The Mass Media as Political Actors

Author(s): Benjamin I. Page

Source: PS: Political Science and Politics, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Mar., 1996), pp. 20-24
Published by: American Political Science Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/420185 .
Accessed: 14/06/2014 09:19

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Political Science Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
PS: Political Science and Politics.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.89 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:19:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Symposium
Lichter,S. Robert,and DanielR. Amund-
son. 1994."Less News Is WorseNews:
TelevisionNews CoverageofCongress,
1972-92." In Congress, the Press, and
thePublic,ed. ThomasE. Mannand
NormanJ.Ornstein. D.C.:
Washington,
American and
Institute
Enterprise
BrookingsInstitution.
Mann,ThomasE., andNormanJ.Ornstein,
1994."Introduction."
In Congress, the
Press, and the Public, ed. Thomas E.
MannandNormanJ.Ornstein. Washing-
ton,D.C.; American Institute
Enterprise
andBrookings Institution.
Edie N. Goldenberg,
Miller,Warren, and
Lutz Erbring.1979."Type-SetPolitics:
ImpactofNewspaperson PublicConfi-
dence." American Political Science Re-
view7:67-84.
Thomas.1991."More StyleThan
Patterson,
Substance:TelevisionNewsin U.S. Na-
tional Elections." Political Communica-
tionand Persuasion 8:145-61.
The Mass Media as PoliticalActors
BenjaminI. Page, NorthwesternUniversity
One can imagineseveralwaysin
whichmediaorganizations-that is,
individual mediaoutlets,chains,
networks, or umbrellacorpora-
tions-mightpursuepolicyobjec-
tives.One waycouldinvolvestan-
dardinterest-group techniquesfor
influencing politicalcandidatesand
publicofficials.Media organizations
(e.g., RupertMurdoch'sNews Cor-
poration)and theirexecutives
mightseekpublicpoliciesofpartic-
ularconcernto themselves (e.g.,
relaxation oflimitson foreign own-
ershipofU.S. TV stations),by
makingcampaigncontributions,
doingfavorsforpoliticians, or lob-
bying, just likeotherinterest
groups.Journalists and scholars
have comeupona numberofex-
amplesof suchinfluence attempts.
A closerlook,particularly at possi-
ble connections betweenwhatme-
dia firms lobbyforand whatthey
airor printcouldbe valuable.
(Devereux1993,forexample,has
foundevidencethatsomenewspa-
pers' endorsements of Lyndon
Johnson in 1964werelinkedwith
policypayoffs.)
20
This content downloaded from 185.2.32.89 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:19:17 AM
Thomas.1994.OutofOrder.
Patterson,
New York:Vintage.
Pomper,Gerald,andSusanLederman.
1980.
Elections in America. New York: Long-
man.
Robinson,Michael.1976."PublicAffairs
TelevisionandtheGrowthofPolitical
Malaise:The Case of 'The Sellingofthe
Pentagon'." AmericanPolitical Science
Review 70:409-32.
Robinson,Michael.1983."ImprovingElec-
tionInformationintheMedia." Paper
presentedat VotingforDemocracy
Forum,Washington, D.C.
Rosensteil,Tom. 1994. The Beat Goes On:
PresidentClinton's First Year withthe
Media. New York:Twentieth Century
Fund.
Rozell,MarkJ. 1994."PressCoverageof
Congress,1946-92."In Congress,the
Press, and the Public, ed. Thomas E.
Mannand NormanJ.Ornstein.Washing-
ton,D.C.: American Institute
Enterprise
and Brookings
Institution.
I wantto focus,however,on a
differentwayin whichmediaorga-
nizationsmightseek to influence
policy:theindirect approachofus-
ing their
publicationsor broadcasts
to tryand changethebeliefsand
policypreferences ofmassand/or
eliteaudiences,whichwouldpre-
sumablyaffectsubsequentpolicy
decisions.'Thisindirect approach
mightbe especiallyattractive to
mediaorganizations becauseof
theirspecialpositionsas keydis-
seminators ofpoliticalinformation.
Its use couldhaveimportant impli-
cationsforthenatureofdemocratic
deliberation.
