A Functional Analysis of Presidential Direct Mail Advertising

This study investigated the nature of direct mail advertising, a commonly used but little studied form of political campaign communication. 715 brochures were content analyzed employing the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse and Issue Ownership Theory. Acclaims were more common than attacks, which in turn were more frequent than defenses. Primary campaign pamphlets used more acclaims and fewer attacks than general campaign brochures. Democrats used more attacks and fewer acclaims than Republicans. In the general campaign, incumbent party candidates acclaimed more and attacked less than challengers. Incumbents were also prone to use past deeds to acclaim more, and attack less, than challengers. Incumbents tended to use future plans to acclaim more, and attack less, than challengers. Winners used more acclaims and fewer attacks than losers. Overall, direct mail brochures discussed policy more than character. Democrats discussed policy more and character less than Republicans. Democrats discussed Democratic issues more, and Republican issues less, than Republicans. Incumbent party candidates discussed policy more, and character less, than challengers. Winners discussed policy more, and character less, than losers. Winners attacked more on policy, and less on character, than losers. Similarities and differences between direct mail advertising and other message forms were discussed.     

A functional analysis of political advertising across media, 1998

This study applied the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse to 118 political advertisements (television spots, newspaper ads, direct mail, and WWW pages) from 1998. Acclaims (self‐praise; positive statements) were the most common function (84%), followed by attacks (criticism, negative statements; 15%). Defenses (refutation of attacks) were relatively infrequent (1%). There were some differences by medium (WWW pages had the most acclaims, while television spots had the most attacks; no defenses occurred on WWW pages or in direct mail) but these functions are consistent both across media and with prior research on presidential campaign advertising. Incumbents produced more acclaims than challengers, who attacked more than incumbents. Finally, policy utterances were more common than character utterances in all media but www pages. The overall consistency in Junctions and topics across media and across levels of campaigns (presidential and non‐presidential) strongly suggests the existence of important situational influences on political campaign advertising. These findings can be useful for practitioners, theorists, and critics of campaign discourse.     

On the Spot: A Functional Analysis of Congressional Television Spots, 1980–2004

Congressional elections are crucial to the American political system and candidates spend millions of dollars seeking votes with television spots. Unfortunately, the literature in this area is a hodgepodge of studies (with different methods and samples) rather than a comprehensive analysis of congressional television advertising. This study utilized the Functional Theory of Political Campaign Discourse to content analyze 744 television spots for House and Senate candidates from 1980–2004. Candidate discourse in these spots employed acclaiming (positive) strategies much more frequently than attacking (negative) or defending (refutational) strategies. Unlike discourse in presidential campaigns, congressional TV spots tend to place equal emphasis on policy and character (although since 1992 the emphasis has been on policy). Democrats tend to attack more and to discuss policy more than their counterparts. Incumbents acclaimed more and attacked less than challengers, whereas open-seat candidates have a style that lies between these two extremes. Open-seat candidates discuss past deeds less frequently than incumbents or challengers, both of whom tend to rely on the incumbent's record to attack (challengers) or to acclaim (incumbents).     

Issue competition and presidential debates in multiparty systems: evidence from the 2002, 2007, and 2012 Korean presidential elections

Which issues do political parties emphasize in campaigns? Selecting the issues to emphasize in campaigns is treated with the same importance as policy positioning. Nevertheless, little attention has been paid to understanding parties’ strategies of issue competition in presidential elections under multiparty systems. By analyzing statements of presidential candidates in the 2002, 2007, and 2012 Korean presidential debates, we find that presidential candidates use their issue emphasis strategies differently in presidential elections according to party size and ideological relationships with other parties. Specifically, a small party’s candidates have been more likely than mainstream parties’ candidates to pursue their issue ownership advantage. In addition, a mainstream party’s candidates have emphasized the issues of a small party more than those of his own party when the two parties have had a similar ideological foundation, whereas, when there were no such ideological similarities, a mainstream party’s candidate has only focused on issues of the mainstream party. Our results imply that the political communication used by political parties and candidates is conditioned not only by political contexts such as electoral systems or party systems but also by the size and ideology of parties.     

