The Consequences of Strategic News Coverage for Democracy: A Meta-Analysis
The Consequences of Strategic News Coverage for Democracy: A Meta-Analysis
复制标题
民主战略新闻报道的后果：荟萃分析
DOI：
10.1177/0093650218808691
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
6.2
通讯作者：
Alon Zoizner
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Alon Zoizner
媒体报道政治的最主要方式之一是关注政客们争取公众支持的策略以及他们在民意调查中的立场。传统观点认为，这种倾向--通常被称为战略、赛马或游戏报道--对民主有负面影响，因为它加剧了政治疏远。然而，其他人认为，公众对战略报道的吸引力提高了对问题的了解，并鼓励公民参与。本研究通过对已发表和未发表的研究进行元分析来检验战略报道的后果。基于32项研究和38,658名受访者的54项研究结果，我表明，在研究和背景中，战略报道增加了政治犬儒主义(d=0.32)，减少了以实质为基础的政治知识(d=−0.31)，并阻碍了对新闻项目的积极评价(d=−0.22)。然而，没有证据表明这种报道削弱了参与度。这些发现与学者们之前的担忧相一致。
One of the most dominant ways of covering politics in the media is by focusing on politicians’ strategies for gaining public support and their positions at the polls. The conventional wisdom is that this tendency—usually referred to as strategic, horse race, or game coverage—has negative consequences for democracy because it increases political alienation. Others argue, however, that the public’s attraction to strategic coverage improves knowledge about issues and encourages civic engagement. This study examines the consequences of strategic coverage by performing a meta-analysis of published and unpublished studies. Based on 54 findings from 32 studies and 38,658 respondents, I show that across studies and contexts, strategic coverage increases political cynicism (d = 0.32), reduces substance-based political knowledge (d = −0.31), and discourages positive evaluations regarding the news items (d = −0.22). However, there is no evidence that this coverage erodes participation. These findings correspond with scholars’ previous concerns.