Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Media influences on public opinion
Political polarization throughout the years
Effects of media on public perception of politics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Media influences on public opinion
Party polarization is the idea that a party’s individual stance on a given issue or person is more likely to be liberal or conservative. Typically the rise of political uniformity has been more noticeable among people who are the most politically active, but as of late, the vast majority of the American public is spilt down the middle. The broad gap between liberals and conservatives is growing rapidly through the years. Which brings on questions of why there is a cultural division? While it is agreed by most political scientists that the media, elected officials, and interest groups are polarized on given issues, in James Q. Wilson’s article How Divided Are We? he discusses the factors that contribute to the division not only to those major …show more content…
Although, in recent years it is seen that consumers are less likely to subscribe to newspapers and/or watch the daily news. This is due to the fact that they are typically bias in their opinions, and are seen to lack the whole story when presented. Rise in polarization in the media is due to a new found competition between news networks, which was not present sixty years ago. Wilson says, “the news we get is not only more omnipresent, it is also more competitive and hence often more adversarial”. The media outlets are fighting for views, and are willing to do whatever it takes to get them. Which leads to them configuring the stories to what people want to here. Thus making their viewer ratings higher. It is known that certain news stations get more views depending on the political party. “Those who watch CNN are more likely to be Democrats than Republicans; the reverse is emphatically true of Fox”. The media has more outlets to reach their viewers to maximize the effectiveness of their biased …show more content…
It is seen that as political awareness increases, cultural division increases. Since 1972, the gap between Democrats and Republicans has doubled in 2004. Although this mass polarization is only seen within a minority of voters that happen to be college-educated, Marc Hetherington of Vanderbilt says “people with the greatest ability to assimilate new information, those with more formal education, are most affected by elite polarization”. The growth in polarization is noticeable because throughout the years the need for higher education has grown; no longer is a high school diploma enough. The younger generations are striving for college diplomas, which leads to more political agitation. It has been seen that affluence is out weighted by postgraduate education. American society is in a cultural war within itself since polarization has seeped down into the public. There is believed to be political differences that cannot be solved and this makes it hard for elected officials to solve problems they were elected to solve. There is a constant stand still with issues in America due to the high amount of polarization in this
The book Culture Wars? The Myth of a Polarized America by Morris P. Fiorina, Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope is a persuasive text regarding America and its division on political topics.
In this article “Culture War”, Morris Fiorina addresses the issue of the cultural divide between Democrats and Republicans in the political world we live in today, as the Republicans are discussed as the “red” states and Democrats are the “blue” states. The Culture War that Fiorina alludes to refer to a movement of standard economic struggles that have spiked up twentieth century politics. Fiorina will debunk the myth of polarized America by addressing each side of the red and blue states. “When George W. Bush took office, half the country cheered and the other half seethed.” This quotation reflects the so-called myth of the deep division of demographics within the red and the blue states. The main argument I will address and the argument that Fiorina is trying to get across is that America is not divided almost in half by blue and red states, but the typical American is in the
American states each have individual political cultures which are important to our understanding of their political environments, behavior, and responses to particular issues. While voters probably do not consciously think about political culture and conform to that culture on election day, they seem to form cohesive clusters in different areas of the state, creating similar group political ideologies. Because of these similarities, it is possible to measure the dominant political culture within states or areas of a state, gaining insight into the mind-set of state residents. Whatever the state culture, whether liberal or conservative, participatory or exclusive, political culture identifies dominant, state-wide trends. The question remains whether there is an accurate way to measure this political culture phenomenon in the United States.
The United States of America has engaged in the battle known as political polarization since before its foundation in 1776. From the uprising against the powerful British nation to the political issues of today, Americans continue to debate about proper ideology and attempt to choose a side that closely aligns with their personal beliefs. From decade to decade, Americans struggle to determine a proper course of action regarding the country as a whole and will often become divided on important issues. Conflicts between supporters of slavery and abolitionists, between agriculturalists and industrialists, and between industrial workers and capitalists have fueled the divide. At the Congressional level there tends to be a more prevalent display of polarization and is often the blame of Congress’ inefficiency. James Madison intentionally designed Congress to be inefficient by instating a bicameral legislation. Ambition would counter ambition and prevent majority tyranny. George Washington advised against political parties that would contribute to polarization and misrepresentation in his Farewell Address of 1796. Washington warns, “One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts.” Today, the struggle to increase power between political parties results in techniques to gain even the smallest marginal gains. To truly understand political polarization, we must examine data collected through a variety of means, the effects of rapidly changing technology, and observe what techniques are used to create such a polarized political system.
