John+Knobel

For my topic I want to explore the evolution of the media over the past decades and how it has effected politics. The news was once relatively unbiased and simply informed the American about what events were happing in their world and the world around them. It was on once a night and Americans watched together across the country. However that world has disappeared and given way to 24/7 networks that want to boost ratings and make the news more entertaining. Stories that seemed insignificant in years past are now running for hours. This transition has effected politics and policy in the United States and continues to do so.

Source 1) Sears, David O., Kosterman, Rick. "Mass Media and Political Persuasion." //Persuasion, Phycological insights and perspectives.// Sage Publishers, 1989. Print http://www.issr.ucla.edu/sears/pubs/A108.pdf

Mass Media and Political Persuasion. Credibility
 * This source is credible and scholarly source. It was referenced to me by a political science professor. The article itself was written by two professors from the University of California and University of Washington, and furthermore it has a multitude of credible citations in its bibliography

Summary
 * This article looks at the cause and effect relationship of media and politics during the 50's to mid 80's. The two most important sections in this article to me are those that talk about hoopla and agenda setting. The agenda setting article shows how media can drum up issues to make them seem more important to the American people. A study cited shows how the amount of coverage of an issue gets on a news station influences how important the public views the issue. Hoopla began to emerge during the 80's when networks noticed more ratings could be attained if the news simply became more interesting. Complex political issues are broken down and issues are given a backseat and whatever developments seem more exciting and entertaining get the spotlight. This study also has excellent examples that strengthen the argument of it all. The most prominent being the news coverage of the Kennedy assignation. This event was so profound that it crossed almost all political borders and gave the dead president a martyr like image in minds of the american people.

Response to Text
 * In the section on media and agenda setting a study done by McCombs and Shaw is truly a fore runner to my thesis. It is one of the earlier studies done on the relationship between politics and media. As stated in the summery it shows the relationship between the amount of airtime that an issue has and its political importance with people. This becomes an important point of interest during election season. Although there is no way of telling exactly how deep the persuasion goes, there is a noticeable effect on what the media can deep important and what issues are important to candidates. However it is difficult to dictate if the media causes the candidates to choose the issue or if the candidates cause the media to choose the issues. Thankfully the study was able to be done in laboratory settings which makes it possible to examine only how media influence the agenda of candidates.
 * I agree with this article on terms that media does effect politics through its coverage and use of loose facts and hoopla. However in the end of the article it draws down the overall effect of the relationship saying that it is minimal in the overall political system. Although I am in no position to disprove the research of political science professors I believe this can be used to prove my point further showing the evolution of the media. This paper was published in late eighties in the beginning of the transition from "news networks" to "24/7 media". This would make sense that the effect of media was still minimal and would gradually change to a force that can make or break a candidates election and make even leaders in appointed positions, which are supposed to be void of public opinion, make rash decisions. Such as in the case of Shirley Sherrod.

Source 2) Iyengar, Shanto., McGrady, Jennifer "Mass Media and Political Persuasion." //Persuasion, Phycological insights and perspectives.// Sage Publishers, 2005. Print http://books.google.com/books?id=oAfvWBTFb_QC&pg=PA225&lpg=PA225&dq=mass+media+and+political+persuasion&source=bl&ots=95pI0gzsQp&sig=VCjwhdsip-87R_ZurKmcpT8Qqi8&hl=en&ei=xnzITOz3EcX7lwfCmZ32Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=mass%20media%20and%20political%20persuasion&f=true

Mass Media and Political Persuasion (different article same name) Credibility
 * Another Scholarly source published in the same book over a decade later. Its written by two professors from Stanford on the same topic. Again it has multiple citations in the bibliography and from looking at the article it is obvious that a tremendous amount of time was spend on it.

Summary
 * This publication takes a different approach on the topic and is a wealth of information. In the first section they provide a history of what they call "the rise of media based politics." It mostly looks at political campaigns to prove their thesis and use data gathered from these to further their argument. Looking at the past 50 years of political elections evolving from party based system where party leaders were the main power behind who would be elected to a rank and file system where voters had the majority of control. They then go into a summery of what is known about the influence of media upon politics. Looking at early studies of voter behavior and then comparing them over time to map the evolution of medias influence the political realm. Finally they provide research based opinions on what the future of this relationship can be.

