Media & Democracy Flashcards
1
Q
Media Bias
A
- When government controls media and uses it to pursue its goals and weaken its opponents, elections are not fair
- Debate:
- Many also believe a biased media can limit democracy in places that are relatively democratic. Can be used to shape voting behaviour in ways that favour certain candidates
- Others Disagree: Suggest that people are smarter than we assume and can’t be brainwashed by the media
2
Q
Media Bias Effects
A
(1) What to Think About: By covering certain topics, it causes people to view these topics as important
(2) Priming: Media can influence us by emphasizing which issues are most important and suggesting whether something is good or bad
(3) Framing: How media frames issues/candidates in ways that affect how the public evaluates them
3
Q
Peter Jennings Effect
A
- Study conducted by Mullen et al. of 1984 presidential campaign. Taped the nightly news broadcasters of the three big US TV networks when they discussed either Mondale or Reagan
- Showed the tapes to individuals and asked them to score the anchor’s facial expressions (no sound)
- Found that two commentators were neutral but Jennings was biased toward Reagan
- Polled individuals: asked which nightly news they watched and which candidate they preferred
Found that Jennings’ viewers liked Reagan much more - Suggests very subtle priming like facial expressions can bias public opinion
4
Q
Systematic Media Bias
A
- Studies therefore find that people can be biased, but the media will only affect voting outcomes if there is a systematic bias
- Little effect if the biases are random
- Most famous social scientific analysis argues that there is a systemic right-wing bias in the US media
5
Q
Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent
A
- Written in 1988, focuses on print media as well as the second generation of mass media (mainly the TV, movies)
- Suggest that five ‘filters’ promote systematic bias under capitalism that help right-of-centre parties
(1) Corporate Structure of the Media: Big business, extreme media concentration
(2) Advertisement Revenue: Court capitalists for money
(3) Flak: Fear of retaliation by powerful people
(4) Sources: Organizational elites are main source of info
(5) Anti-Communism: Ideological view of media in US
6
Q
Potential Weakening of Filters
A
- Deconcentration: Social media and internet allowing for smaller media outlets
- Advertisement: Netflix, HBO, Showtime, Facebook, etc. diminishing power of advertisement-driven TV
- Sources: New media allows anyone who wants to get their views out
- Flak: Not as powerful with the new media
- Pro-Capitalism: Still there but not as extreme since end of Cold War
7
Q
Sunstein’s #republic
A
- Suggests there isn’t one general bias with new social media but many biases, some extreme
- Believes this has negative effects on democracy
- Reason: New Media caters to particular views in ways that promote polarization instead of unity
- Durkheimian view of the media
8
Q
New Media and Choice
A
- Until recently, people’s choices for news were limited
- A few newspapers, magazines, TV stations
- General News Sources: Covered major issues and tried to give relatively balanced view
- Internet and Social Media: Have placed a great variety of news sources at your fingertips
- From all around the world
- Specialist media covering particular topics
- Specialist media purposefully taking particular political perspectives
9
Q
Individualized News
A
- Individualized news allows people to get the news that they want
- People prefer this, and the news industry—as capitalist enterprises seeking revenue—has adapted accordingly
- Result: People and companies are actively filtering what information people get
- People are getting less “balanced” news, more news from sources that match their particular perspective
- Sunstein says this promotes political polarization
10
Q
Polarization
A
- Definition: Process whereby the views and beliefs of a population becoming more distinct, less similar
- Sunstein notes a variety of studies showing that polarization increases when people’s contacts and information are limited to like-minded individuals
- Studies consistently find that people who talk with other like-minded individuals will have more extreme views after talking with them
- Alternatively, when our contacts have diverse views and when we get information from many sources, we are more likely to see all sides of the story, less extreme
11
Q
Echo Chambers
A
- Sunstein: Social media is creating echo chambers
Extreme views are getting more extreme
Less common middle ground - Less agreement about the ‘facts’ with polarization
Study: When people with extreme views receive information contradicting their position, their positions are more likely to strengthen
They ignore the ‘facts,’ view them as lies - Trump: The media was always calling him out for his “lies” but this didn’t affect his support
Supporters like him more, blame it on media bias
12
Q
Levendusky’ “Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers?”
A
- Agrees with Sunstein about the impact of the social media on polarization
Wants to test these claims more rigorously by using controlled experiments - Involves giving individuals a “treatment” and seeing the impact of this treatment
Able to know what caused any transformation, and able to measure the extent of transformation - Experimental Design: Levendusky asked people questions to figure out where they fall on the conservative-liberal spectrum
- Treatment: Showed news content that was either neutral, liberal, or conservative
- Then, retested their political views to see if different from previous measure
- Findings
Found that biased news promotes polarization
People at the extreme become more extreme with biased news
Both news that supports their views and news that opposes it
Finds that these effects were still evident a week after the treatment
Little effect among people in the middle of the political spectrum with only one treatment
People with moderate views less prone to extremism
Supports Sunstein’s claims about polarization