There is much debate in the United States whether or not there is polarization between our two dominate political parties. Presidential election results have shown that there is a division between the states; a battle between the Democratic blue states and the Republican red states. And what is striking is that the “colors” of these states do not change. Red stays red, and blue stays blue. Chapter 11 of Fault Lines gives differing views of polarization. James Wilson, a political science professor at Pepperdine University in California, suggests that polarization is indeed relevant in modern society and that it will eventually cause the downfall of America. On the contrast, Morris Fiorina, a political science professor at Stanford University, argues that polarization is nothing but a myth, something that Americans should not be concerned with. John Judis, a senior editor at The New Republic, gives insight on a driving force of polarization; the Tea Party Movement. Through this paper I will highlight the chief factors given by Wilson and Judis which contribute to polarization in the United States, and will consider what factors Fiorina may agree with.
The trend of political polarization has many roots, but one particular cause over the last decade
To understand American society fully, one must understand America’s political makeup. In order to do that, it is necessary to understand a person’s political opinions and how they came about. This is done by examining how political ideology and political socialization influence society and individuals within that society. Political ideology is the set of beliefs that shape the way someone views government action; it is the way that they think the government should act and react to certain situations. In the United States, the two main political ideologies are liberal and conservative. How American’s teach the tenets and goals of the political system is known as political socialization. This is typically done through parents, peers, school,
According to the New York Times, polarization is dividing american culture, along with the political landscape. They directly state “they are gradually adopting more consistently liberal or conservative viewpoints.”. This results in more voters becoming sure that their votes are becoming important to change the political landscape they are in. One result that was seen was the recent election results. Democrats were able to win seats within districts that were gerrymandered to assist republicans, this shows that more democrats are now voting to
398).It is also stated that news divisions reduced their costs, and raised the entertainment factor of the broadcasts put on air. (p. 400). Secondly, the media determines its sources for stories by putting the best journalists on the case and assign them to areas where news worthy stories just emanates. (p.400). Third, the media decides how to present the news by taking the most controversial or relevant events and compressing them into 30 second sound-bites. (p.402). finally, the authors also explain how the media affects the general public. The authors’ state “The effect of one news story on public opinion may be trivial but the cumulative effect of dozens of news stories may be important. This shows a direct correlation between public opinions and what the media may find “relevant”. (Edwards, Wattenberg, Lineberry, 2015, p.
...plications, the public is able to share and obtain information before the morning newspaper is delivered. In addition, the media today continues to dramatize public events. Cases such as the Zimmerman Trial or foreign incidents in Ukraine remain headlines on news articles for months. Each source presents bias and influences its audience differently.
While the causes are infinite, the consequences of polarization are just as far reaching. Robinson and Mullinix (2016) Studying the media content from polarized elites show that there is decreased trust in government, by moderates and median-voter when they are exposed to polarized, partisan messages. However, parties communicate their values and rely less on strategic communication to promote their message. There is also a consequence from the media messaging by elites of a growing distrust of members of the opposite party. Division occurs between the out-party (minority party in the positions of power) and in-party (party in a majority position) due to increasing distrust and divergent stances that promote opposing party positions as
Others see factors such as issue and policy preference or, media/elite opinion as how a person identifies. While some scholars argue that it is the genes or genetics of a person that will determine how they politically identify; it is just the way that they were born. Regardless of the different schools of thought, researchers continue to wonder and conduct studies to determine exactly what influences one’ party identification. Through analyzing literature on these four schools of thought (parental socialization, issue and policy preference, media and elite opinion, and genes) I believe I will be able to shed light on the question of what influences an individual’s party identification.
News adopts values of parent network company which in turn introduces extreme levels of partisanship and censorship, depending on the network.
Many news organizations distort the news so that “opinionated voters, go to the news sources that reinforce and perhaps intensify their preexisting political beliefs” (“Media Power and Bias”). This increases their size pool of viewers and is harmful because media bias can disorientate the news so much that Americans don’t know who to listen too (“Political Polarization”).
As time has gone on political parties have begun to be less influential compared to what they once were, and media has become more and more dominant. While media has become more important, separate sources of information have begun to focus on different topics, or reporting more about one subject as compared to another. Certain news sources focus more on entertainment, some focus on global issues, and others focus on politics in the United States. From looking at different media outlets it is visible that different forms of news focus on different stories and headlines, and they present it in all different ways.