Books received

This study examined issue learning outcomes in three intra‐party political debates during the 1984 campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. The results indicated that intra‐party political debates produce significant viewer learning (1) about the issue positions of each participating candidate, (2) about most issues, and (3) among all categories of viewers. In addition, the study found that intra‐party political debates produce distinct outcomes, including: variation in learning between debates about candidate positions on particular issues; significant increases in learning about the positions of the Democratic candidates on the part of Democratic, Republican, and nonaffiliated viewers; and a negative effect on viewer knowledge about nonparticipating incumbent Ronald Reagan's positions on the issues.     

America,America: National Identity,Presidential Debates,and National Mood

In their public messages, United States politicians often invoke America in an attempt to unite citizens and build electoral coalitions. Such an emphasis is particularly common in presidential debates, which are climactic “media events” late in campaigns for the White House, when candidates take questions from journalists and citizens while addressing millions of voters. We analyzed the connection between (a) candidates' highlighting of national identity in presidential debates and (b) mass public opinion since 1960. We expected and found that (a) candidates increased their emphasis on the nation during times of heightened national uncertainty, (b) Democratic presidential candidates invoked the nation more often than Republican candidates, and (c) comparisons across elections among incumbents suggest that national uncertainty was more important than partisan identity in eliciting invocations of the nation.     

Beyond learning and persona: extending the scope of presidential debate effects

Research on the effects of watching presidential debates tends to show that these messages can foster learning about the candidates' issue positions and influence voters' impressions of the candidates. This study uses a pretest/posttest design to assess more subtle effects of watching a 2000 presidential debate on attitudes and vote intention. Leadership and overall policy stance became more important factors in vote choice after watching the debate. Specific groups of issues also became more important in vote choice. Viewers reacted to the candidates differentially: Bush enhanced perceptions of his character (but not of his policy positions), while Gore improved perceptions of his policy positions (but not of his character). The data also reveal that the debates increased the confidence of vote choices for those who did not change their preferred candidate over the course of this study (which could make them more likely to vote on election day and/or less likely to change their vote choice). This study demonstrates a variety of potentially important effects of watching presidential debates.     

A meta-analysis of the effects of viewing U.S. presidential debates

Televised debates are now an expected component of the American presidential election campaign. A meta-analysis was used to cumulate the research on the effects of watching presidential debates. General campaign debates increase issue knowledge and issue salience (the number of issues a voter uses to evaluate candidates) and can change preference for candidates' issue stands. Debates can have an agenda-setting effect. Debates can alter perceptions of the candidates' personality, but they do not exert a significant effect on perceptions of the candidates' competence (leadership ability). Debates can affect vote preference. Primary debates increase issue knowledge, influence perceptions of candidates' character, and can alter voter preferences (the effect sizes for these variables are larger in primary than general debates). The effect sizes for the dependent variables with significant effects were heterogeneous (except for effects of debates other than the first on vote preference). No support was found for several possible moderator variables on issue knowledge, character perceptions, candidate competence, and vote preference: nature of subject pool (students, nonstudents), study design (pretest/posttest, viewers/nonviewers), number of days between debate and election, or data collection method (public opinion poll or experimenter data). The first debate in a series had a larger effect on vote preference than other debates, but was not a moderator for other dependent variables. The possibility that other moderator variables are at work cannot be rejected.     

Political bias in the news coverage of Taiwan's first presidential election: A comparative analysis of broadcast TV and cable TV news

This research examines how TV reported the campaign and the candidates during Taiwan's first‐ever presidential election in 1996.

A content analysis of evening news coverage of six TV stations indicated that the state‐owned broadcast TV stations were far more likely than the privately owned cable TV stations to give a greater amount of coverage and soundbites to the ruling party presidential and vice presidential candidates, using the ruling party officials as principal news sources. The TV Stations’ coverage also contained more news favourable to the ruling party candidates than to other candidates.