The conceptof "politicalactor,"
appliedto themediaor anyone
else, impliesobservableactionthat
is purposive(thoughperhapsfunc-
tionalratherthanconsciouslyin-
tended)and sufficiently unifiedso
thatit makessenseto speakofa
singleactor.A criticalquestion,
therefore, concernswhether--or to
whatextent-mediaoutletsdo in
factuse theirpublications and
broadcastsin a purposiveand uni-
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sabato, Larry. 1991. Feeding Frenzy: How
AttackJournalismHas Transformed
AmericanPolitics. New York: Free
Press.
Westerstahl, and FolkeJohansson.
J6rgen,
1986."News Ideologiesas Moldersof
Domestic News." European Journalof
Communication1:126-43.
About the Author
ThomasE. Patterson is Distinguished
Profes-
sor ofPoliticalSciencein SyracuseUniver-
sity'sMaxwellSchoolofCitizenship. He is
theauthorofOutofOrder(Vintage,1994),
whichexaminesthemedia'srolein presi-
dentialelections.He is also theauthorofa
full-length
introductory American govern-
menttext, The American Democracy
1996),and a briefeditionof
(McGraw-Hill,
thesametext,WethePeople(McGraw-Hill,
1995).
fiedfashionto pursuepolicyobjec-
tives.
Subsidiary butimportant re-
searchquestionsconcernwhat
kindsofmediaact in thisway,un-
derwhatcircumstances, concerning
whatsortsof issues.Also, who
drivestheprocess(owners?manag-
ers?journalists?), actinguponwhat
motives(economicself-interest?
values?ideology?professional
norms?),withwhatdegreeofcon-
sciousness?By whatmechanisms
couldtheactionsofmanyindivid-
ual coworkersbe coordinated
(ownership interference?manage-
rialhierarchy? selectiverecruit-
ment?internalized normsand rou-
tines?)In whatformats are
attempts at policypersuasion
made?(In editorialsand commen-
taryonly?Also in newsstories?
Entertainment?) Whatpersuasive
techniquesare used? (Framing?
Manipulation of salience?Selective
quotation?Value-ladenlanguage?
Evidenceand argumentation? Strik-
inganecdotes?False or misleading
assertions?)Finally,whateffects, if
any,do suchinfluence attempts
PS: PoliticalScience& Politics

have uponaudiencesand upon
publicdeliberation?
Do Media Organizations
Pursue PolicyObjectives
ThroughTheir Publications
or Broadcasts?
On thisfundamental
question
thereis a curiousdisjuncture be-
tweenthecommunications litera-
tureand commonsense. Mostso-
phisticated observersofthemedia,
at leastmostnonacademicobserv-
ers,wouldsay, "of course." They
speakwithcasual certainty of how
theNew YorkTimesworkedto
pass NAFTA, or howthe Wall
StreetJournalcrusadesforcutsin
government spending.
Butcommunications scholars
tendto dismisssuchpossibilities
outofhand,burying themundera
flurry ofdoubts.How couldsucha
thingbe managed?Journalists take
pridein theirindependence and in
professional normsofobjectivity.
Surely media ownersdo notinflu-
ence whatjournalistssay or print!
As an anonymous reviewerofone
ofmyownmanuscripts succinctly
and correctly
putit: mostspecial-
istson thenewsmediado nottake
thispossibility
veryseriously.
In orderto makeanyheadway
on researching thissubjectit is
necessaryto breaktheglobalques-
tiondownintosmaller,moreman-
ageablepieces.
Do mediaargueforparticular poli-
cies in editorials?Here we are on
fairlysolidground.Yes, obviously,
mediaeditorialsoftentakestands
on theissuesoftheday; thatis one
oftheirdeclaredpurposes.Many
newspapers, magazines(especially
journalsofopinion),and broadcasts
carrysucheditorials.Moreover,
practicallyall observersoftheme-
dia wouldagreethatdifferent me-
dia tendto takedistinctive stands,
and thatthosestandsoftenremain
consistent overmanyyears.The
Nation leans left,and the National
Review tiltsright.The Washington
Post and New YorkTimes are so-
cially(and,to a lesserextent,eco-
nomically)liberal,whileWall
StreetJournaleditorialsthunder
withconservatism;
otherpublica-
March 1996
This content downloaded from 185.2.32.89 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:19:17 AM
tionslineup at variouspointsalong
theideologicalcontinuum or con-
tinua.
