This article explores two approaches to campaign coverage in order to estimate their relative importance to state and national media coverage levels during presidential nomination campaigns: the horse race account and the campaign account. Using news coverage data from a sample of 21 state newspapers, three national newspapers, and the ABC World News Tonight, multivariate models of state and national candidate news coverage levels are estimated. The findings, although confirming the conventional wisdom that candidates who do well gain more media attention, also suggest that candidate activity can make a difference and that candidate factors can have a significant influence, whereas structural factors, such as the number of candidates competing, appear to have little influence on how the national and state media determine their distribution of coverage when other factors are present. Moreover, the state news media are strongly influenced by performance factors, but these are felt primarily through the priming influence of the national news media.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, J.H. (1980). Before the convention: Strategies and choices in presidential nomination campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. (1995). Going negative: How political advertisements shrink and polarize the electorate. New York: Free Press.
3.
Arterton, F.C. (1984). Media politics: The new strategies of presidential campaigns. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
4.
Bartels, L.M. (1988). Presidential primaries and the dynamics ofpublic choice. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
Bartels, L.M. (1993). Messages received: The political impact of media exposure. American Political Science Review, 79, 804-815.
6.
Brady, H.E., & Johnston, R. (1987). What's the primary message: Horse race or issue journalism ? In G. Orren & N. W. Polsby (Eds.), Media and momentum: The New Hampshire primary and nomination politics (pp. 127-187). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
7.
Buell, E.H. Jr. (1987). "Locals" and "cosmopolitans": National, regional and state newspaper coverage of the New Hampshire primary. In G. Orrin & N. W. Polsby (Eds.), Media and momentum: The New Hampshire primary and nomination politics (pp. 60-103). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
8.
Chaffee, S.H., Zhao, X., & Leshner, G. (1994). Political knowledge and the campaign media of 1992. Communication Research, 21, 305-324.
9.
Cook, F.L., Tyler, T.R., Goetz, E.G., Gordon, M.T., Protess, D., Layoff, D.R., & Molotch, H.H. (1983). Media and agenda setting: Effects on the public, interest group leaders and policy makers and policy. Public Opimon Quarterly, 47, 16-35.
10.
Drew, D., & Weaver, D. (1993). Voter learning in the 1990 off-year election: Did the media matter ? Journalism Quarterly, 70, 356-368.
11.
Graber, D.A. (1980) Mass media and American politics. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
12.
Graber, D.A. (1987). Kind words and harsh pictures: How television presents the candidates. In K. L. Scholzman (Ed.), Elections in America (pp. 115-142). Boston: Allen and Unwin.
13.
Graber, D.A. (1993). Mass media and American politics (4th ed.) Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
14.
Gurian, P.H. (1986). Resource allocation strategies in presidential nomination campaigns. American Journal of Political Science , 30, 802-821.
15.
Gurian, P.H. (1993). Campaign strategy in presidential primaries, 1976-1988 . American Journal of Political Science, 37, 335-341.
16.
Hagen, M. (1996). Press treatment of front-runners. In W. G. Mayer (Ed.), In pursuit of the White House (pp. 190-219). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
17.
Haynes, A.A. (1995, November). The many voices of the news media: A coverage comparison of national and state/local news outlets. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Atlanta, GA.
18.
Haynes, A.A. (1996). National and local media coverage and the presidential nomination campaign. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.
19.
Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D.R. (1987). News that matters. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
20.
Just, M.R., Crigler, A.M., Alger, D.E., Cook, T.E., Kern, M., & West, D.M. (1996). Crosstalk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P.F. (1955). Personal influence: The part played by people in the flow of mass communications. New York: Free Press.
22.
Keeter, S. (1987). The illusion of intimacy: Television and the role of candidate personal qualities in voter choice. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51, 344-358.
23.
Keeter, S., & Zukin, C. (1983). Uniformed choice: The failure of the new presidential nominating system. New York: Praeger .
24.
Klapper, J.T. (1960). The effects of mass communication. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
25.
Larson, P. (1996). Media coverage of the White House in transition. Unpublished manuscript, University of Georgia.
26.
Lichter, R.S., Amundson, D., & Noyes, R.E. (1988). Media coverage: Election '88. Public Opinion, 11, 18-21.
27.
Lupia, A. (1994). Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review, 88, 63-76.
28.
Markham, J.W., & Stempel, G.H. Iii. ( 1957, April). One-party press charge suffers firm setback in Pennsylvania study. The Quill, pp. 13-21.
29.
Marshall, T. (1981). Presidential primaries in a reform age. New York: Praeger.
30.
McCombs, M.E., & Shaw, D.L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of the mass media . Public Opinion Quarterly, 36,176-187.
31.
McKuen, M. (1984). Exposure to information, brief integration, and individual responsiveness to agenda change. American Political Science Review, 78, 372-391.
32.
McLeod, J.M., Guo, Z., & Steele, K. (1996). The impact of traditional and nontraditional media forms in the 1992 presidential election. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 73,401-416.
33.
Meadow, R.G. (1973). Cross-media comparison of coverage of the 1972 presidential campaign. Journalism Quarterly, 50, 482-488.
34.
Page, B.I., & Shapiro, R.Y. (1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans' policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35.
Page, B.I., Shapiro, R.Y., & Dempsey, G.R. (1987). What moves public opinion? American Political Science Review, 81, 23-43.
36.
Paolino, P. (1996). Perceptions of candidate viability: Media effects during the presidential nomination process. Political Methodology Working Paper.
37.
Patterson, T.E. (1988). The mass media election: How Americans choose their president (3rd ed.). New York. Preager.
38.
Patterson, T.E. (1993) 1-800-President: The report on the twentieth century fund taskforce on television and the campaign of 1992. New York: Twentieth Century Fund.
39.
Patterson, T.E., & Davis, R. (1985). The media campaign: Struggle for the agenda. In M. Nelson (Ed.), The election of 1984 (pp. 111-127). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly.
40.
Patterson, T.E., & McClure, R.D. (1976). The unseeing eye: The myth of television power in national elections. New York: G. P. Putnam.
41.
Ramsden, G.P. (1996). Media coverage of issues and candidates: What balance is appropriate in a democracy? Political Science Quarterly , 111, 65-81.
42.
Repass, D.E., & Chaffee, S.H. (1968). Administrative vs. campaign coverage of two presidents in eight partisan dailies. Journalism Quarterly, 45, 528-531.
43.
Robinson, M.J., & Sheehan, M.A. (1983). Over the wire and on TV: CBS and UPI in campaign '80. New York: Russell Sage.
44.
Stimson, J.A. (1987). Regression models in space and time: A statistical essay. American Journal of Political Science, 29, 914-947.
45.
Weaver, D., & Drew, D. (1995). Voter learning in the 1992 presidential election: Did the "nontraditional" media and debates matter? Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 72, 7-17.
46.
Yum, J.O., & Kendall, K.E. (1988). Sources of political information in a presidential primary campaign. Journalism Quarterly, 65, 148-151.
