Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2015
  • Online publication date: November 2015

15 - The Polarizing Effects of Partisan and Mainstream News

from PART IV - POLARIZATION IN THE MEDIA

Summary

• Strong partisans gravitate toward like-minded partisan media.

• Like-minded media use can polarize attitudes and, in some instances, so can the use of counter-attitudinal media.

• An experiment using NBC, MSNBC, and Fox News coverage of the Keystone XL Pipelinee's environmental impact shows that media coverage affects attitudes and beliefs.

• Drawing from inoculation theory, like-minded news polarized attitudes, and watching a combination of like-minded and mainstream news coverage did little to reduce polarization.

On January 31, 2014, the U.S. Department of State released its “Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Keystone XL Project.” The report garnered substantial attention. Would the pipeline have a devastating environmental impact as some groups had alleged? Or was the effect minimal and offset by the prospect of a reliable source of oil and an influx of new jobs? If you learned about this report from television, your answer to these questions would depend on which outlet you watched. According to Fox News, the report concluded that the environmental impact would be minimal. MSNBC, however, highlighted the environmentally damaging effects of not only the tar sands that would travel through the pipeline, but also the natione's continuing dependence on oil. NBC News noted that there would be some environmental impact, but it would be minimal and that although jobs would be created, there wouldne't be many and they would be short term. All three outlets covered exactly the same report, but each was unique in its coverage.

The Keystone Pipeline report is an illuminating case study of how information is presented in todaye's fragmented media environment. Partisan outlets have decidedly different takes on the daye's news and events. Based on these divergent portrayals, audiences may rely on unique sets of facts to support polarized attitudes and opinions about important political matters. It is precisely this topic that we tackle in this chapter. To begin, we briefly describe evidence regarding partisan selective exposure, the selection of politically like-minded media. Our review lays the groundwork for why partisan media are relevant for understanding polarization. Next, we present an overview of research on how the media affect partisans’ political beliefs, opinions, and attitudes. Equipped with this background, we turn to the Keystone Pipeline report and present original data on how people react to the coverage. Our case study illustrates the mediae's ability to polarize beliefs and attitudes.

