The election of Donald Trump has reaffirmed that presidents are still able to lead the news agenda in the US. But, can presidents use this power to lead debates towards legislative fixes in important policy areas? In new research that examines 14 years of presidential news coverage, Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha and Ronald J. McGauvran find that presidential attention appears to have ..

Eshbaugh-Soha, Matthew

McGauvran, Ronald J.

LSE Research Online

Even	in	today’s	fragmented	media	environment,	thepresident	still	has	the	power	to	lead	the	debate	onincome	inequalityThe	election	of	Donald	Trump	has	reaffirmed	that	presidents	are	still	able	to	lead	thenews	agenda	in	the	US.	But,	can	presidents	use	this	power	to	lead	debates	towardslegislative	fixes	in	important	policy	areas?	In	new	research	that	examines	14	years	ofpresidential	news	coverage,	Matthew	Eshbaugh-Soha	and	Ronald	J.	McGauvranfind	that	presidential	attention	appears	to	have	led	news	coverage	of	inequality,	apattern	that	is	especially	true	of	Democratic	presidents.	Despite	this	relationship,	theywrite,	presidents	often	do	not	respond	further	to	the	increased	news	attention,	meaning	that	federal	policyresponses	are	unlikely.Of	any	single	American,	the	president	is	in	the	best	position	to	lead	the	news	agenda.	This	is	changing,	though;technological	advancements	and	the	increasing	variety	of	news	options	have	created	an	unpredictable	newsenvironment	that	is	eroding	the	president’s	place	as	the	top	agenda-setter	in	US	politics.		In	new	research,	weargue	that	presidents,	particularly	Democratic	presidents,	can	lead	most	news	coverage	of	income	inequality,although	their	power	insufficient	to	produce	major	legislative	changes.If	presidents	hope	to	generate	lasting	policy	change	on	important	issues,	affecting	news	coverage	is	the	first	stepin	doing	so.	As	Americans	enjoy	more	news	and	entertainment	choices,	however,	presidents	are	no	longerguaranteed	access	to	the	large	viewing	audiences	they	once	had.	To	be	sure,	the	increased	diversity	of	availablemedia	choices	supplies	presidents	with	more	options	when	communicating	their	policy	agendas.	They	are	nolonger	restricted	to	three	broadcast	networks	and	national	newspapers,	a	characteristic	of	the	broadcast	era.Even	so,	fragmented	media	incentivizes	the	public	to	ignore	presidential	politics,	which	may	simultaneouslyundermine	the	president’s	ability	to	lead	all	news	coverage,	and	thus	those	issues	the	nation	deems	important,through	their	public	rhetoric.On	many	important	issues,	leading	news	coverage	is	often	a	precursor	to	forcing	legislative	action	(depending	onwhether	the	president’s	party	controls	Congress,	of	course.)	One	important	issue	that	has	been	at	the	forefront	ofthe	public’s	consciousness	since	the	global	financial	crisis	of	2008	is	income	inequality.	It	has	dominated	ourpolitics	for	the	last	decade,	and	was	an	important	part	of	the	2016	presidential	race.	Although	some	researchsuggests	that	Republican	economic	policies	have	compounded	inequality,	none	of	this	research	underscores	theimportance	of	media	coverage	to	the	prospects	for	policy	change	or	the	role	presidents	play	in	encouraging	newsto	cover	the	topic.	Although	our	research	stops	short	of	answering	whether	presidents	who	prioritize	the	issue	andlead	news	coverage	also	affect	income	inequality	through	policymaking,	we	do	show	that	presidents	who	speakabout	income	inequality	influence	the	national	policy	debate.To	see	whether	presidents	have	influenced	news	coverage	in	an	increasingly	diverse	news	environment,	we	codeweekly	news	coverage	from	1999	through	2013	for	newspapers	(New	York	Times	and	Washington	Post),broadcast	(NBC	and	CBS)	and	cable	television	news	(CNN,	Fox	News	Channel	(FNC),	and	MSNBC)	transcripts,and	political	websites	(slate.com	and	nationalreview.com).	The	figures	included	document	some	importantvariation	by	news	media,	which	also	tell	an	important	story	of	the	ebb	and	flow	of	news	coverage	of	this	importantissue:	News	coverage	fluctuates	predictably	according	to	events	that	drive	much	news	coverage.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Even in today’s fragmented media environment, the president still has the power to lead the debate onincome inequalityPage 1 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-10-24Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/10/24/even-in-todays-fragmented-media-environment-the-president-still-has-the-power-to-lead-the-debate-on-income-inequality/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/“DSC_8882”	by	Dean	Chahim	is	licensed	under	CC	BY	NC	SA	2.0The	importance	of	income	inequality	has	varied	by	presidential	administration.	In	the	late	1990s,	Bill	Clintonheightened	attention	to	the	issue	by	arguing	that	the	economic	boom	of	the	late	1990s	should	extend	beyond	afew,	who	benefited	greatly,	to	an	even	broader	segment	of	American	society.	Not	unlike	other	policy	issues,income	inequality	fell	off	the	national	agenda	when	President	Bush	turned	his	attention	elsewhere,	only	to	riseagain	during	the	2004	presidential	election	and	the	accompanying	economic	slowdown.	Bush	had	to	respond	toJohn	Kerry’s	charge	that	the	Bush	tax	cuts	hurt	lower	and	middle	class	Americans.		Although	this	criticism	did	notcost	him	reelection,	it	did	reinforce	the	conventional	wisdom	the	income	inequality	worsens	under	RepublicanAdministrations.	Naturally,	attention	to	income	inequality	rose	again	after	the	2008	financial	meltdown	and	theGreat	Recession	that	followed.	