Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T13:50:06.620Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Who Gets into the Papers? Party Campaign Messages and the Media

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 September 2017

Thomas M. Meyer ,
Martin Haselmayer  and
Markus Wagner
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Parties and politicians want their messages to generate media coverage and thereby reach voters. This article examines how attributes related to content and sender affect whether party messages are likely to get media attention. Based on content analyses of 1,613 party press releases and 6,512 media reports in a parliamentary, multiparty context, we suggest that party messages are more likely to make it into the news if they address concerns that are already important to the media or other parties. Discussing these issues may particularly help opposition parties and lower-profile politicians get media attention. These results confirm the importance of agenda setting and gatekeeping, shed light on the potential success of party strategies, and have implications for political fairness and representation.

Keywords

campaign communicationelection campaignsparty–media agenda settingissue competitionpolitical partiespress releasesmedia gatekeeping
Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , January 2020 , pp. 281 - 302
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Government, University of Vienna (emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]). We would like to thank the FWF (Austrian Science Fund) for their support under grant numbers S10902-G11, S10903-G11 and S10907-G11. We thank the anonymous reviewers, Heike Klüver, our panellists at the 2015 MPSA Annual Conference, and the 2015 EPSA Annual Conference and seminar participants at the Universities of Essex and Zurich for valuable comments and suggestions. We also thank Jana Brandl and Ferdinand Ferroli for their research assistance. Replication data sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at: https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7910/DVN/RB48KU and online appendix is available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123417000400.

References

Adams, James. 2012. Causes and Electoral Consequences of Party Policy Shifts in Multiparty Elections: Theoretical Results and Empirical Evidence. Annual Review of Political Science 15:401–419.Google Scholar
Aichholzer, Julian, Kritzinger, Sylvia, Jenny, Marcelo, Müller, Wolfgang C., Schönbach, Klaus, and Vonbun, Ramona. 2014. Die Ausgangslage. In Die Nationalratswahl 2013. Wie Parteien, Medien und Wählerschaft zusammenwirken, edited by Sylvia Kritzinger, Wolfgang C. Müller and Klaus Schönbach, 9–38. Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Altheide, David, and Snow, Robert P.. 1979. Media Logic. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Andersen, Robert, Tilley, James, and Heath, Anthony F.. 2005. Political Knowledge and Enlightened Preferences: Party Choice through the Electoral Cycle. British Journal of Political Science 35 (2):285–302.Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Iyengar, Shanto. 1994. Riding the Wave and Claiming Ownership over Issues – the Joint Effects of Advertising and News Coverage in Campaigns. Public Opinion Quarterly 58 (3):335–357.Google Scholar
Bale, Tim. 2003. Cinderella and Her Ugly Sisters: The Mainstream and Extreme Right in Europe’s Bipolarising Party Systems. West European Politics 26 (3):67–90.Google Scholar
Bale, Tim, Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, Krouwel, André, Luther, Kurt Richard, and Sitter, Nick. 2010. If You Can’t Beat Them, Join Them? Explaining Social Democratic Responses to the Challenge from the Populist Radical Right in Western Europe. Political Studies 58 (3):410–426.Google Scholar
Balmas, Meital, Rahat, Gideon, Sheafer, Tamir, and Shenhav, Shaul R.. 2014. Two Routes to Personalized Politics: Centralized and Decentralized Personalization. Party Politics 10 (1):37–51.Google Scholar
Bartle, John, and Laycock, Samantha. 2012. Telling More Than They Can Know? Does the Most Important Issue Really Tell What Is Most Important to Voters? Electoral Studies 31 (4):679–688.Google Scholar
Bennett, Walter L. 1990. Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations in the United-States. Journal of Communication 40 (2):103–125.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Louis. 2014. WCopyFind. Software. Release 4.1.4. Available from http://plagiarism.phys.virginia.edu/Wsoftware.html, accessed 1 May 2015.Google Scholar
Bolleyer, Nicole, and Bytzek, Evelyn. 2013. Origins of Party Formation and New Party Success in Advanced Democracies. European Journal of Political Research 52 (6):773–796.Google Scholar
Brandenburg, Heinz. 2002. Who Follows Whom?: The Impact of Parties on Media Agenda Formation in the 1997 British General Election Campaign. International Journal of Press/Politics 7 (3):34–54.Google Scholar
Brandenburg, Heinz. 2006. Party Strategy and Media Bias: A Quantitative Analysis of the 2005 UK Election Campaign. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties 16 (2):157–178.Google Scholar
Brants, Kees, and de Haan, Yael. 2010. Taking the Public Seriously: Three Models of Responsiveness in Media and Journalism. Media, Culture & Society 32 (3):411–428.Google Scholar
Budge, Ian, and Farlie, Dennis J.. 1983. Explaining and Predicting Elections. Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-three Democracies. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Cook, Timothy E. 1988. Press Secretaries and Media Strategies in the House of Representatives: Deciding Whom to Pursue. American Journal of Political Science 32 (4):1047–1069.Google Scholar
Cook, Timothy E. 2005. Governing with the News: News Media as a Political Institution. 2nd Edition, Chicaco: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J. 2013. Citizen Politics. Public Opinion and Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies. Los Angeles: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Dalton, Russell J., McAllister, Ian, and Farrell, David M.. 2011. Political Parties and Democratic Linkage: How Parties Organize Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
De Vries, Catherine E., and Hobolt, Sara B.. 2012. When Dimensions Collide: The Electoral Success of Issue Entrepreneurs. European Union Politics 13 (2):246–268.Google Scholar
Dolezal, Martin, Ennser-Jedenastik, Laurenz, Müller, Wolfgang C., and Winkler, Anna Katharina. 2014. How Parties Compete for Votes. A Test of Saliency Theory. European Journal of Political Research 53 (1):57–76.Google Scholar
Elmelund-Præstekær, Christian. 2010. Beyond American Negativity: Toward a General Understanding of the Determinants of Negative Campaigning. European Political Science Review 2 (1):137–156.Google Scholar
Entman, Robert M. 2007. Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power. Journal of Communication 57 (1):163–173.Google Scholar
Flowers, Julianne F., Haynes, Audrey, and Crespin, Michael H.. 2003. The Media, the Campaign and the Message. American Journal of Political Science 47 (2):259–273.Google Scholar
Galtung, Johan, and Ruge, Mari H.. 1965. The Structure of Foreign News: The Presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus Crises in Four Foreign Newspapers. Journal of Peace Research 2 (1):64–91.Google Scholar
Gans, Herbert J. 1979. Deciding Whats News – Story Suitability. Society 16 (3):65–77.Google Scholar
Gattermann, Katjana, and Vasilopoulou, Sofia. 2015. Absent Yet Popular? Explaining News Visibility of Members of the European Parliament. European Journal of Political Research 54 (1):121–140.Google Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and King, Gary. 1993. Why Are American Presidential-Election Campaign Polls So Variable When Votes Are So Predictable. British Journal of Political Science 23 (4):409–451.Google Scholar