An, C., and Pfau, M.. 2004. “The Efficacy of Inoculation in Televised Political Debates.” Journal of Communication 54 (3): 421–436.
Arceneaux, K., and Johnson, M.. 2013. Changing Minds or Changing Channels? Partisan News in an Age of Choice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Banas, J.A., and Rains, S.A.. 2010. “A Meta-analysis of Research on Inoculation Theory.” Communication Monographs 77 (3): 281–311.
Berelson, B.R., Lazarsfeld, P.F., and McPhee, W.N.. 1954. Voting: A Study of Opinion Formation in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Compton, J. 2013. “Inoculation Theory.” In Dillard, J.P. and Shen, L., eds., The SAGE Handbook of Persuasion, edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 220–236.
Compton, J., and Pfau, M.. 2004. “Use of Inoculation to Foster Resistance to Credit Card Marketing Targeting College Students.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 32 (4): 343–364.
Dilliplane, S. 2011. “All the News You Want to Hear: The Impact of Partisan News Exposure on Political Participation.” Public Opinion Quarterly 75 (2): 287–316.
Feldman, L. 2011. “The opinion factor: The effects of opinionated news on information processing and attitude change.” Political Communication 28 (2): 163–181.
Festinger, L. 1962. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Garrett, R.K. 2009. “Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate.” Journal of Communication 59 (4): 676–699.
Garrett, R.K., Carnahan, D., and Lynch, E.K.. 2011. “A Turn toward Avoidance? Selective Exposure to Online Political Information, 2004–2008.” Political Behavior 35 (1), 113–134.
Garrett, R.K., Gvirsman, S.D., Johnson, B.K., Tsfati, Y., Neo, R., and Dal, A.. 2014. “Implications of Pro- and Counterattitudinal Information Exposure for Affective Polarization.” Human Communication Research 40 (3), 309–332.
Garrett, R.K., and Stroud, N.J.. 2014. “Partisan Paths to Exposure Diversity: Differences in Pro- and Counterattitudinal News Consumption.” Journal of Communication 64 (4): 680–701.
Gentzkow, M., and Shapiro, J.M.. 2011. “Ideological Segregation Online and Offline.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 126 (4): 1799–1839.
Groeling, T. 2008. “Who's the Fairest of Them All? An Empirical Test for Partisan Bias on ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox News.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 38 (4): 631–657.
Hart, W., Albarracín, D., Eagly, A.H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M.J., and Merrill, L.. 2009. “Feeling Validated Versus Being Correct: A Meta-analysis of Selective Exposure to Information.” Psychological Bulletin 135 (4): 555–588.
Ivanov, B., and Miller, C.H.. 2011. “Boosting the Potency of Resistance: Combining the Motivational Forces of Inoculation and Psychological Reactance.” Paper presented at the annual convention of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA, November.
Iyengar, S., and Hahn, K.S.. 2009. “Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use.” Journal of Communication 59 (1): 19–39.
Jamieson, K.H., and Cappella, J.N.. 2008. Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment. New York: Oxford University Press.
Knobloch-Westerwick, S. 2012. “Selective Exposure and Reinforcement of Attitudes and Partisanship before a Presidential Election.” Journal of Communication 62 (4): 628–642.
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., and Meng, J.. 2009. “Looking the Other Way: Selective Exposure to Attitude-Consistent and Counterattitudinal Political Information.” Communication Research 36 (3): 426–448.
Levendusky, M. 2013. How Partisan Media Polarize America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lin, W-K., and Pfau, M.. 2007. “Can Inoculation Work against the Spiral of Silence? A Study of Public Opinion on the Future of Taiwan.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research 19 (2): 155–172.
Lumsdaine, A.A., and Janis, I.L.. 1953. “Resistance to “Counterpropaganda” Produced by One-sided and Two-sided “Propaganda” Presentations.” Public Opinion Quarterly 17: 311–318.
McGuire, W.J. 1964. “Inducing Resistance to Persuasion: Some Contemporary Approaches.” In Berkowitz, L., ed., Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 1. New York: Academic Press, 191–229.
Muddiman, A., Stroud, N.J., and McCombs, M.. 2014. “Media Fragmentation, Attribute Agenda Setting, and Political Opinions about Iraq.” Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 58 (2): 215–233.
Noelle-Neumann, E. 1974. The Spiral of Silence. Journal of Communication 24: 43–51.
Petrocik, J.R. 2009. “Measuring Party Support: Leaners Are Not Independents.” Electoral Studies 28 (4): 562–572.
Pfau, M., Kenski, H.C., Nitz, M., and Sorenson, J.. 1990. “Efficacy of Inoculation Strategies in Promoting Resistance to Political Attack Messages: Application to Direct Mail.” Communication Monographs 57 (1): 25–43.
Pfau, M., Roskos-Ewoldsen, D., Wood, M., Yin, S., Cho, J., Lu, K-H., and Shen, L.. 2003. “Attitude Accessibility as an Alternative Explanation for How Inoculation Confers Resistance.” Communication Monographs 70 (1): 39–51.
Pfau, M., Tusing, K.J., Koerner, As. F., Lee, W., Godbold, L.C., Penaloza, L. et al. 1997a. “Enriching the Inoculation Construct: The Role of Critical Components in the Process of Resistance.” Human Communication Research 24 (2): 187–215.
Pfau, M., Tusing, K.J., Lee, W., Godbold, L.C., Koerner, A., Penaloza, L. et al. 1997b. “Nuances in Inoculation: The Role of Inoculation Approach, Ego-Involvement, and Message Processing Disposition in Resistance.” Communication Quarterly 45 (4): 461–481.
Prior, M. 2013. “Media and Political Polarization.” Annual Review of Political Science 16 (1): 101–127.
Sears, D.O., and Freedman, J.L.. 1967. “Selective Exposure to Information: A Critical Review.” Public Opinion Quarterly 31 (2): 194–213.
Stroud, N.J. 2011. Niche News: The Politics of News Choice. New York: Oxford University Press.
Stroud, N.J. 2010. “Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure.” Journal of Communication 60 (3): 556–576.
Stroud, N.J. 2008. “Media Use and Political Predispositions: Revisiting the Concept of Selective Exposure.” Political Behavior 30 (3): 341–366.
Stroud, N.J., Muddiman, A., and Lee, J.K.. 2014. “Seeing Media as Group Members: An Evaluation of Partisan Bias Perceptions.” Journal of Communication 64 (5): 874–894.
Szabo, E.A., and Pfau, M.. 2002. “Nuances in Inoculation: Theory and Applications.” In Dillard, J.P. and Pfau, M., eds., The Persuasion Handbook: Developments in Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 233–258.
Taber, C.S., and Lodge, M.. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 755–769.
Tannenbaum, P.H., and Norris, E.L.. 1965) “Effects of Combining Congruity Principle Strategies for the Reduction of Persuasion.” Sociometry 28 (2): 145–157.
Tsfati, Y., Stroud, N.J., and Chotiner, A.. 2013. “Exposure to Ideological News and Perceived Opinion Climate: Testing the Media Effects Component of Spiral-of-Silence in a Fragmented Media Landscape.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 19 (1): 3–23.
Vallone, R.P., Ross, L., and Lepper, M.R.. 1985. “The Hostile Media Phenomenon: Biased Perception and Perceptions of Media Bias in Coverage of the Beirut Massacre.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 49 (3): 577–585.
Watts, M.D., Domke, D., Shah, D.V., and Fan, D.P.. 1999. “Elite Cues and Media Bias in Presidential Campaigns: Explaining Public Perceptions of a Liberal Press.” Communication Research 26 (2): 144–175.
Wyer, R.S. Jr. 1974. Cognitive Organization and Change: An Information Processing Approach. New York: John Wiley and Sons.