Without	a	consensus	on	how	to	address	the	issue	at	the	federal	level,	the	firstyear	of	the	Obama	Administration	witnessed	the	rise	of	the	Tea	Party	and	Occupy	Wall	Street	movements,	eachof	which	spoke	to	the	larger	issue	of	income	inequality	with	the	latter	generating	a	spike	in	news	coverage	of	theissue	(see	Figure	1).	Figure	1	–	Weekly	Attention	to	Income	Inequality,	by	Type	of	News	SourceUSApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Even in today’s fragmented media environment, the president still has the power to lead the debate onincome inequalityPage 2 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-10-24Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/10/24/even-in-todays-fragmented-media-environment-the-president-still-has-the-power-to-lead-the-debate-on-income-inequality/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/Sources:	coded	from	transcripts	retrieved	from	Lexis-Nexis	Academic,	Public	Papers	of	the	Presidents,	and	from	onlineUSApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Even in today’s fragmented media environment, the president still has the power to lead the debate onincome inequalityPage 3 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-10-24Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/10/24/even-in-todays-fragmented-media-environment-the-president-still-has-the-power-to-lead-the-debate-on-income-inequality/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/websites.The	president’s	attention	(collected	from	weekly	mentions	of	income	inequality	in	the	Public	Papers	of	thePresidents)	not	only	correlates	with	this	news	coverage,	but	also	appears	to	have	led	it.	Indeed,	the	impact	ofpresidential	attention	on	news	coverage	is	quite	large,	as	presidential	attention	to	income	inequality	has	led	to	anincrease	of	news	coverage	of	it	across	most	news	sources	except	surprisingly	for	broadcast	television	news.	This	is	compelling	evidence	in	favor	of	presidential	leadership	of	the	news	even	within	the	fragmented	mediaenvironment	of	the	post-broadcast	age.	The	reverse	does	not	hold,	however;	news	coverage	of	income	inequalityfails	to	influence	presidential	attention	to	it.		Finally,	we	find	that	Democratic	(not	Republican)	presidents	are	theprimary	leaders	of	coverage	of	income	inequality	just	as	the	Occupy	Wall	Street	movement	caused	a	spike	incoverage	of	the	issue.Our	findings	have	two	important	implications.	First,	they	support	the	partisan	nature	of	income	inequality:Democrats	prefer	to	prioritize	income	inequality	and	are	more	likely	to	use	their	public	rhetoric	as	a	vehicle	tofocus	national	attention	on	it.	Second,	the	lack	of	a	reciprocal	relationship	between	the	president	and	news	mediasuggests	one	reason	for	why	significant	policy	change	on	income	inequality	has	been	lacking	at	the	federal	level.If	media	attention	to	an	issue	increases	in	response	to	presidential	speeches	about	it	or	events	related	to	it	(e.g.,Occupy	Wall	Street),	but	presidents	do	not	respond	further	to	this	increased	news	attention	in	their	publicspeeches	(and,	eventually,	as	part	of	their	legislative	agendas),	then	a	major	federal	policy	response	may	beunlikely.	After	all,	policy	change	is	most	likely	when	the	news	media,	presidents,	and	other	federal	institutionsshare	the	same	priorities.In	the	absence	of	the	clear	and	consistent	convergence	of	presidential	and	news	priorities,	policy	change	isunlikely	but	not	impossible.	There	are	myriad	avenues	to	the	legislative	agenda,	after	all,	whether	by	policyentrepreneurs	or	through	institutional	responses	to	crises	or	other	events	that	may	transcend	predictable	andpartisan	voting	patterns.	Given	our	findings,	it	is	likely	that	significant	policy	changes	on	income	inequality	arelikely	to	come	from	somewhere	other	than	the	White	House.This	article	is	based	on	the	paper,	‘Presidential	Leadership,	the	News	Media,	and	Income	Inequality’,	inPolitical	Research	Quarterly.Please	read	our	comments	policy	before	commenting.Note:		This	article	gives	the	views	of	the	author,	and	not	the	position	of	USAPP	–	American	Politics	and	Policy,nor	of	the	London	School	of	Economics.	Shortened	URL	for	this	post:	http://bit.ly/2iv0RLY_________________________________________	About	the	authorsMatthew	Eshbaugh-Soha	–	University	of	North	TexasMatthew	Eshbaugh-Soha,	is	Department	Chair	and	Professor	of	Political	Science	at	the	Universityof	North	Texas		His	research	focuses	on	American	political	institutions,	specifically	the	presidencyand	mass	media,	and	public	policy.		He	is	the	author	of	nearly	three	dozen	scholarly	articles	and	twobooks,	the	most	recent	of	which	is	Breaking	through	the	Noise:	Presidential	Leadership,	PublicOpinion,	and	the	News	Media	(Stanford	University	Press).Ronald	J.	McGauvran	–	University	of	North	TexasRonald	J.	McGauvran	is	a	PhD	Candidate	at	the	University	of	North	Texas,	with	research	interestsin	economic	inequality	and	political	behavior.	His	dissertation,	The	Middle	Matters:	PoliticalResponses	to	Income	Inequality	in	an	American	State,	examines	the	participatory	effects	of	incomeinequality	at	the	community	level.USApp – American Politics and Policy Blog: Even in today’s fragmented media environment, the president still has the power to lead the debate onincome inequalityPage 4 of 4		Date originally posted: 2017-10-24Permalink: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2017/10/24/even-in-todays-fragmented-media-environment-the-president-still-has-the-power-to-lead-the-debate-on-income-inequality/Blog homepage: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/

Even in today's fragmented media environment, the president still has the power to lead the debate on income inequality

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online