This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by ALSINA, C. Articles by GRONBECK, B. E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Preference Poll Stories in the Last 2 Weeks of Campaign 2000

Uses of the Massed Opinions of Numbered Citizens

University of Barcelona

PHILIP JOHN DAVIES

De Monfort University, United Kingdom

BRUCE E. GRONBECK

University of Iowa

If campaigns are times for political representatives to consult or negotiate with a citizenry, then the ways that a public conversation is conducted matters. In this study, all campaign stories in two national newspapers over the last 2 weeks of Campaign 2000 were sorted by dominant issues and examined for public commentary on those issues. About 60% of the stories featured discussion of candidate images (within narratives of campaigning depicted as races, military campaigns, or dramatic performances), with the remaining stories featuring 1 of 18 other issues. Issues as such all but disappeared. The candidate image stories were dominated by statistical representations of binary—yes-no, good-bad—opinions. The study concludes that the public had no real voice in the electoral conversation at the end of Campaign 2000, only serving to indicate who was ahead or behind. A citizenry can have little effect on political agenda if depicted only as a numerical mass.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. S. Trent, C. Short-Thompson, P. A. Mongeau, M. S. Metzler, and J. D. Trent The Idealized Presidential Candidate: A Vision Over Time American Behavioral Scientist, September 1, 2005; 49(1): 130 - 156. [Abstract] [PDF]