Even on thispoint,however,
moreresearchis needed:careful
documentation ofwhichmediatake
editorialstands(presumably print
mediaeditorializemorethanelec-
tronicones),preciselywhatedito-
rialpositionsdifferent
mediaoutlets
takeon variousissues,and how
thosepositionsdo or do notchange
overtime.The lessernewspapers,
general-purpose magazines,and TV
programs have beenespeciallylittle
studied.
thereis some
S..
evidence to suggest that
thepredominantpolitical
values expressed in news
storiesdo infact
sometimescorrespond
closely to thepolitical
stands thatare taken in
overteditorials.
Whataboutcommentary
and Op-
Eds? Thisis less clear.Manypub-
licationsand programs aimforat
leastan appearanceofdiversity in
thecomments and opinionsthey
carry;somemayevenaspireto
createminiature "publicspheres"
in whichall (all?) viewsfreelycon-
tend.The extentof suchdiversity
has impressedsomeobservers.
On theotherhand,mystudyof
New YorkTimesOp-Edsconcern-
ingwhether or notto go to war
withIraq suggeststhattheTimes's
apparently free-wheeling discourse
was actuallyconstructed so as to
furthertheTimes'sownpositionas
manifested in itsunsignededitori-
als. Guestas wellas regularcol-
umnscamefromlimitedkindsof
sources,expresseda limitedrange
ofviewpoints, and werearranged
withalmostperfectsymmetry on
bothsidesoftheTimes'sown
stand(Page 1996,chapter2).
Moreresearchis neededcon-
cerningwhatviewsare expressed
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheMassMediaas Political
Actors
on Op-Ed pagesand on punditand
interview shows,howdiverseor
uniform theyare,and howthey
relateto theexpliciteditorial
stands(ifany)ofthemediaoutlet
or to otherfactorslikeaudience
preferences.Does CNN tendto-
wardmostlyconservative commen-
tary?Arethe(somewhatregulated)
electronicmediamoreopento con-
viewsthanprintmedia?
tending
Are theredifferences betweencor-
porateand familyownership, with
press barons or newspaper families
perhapsmorepronethanprofit-
seekingconglomerates to indulgein
ideologicalcrusades?
Do media furthertheirown policy
stands throughnews stories? This
is hotlydisputed.Communications
researchhas, I believe,thoroughly
demolishedtheidea thatnewsis or
can be "value free."The canonsof
bland,"objective"reporting are
perfectlyconsistent withtheselec-
tionofquotesand facts,thefram-
ingofinterpretations, and theattri-
butionofimportance (through
repeatedfrontpage headlines,for
example),all so as to supportor
opposea particular policyposition.
Moreover,thecanonsofobjectivity
themselves seemto have eroded.
Even theformerly greyNew York
Times, nowsometimes runsnews
(or unobtrusively labelled"analy-
sis") storiesfullofthecolorful,
value-ladenadjectivesand adverbs
once foundonlyinjournalsofopin-
ion or Timemagazine.
Curiously,however,manycom-
munications researchers tendto
resistthepossibility thatthevalues
conveyedin newsstoriesmight
tendsystematically to reflect
the
policypreferences of media organi-
zationsthemselves.Scholarsseem
particularlyskepticalof theidea
thatmultiplenews stories,written
at differenttimesby different(pre-
sumablyindependent)reporters,
and based on different sources,
could share a commonpolitical
thrust,or thatthe "wall of separa-
tion" between news and editorial
departmentscould somehow be
breachedso thatnews storieswould
tendto mirroreditorialviews.
Nonetheless, thereis some evi-
dence to suggestthatthe predomi-
nant politicalvalues expressed in
21
Symposium
newsstoriesdo in factsometimes
correspond closelyto thepolitical
standsthatare takenin overtedito-
rials.Rowse (1957),forexample,
founda veryclose fitbetween31
differentnewspapers'handling of
the 1952Nixonand Stevenson
"fund"storiesand theireditorial
endorsements ofcandidates.My
studyofmediareactionsto theLos
Angelesriotsfounda similarcorre-
spondencebetweennewsand edi-
torials,and dissecteda numberof
techniques by whichnewsstories
can be deployedto advancepolicy
objectives(Page 1995;1996,chap-
ter3).