The future may well see a turning point in TV election coverage as well as in general news coverage in Taiwan. The three state‐owned broadcast TV stations face competition from privately owned cable TV stations and may soon be confronted with the loss of public trust and audience, unless they can provide fair and balanced news free from government control.     

The Partisan Affect of News Seekers vs. Gatekeepers: Linguistic Differences in Online vs. Front-Page News in Campaign 2012

This article examines if patterns in online news seeking privilege stories featuring more linguistic markers of partisan affect than those positioned by traditional gatekeepers on the print front page. Online “most-read” and print front-page stories covering 8 weeks of the 2012 presidential campaign were submitted to computer-assisted text analysis (n = 302). Guided by research on online and partisan affect, this study hypothesizes that (a) “most-read” stories will feature more supportive language than stories placed on the front page by traditional gatekeepers when the news outlet has a reputation for supporting the incumbent party; and (b) “most-read” stories will feature more antagonistic language than those placed on the front page by traditional gatekeepers when the news outlet has a reputation for supporting the challenger party. The findings show how online audiences opted for stories that featured more linguistic markers of preferred partisan affect than journalists and editors placed on Page One.     

PRESIDENTIAL APPROVAL, PARTISANSHIP AND THE ECONOMY: EVIDENCE FROM THE 1984 CONTINUOUS MONITORING SURVEY IN THE US

This paper examines several key debates in the literature onthe effects of economic performance on political support, usingthe Continuous Monitoring Survey of the 1984 CPS American nationalelection study. Box-Jenkins time-series analyses show that theelectorate operates in terms of a reward-punishment model whichis asymmetrical and sociotropic in its effects. In the modelsdeveloped party identification and economic evaluations Granger–causepresidential approval, the effects of the former being strongerthan those of the latter. Partisanship and economic evaluationsform two independent streams of influence on presidential approval,casting doubt on some revisionist interpretations in the votingliterature, i.e., that party identification is simply a runningtally of voters' judgments about party performance on economicand other issues. In addition, the results suggest that popularityfunctions which omit party identification are theoreticallymisspecified.     

Evolution of Online Campaigning: Increasing Interactivity in Candidate Web Sites and Blogs Through Text and Technical Features

Political candidates have responded to the public's desire to use the Internet as an interactive information source by creating their own online presence. This study is a content analysis of the Web sites and blogs of the 10 Americans vying to be the Democratic candidate for the 2004 presidential election. Focusing on interactivity, data indicated front pages hyperlink to participation areas such as Donation or Volunteer sections and rarely linked to external content. Blogs used hyperlinks at a rate less than Web sites. Interactivity was encouraged through text, as 83.7% of Web sites asked voters to become more involved. Blog posts discussed issues and attacked the opponents, including President Bush. For the most part, blog posts were personal in nature and used direct address. The tactical use of advanced Web site features showed a technological progression of political campaigning and an overall increase in interactivity through technology and text.     

A cross-cultural perspective on videostyles of presidential debates in the US and Korea

This study intends to examine the representation of cultural values through the presidential candidate debates of the US and South Korea. A content analysis of the videostyles of debates in these two countries showed that political debates seemed to manifest differences in cultural values at large due to their nature as conspicuous indicators of cultural values. By examining specific verbal components of the debates, however, this study revealed that the nature of presidential debates might actually overpower cultural norms, which are likely to be embedded in debates. These findings imply that by imitating campaign practice developments in the US, many countries are transitioning to media-centered democracies in which various forms of mass media, particularly television, technological innovations, and political marketing approaches, have grown to play a significant role in influencing and changing the nature of electoral communication and other political practices around the globe.     

Contractualism,Committalism, and Covenantalism: A Worldview Dimensional Analysis of Human Relating

Throughout the literature much of the research on political campaign debates has focused on presidential debates and has largely ignored non‐presidential debates, particularly those featuring candidates competing in mixed‐gender races. The purpose of this study is to draw attention to these non‐presidential debates and particularly those in which gender may play a pivotal role. Through our analysis of four debates—two gubernatorial and two U.S. Senate debates—we advance the notion of debatestyle as a useful analytic scheme to examine the verbal content of female and male candidate debate dialogue. While few differences in female and male debatestyles ultimately emerged, results of the current study indicate that female and male political candidates, when engaged in debate, adopt a strategy of gendered adaptiveness that offers important contributions to both research on political debates as well as research on gender and politics.     

