1. What do people who do blame the media for Trump argue that they did?
2. What did Berelson and Lazarsfeld find in their study of media impact?
3. What aspects of the election does the media tend to focus on?
4. What does "priming" mean?
5. What does the article claim is the main thing the media did that impacted Trump's success?
6. What impacts did this have exactly?
7. What evidence does this author use to refute the claims that Trump has benefited from the coverage?
8. When does the author claim that media coverage is most important to a candidate?
9. How does the article characterize the media coverage of Trump during the primaries?
10. Why does the author claim that the "media is the effect, not the cause?"
Answers:
1. They feel Trump gained too much media attention, which gave him a greater platform.
2. "They found very little evidence that the media exerted an independent influence on whom voters decided to back. They found that the voters’ choices owed much more to their partisan predispositions and socioeconomic standing..."
3. The media focuses on what they think are the major issues along with how candidates stand on said issues.
4. Priming is "the way the press can influence the standards by which audiences evaluate a candidate. [For examples,] when... researchers exposed viewers to programs focused on national defense, [they] asked them to evaluate a president’s performance... [V]iewers were more likely to judge the president by how well they thought he had provided for the nation’s security (as opposed to, say, domestic issues)."
5. The media gave Trump large amounts of extra attention he should not have been entitled to.
6a. "It signaled that Trump’s candidacy was something to take seriously, rather than a novelty act that viewers might dismiss."
6b. "The disproportionate coverage of Trump’s views on issues like trade and immigration made these issues more salient to voters, meaning they were more likely to consider them when choosing a candidate."
6c. "His 16 Republicans rivals, and the issues they might like to see highlighted, were not getting beneficial exposure."
7. "He now is viewed negatively by 70 percent of voters, and would lose to Hillary Clinton by 12 points if the general election were held today."
8. Positive media coverage is most important during the invisible primary.
9. "Trump enjoyed more 'positive or neutral' news coverage than the other Republican primary candidates,... that the volume and tenor of early coverage were disproportionate to voters' interest in Trump's candidacy."
10. The authors feels that "[t]he media [was merely] noting—often to their collective surprise—that more and more Republican primary voters were becoming receptive to Trump's message," not necessarily inherently advocating it.
3. The media focuses on what they think are the major issues along with how candidates stand on said issues.
4. Priming is "the way the press can influence the standards by which audiences evaluate a candidate. [For examples,] when... researchers exposed viewers to programs focused on national defense, [they] asked them to evaluate a president’s performance... [V]iewers were more likely to judge the president by how well they thought he had provided for the nation’s security (as opposed to, say, domestic issues)."
5. The media gave Trump large amounts of extra attention he should not have been entitled to.
6a. "It signaled that Trump’s candidacy was something to take seriously, rather than a novelty act that viewers might dismiss."
6b. "The disproportionate coverage of Trump’s views on issues like trade and immigration made these issues more salient to voters, meaning they were more likely to consider them when choosing a candidate."
6c. "His 16 Republicans rivals, and the issues they might like to see highlighted, were not getting beneficial exposure."
7. "He now is viewed negatively by 70 percent of voters, and would lose to Hillary Clinton by 12 points if the general election were held today."
8. Positive media coverage is most important during the invisible primary.
9. "Trump enjoyed more 'positive or neutral' news coverage than the other Republican primary candidates,... that the volume and tenor of early coverage were disproportionate to voters' interest in Trump's candidacy."
10. The authors feels that "[t]he media [was merely] noting—often to their collective surprise—that more and more Republican primary voters were becoming receptive to Trump's message," not necessarily inherently advocating it.
No comments:
Post a Comment