Moreresearchis neededon
whether consistent policystands
tendto showup in mediaoutlets'
newsstories;howthosestands
vary(does CBS newsdiffer from
ABC?); andjust howcloselysuch
standsdo or do notcorrespond
withoverteditorialsor otherindi-
catorsofmedia'sownpositions.
Does theextentof news-editorial
correspondence varybetweenprint
and electronic media,or withform
ofownership (e.g., familyor corpo-
rate),or by typeofissue,or in
otherways? (Do Wall StreetJour-
nal newsstoriesand editorials
sometimes clashwitheach other?
If so, is theJournalunusual?)
WhoControlsthePolicy
StandsthatMedia Take,
How,and to WhatEnds?
Officialgovernmentsources? A
major,quiteimportant findingfrom
researchis that
communications
government serveas the
officials
chiefsourcesofmanykindsofpo-
liticalnewsand tendto constrain
the range of debate foundin the
media (Sigal 1973; Gans 1980; Hal-
lin 1986; Bennett 1990; Soley 1992).
Media dependence upon officialsis
oftensaid to resultlargelyfromthe
natureof newsgatheringroutines
and the need forregular,easy ac-
cess to legitimatesources who pos-
sess valuable information.Such
dependence impliesthatpolicy
stands expressed by media outlets
mightsimplyreflectwhatever
stands are taken by officialsin
power (some media perhaps echo-
ing mostlyDemocratic officials,
22
This content downloaded from 185.2.32.89 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:19:17 AM
whileothersecho mostlyRepubli-
cans).
This view,carriedin one direc-
tion,couldsupporta hegemony
theoryofthemedia,in which
newspapers, magazines,and TV
programs mostlypass alongofficial
propaganda, especiallyin foreign
affairs(HermanandChomsky1988).
Takenin anotherdirection, the
samefindings that
suggest policy
standsin themediamayreflect
whateverpoliticalforcesare domi-
nantin societyas a whole-
whether thoseare primarily large, fruitofmediastudies.The sugges-
capitalistcorporations (Parenti
I have foundfew
systematiceffortsto
investigatepossible
mechanismsof owneror Surprisingly
manager controlof
media's political stands.
1993)or a morepluralistic mixof
voters,interest groups,andparty
activiststhatgetofficialselected.
Eitherway,thedependence-on-
viewcaststhemediaas
officials
passivetransmission belts,feeding relationships all
theiraudienceswhateverotherac-
tors(officialsthemselves or broader journalists and editorsvehemently
societalforcesbehindofficials)
wantto serveup. It casts serious
doubtupontheimportance ofthe
mediaas independent
political
actors.
theevidenceofheavy
Although
mediadependenceupongovern-
mentofficials is quiteconvincing, I Editorsassign(and sometimes
thinkmoreresearchis neededcon-
cerningpreciselyhowit worksand
how farit extends.For example,
thelogicofnewsgathering (involv- mentand salience.
ingtimepressureand dependence
on narrow,accessiblesources)
does notapplyso wellto thepro-
ductionofOp-Edpagesor TV dis-
cussionshows,whichoftenhave
monthsor yearsin whichto solicit
theviewsofanyonetheyplease on
enduring policyquestions.Do the
boundariesof official,two-party
debatetendto constrain opinions
and commentary as wellas news?
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
If so (and theevidencesuggests
theydo-Reese, Grant,and Daniel-
ian 1994),howand whydo theydo
so? Mightclosenessto officials suit
thepolicypreferences of mediaor-
ganizations themselves? More
broadly, is thereroom for a viewof
mediaorganizations as somewhat
autonomouspoliticalactors,some-
timesagreeingwithofficial views
butsometimes going theirown way?
Do owners or managers do it?
Now we approachtheforbidden
tionthattheownersand/ormanag-
ers of mediaorganizations might
influence thepolicystandsthatme-
dia outletstakesometimes triggers
criesof "Marxism"or "conspiracy
theory."Surely,however,thisis a
possibilitythatserioussocial scien-
tistsofvarioustheoretical stripes
oughtto be willingto investigate.
fewhavedone so.
The chiefempirically based rea-
son fordoubting ownership or man-
agementinfluence seemsto be the
finding, bya numberofexcellent
sociology-of-newsmaking studies
(e.g., Gans 1980),that journalists
oftenhave subjectivefeelingsof
substantial and thatthey
autonomy
are not treatedas mere hirelings
but engage in complex bargaining
withtheireditors.
