale University Press .
30.
Niven, David, and Jeremy Zilber. 1999. “DoWomen and Men in Congress Cultivate Different Images? Evidence from Congressional Web Sites.” Political Communication18: 395-405 .
31.
Ota, Alan K. 1997. “Web Sites, Networks and E-mail Help Kick the Paper Habit.” CQ Weekly Report, November 29, 29-44.
32.
Owen, Diana, Richard Davis, and Vincent James Strickler. 1999. “Congress and the Internet.” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics4(2): 10-29 .
33.
Poole, Keith T., and L. Harmon Zeigler. 1985. Women, Public Opinion, and Politics. New York: Longman .
34.
Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Congress:A Political History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press .
35.
Swope, Christopher. 1997. “Mr. Smith E-Mails Washington, DC: Constituents On Line.” CQ Weekly Report, November 29, 29-40.
36.
Reingold, Beth. 2000. Representing Women: Sex,Gender, and Legislative Behavior in Arizona and California. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press .
37.
Thomas, Sue. 1989. “Voting Patterns in the California Assembly: The Role of Gender.” Women and Politics9(4): 43-53 .
38.
Vega, Arturo, and Juanita Firestone. 1995. “The Effects of Gender on Congressional Behavior and the Substantive Representation of Women.” Legislative Studies Quarterly20(2): 213-222 .
39.
Weismann, Jonathan. 1997. “Lawmakers Gingerly Step into the Information Age.” CQ Weekly Report, November 29, 29-35.
40.
Welch, Susan. 1985. “AreWomen More Liberal ThanWomen in the U.S. Congress?” Legislative Studies Quarterly10: 125-134 .
41.
West, Darrell M. 2001. AirWars:Television Advertising in Election Campaigns,1952-2000. Washington, DC: C.Q. Press .
42.
Williams, Leonard. 1998.“Gender, Political Advertising, and the ‘AirWars.’ ” In Women and Elective Office, ed. Sue Thomas and Clyde Wilcox. New York: Oxford University Press .
43.
Young, James Sterling. 1966. TheWashington Community,1800-1828. NewYork: Harcourt, Brace & World .
