Taking late night comedy seriously: How candidate appearances on late night television can engage viewers

Political Research Quarterly

Volumn 63, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 3-15

  Parkin, Michael ^a  

^a OBERLIN COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Elections and voting behavior; Political communication; Political participation; Political psychology; Public opinion

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649241155     PISSN: 10659129     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1065912908327604     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Althaus, Scott L., and Young Mie Kim. 2006. Priming effects in complex information environments: Reassessing the impact of news discourse on presidential approval. Journal of Politics 68 (4): 960-76.
2. Baum, Matthew A. 2002. Sex, lies, and war: How soft news brings foreign policy to the inattentive public. American Political Science Review 96 (1): 91-109.
3. Baum, Matthew A. 2003a. Soft news goes to war: Public opinion and American foreign policy in the new media age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Baum, Matthew A. 2003b. Commentary: Soft news and political knowledge: Evidence of absence or absence of evidence. Political Communication 20:173-90.
5. Baum, Matthew A. 2005. Talking the vote: Why presidential candidates hit the talk show circuit. American Journal of Political Science 49 (2): 213-34.
6. Baum, Matthew A., and Angela S. Jamison. 2006. The Oprah effect: How soft news helps inattentive citizens vote consistently. Journal of Politics 68 (4): 946-59.
7. Baumgartner, Jody, and Jonathan S. Morris. 2006. The Daily Show effect: Candidate evaluations, efficacy, and American youth. American Politics Research 34 (3): 341-67.
8. Billings Gazette. 2004. Kerry seeks to lighten up in TV appearance. September 22. http://billingsgazette.net/articles/2004/09/22/nation/export173967.txt (accessed October 27, 2008).
9. Brewer, Paul R., and Xiaoxia Cao. 2006. Candidate appearances on soft news shows and public knowledge about primary campaigns. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 50 (1): 18-35.
10. CBS News. 2004. Kerry does top-ten on David Letterman's show. September 21. http://cbs2chicago.com/cooler/watercooler_story_265080922.html (accessed December 12th, 2004).
11. Davis, Richard, and Diana Owen. 1998. New media and American politics. New York: Oxford University Press.
12. Druckman, James N. 2003. The power of television images: The first Kennedy-Nixon debate revisited. Journal of Politics 65 (2): 559-71.
13. Frey, Jennifer. 2004. Dr. Phil's advice to candidates: Come on my show. Washington Post. September 29, sec. C, 1.
14. Funk, Carolyn L. 1997. Implications of political expertise in candidate trait evaluations. Political Research Quarterly 50: 675-97.
15. Graber, Doris A. 1990. Seeing is remembering. Journal of Communication 40 (3): 134-55.
16. Graber, Doris A. 1996. Say it with pictures. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 546:85-96.
17. Graber, Doris A. 2001. Processing politics: Learning from television in the Internet age. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
18. Hayden, Joseph. 2002. Covering Clinton: The president and the press in the 1990s. Westport, CT: Praeger.
19. Iyengar, Shanto, and Donald R. Kinder. 1987. News that matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20. Keeter, Scott. 1987. The illusion of intimacy: Television and the role of candidate personal qualities in voter choice. Public Opinion Quarterly 51 (3): 344-58.
21. Kinder, Donald R. 1986. Presidential character revisited. In Political cognition: The 19th annual Carnegie Symposium on Cognition, ed. Richard R. Lau and David O. Sears, 233-55. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. Kinder, Donald R. 2003. Communication and politics in the age of information. In The Oxford handbook of political psychology, ed. David O. Sears, Leonie Huddy, and Robert Jervis, 357-93. New York: Oxford University Press.
23. Kolbert, Elizabeth. 2004. Stooping to conquer: Why candidates need to make fun of themselves. The New Yorker. April 15.
24. Mason, Julie. 2004. Kerry makes TV rounds to aid image; more candidates seeking advantages of popular shows. Houston Chronicle. September 22, sec. A, 14.
25. Miller, Joanne M., and Jon A. Krosnick. 1996. News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: A program of research on the priming hypothesis. In Political persuasion and attitude change, ed. Diana C. Mutz, Paul M. Sniderman, and Richard A. Brody, 79-100. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
26. Miller, Joanne M. 2000. News media impact on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Politically knowledgeable citizens are guided by a trusted source. American Journal of Political Science 44:295-309.
27. Moy, Patricia. 2008. The political effects of late night comedy and talk shows. In Laughing matters: Humor and American politics in the media age, ed. Jody C. Baumgartner and Jonathan S. Morris, 295-314. New York: Routledge.
28. Moy, Patricia, Michael A. Xenos, and Verena K. Hess. 2005. Priming effects of late-night comedy. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 18 (2): 198-210.
29. Niven, David, S. Robert Lichter, and Daniel Amundson. 2003. The political content of late night comedy. Press/Politics 8 (3): 118-33.
30. Patterson, Thom. 2004. A season of TV stumping: Candidates book face-time on talk shows. CNN. September 7. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/07/candidates.talkshows/index.html (accessed October 27, 2008).
31. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 2004. Cable and Internet loom large in fragmented political news universe. http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=200 (accessed October 27, 2008).
32. Price, Vincent, and John Zaller. 1993. Who gets the news? Alterative measures of news reception and their implication for research. Public Opinion Quarterly 57 (2): 133-64.
33. Prior, Markus. 2003. Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference on political knowledge. Political Communication 20:143-71.
34. Prior, Markus. 2005. News vs. entertainment: How increasing media choice widens gaps in political knowledge and turnout. American Journal of Political Science 49 (3): 577-92.
35. Reuters. 2004. Letterman gets big ratings boost from Kerry. September 21. http://entertainment.excite.com/article/id/428464%7Centertainment%7C09-21-2004::16:12%7Creuters.html (accessed October 27, 2008).
36. Sears, David O. 1986. College sophomores in the laboratory: Influence of a narrow base on social psychology's view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:515-30.
37. Sella, Marshall. 2000. The stiff guy vs. the dumb guy. New York Times. September 24, sec. 6, 72.
38. Vasquez, Diego. 2004. Jimmy Kimmel Live in an April pickup. Media Life.com. April 26. http://www.medialifemagazine.com/news2004/apr04/apr26/4_thurs/news5thursday.html (accessed October 27, 2008).
39. Woodward, Calvin. 2000. Candidates look for laughs, votes. Washington Post. March 1. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000301/aponline204131_000.htm (accessed October 27, 2008).
40. Young, Dannagal Goldthwaite. 2004. Late night comedy in Election 2000: Its influence on candidate trait ratings and the moderating effects of political knowledge and partisanship. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 48 (1): 1-22.
41. Young, Dannagal G., and Russell M. Tisinger. 2006. Dispelling late-night myths: News consumption among late-night comedy viewers and the predictors of exposure to various late-night shows. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 11 (3): 113-34.
42. Zaller, John. 2003. A new standard of news quality: Burglar alarms for the monitorial citizen. Political Communication 20 (2): 109-30.