1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. The Agenda Setting Journal
  4. Volume 4, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 4, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2452-0063
  • E-ISSN: 2452-0071
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Why do politicians react to some stories in the news and ignore others? We attempt to answer this question by integrating the micro-level politician perspective with a macro-level country approach. Using a unique experimental approach, we test when politicians in the Netherlands and Switzerland ( = 80) take political action based on a (fictional) news report. We find that all politicians react more to negative coverage, but not if the information is merely presented as investigative reporting. Results also reveal a systematic variation that we ascribe to two key differences in the electoral systems. In The Netherlands, with its large single voting district, politicians react to news reports covering issues they are specialized in. In Switzerland, where between-party competition is more important, politicians are more likely to capitalize on the party’s profile. Overall, this study shows when and how politicians react to news coverage also depends on the institutional context.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/asj.19002.hel
2020-04-10
2023-09-28

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/asj.19002.hel
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amsalem, E., & Walgrave, S.
    (2017) Media motivation, political systems, and the nature of elite rhetoric. Political Communication, 34(3), 385–403. 10.1080/10584609.2016.1266065
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1266065 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andeweg, R. B., & Irwin, G. A.
    (2014) Governance and politics of the Netherlands. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑43942‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-43942-0 [Google Scholar]
  3. Andeweg, R. B., & Thomassen, J.
    (2011) Pathways to party unity: Sanctions, loyalty, homogeneity and division of labour in the Dutch parliament. Party Politics, 17(5), 655–672. 10.1177/1354068810377188
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068810377188 [Google Scholar]
  4. Arceneaux, K., Johnson, M., Lindstädt, R., & Vander Wielen, R. J.
    (2016) The influence of news media on political elites: Investigating strategic responsiveness in Congress. American Journal of Political Science, 60(1), 5–29. 10.1111/ajps.12171
     https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12171 [Google Scholar]
  5. Auspurg, K., & Hinz, T.
    (2015) Factorial survey experiments (Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. 10.4135/9781483398075
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483398075 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bakker, P., & Scholten, O.
    (2014) Communicatiekaart van Nederland: overzicht van media en communicatie [Communication map of the Netherlands: Overview of the media and communication]. Amsterdam: Adfo Groep.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bartels, L. M.
    (1993) Messages received: The political impact of media exposure. American Political Science Review, 87(2), 267–285. 10.2307/2939040
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2939040 [Google Scholar]
  8. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D.
    (2009) Agendas and instability in American politics (2nd edition). University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S.
    (2008) A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2008.00410.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x [Google Scholar]
  10. Church, C. H., & Vatter, A.
    (2009) Opposition in consensual Switzerland: A short but significant experiment. Government and Opposition, 44(04), 412–437. 10.1111/j.1477‑7053.2009.01295.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-7053.2009.01295.x [Google Scholar]
  11. Daalder, H.
    (1971) On building consociational nations: the cases of the Netherlands and Switzerland. International Social Science Journal, 23(9), 14–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dalmus, C., Hänggli, R., & Bernhard, L.
    (2017) The charm of salient issues? Parties’ strategic behavior in press releases. InP. Van Aelst & S. Walgrave (Eds.), How political actors use the media. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 187–205. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑60249‑3_10
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60249-3_10 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dearing, J. W., & Rogers, E.
    (1996) Agenda-Setting. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Dejaegher, B., & Vander Heyden, Y.
    (2011) Experimental designs and their recent advances in set-up, data interpretation, and analytical applications. Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis, 56(2), 141–158. 10.1016/j.jpba.2011.04.023
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2011.04.023 [Google Scholar]
  15. Gans, H. J.
    (1979) Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS evening news, NBC nightly news, Newsweek, and Time. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Graber, D. A.
    (2006) Mass Media & American Politics (7th dr.). Washington DC: CQ Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Green-Pedersen, C.
