Marion R. Just – författare

This analysis of the 1992 US presidential campaign looks at how citizens use information in the media to make their voting decisions and how politicians and the media interact to shape that information. Examining political advertisements, news coverage, ad watches and talk shows in Los Angeles, Boston, Winston-Salem, and Fargo/Moorhead, the authors chart the impact of different information environments on citizens and show how people developed images of candidates over the course of the campaign. The text also presents evidence that campaigns do matter, that citizens are active participants in the campaign process, and that their perceptions of a candidate's character is the central factor in the voting process. Although the focus is on the 1992 presidential race, the study is intended to contribute to understanding of campaigns in general, and show how election campaigns can play an important role in the long-term vitality of democracy.

Photo opportunities, ten-second sound bites, talking heads and celebrity anchors: so the world is explained daily to millions of Americans. The result, according to the experts, is an ignorant public, helpless targets of a one-way flow of carefully filtered and orchestrated communication. Common Knowledge shatters this pervasive myth. Reporting on a ground-breaking study, the authors reveal that our shared knowledge and evolving political beliefs are determined largely by how we actively reinterpret the images, fragments, and signals we find in the mass media. For their study, the authors analyzed coverage of 150 television and newspaper stories on five prominent issues--drugs, AIDS, South African apartheid, the Strategic Defense Initiative, and the stock market crash of October 1987. They tested audience responses of more than 1,600 people, and conducted in-depth interviews with a select sample. What emerges is a surprisingly complex picture of people actively and critically interpreting the news, making sense of even the most abstract issues in terms of their own lives, and finding political meaning in a sophisticated interplay of message, medium, and firsthand experience.At every turn, Common Knowledge refutes conventional wisdom. It shows that television is far more effective at raising the saliency of issues and promoting learning than is generally assumed; it also undermines the assumed causal connection between newspaper reading and higher levels of political knowledge. Finally, this book gives a deeply responsible and thoroughly fascinating account of how the news is conveyed to us, and how we in turn convey it to others, making meaning of at once so much and so little. For anyone who makes the news--or tries to make anything of it--Common Knowledge promises uncommon wisdom.

This Handbook provides the most comprehensive overview of the role of electoral advertising on television and new forms of advertising in countries from all parts of the world currently available. Thematic chapters address advertising effects, negative ads, the perspective of practitioners and gender role. Country chapters summarize research on issues including political and electoral systems; history of ads; the content of ads; reception and effects of ads; regulation of political advertising on television and the Internet; financing political advertising; and prospects for the future. The Handbook confirms that candidates spend the major part of their campaign budget on television advertising. The US enjoys a special situation with almost no restrictions on electoral advertising whereas other countries have regulation for the time, amount and sometimes even the content of electoral advertising or they do not allow television advertising at all. The role that television advertising plays in elections is dependent on the political, the electoral and the media context and can generally be regarded as a reflection of the political culture of a country. The Internet is relatively unregulated and is the channel of the future for political advertising in many countries

This Handbook provides the most comprehensive overview of the role of electoral advertising on television and new forms of advertising in countries from all parts of the world currently available. Thematic chapters address advertising effects, negative ads, the perspective of practitioners and gender role. Country chapters summarize research on issues including political and electoral systems; history of ads; the content of ads; reception and effects of ads; regulation of political advertising on television and the Internet; financing political advertising; and prospects for the future. The Handbook confirms that candidates spend the major part of their campaign budget on television advertising. The US enjoys a special situation with almost no restrictions on electoral advertising whereas other countries have regulation for the time, amount and sometimes even the content of electoral advertising or they do not allow television advertising at all. The role that television advertising plays in elections is dependent on the political, the electoral and the media context and can generally be regarded as a reflection of the political culture of a country. The Internet is relatively unregulated and is the channel of the future for political advertising in many countries

Twitter already has become an important electoral communication tool between candidates, parties and their specific constituencies. No serious candidate campaign ignores Twitter, while political party organizations utilize Twitter to communicate with partisans, reinforce supporters, and mobilize voters. Whereas much scholarship to date has focused primarily on Twitter’s political usage in the United States, there still remain many questions about the political uses and effects of Twitter in a global context. Does Twitter affect how reporters interact with candidates or even with each other? Does Twitter increase voter participation? Who is tweeting about elections? Why do people use Twitter in electoral contexts? Which type of candidate is more likely to use Twitter and why? Do parties differ in their use of Twitter, and why? Does Twitter increase candidate-voter interaction? Is Twitter shaping elections in various system contexts, and if so how? What is the influence of system context on Twitter use by parties, candidates, reporters, and voters? Eloquently combining theory and practice, established and rising scholars in the field of political communication have been brought together to provide an essential overview of the influence of Twitter on elections in a comparative perspective. Readers of this book will not only learn everything there is to know about this specific influence of Twitter, but more broadly how to approach the study of various online tools in general.