IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v62y2018i3p535-550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Electoral Effects of Biased Media: Russian Television in Ukraine

Author

Listed:
  • Leonid Peisakhin
  • Arturas Rozenas

Abstract

We use plausibly exogenous variation in the availability of the Russian analog television signal in Ukraine to study how a media source with a conspicuous political agenda impacts political behavior and attitudes. Using highly disaggregated election data and an original survey, we estimate that Russian television substantially increased average electoral support for parties and candidates with a “pro‐Russian” agenda in the 2014 presidential and parliamentary elections. Evidence suggests that this effect is attributable to persuasion rather than differential mobilization. The effectiveness of biased media varied in a politically consequential way: Its impact was largest on voters with strong pro‐Russian priors but was less effective, and to some degree even counter‐effective, in persuading those with strong pro‐Western priors. Our finding suggests that exposing an already polarized society to a biased media source can result in even deeper polarization.

Suggested Citation

  • Leonid Peisakhin & Arturas Rozenas, 2018. "Electoral Effects of Biased Media: Russian Television in Ukraine," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(3), pages 535-550, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:62:y:2018:i:3:p:535-550
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12355
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12355?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cantarella, Michele & Fraccaroli, Nicolò & Volpe, Roberto, 2023. "Does fake news affect voting behaviour?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    2. Grossman, Gene M. & Helpman, Elhanan, 2023. "Electoral competition with fake news," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Jetter, Michael & Walker, Jay K., 2022. "News coverage and mass shootings in the US," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    4. Gorodnichenko, Yuriy & Pham, Tho & Talavera, Oleksandr, 2021. "Social media, sentiment and public opinions: Evidence from #Brexit and #USElection," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    5. Ashani Amarasinghe & Paul A. Raschky, 2022. "Competing for Attention - The Effect of Talk Radio on Elections and Political Polarization in the US," SoDa Laboratories Working Paper Series 2022-02, Monash University, SoDa Laboratories.
    6. Belmonte, Alessandro & Rochlitz, Michael, 2019. "The political economy of collective memories: Evidence from Russian politics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 229-250.
    7. Artem Zakharchenko & Tomáš Peráček & Solomiia Fedushko & Yuriy Syerov & Olha Trach, 2021. "When Fact-Checking and ‘BBC Standards’ Are Helpless: ‘Fake Newsworthy Event’ Manipulation and the Reaction of the ‘High-Quality Media’ on It," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-13, January.
    8. Alessandro Belmonte & Michael Rochlitz, 2018. "The Political Economy of Collective Memories: Evidence from Russian Politics," HSE Working papers WP BRP 59/PS/2018, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    9. Elodie Douarin, 2021. "Institutional Change in Transition: An Evolving Research Agenda," Springer Books, in: Elodie Douarin & Oleh Havrylyshyn (ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Comparative Economics, edition 1, chapter 17, pages 429-457, Springer.
    10. Lee, Jeoung Yul & Jiménez, Alfredo & Choi, Seong-jin & Choi, Yun Hyeong, 2022. "Ideological polarization and corporate lobbying activity: The contingent impact of corruption distance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 448-461.
    11. Christian Gläßel & Katrin Paula, 2020. "Sometimes Less Is More: Censorship, News Falsification, and Disapproval in 1989 East Germany," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(3), pages 682-698, July.
    12. Scott Williamson & Mashail Malik, 2021. "Contesting narratives of repression: Experimental evidence from Sisi’s Egypt," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 58(5), pages 1018-1033, September.

    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:wly:amposc:v:62:y:2018:i:3:p:535-550. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    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.