Green, Jane, and Hobolt, Sara B.. 2008. Owning the Issue Agenda: Party Strategies and Vote Choices in British Elections. Electoral Studies 27 (3):460–476.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer. 2007. The Growing Importance of Issue Competition: The Changing Nature of Party Competition in Western Europe. Political Studies 55 (3):607–628.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Mortensen, Peter B.. 2010. Who Sets the Agenda and Who Responds to it in the Danish Parliament? A New Model of Issue Competition and Agenda-setting. European Journal of Political Research 49 (2):257–281.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, and Mortensen, Peter B.. 2015. Avoidance and Engagement: Issue Competition in Multiparty Systems. Political Studies 63 (4):747–764.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, Christoffer, Mortensen, Peter B., and Thesen, Gunnar. 2017. The Incumbency Bonus Revisited: Causes and Consequences of Media Dominance. British Journal of Political Science 47 (1):131–148.Google Scholar
Grimmer, Justin. 2010. A Bayesian Hierarchical Topic Model for Political Texts: Measuring Expressed Agendas in Senate Press Releases. Political Analysis 18 (1):1–35.Google Scholar
Grimmer, Justin. 2013. Representational Style in Congress: What Legislators Say and Why It Matters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hänggli, Regula. 2012. Key Factors in Frame Building: How Strategic Political Actors Shape News Media Coverage. American Behavioral Scientist 56 (3):300–317.Google Scholar
Haselmayer, Martin, Wagner, Markus, and Meyer, Thomas M. (forthcoming). Partisan Bias in Message Selection: Media Gatekeeping of Party Press Releases. Political Communication. doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1265619.Google Scholar
Helfer, Luzia, and Van Aelst, Peter. 2016. What Makes Party Messages Fit for Reporting? An Experimental Study of Journalistic News Selection. Political Communication. 33 (1):59–77.Google Scholar
Hopmann, David N., Elmelund-Præstekær, Christian, Albæk, Erik, Vliegenthart, Rens, and de Vreese, Claes H.. 2012. Party Media Agenda-setting: How Parties Influence Election News Coverage. Party Politics 18 (2):173–191.Google Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto, and Kinder, Donald R.. 1987. News that Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kaplan, Noah, Park, David K., and Ridout, Travis N.. 2006. Dialogue in American Political Campaigns? An Examination of Issue Convergence in Candidate Television Advertising. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3):724–736.Google Scholar
Kitschelt, H. 1994. The Transformation of European Social Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kleinnijenhuis, Jan, and Pennings, Paul. 2001. Measurement of Party Positions on the Basis of Party Programmes, Media Coverage and Voter Perceptions. In Estimating the Policy Position of Political Actors, edited by Michael Laver, 162–182. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Klüver, Heike, and Sagarzazu, Iñaki. 2016. Setting the Agenda or Responding to Voters? Political Parties, Voters and Issue Attention. West European Politics 39 (2):380–398.Google Scholar
Klüver, Heike, and Spoon, Jae-Jae. 2016. Who Responds? Voters, Parties and Issue Attention. British Journal of Political Science 64 (3):633–654.Google Scholar
Kriesi, Hanspeter. 2012. Personalization of National Election Campaigns. Party Politics 18 (6):825–844.Google Scholar
Kritzinger, Sylvia, Johann, David, Aichholzer, Julian, Glinitzer, Konstantin, Glantschnigg, Christian, Thomas, Kathrin, Wagner, Markus, and Zeglovits, Eva. 2014. AUTNES Rolling-Cross-Section Panel Study 2013. GESIS Data Archive, Cologne. ZA5857 Data file Version 1.0.0, doi: 10.4232/1.11950.Google Scholar
Mazzoleni, Gianpietro. 2008. Mediatization of Politics. In The International Encyclopedia of Communication, edited by Wolfgang Donsbach, 3047–3051. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
McCombs, Maxwell E. 2004. Setting the Agenda. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
McCombs, Maxwell E., and Shaw, Donald L.. 1972. The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly 36 (2):176–187.Google Scholar
Meguid, Bonnie M. 2008. Party Competition between Unequals: Strategies and Electoral Fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, Thomas M., and Wagner, Markus. 2016. Issue Engagement in Election Campaigns: The Impact of Electoral Incentives and Organizational Constraints. Political Science Research and Methods 4 (3):555–571.Google Scholar