Response to Text
 * I agree with the section on how recently media has been able to make issues important that did not used to be so in the past. Personal lives of politicians are now thrust into the political realm. The personal life of a politician can now become a sort of Achilles heel for even the most powerful men in washington. Anything the public may view as negative will flood the news and may be used by the opposing party or candidate to attack that persons credibility and effect their time in office. The paper also addresses how politicians combat this. In recent years a major part of any politicians career is working on their public image. People are hired in order to avoid negative images of the candidate being brought to the media and are there to combat them when they are.
 * The point in the beginning of the paper is perhaps the most profound and ties the topic together. Examples like George Bush landing on the aircraft carrier and declaring Mission Accomplished had little significance in the overall plans for Iraq, but they were events important to the media and Americas view of the war. Media stunts like this would of been unknown 40 years ago but in todays age it is an important part to anyone who has or wants clout over public policy. Its not news in the sense that the event was created for the media, but it makes headlines because it stirs the publics interest and creates debate across networks.

Source 3)Craig, Geoffrey. //The Media, Politics and Public Life.// Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, 2004. Print. The Media, Politics and Public Life Credibility
 * THe author is a Senior Lecturer in Mass Communications at Murdoch University. It has a full bibliography and has been peer reviewed by other professors in his field.

Summary
 * This book has important points and examples of what media has done to political image. It is able to compare well known political figures from a pre-media era and put them in todays political culture. It states how important a political image is and how it has been the downfall to multiple powerful figures. It takes looks into "The self" which is how politicians are shaped by media handlers in order to create a more positive image that will attract votes. The management of visibility in ones private life is one of importance in modern media. A major part of this is crisis management, when a politicians private life comes under intense scrutiny it is possible for their career to be ruined in a matter of days.

Response to Text
 * The section on crisis management is one that is very interesting and helpful to me. This a new part of a politicians life as privacy for public figures is not as respected as it once was. Stories about sex scandals or a night out on the town reporters in recent years have jumped on as an opportunity to make entertaining news. The most important component to the management is the disclosure of any truthful information the media does not already have, because in time they will. This helps reduce the longevity of the crisis however this information is rarely followed. Its important to also take into account legal issues. Politicians must be able to express concern without admitting liability. Being able to take on a crisis can now be a measure of how powerful a person is.
 * Another major section that i agree with in this book is that on media coaching. The public wants to know their leaders. Thats why as media has encroached into the lives of politicians its become important for them to open up rather than shut the public out. Regardless of policy, if the public feels like they know the politician then they will be more agreeable towards them and less hostile in issues that they disagree with. Looks are also an important part of this, examples in the book back up this point and research furthers this. Its important that while in the public eye not to have outbursts or gaffs as these will be attacked by opponents. Public speeches and appearances at events that matter to the people are a major part of this. Politicians must remain in the spotlight and appear to be in control while not taking it over from whoever is actually running the show. This would appear as control hungry which people do not like.

Source 4) Norris, //Pippa, ed. Politics and the Press.// Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1997. Print. Politics and the Press Summary and Relevance
 * This book, like the one before, covers how political image is important. However it does it from the voters perspective giving us a different look at it. The book also proposes the "CNN effect" in which media has an increasing ability to effect foreign policy.
 * It is relevant because it is able to research and term the effect media has on policies and it also backs up previous sources with political imagery.

Source 5) Reid, Harry. Personal Interview. 25 Oct. 2010 Interview Summary and Relevance
 * Reid was able to give a first hand account of how the media has changed in their reporting styles in his 20 years of office.
 * His statements are in line with my topic further helping prove the thesis.

Source 6) Jackson, David. "24/7" media makes it hard to focus on long term" //usatoday.com.// USA Today, 13 Oct. 2010. Web. http://www.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/10/obama-247-media-makes-it-hard-to-focus-on-the-long-term/1 Summary and Relevance
 * This article shows Obamas view on media and how it is so short term and focuses on issues that are popular instead of the long term
 * Along with Reid's statement it makes a powerful statement about the downfall of modern media.