Moreover, nearly practicing
denythatownersinterfere with
what theydo.
Butdoes thisdisposeofthepos-
ofownership or managerial
sibility
influence?Certainly not.For one
thing,thejob description ofeditors
includesthehiring, promotion, su-
pervision,and firing ofjournalists.
take
away) stories.Theyreadcopyand
accept,alter,or rejectwhatis writ-
ten. They decide upon storyplace-
It should not be shockingto sug-
gest thateditorsmightconsciously
or unconsciouslytend to hireand
promotereporterswho share their
policy preferences,or thatthey
mighttend to assign, edit, and
place storiesin such a way as to
advance policy views thatthey
themselveshold. Such influence
could be entirelyconsistentwith
journalists' sense of autonomy,es-
PS: PoliticalScience& Politics

peciallyifthejournalistswerecho-
senforpoliticalcompatibility in the
firstplace or iftheyquicklylearned
and internalized whatwas expected
ofthem.
Similarreasoningappliesto influ-
ence by higher-level mediamanag-
ers and owners.Ownersand man-
agerspicktheireditors;little
wonderiftheydo so carefully, with
someregardto politicalcompatibil-
ity.Theremay,therefore, be little
needforday-to-day interference.
(To be sure,somestartling ac-
countsof suchinterference can be
found;see Bagdikian1992.)The
extentthatownersdo superviseor
interferewiththeireditorswould
be verydifficult forobservers-
even sociologists or reporters hang-
ingaroundthenewsroom-tode-
tect.A low-key,privatenoteor
phonecall froma Sulzberger to a
Timeseditormightaccomplish
quitea lot,and bothpartiesmight
have reasonto keep sucha contact
veryprivate.Furthermore, selec-
tiverecruitment ofeditorsplus
quietsupervision by ownersor top-
levelmanagerscouldaccountfor
politicaluniformity betweennews
and editorialdepartments, evenif
they never talkedto each other and
the"wall of separation"stayed
intact.
To mygreatsurprise, I have
foundfewsystematic effortsto in-
vestigatepossiblemechanisms of
owneror managercontrolof me-
dia's politicalstands.(A striking
recentexceptionis D. Chomsky
(1996),whohas uncoveredremark-
able evidenceofhowtheownersof
the New YorkTimes have influ-
encedthecontentofnewsstories.)
Thistopicseemsto deservehigh
forfuture
priority research.
To be sure,it wouldbe difficult
or impossibleto gathera random
sample of influenceattemptsand
observe theirresults.The subtle
natureof processes like selective
recruitment and internalizedexpec-
tations,togetherwiththe highly
confidentialnatureof overtinter-
ventions,affectswhat research de-
signs are feasible. The use of mem-
oirs, participant-observation,and
interviewscan be helpful,but most
promisingis archivalresearchinto
the confidentialmemos or diaries of
media owners and managers(e.g.,
March1996
This content downloaded from 185.2.32.89 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:19:17 AM
TheMassMediaas Political
Actors
Chomsky1996).A complementary, themediatendto lead people
outsidestrategyis to analyzepat- astrayfromtheopinionsthey
ternsin whichnewsand editorial wouldholdiffullyand accurately
standsmayvaryaccordingto own- informed?
ershipcharacteristics,e.g., indus- These are largeand difficult
trialsectors(Devereux1993). questionswhichI havetriedto ad-
dressat lengthelsewhere(Page
1996,chapter1, 5; see also Page
What EffectsDoes and Shapiro1992,chapter9, 10.)
Media Bias Have? Here I wantto suggestthatthe
overallimpactof mediaas political
The daysofbeliefin "minimal actorsmaydependheavilyupon
effects"bythemediaare over.A howpersuasivepoweris distrib-
largebodyofevidencenowindi- utedamongthem(especiallyhow
catesthatwhatappearsin printor concentrated or dispersedthedis-
on theairhas a substantial impact tributionis), and howpolitical
uponhowcitizensthinkand what standsare distributed amongmedia
theythinkabout:e.g., whatthey outlets(withhowmuchdiversity,
citeas "important problems"(Mc- and howclose or fartheyare from
Combsand Shaw 1972;Iyengarand thevaluesand interests ofordinary
Kinder1987),howtheyattribute citizens).
