A Failure to Communicate: Agenda Setting in Media and Policy Studies

Political Communication

Volumn 30, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 175-192

  Wolfe, Michelle ^a   Jones, Bryan D ^a   Baumgartner, Frank R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

agenda setting; framing; policy process

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877279324     PISSN: 10584609     EISSN: 10917675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2012.737419     Document Type: Article

References (131)

1. Althaus, S. L. 2003. When news norms collide, follow the lead: New evidence for press independence. Political Communication, 20: 381 - 414.
2. Altheide, D. L. 1991. The impact of television news formats on social policy. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 35: 3 - 21.
3. Baum, M. and Groeling, T. J. 2010. War stories: The causes and consequences of public views of war, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Baumgartner, F. R., Berry, J. M., Hojnacki, M., Kimball, D. C. and Leech, B. L. 2009. Lobbying and policy change: Who wins, who loses, and why, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
5. Baumgartner, F. R., De Boef, S. L. and Boydstun, A. E. 2008. The decline of the death penalty and the discovery of innocence, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
6. Baumgartner, F. R. and Jones, B. D. 1993. Agendas and instability in American politics, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
7. Baumgartner, F. R. and Jones, B. D., eds. 2002. Policy dynamics, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
8. Baumgartner, F. R. and Mahoney, C. 2008. The two faces of framing: Individual-level framing and collective issue definition in the EU. European Union Politics, 9: 435 - 449.
9. Behr, R. L. and Iyengar, S. 1985. Television news, real-world cues, and changes in the public agenda. Public Opinion Quarterly, 49: 38 - 57.
10. Bennett, W. L. 1990. Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Political Communication, 40: 103 - 125.
11. Bennett, W. L. and Iyengar, S. 2008. A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58: 707 - 731.
12. Bennett, W. L. and Iyengar, S. 2010. The shifting foundations of political communication: Responding to a defense of the media effects paradigm. Journal of Communication, 60: 35 - 39.
13. Bennett, W. L. and Lawrence, R. G. 1995. News icons and the mainstreaming of social change. Journal of Communication, 45: 20 - 39.
14. Berinsky, A. J. and Kinder, D. R. 2006. Making sense of issues through media frames: Understanding the Kosovo crisis. Journal of Politics, 68: 640 - 656.
15. Birkland, T. A. 1997. After disaster: Agenda setting, public policy and focusing events, Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
16. Birkland, T. A. 1998. Focusing events, mobilization and agenda setting. Journal of Public Policy, 18: 53 - 74.
17. Carmines, E. and Stimson, J. A. 1989. Issue evolution: Race and the transformation of American politics, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18. Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. 2007a. Framing public opinion in competitive democracies. American Political Science Review, 101: 637 - 655.
19. Chong, D. and Druckman, J. N. 2007b. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10: 103 - 126.
20. Cobb, R. W. and Elder, C. D. 1972. Participation in American politics: The dynamics of agenda building, 2nd, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
21. Cohen, B. 1963. The press and foreign policy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22. Cook, F. L., Tyler, T. R., Goetz, E. G., Gordon, M. T., Protess, D., Leff, D. R. and Molotch, H. L. 1983. Media and agenda setting: Effects on the public, interest group leaders, policy makers, and policy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47: 16 - 35.
23. Cook, T. 1989. Making laws and making news: Media strategies in the U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
24. Dearing, J. W. and Rogers, E. M. 1996. Agenda-setting, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25. Downs, A. 1972. Up and down with ecology: The issue attention cycle. Public Interest, 28: 28 - 50.
26. Druckman, J. N. 2001a. On the limits of framing effects: Who can frame?. Journal of Politics, 63: 1041 - 1066.
27. Druckman, J. N. 2001b. The implication of framing effects for citizen competence. Political Behavior, 23: 225 - 256.
28. Druckman, J. N. 2004. Political preference formation: Competition, deliberation, and the (ir)relevance of framing effects. American Political Science Review, 98: 761 - 786.
29. Edelman, M. J. 1985. The symbolic uses of politics, Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
30. Enelow, J. M. and Hinich, M. J. 1984. The spatial theory of voting: An introduction, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
31. Entman, R. M. 1989. How the media affect what people think: An information processing approach. Journal of Politics, 51: 347 - 370.
32. Entman, R. M. 1993. Framing: Toward a clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43: 51 - 58.
33. Entman, R. M. 2004. Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
