UK Election Analysis 2017: Media, Voters and the Campaign (original) (raw)
Related papers
UK Election Analysis 2019: Media, Voters and the Campaign
UK Election Analysis 2019: Media, Voters and the Campaign, 2019
Featuring 85 contributions from over 100 leading UK and international academics, this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections and early research insights on the 2019 UK General Election from the cutting edge of media and politics research. Published 10 days after the election, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers original ways of understanding the campaign. Contributions also bring a rich range of disciplinary influences, from political science to cultural studies, journalism studies to psychology.
UK Election Analysis 2024: Media, Voters and the Campaign
UK Election Analysis 2024: Media, Voters and the Campaign, 2024
Featuring more than 100 contributions from leading UK academics, this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections and early research insights on the 2024 UK General Election from the cutting edge of media and politics research. Published 10 days after the election, contributions are short and accessible for a wide range of audiences. As with our previous reports, authors provide authoritative analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers original ways of understanding the election.
UK Election Analysis 2015: Media, Voters and the Campaign
Featuring 71 contributions from leading UK academics, this publication captures the immediate thoughts, reflections and early research insights on the 2015 UK General Election from the cutting edge of media and politics research. Published 10 days after the election, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers original ways of understanding the election. Contributions also bring a rich range of disciplinary influences, from political science to fan studies, journalism studies to advertising.
Covering the vote: UK coverage of Brexit, Jeremy Corbyn, and the 2017 General Election
2018
The need to examine how news media (print, broadcast, and online) cover political events rests in no small part on journalism’s role as a 'fourth estate' or a 'watchdog'. Both terms refer to the role of journalists in keeping government to account, through reporting in a manner that produces a knowledgeable and critical electorate. This paper argues that the current political climate in the UK, Brexit, the ensuing 2017 General Election, and the introduction of controversial political figures make the need for this re-assessment of print, broadcast, and online journalism in the UK ever more pertinent.
This article introduces a dual perspective to the study of mediatization of politics, a political actor-centric and a media actor-centric perspective. It applies both perspectives to a case study of the 2015 UK General Election campaign. The media actor-centric perspective focuses on push forces of mediatization, manifested in proactive, interventionist reporting methods. The political actor-centric perspective focuses on pull forces of mediatization, referring to how candidates and parties purposefully draw media logic into the political world in order to achieve better their campaign goals. We argue that the Conservative Party and Labour Party, when exposed to equal push forces, employed different pull strategies in the 2015 UK General Election Campaign. The article uses a set of five indicators to recognize push forces that focus on the style of questions used by journalists when interrogating politicians on TV election programmes (reflecting media actor-centric mediatization). It finds clear indications of assertiveness, adversarialism and accountability in the news approach of the BBC. To recognize pull forces, the article uses a set of seven indicators developed from the literature on campaign professionalism (reflecting political actor-centric mediatization) and finds a considerable imbalance in the effective use of pull strategies between the Conservative and Labour Parties. This latter point leads to what we call lop-sided mediatization. The
US Election Analysis 2016: Media, Voters and the Campaign
Featuring 83 contributions from leading academics and emerging scholars across the world, this publication captures the immediate thoughts and early research insights on the 2016 US Presidential Election from the cutting edge of media and politics research. Published 10 days after the election, these contributions are short and accessible. Authors provide authoritative analysis of the campaign, including research findings or new theoretical insights; to bring readers original ways of understanding the election and its consequences. Contributions also bring a rich range of disciplinary influences, from political science to popular culture, journalism studies to advertising. We hope this makes for a vibrant and engaging read.
This study reassesses the ability of the mass media to influence voter opinions directly. Combining data on media content with individuals' assessments of British political parties during the 2005 general election campaign allows a test of newspapers' persuasive influence in a way previously considered a 'virtual impossibility'. Utilizing repeated measures from the 2005 BES campaign panel, multilevel regression analysis reveals significant impact of partisan slant not just on the evaluation of the party mentioned but also on evaluations of its competitor(s). The strongest evidence of direct media persuasion is provided by the finding that variation in slant over the campaign drives how undecided voters evaluate the incumbent government party, even when controlling for a newspaper's average partisan slant. The idea of the media as active persuader of the public has waxed and waned in media research over the past decades. The pervasiveness of the media is now accepted, but its persuasiveness is often dismissed. This article aims to challenge this notion, in line with recent work in political science and political communication investigating the conditions under which partisan bias and editorial comment can have a direct and directional impact on public opinion. 1