Reviews"This is an important study with a research model that is an excellent paradigm for students of media and of democratic processes. The methods of testing and of analysis are fully explained....it is invaluable to have the work of scholars like these that so cleanly demonstrates a way tohandle the attitudinal causes for political behaviors and a philosophy of the public good."--Publishing Research Quarterly, "This landmark study is pregnant with profound implications on the propercoverage of politics by the mass media and the proper conduct of politics bycitizens and elites alike. It merits a broad audience among politicians,journalists, and engaged citizens, and it promises to be an invaluable text inundergraduate and graduate courses."--Harvard International Journal of Press andPolitics, "Takes the connection between strategic coverage and public cynicism andsubjects it to the most rigorous analysis and testing anyone could wishfor."--Star Ledger, "Capella and Jamieson provide convincing evidence that people exposed tocoverage that focuses on strategy at the expense of issues are more cynical andless informed."--Eye Weekly, "This landmark study is pregnant with profound implications on the proper coverage of politics by the mass media and the proper conduct of politics by citizens and elites alike. It merits a broad audience among politicians, journalists, and engaged citizens, and it promises to be an invaluabletext in undergraduate and graduate courses."--Harvard International Journal of Press and Politics, "This is an important study with a research model that is an excellentparadigm for students of media and of democratic processes. The methods oftesting and of analysis are fully explained....it is invaluable to have the workof scholars like these that so cleanly demonstrates a way to handle theattitudinal causes for political behaviors and a philosophy of the publicgood."--Publishing Research Quarterly, "Takes the connection between strategic coverage and public cynicism and subjects it to the most rigorous analysis and testing anyone could wish for."--Star Ledger, "This is an important study with a research model that is an excellent paradigm for students of media and of democratic processes. The methods of testing and of analysis are fully explained....it is invaluable to have the work of scholars like these that so cleanly demonstrates a way to handle the attitudinal causes for political behaviors and a philosophy of the public good."--Publishing Research Quarterly"Takes the connection between strategic coverage and public cynicism and subjects it to the most rigorous analysis and testing anyone could wish for."--Star Ledger"Capella and Jamieson provide convincing evidence that people exposed to coverage that focuses on strategy at the expense of issues are more cynical and less informed."--Eye Weekly"This landmark study is pregnant with profound implications on the proper coverage of politics by the mass media and the proper conduct of politics by citizens and elites alike. It merits a broad audience among politicians, journalists, and engaged citizens, and it promises to be an invaluable text in undergraduate and graduate courses."--Harvard International Journal of Press and Politics, "Capella and Jamieson provide convincing evidence that people exposed to coverage that focuses on strategy at the expense of issues are more cynical and less informed."--Eye Weekly
SynopsisWhy do some citizens vote while others do not? Why does less than half of the American voting public routinely show up at the polls? Why is it that the vast majority of political issues affecting our day-to-day lives fail to generate either public interest or understanding? These questions have troubled political scientists for decades. Here, Kathleen Hall Jamieson and Joseph N. Cappella provide the first conclusive evidence to date that it is indeed the manner in which the print and broadcast media cover political events and issues that fuels voter non-participation. This book illustrates precisely how the media's heavy focus on the game of politics, rather than on its substance, starts a "spiral of cynicism" that directly causes an erosion of citizen interest and, ultimately, citizen participation. Having observed voters who watched and read different sets of reports--some saturated in strategy talk, others focused on the real issues--the authors show decisive links between the way in which the media covers campaigns' and voters' levels of cynicism and participation. By closely monitoring media coverage among sample audiences for both the recent mayoral race in Philadelphia and the national health care reform debate, the authors confront issues concerning the effects of issue-based and competitive-based political coverage. Finally, they address the question repeatedly asked by news editors, "Will the public read or watch an alternative media coverage that has more substance?" The answer their findings so clearly reveal is "yes." Spiral of Cynicism is a pioneering work that will urge the media to take a close look at how it covers political events and issues, as well as its degree of culpability in current voter dissatisfaction, cynicism, and non-participation. For, in these pages, a possible cure to such ills is just what Jamieson and Cappella have to offer. Moreover, their work is likely to redefine the terms of the very debate on how politics should be covered in the future., This is the first study to provide conclusive evidence that the way the American news and broadcast media currently cover political issues and events directly causes increased voter cynicism and non-participation. In a path-breaking study, Jamieson and Cappella examine how the media cover both political campaigns and significant legislation (the passage of health care reform). The focus on the game of politics, rather than its substance, fuels a cycle of cynicism, trapping media, politicians and voters. Giving reason to hope, the authors provide detailed discussion of what the media could do to halt the current cycle of cynicism.