IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v93y1999i01p99-114_21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Has Cable Ended the Golden Age of Presidential Television?

Author

Listed:
  • Baum, Matthew A.
  • Kernell, Samuel

Abstract

For the past 30 years, presidents have enlisted prime-time television to promote their policies to the American people. For most of this era, they have been able to commandeer the national airwaves and speak to “captive†viewers. Recently, however, presidents appear to be losing their audiences. Two leading explanations are the rise of political disaffection and the growth of cable. We investigate both by developing and testing a model of the individual's viewing decision using both cross-sectional (1996 NES survey) and time-series (128 Nielsen audience ratings for presidential appearances between 1969 and 1998) data. We find that cable television but not political disaffection has ended the golden era of presidential television. Moreover, we uncover evidence that both presidents and the broadcast networks have begun adapting strategically to this new reality in scheduling presidential appearances.

Suggested Citation

  • Baum, Matthew A. & Kernell, Samuel, 1999. "Has Cable Ended the Golden Age of Presidential Television?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 93(1), pages 99-114, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:93:y:1999:i:01:p:99-114_21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S000305540021664X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Duca, John V. & Saving, Jason L., 2018. "What drives economic policy uncertainty in the long and short runs: European and U.S. evidence over several decades," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 128-145.
    2. Li Hu & Anqi Li, 2018. "The Politics of Attention," Papers 1810.11449, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2019.
    3. Jimmy Chan & Daniel Stone, 2013. "Media proliferation and partisan selective exposure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 467-490, September.
    4. Christopher Gelpi, 2017. "Democracies in Conflict," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(9), pages 1925-1949, October.
    5. Baum, Matthew A., 2011. "Red, Blue, and the Flu: Media Self-Selection and Partisan Gaps in Swine Flu Vaccinations," Working Paper Series rwp11-010, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    6. John V. Duca & Jason L. Saving, 2016. "Income Inequality and Political Polarization: Time Series Evidence Over Nine Decades," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 62(3), pages 445-466, September.
    7. Matthew A. Baum, 2004. "Going Private," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 48(5), pages 603-631, October.
    8. Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha, 2014. "The Tone of Spanish-Language Presidential News Coverage," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1278-1294, December.
    9. Baum, Matthew A., 2011. "Red, Blue, and the Flu: Media Self-Selection and Partisan Gaps in Swine Flu Vaccinations," Scholarly Articles 4696292, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    10. Markus Prior, 2005. "News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(3), pages 577-592, July.
    11. Joseph E. Uscinski, 2009. "When Does the Public's Issue Agenda Affect the Media's Issue Agenda (and Vice‐Versa)? Developing a Framework for Media‐Public Influence," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 90(4), pages 796-815, December.
    12. John V. Duca & Jason L. Saving, 2017. "Income Inequality, Media Fragmentation, And Increased Political Polarization," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 35(2), pages 392-413, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:93:y:1999:i:01:p:99-114_21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.