34. Erikson, R. S., Stimson, J. A. and MacKuen, M. 2002. The macro polity, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35. Evatt, D. and Ghanem, S. I. September 2001. Building a scale to measure salience, September, Rome, Italy: Paper presented at the World Association of Public Opinion Research annual conference.
36. Funkhouser, G. R. 1973. The issues of the sixties: An exploratory study in the dynamics of public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 37: 62 - 75.
37. Gamson, W. A. 1989. News as framing. American Behavioral Scientist, 33: 157 - 161.
38. Gamson, W. A. and Modigliani, A. 1989. Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95: 1 - 37.
39. Gans, H. J. 1979. Deciding what's news, New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
40. Ghanem, S. 1996. Media coverage of crime and public opinion: An exploration of the second level of agenda setting, Austin: University of Texas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation
41. Ghanem, S. 1997. " Filling the tapestry: The second level of agenda setting ". In Communication and democracy, Edited by: McCombs, M. E., Shaw, D. L. and Weaver, D. 3 - 14. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Gilliam, F. D. Jr. and Iyengar, S. 2000. Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on the viewing public. American Journal of Political Science, 44: 560 - 573.
43. Gilliam, F. D. Jr., Iyengar, S., Simon, A. and Wright, O. 1996. Crime in black and white: The violent, scary world of local television news. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 1: 6 - 23.
44. Gonzenbach, W. J. 1996. The media, the president, and public opinion: A longitudinal analysis of the drug issue, 1984-1991, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
45. Green-Pedersen, C. and Mortensen, P. B. 2010. Who sets the agenda and who responds to it in the Danish parliament? A new model of issue competition and agenda setting. European Journal of Political Research, 49: 257 - 281.
46. Green-Pedersen, C. and Wolfe, M. 2009. The institutionalization of environmental attention in the United States and Denmark: Multiple- versus single-venue systems. Governance, 22: 625 - 646.
47. Hilgartner, S. and Bosk, C. L. 1988. The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model. American Journal of Sociology, 94: 53 - 78.
48. Iyengar, S. 1991. Is anyone responsible? How television frames political issues, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
49. Iyengar, S. and Kinder, D. L. 1987. News that matters: Television and American opinion, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
50. Iynengar, S. and Simon, A. 1993. News coverage of the Gulf crisis and public opinion: A study of agenda setting, priming, and framing. Communication Research, 20: 365 - 383.
51. Jacobs, L. R. and Shapiro, R. Y. 2000. Politicians don't pander: Political manipulation and the loss of democratic responsiveness, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
52. Jones, B. D. 1994a. A change of mind or a change of focus? A theory of choice reversals in politics. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4: 141 - 177.
53. Jones, B. D. 1994b. Reconceiving decision making in democratic politics: Attention, choice, and public policy, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
54. Jones, B. D. 2001. Politics and the architecture of choice: Bounded rationality and governance, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
55. Jones, B. D. and Baumgartner, F. R. 2005. Politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
56. Jones, B. D., Baumgartner, F. R., Breunig, C., Wlezien, C., Soroka, S. N., Foucault, M. and Walgrave, S. 2009. A general empirical law of public budgets. American Journal of Political Science, 53: 855 - 873.
57. Jones, B. D., Sulkin, T. and Larsen, H. A. 2003. Policy punctuations in American political institutions. American Political Science Review, 97: 151 - 169.
58. Jones, B. D. and Wolfe, M. 2010. Public policy and the mass media: An information processing approachPublic policy and the media: The interplay of mass communication and political decision making (pp. 17-43), Edited by: Koch-Baumgarten, S. and Voltmer, K. New York, NY: Routledge.
59. Kernell, S. 1986. Going public: New strategies of presidential leadership, Washington, DC: CQ Press.
60. Kinder, D. 2007. Curmudgeonly advice. Journal of Communication, 57: 155 - 162.
61. Kingdon, J. W. 1984. Agendas, alternatives, and public policies, Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
62. Klapper, J. T. 1960. The effects of mass communication, Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
63. Krosnick, J. A. and Kinder, D. R. 1990. Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming. American Political Science Review, 84: 497 - 512.
64. Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schweider, D. and Rich, R. F. 2000. Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 62: 790 - 816.
65. Kunda, Z. 1990. The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108: 480 - 498.
66. Lawrence, R. G. 2000. The politics of force, Berkeley: University of California Press.
