Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 15.1: Udani, A., Kimball, D. C., & Fogarty, B. (2018). How local media coverage of voter fraud influences Partisan perceptions in the United States. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 18, 193–210.

Abstract: Extant findings show that voter fraud is extremely rare and difficult to prove in the United States. Voter’s knowledge about voter fraud allegations likely comes through the media, who tend to sensationalize the issue. In this study, we argue that the more voters are exposed to media coverage of voter fraud allegations, the more likely that they will perceive that voter fraud is a frequent problem. We merge the 2012 Survey of Performance of American Elections with state-level media coverage of voter fraud leading up to the 2012 election. Our results show that media coverage of voter fraud is associated with public beliefs about voter fraud. In states where fraud was more frequently featured in local media outlets, public concerns about voter fraud were heightened. In particular, we find that press attention to voter fraud has a larger influence on Republicans than Democrats and Independents. We further find that media coverage of voter fraud does not further polarize partisan perceptions of voter fraud. Rather, political interest moderates state media coverage on voter fraud beliefs only among Republicans. Last, our results provide no support that demographic changes, approval of election administration, or information concerning actual reported voting irregularities have any discernable effects on partisan perceptions.

Journal Article 15.2: Wasburn, P. C. & Wasburn, M. H. (October 2011). Media coverage of women in politics: The curious case of Sarah Palin. Media, Culture, & Society, 33, 1027-1041.

Abstract: Decades of research on media coverage of the campaigns of women running for high public office have identified several patterns of gendered reporting that supposedly have discouraged citizens from voting for women candidates, discouraged them from contributing to women’s campaigns and dissuaded women from entering politics. This study examines the ways in which each of the patterns was evident in media reporting on Sarah Palin, the Republican candidate for Vice President of the United States in the 2008 election. Data reveal a mixed pattern of continuities and differences. The findings suggest that the consequences of gendered reporting may not be uniform. Rather, they can vary according to the issue or symbolic focus of a campaign, and the degree of conflict between a candidate attempting to keep reporting ‘on message’ and the commercial news media concerned with attracting a large market share.

Journal Article 15.3: Payne, J. G. (December 2010). The Bradley effect: Mediated reality of race and politics in the 2008 U.S. presidential election. American Behavioral Scientist, 54, 417-435.

Abstract: This article discusses the origins of the so-called theory known as the “Bradley effect” within the historical context of the 1982 California gubernatorial election and its emergence as a popular, albeit questionable, explanation for Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley’s unexpected loss in which racism is singled out as a major reason. The essay explores the validity of the Bradley effect in politics as well as how campaign operatives, journalists, pollsters, bloggers, and pundits focus on race, sometimes in a synergistic manner, to both validate and dismiss the effect of race on the election.

Journal Article 15.4: Eisinger, R. M., Veenstra, L. R., & Koehn, J. P. (Winter 2007). What media bias? Conservative and liberal labeling in major U.S. newspapers. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 12, 17-36.

Abstract: This article tests the hypothesis that major U.S. newspapers disproportionately label conservative politicians. We quantitatively analyze ideological labels of U.S. congresspersons and senators in newspaper articles. We then qualitatively review these articles, seeking to discern if any patterns exist, and if so, why. Disproportionate labeling of conservatives exists but not in a way that constitutes “bias,” as newspapers often label liberals, at times more than they do conservatives. These labeling patterns may be explained by the rise of conservatives who entered Congress in 1994, the political pejorativization of the word liberal, and the increased conservative ideological tenor of the Congress during the past fifteen years. We conclude by discussing possible implications of our findings.