Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684bc48f8b-ttgcf Total loading time: 4.048 Render date: 2021-04-11T11:17:46.707Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Freedom of the Press and Public Responsiveness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2019

Abstract

Public responsiveness to policy is contingent on there being a sufficient amount of clear and accurate information about policy available to citizens. It is of some significance then, that there are increasing concerns about limits being placed on media outlets around the world. We examine the impact of these limits on the public’s ability to respond meaningfully to policy by analyzing cross-national variation in the opinion–policy link. Using new measures on spending preferences from Wave 4 of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, merged with OECD data on government spending and Freedom House measures of press freedom, we assess the role of mass media in facilitating public responsiveness. We find evidence that when media are weak, so too is public responsiveness to policy. These results highlight the critical role that accurate, unfettered media can play in modern representative democracy.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*

Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/OGQJXI

References

Altheide, David L. 1997. “The News Media, the Problem Frame, and the Production of Fear.” Sociological Quarterly 38: 647–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barabas, Jason and Jerit, Jennifer. 2009. “Estimating the Causal Effects of Media Coverage on Policy‐Specific Knowledge.” American Journal of Political Science 53(1): 7389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakshy, Eytan, Messing, Solomon, and Adamic, Lada A.. 2015. “Exposure to Ideologically Diverse News and Opinion on Facebook.” Science 348(6239): 1130–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Béland, Daniel and Schlager, Edella. 2019. “Varieties of Policy Feedback Research: Looking Backward, Moving Forward.” Policy Studies Journal 47(2): 184205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, W. Lance, Lawrence, Regina G., and Livingston, Steven. 2008. When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Besley, Timothy and Prat, Andrea. 2006. “Handcuffs for the Grabbing Hand? Media Capture and Government Accountability.” American Economic Review 96(3): 720–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boydstun, Amber E. 2013. Making the News: Politics, the Media, and Agenda Setting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, Clem and Manza, Jeffrey. 2007. Why Welfare States Persist: Public Opinion and the Future of Social Provision. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burstein, Paul. 2013. American Public Opinion, Advocacy, and Policy in Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, A. Colin, Gelbach, Jonah B., and Miller, Douglas L.. 2011. “Robust Inference with Multiway Clustering.” Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 29(2): 238–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, Fay Lomax and Barrett, Edith J.. 1992. Support for the American Welfare State: The Views of Congress and the Public. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Coppedge, Michael, Gerring, John, Knutsen, Carl Henrik, Lindberg, Staffan I., Skaaning, Svend-Erik, Teorell, Jan, Altman, David, Bernhard, Michael, Steven Fish, M., Cornell, Agnes, Dahlum, Sirianne, Gjerløw, Haakon, Glynn, Adam, Hicken, Allen, Krusell, Joshua, Lührmann, Anna, Marquardt, Kyle L., McMann, Kelly, Mechkova, Valeriya, Medzihorsky, Juraj, Olin, Moa, Paxton, Pamela, Pemstein, Daniel, Pernes, Josefine, von Römer, Johannes, Seim, Brigitte, Sigman, Rachel, Staton, Jeffrey, Stepanova, Natalia, Sundström, Aksel, Tzelgov, Eitan, Wang, Yi-ting, Wig, Tore, Wilson, Steven, and Ziblatt, Daniel. 2018. V-Dem [Country-Year/Country-Date] Dataset v8. Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem), https://doi.org/10.23696/vdemcy18. Gothenburg, Sweden: V-Dem Institute Project.Google Scholar
Coyne, Christopher J. and Leeson, Peter T.. 2004. “Read All About It! Understanding the Role of Media in Economic Development.” Kyklos 57(1): 2144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalen, Arjen van, de Vreese, Claes, and Albæk, Erik. 2015. “Economic News through the Magnifying Glass.” Journalism Studies 18(7): 890909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpini, Delli, Michael, X., Scott, Keeter and Webb, Sharon. 1997. “The Impact of Presidential Debates.” In Politics and the Press: The News Media and their Influences, ed. Norris, Pippa, pp. 145–64. Boulder, CO: Lynne Reiner.Google Scholar
Durr, Robert H. 1993. “What Moves Policy Sentiment?American Political Science Review 87(1): 158–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichenberg, Richard C. and Stoll., Richard 2003. “Representing Defense: Democratic Control of the Defense Budget in the United States and Western Europe.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 47(4): 399422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., MacKuen, Michael B., and Stimson, James A.. 2002. The Macro Polity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Flaxman, Seth, Goel, Sharad, and Rao, Justin M.. 2016. “Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption.” Public Opinion Quarterly 80(S1): 298320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraile, Marta. 2013. “Do Information-Rich Contexts Reduce Knowledge Inequalities? The Contextual Determinants of Political Knowledge in Europe.” Acta Politica 48(2): 119–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Sharon H., Dunwoody, Sharon, and Rogers, Carol L., eds. 1999. Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Garrett, R. Kelly. 2009. “Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate.” Journal of Communication 59(4): 676– 99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goggin, Malcolm and Wlezien, Christopher. 1993. “Abortion Opinion and Policy in the American States.” In Understanding the New Politics of Abortion, ed. Goggin, Malcolm, pp. 190202. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google ScholarPubMed