    (2010) Bringing parties into parliament. The development of parliamentary activities in Western Europe. Party Politics, 16(3), 347–369. 10.1177/1354068809341057
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068809341057 [Google Scholar]
  18. Green-Pedersen, C., & Stubager, R.
    (2010) The political conditionality of mass media influence: when do parties follow mass media attention?British Journal of Political Science, 40(03), 663–677. 10.1017/S0007123410000037
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123410000037 [Google Scholar]
  19. Gunst, R. F., & Mason, R. L.
    (2009) Fractional factorial design. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics, 1(2), 234–244. 10.1002/wics.27
     https://doi.org/10.1002/wics.27 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P.
    (2004) Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511790867
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790867 [Google Scholar]
  21. Helfer, L.
    (2016) Media effects on politicians: An individual-level political agenda-setting experiment. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(2), 233–252. 10.1177/1940161215627461
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161215627461 [Google Scholar]
  22. Herbst, S.
    (1998) Reading public opinion: How political actors view the democratic process. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Hix, S.
    (2002) Parliamentary Behavior with Two Principals: Preferences, Parties, and Voting in the European Parliament. American Journal of Political Science, 46(3), 688–698. 10.2307/3088408
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3088408 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hug, S., & Martin, D.
    (2012) How electoral systems affect MPs’ positions. Electoral Studies, 31(1), 192–200. 10.1016/j.electstud.2011.10.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2011.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kepplinger, H. M.
    (2007) Reciprocal effects: Toward a theory of mass media effects on decision makers. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 12(2), 3–23. 10.1177/1081180X07299798
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1081180X07299798 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kleinnijenhuis, J., & Walter, A. S.
    (2014) News, discussion, and associative issue ownership: Instability at the micro level versus stability at the macro level. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19(2), 226–245. 10.1177/1940161213520043
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161213520043 [Google Scholar]
  27. Knudsen, E., & Johannesson, M. P.
    (2018) Beyond the Limits of Survey Experiments: How Conjoint Designs Advance Causal Inference in Political Communication Research. Political Communication, 36(2), 259–271. 10.1080/10584609.2018.1493009
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1493009 [Google Scholar]
  28. Kriesi, H., & Trechsel, A. H.
    (2008) The politics of Switzerland: Continuity and change in a consensus democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511790676
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790676 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lachat, R.
    (2014) Issue ownership and the vote: The effects of associative and competence ownership on issue voting. Swiss Political Science Review, 20(4), 727–740. 10.1111/spsr.12121
     https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12121 [Google Scholar]
  30. Landerer, N.
    (2014) Opposing the government but governing the audience? Exploring the differential mediatization of parliamentary actors in Switzerland. Journalism Studies, 15(3), 304–320. 10.1080/1461670X.2014.889466
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2014.889466 [Google Scholar]
  31. Livingstone, S.
    (2003) On the challenges of cross-national comparative media research. European Journal of Communication, 18(4), 477–500. 10.1177/0267323103184003
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323103184003 [Google Scholar]
  32. Louwerse, T., & Otjes, S.
    (2016) Personalised parliamentary behaviour without electoral incentives: the case of the Netherlands. West European Politics, 39(4), 778–799. 10.1080/01402382.2015.1111041
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2015.1111041 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lüthi, R.
    (1996) Die Wirkung von institutionellen Reformen dargestellt am Beispiel der Reform des Kommissionensystems der Schweizerischen Bundesversammlung von 1991 [The impact of institutional reforms illustrated by the reform of the committee system of the Swiss federal assembly 1991]. Swiss Political Science Review, 2(2), 1–32. 10.1002/j.1662‑6370.1996.tb00176.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.1996.tb00176.x [Google Scholar]
  34. McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L.
    (1972) The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public opinion quarterly, 36(2), 176–187. 10.1086/267990
     https://doi.org/10.1086/267990 [Google Scholar]
  35. Midtbø, T., Walgrave, S., Van Aelst, P., & Christensen, D. A.
    (2014) Do the media set the agenda of Parliament or is it the opposite? Agenda interactions between MPs and mass media. InK. Deschouwer & S. Depauw (Red.), Representing the People: A Survey among Members of Statewide and Substate Parliaments (pp.188–200). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684533.003.0009
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684533.003.0009 [Google Scholar]
  36. Newman, N.; Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A. L., & Kleis Nielsen, R.
    (2018) Digital News Report 2018. Oxford: Reuters Institute.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Patzelt, W. J.
    (1999) What can an individual MP do in German parliamentary politics?The Journal of Legislative Studies, 5(3–4), 23–52. 10.1080/13572339908420598
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13572339908420598 [Google Scholar]
  38. Petrocik, J. R.
    (1996) Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 825–850. 10.2307/2111797
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2111797 [Google Scholar]
  39. Petrocik, J. R., Benoit, W. L., & Hansen, G. J.
    (2003) Issue ownership and presidential campaigning, 1952–2000. Political Science Quarterly, 118(4), 599–626. 10.1002/j.1538‑165X.2003.tb00407.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2003.tb00407.x [Google Scholar]
  40. Pritchard, D. L.
    (1992) The news media and public policy agendas. InD. Kennamer (Red.), Public opinion, the press and public policy (pp.103–112). Westport, CT: Praeger.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Protess, D. L., Cook, F. L., Curtin, T. R., Gordon, M. T., Leff, D. R., McCombs, M. E., & Miller, P.
    (1987) The impact of investigative reporting on public opinion and policymaking targeting toxic waste. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51(2), 166–185. 10.1086/269027
     https://doi.org/10.1086/269027 [Google Scholar]
  42. Sauer, C., Auspurg, K., Hinz, T., & Liebig, S.
    (2011) The Application of Factorial Surveys in General Population Samples: The Effects of Respondent Age and Education on Response Times and Response Consistency. Survey Research Methods, 5(3).
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Sellers, P.
    (2010) Cycles of Spin: Strategic Communication in the U.S. Congress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Sevenans, J.
    (2017) The Media’s Informational Function in Political Agenda-Setting Processes. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 22(2), 223–243. 10.1177/1940161217695142
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161217695142 [Google Scholar]
  45. Sevenans, J., Walgrave, S., & Epping, G. J.
    (2016) How political elites process information from the news. The cognitive mechanisms behind behavioral political agenda-setting effects. Political Communication, 33(4), 605–627. 10.1080/10584609.2016.1153543
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1153543 [Google Scholar]
  46. Sevenans, J., Walgrave, S., & Vos, D.
    (2015) Political elites’ media responsiveness and their individual political goals: A study of national politicians in Belgium. Research & Politics, 2(3), 1–7. 10.1177/2053168015593307
     https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015593307 [Google Scholar]
  47. Shoemaker, P. J., & Vos, T. P.
    (2009) Media Gatekeeping. InD. W. Stacks & M. B. Salwen (Red.), An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research (2nd dr., pp.75–89). New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Soroka, S., & McAdams, S.
    (2015) News, Politics, and Negativity. Political Communication, 32(1), 1–22. 10.1080/10584609.2014.881942
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2014.881942 [Google Scholar]
  49. Stokes, D. E.
    (1963) Spatial models of party competition. The American Political Science Review, 57(2), 368–377. 10.2307/1952828
     https://doi.org/10.2307/1952828 [Google Scholar]
  50. Strøm, K.
    (1998) Parliamentary committees in European democracies. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 4(1), 21–59. 10.1080/13572339808420538
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13572339808420538 [Google Scholar]
  51. Strömbäck, J.
    (2008) Four phases of mediatization: An analysis of the mediatization of politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 228–246. 10.1177/1940161208319097
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161208319097 [Google Scholar]
  52. Thesen, G.
    (2012) When good news is scarce and bad news is good: Government responsibilities and opposition possibilities in political agenda-setting. European Journal of Political Research, 52(3), 364–389. 10.1111/j.1475‑6765.2012.02075.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.2012.02075.x [Google Scholar]
  53. Traber, D., Hug, S., & Sciarini, P.
    (2014) Party Unity in the Swiss Parliament: The Electoral Connection. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 20(2), 193–215. 10.1080/13572334.2013.837259
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2013.837259 [Google Scholar]
  54. Van Aelst, P., Brants, K., Praag, P. V., Vreese, D., Nuytemans, M., & Van Dalen, A.
    (2008) The fourth estate as superpower? An empirical study on perceptions of media power in Belgium and the Netherlands. Journalism Studies, 9(4), 494–511. 10.1080/14616700802114134
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700802114134 [Google Scholar]
  55. Van Aelst, P., & Walgrave, S.
    (2016) Political agenda setting by the mass media: ten years of research, 2005–2015. InN. Zahariadis (Red.), Handbook of Public Policy Agenda Setting (pp.157–179). Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. 10.4337/9781784715922.00018
     https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784715922.00018 [Google Scholar]
  56. Van Holsteyn, J. J. M., & Andeweg, R. B.
    (2012) Tweede Orde Personalisering: Voorkeurstemmen in Nederland. Res Publica, 54(2), 163–191. 10.5553/RP/048647002012054002002
     https://doi.org/10.5553/RP/048647002012054002002 [Google Scholar]
  57. Van Vonno, C.
    (2016) Achieving Party Unity. A Sequential Approach to Why MPs Act in Concert. (Doctoral Thesis). Universiteit Leiden, Leiden.
  58. Vatter, A.
    (2008) Vom Extremtyp zum Normalfall? Die schweizerische Konsensusdemokratie im Wandel: Eine Re-Analyse von Lijpharts Studie für die Schweiz von 1997 bis 2007 [From an extreme type to a normal case? The Swiss consensus democracy in change: a re-analysis of Lijphart’s study of Switzerland from 1997 to 2007]. Swiss Political Science Review, 14(1), 1–47. 10.1002/j.1662‑6370.2008.tb00095.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1662-6370.2008.tb00095.x [Google Scholar]
  59. Vesa, J., Blomberg, H., & Kroll, C.
    (2015) Minimal and Massive! Politicians’ Views on the Media’s Political Agenda-Setting Power Revisited. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20(3), 279–296. 10.1177/1940161215575391
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161215575391 [Google Scholar]
  60. Vliegenthart, R., & Walgrave, S.
    (2010) When the media matter for politics: Partisan moderators of the mass media’s agenda-setting influence on parliament in Belgium. Party Politics, 17(3). 10.1177/1354068810366016
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068810366016 [Google Scholar]
  61. Walgrave, S., & Van Aelst, P.
    (2006) The contingency of the mass media’s political agenda setting power: Toward a preliminary theory. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 88–109. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2006.00005.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00005.x [Google Scholar]
  62. Vliegenthart, R., Walgrave, S., Baumgartner, F. R., Bevan, S., Breunig, C., Brouard, S., … Tresch, A.
    (2016) Do the media set the parliamentary agenda? A comparative study in seven countries. European Journal of Political Research, 55(2), 283–301. 10.1111/1475‑6765.12134
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12134 [Google Scholar]
  63. Walgrave, S., Lefevere, J., & Nuytemans, M.
    (2009) Issue ownership stability and change: How political parties claim and maintain issues through media appearances. Political Communication, 26(2), 153–172. 10.1080/10584600902850718
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600902850718 [Google Scholar]
  64. Walgrave, S., Soroka, S., & Nuytemans, M.
    (2008) The mass media’s political agenda-setting power. Comparative Political Studies, 41(6), 814–836. 10.1177/0010414006299098
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414006299098 [Google Scholar]
  65. Wolfe, M., Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R.
    (2013) A failure to communicate: Agenda setting in media and policy studies. Political Communication, 30(2), 175–192. 10.1080/10584609.2012.737419
     https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2012.737419 [Google Scholar]
  66. Zoizner, A., Sheafer, T., & Walgrave, S.
    (2017) How Politicians’ Attitudes and Goals Moderate Political Agenda Setting by the Media. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 22(4), 431–449. 10.1177/1940161217723149
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161217723149 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/asj.19002.hel
Loading
Why politicians react to media coverage
The Agenda Setting Journal 4, 88 (2020); https://doi.org/10.1075/asj.19002.hel
/content/journals/10.1075/asj.19002.hel
/content/journals/10.1075/asj.19002.hel
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): comparative; experimental; media effects; political agenda-setting; political elites

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error