Campaign coverage now focuses on the spectacle of the season, the campaign horse race, rather than providing information about candidate views.
Supporting the argument that news coverage is driven by audience appeal, were those who said citizens wanted to see updates on the race and electoral drama rather than issue positions or substantive reporting.
All these factors have led to the shallow press coverage we see today especially with the focus on personality and conflict rather than substantive issues. The presidential campaign coverage of the Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton campaigns are two examples. There can be no doubt that horse race journalism is the dominant approach to media coverage of current presidential campaigns. Television news discusses the strategies and blunders of the election with colorful examples, and newspapers often focus on the polls.
In , the average sound bite from Richard Nixon was Media coverage of campaigns is increasingly negative, with cable news stations demonstrating more bias in their framing of stories during the campaign.
Due in part to the lack of substantive media coverage, campaigns increasingly use social media to relay their message. Candidates can create their own sites and pages and try to spread news through supporters to the undecided. Yet, on social media, candidates still need to combat negativity, from both the opposition and supporters. Stories about Romney that appeared in the mainstream media were negative 38 percent of the time, while his coverage in Facebook news was negative 62 percent of the time and 58 percent of the time on Twitter.
Once candidates are in office, the chore of governing begins, with the added weight of media attention. Historically, if presidents were unhappy with their press coverage, they used personal and professional means to change its tone. Franklin D. The journalists then wrote positive stories, hoping to keep the president as a source. John F. Kennedy hosted press conferences twice a month and opened the floor for questions from journalists, in an effort to keep press coverage positive.
Cabinet secretaries and other appointees also talk with the press, sometimes making for conflicting messages. The creation of the position of press secretary and the White House Office of Communications both stemmed from the need to send a cohesive message from the executive branch. Currently, the White House controls the information coming from the executive branch through the Office of Communications and decides who will meet with the press and what information will be given.
The presidential press secretary runs the daily press briefing and provides access to a limited number of news media members to ask direct questions about administration policy. When Obama first entered office in , journalists focused on his battles with Congress, critiquing his leadership style and inability to work with Representative Nancy Pelosi, then Speaker of the House.
To gain attention for his policies, specifically the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act ARRA , Obama began traveling the United States to draw the media away from Congress and encourage discussion of his economic stimulus package. Once the ARRA had been passed, Obama began travelling again, speaking locally about why the country needed the Affordable Care Act and guiding media coverage to promote support for the act. Congressional representatives have a harder time attracting media attention for their policies.
Senators and high-ranking House members may also be invited to appear on cable news programs as guests, where they may gain some media support for their policies. Yet, overall, because there are so many members of Congress, and therefore so many agendas, it is harder for individual representatives to draw media coverage. It is less clear, however, whether media coverage of an issue leads Congress to make policy, or whether congressional policymaking leads the media to cover policy.
In the s, Congress investigated ways to stem the number of drug-induced deaths and crimes. As congressional meetings dramatically increased, the press was slow to cover the topic.
The number of hearings was at its highest from to , yet media coverage did not rise to the same level until Credit: OpenStax included images. What the media choose to cover affects what the president thinks is important to voters, and these issues were often of national importance.
Skip to main content. Search for:. It has long been asserted by media members and commentators that newspapers are a vital ingredient in American community life, but what do the data say? Political science research experiments have sometimes found that there is no necessary connection between political participation and newspaper exposure, but the topic continues to be explored from different angles.
Internet optimists point to evidence that shows how digital engagement has led to a major increase in political activity on social media sites, and news — not newspapers, per se — is the key to fostering robust civic life.
Others go further, arguing that those who lament the loss of traditional media not only underestimate the power of the Internet, but also view old media through rose-tinted glasses. Still, increased competition for audiences has led to increasing polarization , as news outlets resort to increasingly sensationalist and controversial tactics.
In the cities examined, two lost major newspapers around that time: The Seattle Post-Intelligencer , founded in , went online-only, while the Rocky Mountain News , established in , was shuttered by the E.
With a decrease in adults accessing news updates through their TVs and the use of social media for news on the rise, according to an Ofcom study , fake news has gathered momentum over the years. But what influence has fake news already had on the general public and what risk does it pose? Formed of inaccurate information and often deliberately published or shared in media outlets and social media, fake news can be a dangerous way of obtaining information. And therein lies the danger.
Richard Bowyer, Senior Lecturer in Journalism at the University of Derby, explains the very real danger fake news presents and the way it tarnishes the world of journalism. He says:. This can make sharing fake news dangerous as they want people to change the way they think. However, the question still remains as to how much responsibility companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter should have when trying to target the spread of fake news.
In , Facebook launched its reporting and flagging tools after receiving an increasing amount of criticism regarding fake news being shared on its platform. Google is also trying to play its part. If you develop a critical mindset it will help you to evaluate the story and decide whether you think it is true or not.
0コメント