Groeling, Tim. 2013. “Media Bias by the Numbers: Challenges and Opportunities in the Empirical Study of Partisan News.” Annual Review of Political Science 16(1): 129–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasenfeld, Yeheskel and Rafferty, Jane A.. 1989. “The Determinants of Public Attitudes toward the Welfare State.” Social Forces 67(4): 1027–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto and Hahn, Kyu S.. 2009. “Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use.” Journal of Communication 59(1): 1939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iyengar, Shanto and Kinder, Donald R.. 2010. News that Matters: Television and American Opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, Will. 2009. “The Public Thermostat, Political Responsiveness and Error-Correction: Border Control and Asylum in Britain, 1994–2007.” British Journal of Political Science 39(4): 847– 70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, Will and John, Peter. 2009. “The Dynamics of Political Attention: Public Opinion and the Queen’s Speech in the United Kingdom.” American Journal of Political Science 53(4): 838–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrence, Regina G. 2000. “Game-Framing the Issues: Tracking the Strategy Frame in Public Policy News.” Political Communication 17(2): 93114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leeson, Peter T. and Coyne, Christopher J.. 2007. “The Reformers’ Dilemma: Media, Policy Ownership, and Reform.” European Journal of Law and Economics 23(3): 237–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McQuail, Denis. 1997. “Accountability of Media to Society: Principles and Means.” European Journal of Communication 12(4): 511–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Messing, Solomon and Westwood, Sean J.. 2014. “Selective Exposure in the Age of Social Media: Endorsements Trump Partisan Source Affiliation When Selecting News Online.” Communication Research 41(8): 1042–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyrowitz, Joshua. 1994. “Visible and Invisible Candidates: A Case Study in ‘Competing Logics’ of Campaign Coverage.” Political Communication 11(2): 145–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mulgan, Richard. 2003. Holding Power to Account: Accountability in Modern Democracies. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuner, Fabian. G., Soroka, Stuart N., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2019. “Mass Media as a Source of Public Responsiveness.” International Journal of Press/Politics 24(3): 269–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, Pippa. 2006. “The Role of the Free Press in Promoting Democratization, Good Governance and Human Development.” Matters 45(4–6): 66.Google Scholar
Pacheco, Julianna. 2013. “The Thermostatic Model of Responsiveness in the American States.” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 13(3): 306– 32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin and Shapiro, Robert. 1992. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patterson, Thomas E. 1994. Out of Order. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
Shoemaker, Pamela J. and Vos., Tim P. 2009. Gatekeeping Theory. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. 2012. “The Gatekeeping Function: Distributions of Information in Media and the Real World.” Journal of Politics 74(2): 514–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. and Wlezien., Christopher 2004. “Opinion Representation and Policy Feedback: Canada in Comparative Perspective.” Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique 37(3): 531–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soroka, Stuart N. and Wlezien., Christopher 2010. Degrees of Democracy: Politics, Public Opinion and Policy. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stimson, James A. 1999. Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings, 2nd ed. Boulder CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Stimson, James A., Mackuen, Michael B., and Erikson, Robert S.. 1995. “Dynamic Representation.” American Political Science Review 89(3): 543–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stocking, S. Holly and Holstein, Lisa W.. 2008. “Manufacturing Doubt: Journalists’ Roles and the Construction of Ignorance in a Scientific Controversy.” Public Understanding of Science 18(1): 2342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroud, Natalie Jomini. 2008. “Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure.” Political Behavior 30(3): 341–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stroud, Natalie Jomini. 2010. “Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure.” Journal of Communication 60(3): 556–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Christopher J. and Schoonvelde., Martijn 2018. “It Takes Three: How Mass Media Coverage Conditions Public Responsiveness to Policy Outputs in the United States.” Social Science Quarterly 99(5): 1627–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 1995. “The Public as Thermostat: Dynamics of Preferences for Spending.” American Journal of Political Science 39(4): 9811000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 2004. “Patterns of Representation: Dynamics of Public Preferences and Policy.” Journal of Politics 66: 124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher. 2017. “Public Opinion and Policy Representation: On Conceptualization, Measurement, and Interpretation.” Policy Studies Journal 45(4): 561– 82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher and Soroka, Stuart N.. 2011. ”Federalism and Public Responsiveness to Policy.” Publius 41(1):3152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wlezien, Christopher and Soroka, Stuart N.. 2012. “Political Institutions and the Opinion–Policy Link.” West European Politics 35(6): 1407–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hiaeshutter-Rice et al. Dataset

Link

Hiaeshutter-Rice et al. supplementary material

Hiaeshutter-Rice et al. supplementary material 1

File 246 KB

Hiaeshutter-Rice et al. supplementary material

Hiaeshutter-Rice et al. supplementary material 2

File 82 KB

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 40
Total number of PDF views: 146 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 18th November 2019 - 11th April 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Freedom of the Press and Public Responsiveness
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Freedom of the Press and Public Responsiveness
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Freedom of the Press and Public Responsiveness
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *