Spectacular Politics, Dramatic Interpretations: Multiple Meanings in the Thomas/Hill Hearings

Political Communication

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 1999, Pages 285-314

  Sapiro, Virginia ^a   Soss, Joe ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b AMERICAN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Clarence Thomas Hearings; Framing; Political Spectacles; Preferences; Preference; Extremity

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033196744     PISSN: 10584609     EISSN: 10917675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/105846099198640     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Abelson, R. P. (1995). Attitude extremity. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 25-42). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. A house divided. (1992, January). Essence, pp. 58-59.
3. Alexander, J. C. (1988). Culture and political crisis: ‘Watergate’ and Durkheimian sociology. In J. Alexander (Ed.), Durkheimian sociology: Cultural studies (pp. 187-224). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
4. Allen, E., Jr. (1991). Race and gender stereotyping in the Thomas confirmation hearings. Black Scholar, 22, 13-15.
5. Alvarez, R. M., & Brehm, J. (1995). American ambivalence towards abortion policy: Development of heteroskedastic probit model of competing values. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1055-1082.
6. Beasley, V. B. (1994). The logic of power in the Hill-Thomas hearings: A rhetorical analysis. Political Communication, 11, 287-298.
7. Borger, G., & Gest, T. (1992, October 12). The untold story. U.S. News & World Report, pp. 28-37.
8. Boyd, M. J. (1991). Collard greens, Clarence Thomas, and the high-tech rape of Anita Hill. Black Scholar, 22, 25-27.
9. Bray, R. L. (1991, November 17). Taking sides against ourselves. New York Times Magazine, p. 56.
10. Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. Advances in Social Cognition, 1, 1-36.
11. Brock, D. (1993). The real Anita Hill: The untold story. New York: Free Press.
12. Carver, T. (1996). Gender is not a synonym for woman. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
13. Chong, D. (1993). How people think, reason, and feel about rights and liberties. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 867-899.
14. CHow, G. C. (1960). Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions. Econometrica, 28, 591-605.
15. Conover, P. J. (1984). The influence of group identification on political perception and evaluation. Journal of Politics, 46, 760-785.
16. Conover, P. J. (1988). The role of social groups in political thinking. British Journal of Political Science, 18, 51-75.
17. Conover, P. J., Leonard, S. T., & Searing, D. D. (1993). Duty is a four-letter word: Democratic citizenship in the liberal polity. In G. E. Marcus & R. L. Hanson (Eds.), Reconsidering the democratic public (pp. 147-171). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
18. Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature of belief systems in mass publics. In D. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and discontent (pp. 206-261). New York: Free Press.
19. Danforth, J. C. (1994). Resurrection: The confirmation of Clarence Thomas. New York: Viking.
20. Davis, H. V. (1991). The high-tech lynching and the high-tech overseer: Thoughts from the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas affair. Black Scholar, 22, 27-29.
21. Dayan, D., & Katz, E. (1992). Media events: The live broadcasting of history. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22. Edelman, M. (1964). The symbolic uses of politics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
23. Edelman, M. (1971). Politics as symbolic action: Mass arousal and quiescence. New York: Academic Press.
24. Edelman, M. (1977). Political language: Words that succeed and policies that fail. New York: Academic Press.
25. Edelman, M. (1988). Constructing the political spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26. Frankovic, K., & Gelb, J. (1992). Public opinion and the Thomas nomination. PS: Political Science & Politics, 25, 481-484.
27. From Anita Hill to Capitol Hill. (1992, November 16). Time, p. 21.
28. George, A. I. (1979). Case studies and theory development: The method of structured, focused comparison. In P. G. Lauren (Ed.), Diplomacy: New approaches in history, theory, and policy (pp. 43-60). New York: Free Press.
29. Graber, D. A. (1984). Processing the news: How people tame the information tide. New York: Longman.
30. Granberg, D. (1993). Political perception. In S. Iyengar & W.J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 70-112). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
31. Greene, W. H. (1993). Econometric analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
32. Guy-Sheftell, B. (1991). Breaking the silence: A Black feminist response to the Thomas/Hill hearings. Black Scholar, 22, 35-37.
33. Hanushek, E. A., & Jackson, J. E. (1977). Statistical methods for social scientists. New York: Academic Press.
34. Hart, R. P. (1994). Politics and the virtual event: An overvieWof the Hill-Thomas hearings. Political Communication, 11, 263-275.
35. Heimel, C. (1992, March). Women: She asked for it? Playboy, p. 34.
36. Hill, A. F. (1997). Speaking truth to power. New York: Doubleday.
37. Hill, A. F., & Jordan, E. C. (Eds.). (1995). Race, gender, and power in America: The legacy of the Hill-Thomas hearings. New York: Oxford University Press.
38. Hochschild, J. (1993). Disjunction and ambivalence in citizens’ political outlooks. In G. Marcus & R. Hanson (Eds.), Reconsidering the democratic public (pp. 187-210). University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
39. Iyengar, S. (1991). Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
41. Jacobs, R. N. (1996). Civil society and crisis: Culture, discourse, and the Rodney King beating. American Journal of Sociology, 101, 1238-1272.