Meyer, Thomas, Martin, Haselmayer, and Markus, Wagner. 2017. “Replication Data for: Who gets into the papers? Party campaign messages and the media”, doi: https://dx.doi.org/doi:10.7910/DVN/RB48KU, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:t4IPxcLYUIk3pdJuUn2gcw==UNF:6:t4IPxcLYUIk3pdJuUn2gcw==.Google Scholar
Norris, Pippa, Curtice, John, Sanders, David, Scammell, Margaret, and Semetko, Holli A.. 1999. On Message: Communicating the Campaign. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Oliver, Pamela E., and Myers, Daniel J.. 1999. How Events Enter the Public Sphere: Conflict, Location, and Sponsorhip in Local Newspaper Coverage of Public Events. American Journal of Sociology 105 (1):38–87.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1996. Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study. American Journal of Political Science 40 (3):825–850.Google Scholar
Plasser, Fritz, and Plasser, Gunda. 2002. Global Political Campaigning: A Worldwide Analysis. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Sagarzazu, Iñaki, and Klüver, Heike. 2017. Coalition Ggovernments and Party Competition: Political Communication Strategies of Coalition Parties. Political Science Research and Methods 5 (2):333–349.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni. 1976. Parties and Party Systems. A Framework for Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schönbach, Klaus, De Ridder, Jan, and Lauf, Edmund. 2001. Politicians on TV News: Getting Attention in Dutch and German Election Campaigns. European Journal of Political Research 39 (4):519–531.Google Scholar
Semetko, Holli A., and Valkenburg, Patti M.. 2000. Framing European politics: a content analysis of press and television news. Journal of Communication 50 (2):93–109.Google Scholar
Senninger, Roman, and Wagner, Markus. 2015. Political parties and the EU in national election campaigns: who talks about Europe, and how? Journal of Common Market Studies 53 (6):1336–1351.Google Scholar
Sevenans, Julie, Walgrave, Stefaan, and Epping, Gwendolyn Joanna. 2016. How Political Elites Process Information From the News: The Cognitive Mechanisms Behind Behavioral Political Agenda-Setting Effects. Political Communication 33 (4):605–627.Google Scholar
Sigelman, Lee, and Buell, Emmett H.. 2004. Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. Presidential Campaigns, 1960–2000. American Journal of Political Science 48 (4):650–661.Google Scholar
Simon, Adam F. 2002. The Winning Message: Candidate Behavior, Campaign Discourse, and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. 2002a. Issue attributes and agenda-setting by media, the public, and policymakers in Canada. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 14 (3):264–285.Google Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. 2002b. Agenda-Setting Dynamics in Canada. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N., Stecula, Dominik A., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2015. It’s (Change in) the (Future) Economy, Stupid: Economic Indicators, the Media, and Public Opinion. American Journal of Political Science 59 (2):457–474.Google Scholar
Spoon, Jae-Jae, and Klüver, Heike. 2014. Do Parties Respond? How Electoral Context Influences Party Responsiveness. Electoral Studies 35:48–60.Google Scholar
Spoon, Jae-Jae, Hobolt, Sara B., and De Vries, Catherine E.. 2014. Going Green: Explaining Issue Competition on the Environment. European Journal of Political Research 53 (2):363–380.Google Scholar
Steenbergen, Marco R., and Scott, David J.. 2004. Contesting Europe? The Salience of European Integration as a Party Issue. In European Integration and Political Conflict, edited by Gary Marks and Marco R. Steenbergen, 165–192. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Strömbäck, Jasper. 2008. Four Phases of Mediatization: An Analysis of the Mediatization of Politics. International Journal of Press/Politics 13 (3):228–246.Google Scholar
Strömbäck, Jesper, and Van Aelst, Peter. 2013. Why Political Parties Adapt to the Media: Exploring the Fourth Dimension of Mediatization. International Communication Gazette 75 (4):341–358.Google Scholar
