Campaign Reform: Insights and Evidence

5. Shifting the Balance: Journalist versus Candidate Communication in the 1996 Presidential Campaign

Chapter 5 Shifting the Balance: Journalist versus Candidate Communication in the 1996 Presidential Campaign Marion Just, Tami Buhr, and Ann Crigler Voters need enough information about the candidates, the parties, their records, and their proposals to make instrumental choices and carry out their democratic business. Several researchers using different methods have argued that the political information system is the key to effective democratic citizenship (Sniderman, Brody, and Tetlock 1991: Page and Shapiro 1992; Zaller 1992; Lupia 1994). When radio and television first entered the political arena, scholars were optimistic that easy access to information would empower citizens. The first voting studies were begun in the hope of demonstrating the power of the mass media to inform electorell choice. But the early scholars were disappointed (Lazarsfeld, Berelson , and Gaudet 1944). They found that political party rather than radio was the prime mover in voting. The "Michigan" election studies were undertaken in the era of television (and an increasingly educated electorate ) but still found that informed voting was as elusive as ever (Campbell et a!. 1960). The decline of partisanship in the electorate and party control of nominations turned scholarly attention to the mass media. If the electorate is not better informed or more active in the era of electronic communications, perhaps the problem lies with the quality of campaign communication. During the campaign. candidates and journalists exist in uneasy symbiosis. Candidates depend on the news media to takc their messages to the people. Journalists depend on candidates to be newsworthy. Journalists, however. do not see their role as merely passing along candidates' messages; the media must select and add value by verifying , investigating, comparing, and contextualizing the candidates' messages . In this chapter we examine the content of the information environment surrounding the 1996 presidential election campaign and its impact on voters. We extend the focus of past studies by examining a wide range of campaign communications. First. we outline the specific typical criticisms In Shifting the Balance 123 of both journalists' and candidates' contributions to the campaign information environment. Second. we test the validity of these criticisms against a content analysis of the candidates' campaign messages and the media's coverage of the campaign. The number and variety of information sources, particularly those that gave candidates less mediated opportunities to communicate with the audience, continued to expand in 1996. Picking up on a campaign strategy that worked well for Clinton and Perot in 1992, many Republican primary candidates appeared on televised interview programs to present their messages to voters. The major television networks also gave Clinton and Dole free airtime to speak directly to voters as an alternative to short, paid advertising spots. Although only a small number of people used the Internet to learn about the candidates in 1996, for the first time all of the candidates established web sites. Our content analysis compares more traditional forms ofcommunication to these newer information sources to see whether there are significant differences and thus whether one form or another might be more effective at informing and mobilizing the electorate. Finally, we comment on some of the newer information formats and proposed campaign reforms in light of our findings. Candidates and Journalists: Missions and Incentives Differences in mission and incentives are reflected in the disparity between candidate and journalist agendas (Patterson 1980). On one level, both candidates and journalists share the goal of informing the electorate, but each has a competing and more pressing goal as well. The candidates' ultimate goal is to persuade citizens to vote for them; the journalist's requirement is to maintain the audience's interest. Candidates in the Information Environment Candidate communications try to convince voters to choose particular candidates over their opponents. To persuade citizens, candidates offer various kinds of evidence-past successes, proposed actions ifelected, and demonstrations of leadership qualities. In these respects, the candidates' agenda accords well with the kind of evidence that democratic theorists think voters ought to use in making electoral decisions. In the effort to persuade , however, candidates can be faulted for engaging in symbolic politics -making emotional appeals with little substance or relevance to policy issues facing the country. To make the best case, candidates tend to put their records in the most flattering light, to embrace issues where their positions are most popular with the electorate, and to avoid issues that are 124 Campaign Reform unpopular. The result can be an unjoined debate in which each candidate talks...