| skip navigation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
home the archives faculty services arts & science departments college of arts & science mu campus |
Presidential campaigns: what are they really about?
One of the myths focuses on media bias. However, the liberal bias in one outlet tends to be balanced by a conservative bias in another outlet. Given that most voters use only one newspaper or tv news network, individual voters are exposed to biased coverage. These biases tend to cancel each other out. The net result is little or no bias. Benoit’s research concluded that the media focus more on the horse race, what is "new" to attract audience members, and less on a candidate’s character or policy. Benoit’s study of the 2004 Democratic primary concluded that 68 percent of news coverage focused on the horse race, with 18 percent focusing on character and only 14 percent on policy. Benoit also found that while some scholars believe negative ads decrease voter turnout, evidence suggests otherwise. His analysis of negativity in ads and other messages found no significant relationship in voter turnout from 1952 to 2000. Most voters, Benoit said, believe that candidates’ attacks on policy are fair whereas their attacks on character are unfair. "The majority of negative messages can be attributed to non-candidate groups and other political figures, rather than the presidential candidates themselves," Benoit said. "If we believe that candidates run mainly negative campaigns, it is very likely due to the negative coverage of the news, and to some extent from attacks by surrogates." See Benoit's Top Ten Myths About Presidential Campaigns.
Additional links:Bill Benoit |
| copyright © 2000 The Curators of the University of Missouri Last update: 29-Sep-2005 contact the project: Web information |