Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
American Behavioral Scientist
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McKinney, M. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Let the People Speak

The Public’s Agenda and Presidential Town Hall Debates

Mitchell S. McKinney

University of Missouri-Columbia

This study argues that a "devolution" of the presidential town hall debate as public sphere has occurred, whereby every 4 years citizens’ freedom to participate in their debate—as they see fit—has been seriously restricted. The primary purpose of this study is to examine how well the town hall presidential debate, particularly in its current form, addresses issues of greatest concern to the American public. Specifically, to test how well the dialogue of a town hall debate matches the public’s campaign issue agenda, as well as examine possible changes over time, analysis compares the issues discussed in both the 2004 and 1992 town hall debates to the agenda of issues that citizens claimed were most important to them. Results suggest that as candidates have gained greater control over the town hall’s structure and resulting dialogue, the ability of this forum to reflect a citizen’s issue agenda has greatly diminished.

Key Words: presidential debates • town hall debate • public sphere • public agenda

American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 49, No. 2, 198-212 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0002764205279428
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PubliusHome page
J. R. Henson and W. L. Benoit
Functional Federalism in Political Campaign Debates
Publius, September 3, 2009; (2009) pjp018v2.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]