Tresch, Anke. 2009. Politicians in the Media: Determinants of Legislators’ Presence and Prominence in Swiss Newspapers. International Journal of Press/Politics 14 (1):67–90.Google Scholar
Van Aelst, Peter, Maddens, Bart, Noppe, Jo, and Fiers, Stefaan. 2008. Politicians in the News: Media or Party Logic? Media Attention and Electoral Success in the Belgian Election Campaign of 2003. European Journal of Communication 23 (2):193–210.Google Scholar
Van Aelst, Peter, and De Swert, Knut. 2009. Politics in the News: Do Campaigns Matter? A Comparison of Political News During Election Periods and Routine Periods in Flanders (Belgium). Communications 34 (2):149–168.Google Scholar
Van Aelst, Peter, and Vliegenthart, Rens. 2014. Studying the Tango. Journalism Studies 15 (4):392–410.Google Scholar
Van Cuilenburg, Jan. 1999. On Competition, Access and Diversity in Media, Old and New: Some Remarks for Communications Policy in the Information Age. New Media & Society 1 (2):183–207.Google Scholar
Van der Brug, Wouter, and Berkhout, Joost. 2015. The Effect of Associative Issue Ownership on Parties’ Presence in the News Media. West European Politics 38 (4):869–887.Google Scholar
Van der Pas, Daphne J., and Vliegenthart, Rens. 2016. Do Media Respond to Party Conflict? Debates on European Integration in British, Dutch and German Party Manifestos and Newspapers, 1987–2006. Political Studies 64 (2):260–278.Google Scholar
Van der Wardt, Marc, De Vries, Catherine E., and Hobolt, Sara B.. 2014. Exploiting the Cracks: Wedge Issues in Multiparty Competition. Journal of Politics 76 (4):986–999.Google Scholar
Van Santen, Rosa, Helfer, Luzia, and van Aelst, Peter. 2015. When Politics Becomes News: An Analysis of Parliamentary Questions and Press Coverage in Three West European Countries. Acta Politica 50 (1):45–63.Google Scholar
Vavreck, Lynn. 2009. The Message Matters. The Economy and Presidential Campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vliegenthart, Rens, Boomgarden, Hajo G., and Boumans, Jelle W.. 2011. Changes in Political News Coverage: Personalization, Conflict and Negativity in British and Dutch Newspapers. In Political Communication in Postmodern Democracy Challenging the Primacy of Politics, edited by Kees Brants and Katrin Vollmer, 92–110. Houndmills, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Vliegenthart, Rens, and Walgrave, Stefaan. 2008. The Contingency of Intermedia Agenda Setting: A Longitudinal Study in Belgium. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 85 (4):860–877.Google Scholar
Wagner, Markus, and Meyer, Thomas M.. 2014. Which Issues do Parties Emphasise? Salience Strategies and Party Organisation in Multiparty Systems. West European Politics 37 (5):1019–1045.Google Scholar
Walgrave, Stefaan, Tresch, Anke, and Lefevere, Jonas. 2015. The Conceptualisation and Measurement of Issue Ownership. West European Politics 38 (4):778–796.Google Scholar
Walgrave, Stefaan, and Van Aelst, Peter. 2006. The Contingency of the Mass Media’s Political Agenda Setting Power: Toward a Preliminary Theory. Journal of Communication 56 (1):88–109.Google Scholar
Walgrave, Stefaan, Soroka, Stuart N., and Nuytemans, Michiel. 2008. The Mass Media’s Political Agenda-setting Power – A Longitudinal Analysis of Media, Parliament, and Government in Belgium (1993 to 2000). Comparative Political Studies 41 (6):814–836.Google Scholar
Walter, Annemarie S. 2014. Negative Campaigning in Western Europe: Similar or Different? Political Studies 62 (S1):42–60.Google Scholar
Weaver, David. 1994. Media Agenda Setting and Elections: Voter Involvement or Alienation? Political Communication 11 (4):347–356.Google Scholar
Yiannakis, Diana Evans. 1982. House Members’ Communication Styles: Newsletters and Press Releases. The Journal of Politics 44 (4):1049–1071.Google Scholar
Zaller, John R., and Chiu, Dennis. 1996. Government’s Little Helper: US Press Coverage of Foreign Policy Crises, 1945–1991. Political Communication 13 (4):385–405.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Meyer et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/RB48KU
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Meyer et al. supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Meyer et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 140.6 KB