42. Judd, C. M., & Brauer, M. (1995). Repetition and evaluative extremity. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 43-72). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Lawrence, C. R. III. (1991). Cringing at myths of Black sexuality. Black Scholar, 22, 65-66.
44. Lipari, L. (1994). As the word turns: Drama, rhetoric, and press coverage of the Hill-Thomas hearings. Political Communication, 11, 299-308.
45. Lippmann, W. (1949). Public opinion. New York: MacMillan. (Original work published 1922)
46. Lodge, M., & Stroh, P. (1993). Inside the mental voting booth: An impression-driven process model of candidate evaluation. In S. Iyengar & W. J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 225-263). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
47. Lubiano, W. (1992). Black ladies, welfare queens, and state minstrels: Ideological war by narrative means. In T. Morrison (Ed.), Raceing justice, en-gendering power: Essays on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas and the construction of social reality (pp. 323-363). New York: Pantheon.
48. MacRae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy-saving devices: A peek inside the cognitive toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 37-47.
49. Mahtesian, C. (1992, April 18). Anita Hill haunts Specter. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, p. 1022.
50. Mansbridge, J., & Tate, K. (1992). Race trumps gender: The Thomas nomination in the Black community. PS: Political Science & Politics, 25, 488-491.
51. Marcus, G., Sullivan, J. L., Theiss-Morse, E., & Wood, S. L. (1995). With malice toward some. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
52. Mayer, J., & Abramson, J. (1994). Strange justice: The selling of Clarence Thomas. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
53. McGeever, P. J. (1974). Guilty yes; impeachment, no: Some empirical findings. Public Opinion Quarterly, 89, 289-304.
54. Miller, A. (Ed.). (1994). The complete transcripts of the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings: October 11, 12, 13, 1991. Chicago: Academy Publishers.
55. Miller, W. E., Kinder, D. R., & Rosenstone, S. J. (1993). American National Elections Study, 1992: Pre-and post-election survey. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research.
56. Morrison, T. (Ed.). (1992). Race-ing justice, en-gendering power: Essays on Anita Hill, Clarence Thomas and the construction of social reality. New York: Pantheon.
57. Oakes, P. (1996). The categorization process: Cognition and the group in the social psychology of stereotyping. In W. P. Robinson (Ed.), Social groups and identities: Developing the legacy of Henri Tajfel (pp. 95-119). Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann
58. Page, B. I., & Shapiro, R. Y. (1992). The rational public: Fifty years of trends in Americans’ policy preferences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
59. Petty, R. E., & Krosnick, J. A. (Eds.). (1995). Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
60. Phelps, T. M., & Winternitz, H. (1992). Capitol games: Clarence Thomas, Anita Hill, and the story of a Supreme Court nomination. New York: Hyperion.
61. Reed, A. (1992). The underclass as myth and symbol: The poverty of discourse about poverty. Radical America, 24(1), 21-40.
62. Regan, A. (1994). Rhetoric and political process in the Hill-Thomas hearings. Political Communication, 11, 277-285.
63. Robinson, C., & Powell, L. A. (1996). The postmodern politics of context definition: Competing reality frames in the Hill-Thomas spectacle. Sociological Quarterly, 37, 279-305.
64. Rucinscki, D. (1993). The polls—A review: Rush to judgment? Fast reaction polls in the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas controversy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 575-592.
65. Sapiro, V., Conover, P. J. (1998). The variable gender basis of electoral politics: Gender and context in the 1992 U.S. election. British Journal of Political Science, 27, 497-523.
66. Sears, D. O. (1993). Symbolic politics: A socio-psychological theory. In S. Iyengar & W. J. McGuire (Eds.), Explorations in political psychology (pp. 113-149). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
67. Shefter, M. (1992). Institutional conflict over presidential appointments: The case of Clarence Thomas. PS: Political Science & Politics, 25, 678-679.
68. Sinclair, B. (1992). Senate process, congressional politics, and the Thomas nomination. PS: Political Science & Politics, 25, 477-480.
69. Smith, D. L. (1991). The Thomas spectacle: Power, impotence, and melodrama. Black Scholar, 22, 93-95.
70. Stoecker, R. (1991). Evaluating and rethinking the case study. Sociological Review, 39, 80-112.
71. Talbott, S. (1991, October 28). How tout le Monde missed the story. Time, p. 74.
72. Tesser, A., Martin, L., & Mendolia, M. (1995). The impact of thought on attitude extremity and attitude-behavior consistency. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 73-92). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
73. Thomas, D., McCoy, C., & McBride, A. (1993). Deconstructing the political spectacle: Sex, race, and subjectivity in public responses to Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill “sexual harassment” hearings. American Journal of Political Science, 37, 699-720.
74. Thompson, M. M., Zanna, M. P., & Griffin, D. W. (1995). Let’s not be indifferent about (attitudi-nal) ambivalence. In R. E. Petty & J. A. Krosnick (Eds.), Attitude strength: Antecedents and consequences (pp. 361-386). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
75. Verba, S. (1996). The citizen respondent: Sample surveys and American democracy. American Political Science Review, 90, 1-7.
76. When ratings peaked. (1994, August 22). The New York Times, p. 6.
77. White, J. E. (1991, October 21). The stereotypes of race. Time, p. 66.
78. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
79. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.