67. Lawrence, R. G. 2001. " Defining events: Problem definition in the media arena ". In Politics, discourse and American society (pp. 91-110), Edited by: Hart, R. and Sparrow, B. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
68. Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B. and Gaudet, H. 1944. The people's choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign, New York, NY: Duell, Sloan, & Pearce.
69. Lee, J. K. 2009. Incidental exposure to news: Limiting fragmentation in the new media environment, Austin: University of Texas. Unpublished doctoral dissertation
70. Lee, J. K. and McCombs, M. E. in press. " Mapping the psychology of agenda setting ". In Media effects/media psychology, Edited by: Scharrer, E. Oxford, England: Blackwell. &InEd.
71. Linsky, M. 1986. Impact: How the press affects federal policymaking, New York, NY: Norton.
72. Lippman, W. 1922. Public opinion, New York, NY: Macmillan.
73. Lodge, M. and Taber, C. S. 2000. " Three steps toward a theory of motivated political reasoning ". In Elements of reason: Understanding and expanding the limits of political rationality (pp. 183-213), Edited by: Lupia, A., McCubbins, M. D. and Popkin, S. L. London, England: Cambridge University Press.
74. Lord, C. G., Ross, L. and Lepper, M. R. 1979. Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37: 2098 - 2109.
75. Manheim, J. 1991. All the people, all the time: Strategic communication and American politics, Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
76. Manheim, J. 1994. Strategic public diplomacy and American foreign policy: The evolution of influence, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
77. Matthes, J. 2008. Need for orientation as a predictor of agenda-setting effects: Causal evidence from a two-wave panel study. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20: 440 - 453.
78. May, P. J., Workman, S. and Jones, B. D. 2008. Organizing attention: Responses of the bureacracy to agenda disruption. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18: 517 - 541.
79. McCombs, M. E. 1993. The evoluation of agenda-setting research: Twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. Journal of Communication, 43: 58 - 67.
80. McCombs, M. 1999. Personal involvement with the issues of the public agenda. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 11: 152 - 168.
81. McCombs, M. E. 2004. Setting the agenda: The mass media and public opinion, Malden, MA: Blackwell.
82. McCombs, M. E. and Ghanem, S. I. 2001. " The convergence of agenda setting and framing ". In Framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world, Edited by: Reese, S. D., Gandy, O. H. Jr. and Grant, A. E. 67 - 83. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
83. McCombs, M. E., Lopez-Escobar, E. and Llamas, J. P. 2000. Setting the agenda of attributes in the 1996 general election. Journal of Communication, 50: 77 - 92.
84. McCombs, M. E. and Shaw, D. L. 1972. The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36: 176 - 197.
85. McCombs, M., Shaw, D. L. and Weaver, D. 1997. Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers of agenda-setting theory, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
86. McCombs, M. E. and Weaver, D. H. 1985. " Towards a merger of gratifications and agenda setting research ". In Handbook of political communication (pp. 95-108), Edited by: Rosengren, K. E., Wenner, L. A. and Palgreen, P. P. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
87. McGuire, W. 1989. " Theoretical foundations of campaigns ". In Public communication campaigns, 2nd, Edited by: Rice, R. E. and Atkin, C. K. 43 - 65. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
88. Miller, W. E. and Stokes, D. E. 1963. Constituency influence in Congress American Political Science Review, 57, 45-56.
89. Molotch, H. and Lester, M. 1974. News as purposive behavior: On the strategic use of routine events, accidents and scandals. American Sociological Review, 39: 101 - 112.
90. Nelson, B. J. 1986. Making an issue of child abuse: Political agenda setting for social problems, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
91. Nelson, T. E., Clawson, R. A. and Oxley, Z. M. 1997. Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance. American Political Science Review, 91: 567 - 583.
92. Nelson, T. E., Oxley, Z. M. and Clawson, R. A. 1997. Toward a psychology of framing effects. Political Behavior, 19: 221 - 246.
93. Newell, A. and Simon, H. A. 1972. Human problem solving, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
94. Pralle, S. 2003. Venue shopping, political stategy and policy change: The internationalization of Canadian forest advocacy. Journal of Public Policy, 23: 233 - 260.
95. Pralle, S. 2006. The "mouse that roared": Agenda setting in Canadian pesticides politics. Policy Studies Journal, 34: 171 - 194.
96. Protess, D. L., Cook, F. L., Curtin, T. R., Gordon, M. T., Leff, D. R., McCombs, M. E. and Miller, P. 1987. The impact of investigative reporting on public opinion and policymaking targeting toxic waste. Public Opinion Quarterly, 51: 166 - 185.
97. Redford, E. 1969. Democracy in the administrative state, New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