Determinants of Defense in Presidential Debates

This study investigates the relationship between attacks and defenses in political debates. Being the target of an attack provides a candidate with opportunity and motivation to defend; hence, the frequency of attacks directed toward a candidate should be directly related to the number of defenses produced by that candidate. This study employs four data sets to test this expectation: 23 U.S. general presidential debates, 59 U.S. presidential primary debates, 12 U.S. Senate debates, and 10 non-U.S. debates (France, Israel, Taiwan, and Ukraine). Statistical analysis confirms that there is a significant positive relationship between number of attacks aimed at a candidate and the number of defenses employed by that candidate in all four samples of political campaign debates. Arguably, this form of direct clash between candidates could be particularly beneficial to voters as it provides a deeper understanding of the pros and cons of governmental policy and related issues.     

Factors related to attention to the first Kennedy‐Nixon debate

A recent survey by Broadcasting of television programming personnel indicates that professionals in the broadcasting field agree with the general public in holding that the Kennedy‐Nixon debates during the late presidential election campaign were among the most exciting programs ever presented on television. We know that the audiences to these “great debates” were among the largest ever recorded, but sheer numbers do not tell us why audiences paid attention to these debates in the first place, much less the potential and actual effects of these programs.

The following article is one of a number being prepared by the members of the Communications Research Center at Michigan State University, covering a great many facets of political behavior in the 1960 campaign and election. The author of the following article, Dr. Lionel C. Barrow, Jr., is Assistant Professor in the Communications Research Center.     

Candidate-Issue Positioning in the Context of Presidential Debates

This paper presents an analysis of three presidential candidates, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot, who participated in the 1992 presidential debates. The relationships among the three candidates and between each candidate and the issues were examined using semantic network analysis. The results indicate a two-against-one strategy that was issue specific. The candidates teamed up in different pairs, depending on the topic at hand. The results also show the issues that the candidates emphasized most. Specifically, Clinton and Perot had more focused communication consistent with their respective campaign themes of domestic and financial concerns, while Bush did not emphasize any one particular theme. The implications of these differences are discussed, as are the theoretical and practical implications for debater tactics and the strategic use of language for emphasizing political platforms.     

Candidate-Issue Positioning in the Context of Presidential Debates

This paper presents an analysis of three presidential candidates, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and Ross Perot, who participated in the 1992 presidential debates. The relationships among the three candidates and between each candidate and the issues were examined using semantic network analysis. The results indicate a two-against-one strategy that was issue specific. The candidates teamed up in different pairs, depending on the topic at hand. The results also show the issues that the candidates emphasized most. Specifically, Clinton and Perot had more focused communication consistent with their respective campaign themes of domestic and financial concerns, while Bush did not emphasize any one particular theme. The implications of these differences are discussed, as are the theoretical and practical implications for debater tactics and the strategic use of language for emphasizing political platforms.     

The News Norms and Values of Presidential Debate Agendas: An Analysis of Format and Moderator Influence on Question Content

Mediated debates provide audiences with invaluable campaign information, and the public does in fact learn from debate exposure. Debates have undergone format changes over the years, but their ability to attract a mass audience remains constant. The way news media cover U.S. presidential elections has also evolved; increasing commercial pressures drive heightened emphasis on infotainment, soft news, and electoral strategy—often at the expense of hard news and policy content. Yet little is known about the content of agendas that news professionals set in presidential debates. Through a quantitative content analysis, this study examines 20 years of general election debate questions to determine whether the commercial news values common in today's campaign coverage also influence debate agendas. The findings presented herein suggest not only the presence of these news values in debate agendas but that format and moderator also wield a degree of influence over the content of debate questions.