responsibilityforpolicyproblems Media outlets'promotion oftheir
(Iyengar1991),and whatpolicy ownpolicyagendasmightnotmat-
preferences theyhold(Page, Sha- termuch,forexample,ifthose
piro,and Dempsey1987).Further, agendaswerehighlydiverseand
whatthemediasay oftenhas direct competedvigorously witheach
effectsuponwhatpolicymakers do other,and ifat leastsomesignifi-
(Protess,Cook, Doppelt,Ettema, cantmediavoicesprovidedaccu-
Gordon,Leff,and Miller1991). rateinformation and offeredinter-
I wantto highlight twosetsof pretations that resonatedwell with
questionsthatgo beyondtheissue thevaluesand interests ofordinary
of micro-level impact.First,to citizens.Thencitizenscouldpre-
what extentare the media them- sumablysortoutthetruefromthe
selves the ultimatecauses of these false,theusefulfromtheuselessor
effects,and to whatextentare they misleading, and cometo sensible
merelytransmission beltsformore conclusions.On theotherhand,
fundamental forces?Do "the me- however,ifmostor all influential
dia," as relatively
autonomousac- mediapromoted thesamepolicy
tors,shapeopinions?Or do they views,and ifthoseviewswere
just pass on whatcomesfromoffi- badlyoutoftouchwiththevalues
cial newssourcesor otherpowerful and interests ofordinary citizens,
elementsin society?These ques- publicdeliberation mightbe stifled
tionsmatter forhowwe place the and thecitizenry misled.
massmediain a generalmodelof I believeit shouldbe a highpri-
publicopinionand policyforma- orityforpoliticalcommunications
tion.Theytakeus back to ourear- researchto examinethepolicy
lierquestionsaboutwhoor what viewsadvocatedin or by all acces-
determines thepolicystandstaken siblemedia-notjust themost-
by media. studiednewspapersand TV net-
Second, when the manymedia in works-in orderto ascertainhow
a large, complex societylike the diverse those views are, how broad
United States are all taken to- or narrowa range of ideas and in-
gether,how do theyaffectthe qual- terpretationsis presented,and how
ityof public deliberation?Do they theyrelate to the values and inter-
presentsufficientlydiverse and ests of the citizenryas a whole.
helpfulpoliticalinformation and Because the amountof media-
interpretationsso thatcitizenscan transmitted verbiageis vast-even
figureout what kinds of public poli- on a single,narrowlydelimitedis-
cies would best satisfytheirvalues sue-such examinationmustproba-
and interests?Does the "market- bly proceed on an issue-by-issue,
place of ideas" work in the way case studybasis, but it should do
liberaltheoristshave hoped? Or do so in such a way as to ensure com-
23
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Symposium

parability acrossissues. Variations policy aims, while tryingto destroythose tion: Rejecting'1960s Programs'as
who do not; or seekingto enhance or under- Causes of the Los Angeles Riots." Polit-
by type issue mayprovequite
of
mine the legitimacyof governmentitself. ical Communication12:245-61.
interesting. The highlynegativemedia contentdocu- Page, Benjamin I. 1996. WhoDeliberates?
Is it true,forexample,(perhaps mentedby Jamieson(1992), Patterson Mass Media in Modern Democracy. Chi-
becauseofofficial controlofinfor- (1993), and otherscould reflectsuch strate- cago: Universityof Chicago Press.
mationand lack ofdisagreement gies. Many of the researchquestions out- Page, Benjamin I., and RobertY. Shapiro.
betweenthetwomajorparties)that lined here could be applied to those topics
as well as to the shapingof policy prefer-
1992. The Rational Public: FiftyYears of
Trendsin Americans' Policy Preferences.
media-presented debates on foreign ences. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
policyissuesare oftennarrowand Page, Benjamin I., RobertY. Shapiro, and
distantfromtheviewsofordinary Glenn R. Dempsey. 1987. "What Moves
citizens?Do fundamental features Public Opinion?" AmericanPolitical Sci-
ence Review 81:23-43.
ofoureconomicsystemgenerally References
Page, Benjamin I., and Jason Tannenbaum.
go unchallenged, perhaps because 1996. "Populistic Deliberationand Talk
Bagdikian,Ben H. 1992. The Media Monop-
oftheprivate(mostlycorporate) oly. 4thed. Boston: Beacon.
