IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/b/zbw/esmono/175436.html
   My bibliography  Save this book

The Manifesto-Media Link: How Mass Media Mediate Manifesto Messages

Author

Listed:
  • Merz, Nicolas

Abstract

This study analyzes whether media coverage covers messages from parties’ electoral programs (manifestos). Electoral programs contain detailed information on a party’s future policy-making. However, few voters read electoral programs. Still, prior research often assumed that the content of manifestos is known to voters because media disseminate the content of manifestos to voters. This dissertation evaluates this “mediation assumption” empirically, and analyzes whether and how the mass media cover parties’ electoral programs during the electoral campaign. If media coverage did not reflect parties’ electoral programs, citizens would have no chance to base their vote choice on evaluations of those programs. This study introduces the concept of the manifesto-media link in order to describe how media coverage can reflect programmatic offers. The manifesto-media link is formulated as three conditions that can be empirically evaluated and tested in a similar way to the conditions of the responsible party model. These are: First, media must cover similar issues to those that parties cover in their electoral programs. Second, media coverage must link issues with parties that emphasize these issues more than their competitors, in order to inform about the parties’ issue priorities. Third, media must frame parties as left or right in a way that represents how parties emphasize left or right positions in their own manifestos. Methodologically, the study combines secondary content analytical data on media coverage during the electoral campaign with data based on electoral programs. The findings suggest that the manifesto-media link is stable and robust. There is little to no systematic bias in favor of a certain type of party, however there are differences between quality and tabloid media. These findings contribute to our understanding of political representation and the functioning of political competition.

Suggested Citation

  • Merz, Nicolas, 2017. "The Manifesto-Media Link: How Mass Media Mediate Manifesto Messages," EconStor Books, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 175436, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:esmono:175436
    DOI: 10.18452/18863
    Note: Dissertationsschrift / PhD Thesis, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Kultur-, Sozial- und Bildungswissenschaftliche Fakultät, 2017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/175436/1/full-text-Merz-Manifesto.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18452/18863?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guy D. Whitten & Laron K. Williams, 2011. "Buttery Guns and Welfare Hawks: The Politics of Defense Spending in Advanced Industrial Democracies," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(1), pages 117-134, January.
    2. Wenzelburger, Georg, 2015. "Parties, Institutions and the Politics of Law and Order: How Political Institutions and Partisan Ideologies Shape Law-and-Order Spending in Twenty Western Industrialized Countries," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 45(3), pages 663-687, July.
    3. Mattia Zulianello, 2014. "Analyzing party competition through the comparative manifesto data: some theoretical and methodological considerations," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1723-1737, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Niklas Potrafke, 2020. "Dragnet-Controls and Government Ideology," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(5), pages 485-501, July.
    2. Vincenzo Bove & Leandro Elia & Massimiliano Ferraresi, 2023. "Immigration, Fear of Crime, and Public Spending on Security," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(1), pages 235-280.
    3. Klomp, Jeroen, 2023. "Political budget cycles in military expenditures: A meta-analysis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 1083-1102.
    4. David Shin, 2020. "The Military in Politics and Democracy: Its Impact on Government Spending for Education and Health," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1810-1826, September.
    5. Una Hakvåg, 2017. "Russian defense spending after 2010: the interplay of personal, domestic, and foreign policy interests," Post-Soviet Affairs, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(6), pages 496-510, November.
    6. Helmut Herwartz & Bernd Theilen, 2021. "Government ideology and fiscal consolidation: Where and when do government parties adjust public spending?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 187(3), pages 375-401, June.
    7. Klomp, Jeroen, 2023. "Defending election victory by attacking company revenues: The impact of elections on the international defense industry," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. Bove, Vincenzo & Efthyvoulou, Georgios & Navas, Antonio, 2017. "Political cycles in public expenditure: butter vs guns," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 582-604.
    9. Johannes Blum & Niklas Potrafke, 2020. "Does a Change of Government Influence Compliance with International Agreements? Empirical Evidence for the NATO Two Percent Target," Defence and Peace Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(7), pages 743-761, October.
    10. Potrafke, Niklas, 2020. "General or central government? Empirical evidence on political cycles in budget composition using new data for OECD countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    11. Merz, Nicolas, 2017. "Gaining voice in the mass media: The effect of parties’ strategies on party–issue linkages in election news coverage," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 52(4), pages 436-460.
    12. Matthew Fuhrmann, 2020. "When Do Leaders Free‐Ride? Business Experience and Contributions to Collective Defense," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(2), pages 416-431, April.
    13. Brender, Agnes, 2018. "Government Ideology and Arms Exports," ILE Working Paper Series 21, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    14. Vincenzo Bove & Roberto Nisticò, 2014. "Coups d’état and defense spending: a counterfactual analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 321-344, December.
    15. Becker Jordan & Kuokštytė Ringailė & Kuokštis Vytautas, 2023. "The Political Economy of Transatlantic Security – A Policy Perspective," The Economists' Voice, De Gruyter, vol. 20(1), pages 55-77, June.
    16. Johannes Blum, 2020. "Democracy’s Third Wave and National Defense Spending," ifo Working Paper Series 339, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    17. Björn Kauder & Niklas Potrafke & Simone Winterer, 2015. "The Growth of Defense Spending in Germany (1951–2011): What was the Influence of the Political Parties?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 68(10), pages 19-26, May.
    18. Rafał Woźniak & Jacek Lewkowicz, 2023. "Can We Have More Butter and Guns Simultaneously? An Endogeneity Perspective," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 2, pages 28-46.
    19. Anca Turcu & R. Urbatsch, 2020. "Go Means Green: Diasporas’ Affinity for EcologicalGroups," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 20(1), pages 82-102, February.
    20. Potrafke, Niklas, 2017. "Partisan politics: The empirical evidence from OECD panel studies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 712-750.

    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:zbw:esmono:175436. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    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.