98. Riker, W. H. 1986. The art of political manipulation, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
99. Rochefort, D. A. and Cobb, R. W. 1993. Problem definition, agenda access and policy choice. Policy Studies Journal, 21: 56 - 72.
100. Rochefort, D. A. and Cobb, R. W. 1994. The politics of problem definition: Shaping the policy agenda, Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.
101. Sabatier, P. A. and Jenkins-Smith, H. C., eds. 1993. Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
102. Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. The semisovereign people; a realist's view of democracy in America, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
103. Scheafer, T. 2007. How to evaluate it: The role of story-evaluative tone in agenda setting and priming. Journal of Communication, 57: 21 - 39.
104. Scheufele, D. A. 2000. Agenda-setting, priming, and framing revisited: Another look at cognitive effects of political communication. Mass Communication and Society, 3: 297 - 316.
105. Scheufele, D. A. and Tewksbury, D. 2007. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57: 9 - 20.
106. Schneider, A. and Ingram, H. 1993. Social construction of target populations: Implications for politics and policy. American Political Science Review, 87: 334 - 347.
107. Sellers, P. 2010. Cycles of spin: Strategic communication in the U.S. Congress, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
108. Shaw, D. L. and McCombs, M. E., eds. 1977. The emergence of American political issues, St. Paul, MN: West.
109. Sigal, L. 1973. Reporters and officials: The organization and politics of newsmaking, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
110. Soroka, S. N. 2002. Agenda-setting dynamics in Canada, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada: University of British Columbia Press.
111. Soroka, S. N. and Wlezien, C. 2010. Degrees of democracy: Politics, public opinion, and policy, New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
112. Stimson, J. A., MacKuen, M. B. and Erikson, R. S. 1995. Dynamic representation. American Political Science Review, 89: 543 - 565.
113. Stone, D. 1989. Causal stories and the formation of policy agendas. Political Science Quarterly, 104: 281 - 300.
114. Stone, D. 2002. Policy paradox and political reason: The art of political decision making, 2nd, New York, NY: Norton.
115. Taber, C. S. and Lodge, M. 2006. Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50: 755 - 769.
116. True, J. L., Jones, B. J. and Baumgartner, F. R. 2007. " Punctuated-equilibrium theory: Explaining stability and change in public policymaking ". In Theories of the policy process, 2nd, Edited by: Sabatier, P. A. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. InEd.ed., pp. 155-188
117. Walgrave, S., Lefevere, J. and Nuytemans, M. 2009. Issue ownership stability and change: How political parties claim and maintain issues through media appearances. Political Communication, 26: 153 - 172.
118. Walker, J. L. 1977. Setting the agenda in the U.S. Senate: A theory of problem selection. British Journal of Political Science, 7: 423 - 445.
119. Wanta, W. 1997. The public and the national agenda: How people learn about important issues, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
120. Wanta, W., Stephenson, M. A., Turk, J. V. and McCombs, M. E. 1989. How president's State of the Union talk influenced news media agendas. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 66: 537 - 541.
121. Weaver, D. 1991. Issue salience and public opinion: Are there consequences of agenda-setting?. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 3: 53 - 68.
122. Weaver, D. H. 2007. Thoughts on agenda setting, framing and priming. Journal of Communication, 57: 142 - 147.
123. Weaver, D. H., Graber, D., McCombs, M. E. and Eyal, C. H. 1981. Media agenda setting in a presidential election: Issues, images, and interest, New York, NY: Praeger.
124. Winter, J. P. and Eyal, C. H. 1981. Agenda setting for the civil rights issue. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45: 376 - 383.
125. Wlezien, C. 1995. The public as thermostat. American Journal of Political Science, 39: 981 - 1000.
126. Wolfe, M. 2009. Beyond who leads whom: The media and policymaking in the United States, Unpublished manuscript.
127. Wolfe, M. 2012. Putting on the brakes or pressing on the gas? Media attention and the speed of policymaking. Policy Studies Journal, 40: 109 - 126.
128. Workman, S. 2009. " Unpublished doctoral dissertation ". In Economizing attention: Agenda setting and the influence of bureaucracy in American politics, Seattle: University of Washington.
129. Workman, S., Jones, B. D. and Jochim, A. E. 2009. Information processing and policy dynamics. Policy Studies Journal, 37: 75 - 92.
130. Workman, S., Jones, B. D. and Jochim, A. E. 2010. " decisionmaking, and the bureaucracy ". In Agenda settingThe handbook of bureaucracy (pp. 612-637), Edited by: Durant, R. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
131. Zucker, H. G. 1978. " The variable nature of news media influence ". In Communication yearbook 2 (pp. 225-240), Edited by: Ruben, B. D. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.