Radio." Journalof Communication.
ownership of mediaoutlets?On Bennett,W. Lance. 1990. "Toward a The- Forthcoming.
class-related Parenti,Michael. 1993. InventingReality:
issues,do thehigh ory of Press-StateRelations in the
The Politics of News Media. 2nd ed.
economicpositionsofmediaown- United States." Journalof Communica-
tion40(2):103-25. New York: St. Martin's.
ers,officials, and leadingjournalists Chomsky,Daniel. 1996. "Constructingthe Patterson,Thomas E. 1993. Out of Order.
sometimes lead themedianearly Cold War." UnpublishedPh.D. disserta- New York: Knopf.
unanimously to takepositionsthat tion, NorthwesternUniversity. Protess, David L., Fay Lomax Cook, Jack
C. Doppelt, James S. Ettema, Margaret
are outoftouchwiththecitizenry Devereux, Erik August. 1993. "The Partisan T. Gordon, Donna R. Leff,and Peter
as a whole?(The Zoe Bairdinci- Press Revisited: Newspapers and Politics
in the United States, 1964-1968." Unpub- Miller. 1991. The Journalismof Outrage:
dentsuggeststhattheanswermay lished Ph.D. dissertation,The University InvestigativeReportingand Agenda
be yes; populisticuprisings in re- of Texas, Austin. Buildingin America. New York: Guil-
fordPress.
sponsemaybe rare[Page 1996, Gans, HerbertJ. 1980. Deciding What's
Reese, Stephen D., AugustGrant,and Lu-
News: A Study of CBS Evening News,
chapter4; Page and Tannenbaum NBC NightlyNews, Newsweek, and cig H. Danielian. 1994. "The Structure
1996.]) Is debate on otherkinds of Time. New York: Random House. of News Sources on Television: A Net-
issueslikelyto be moreopenand Hallin, Daniel C. 1986. The "Uncensored work Analysis of 'CBS News,' 'Night-
enlightening? War": The Media and Vietnam.New line,' 'MacNeill-Lehrer,' and 'This Week
withDavid Brinkley.'" Journalof Com-
Plentyofobservershave opin- York: Oxford UniversityPress.
munication44(2):84-107.
ionsaboutsuchmatters, and they Herman, Edward S., and Noam Chomsky.
1988. ManufacturingConsent: The Politi- Rowse, ArthurEdward. 1957. Slanted
sometimes defendthemwithgreat cal Economy of the Mass Media. New News: A Case Studyof the Nixon and
energy,butconcreteevidencere- York: Pantheon. StevensonFund Stories.Boston: Beacon.
mainsfragmentary. Sigal, Leon V. 1973. Reportersand Offi-
Onlya large- Iyengar,Shanto. 1991. Is AnyoneResponsi-
cials: The Organizationand Politics of
researcheffort ble? How TelevisionFrames Political
scale,continuing Newsmaking. Lexington,MA.: D.C.
Issues. Chicago: Universityof Chicago
can answersomeofthemostim- Press. Heath.
portant questionsaboutthequality Iyengar,Shanto, and Donald R. Kinder. Soley, Lawrence. 1992. The News Shapers:
ofdemocratic deliberation. 1987. News That Matters: Televisionand The Sources Who Explain the News.
American Opinion. Chicago: University New York: Praeger.
of Chicago Press.
Jamieson,Kathleen Hall. 1992. DirtyPoli-
tics: Deception, Distraction,and Democ-
Notes racy. New York: OxfordUniversity
Press. About the Author
1. Different,and perhaps very important, McCombs, Maxwell E., and Donald L.
indirectmeans by which media politicalac- Shaw. 1972. "The Agenda-SettingFunc- BenjaminI. Page is Gordon Scott Fulcher
tors mightseek policy goals include using tion of Mass Media." Public Opinion Professorof Decision Making at Northwest-
theirpages and airwaves to build up political Quarterly36:176-87. ern University,and is the authorof numer-
candidates or officialswho agree withtheir Page, BenjaminI. 1995. "Speedy Delibera- ous books and articleson Americanpolitics.

24 PS: Political Science & Politics

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.89 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 09:19:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions