Page 262 - Media Effects Advances in Theory and Research

9. POLITICAL COMMUNICATION EFFECTS 251

construct the news to fit their own experiences (McLeod et al., 1987; Mor-
ley, 1980; Philo, 1990). The resulting protocols are often impressive in their
sense-making structure, if not their factual basis. Future research might
test whether variations in characteristics of news (e.g., Bennett, 2000)
restrict complexity of understanding.

Identification of Key Issues

The media have a responsibility not only to identify key issues but also
to analyze the forces that have formed them and the possibilities for their
resolution. Critics charge that the agenda set by the media is not broad,
balanced, or meaningful. Rather, it is set from the agenda of dominant
institutions. Decontextualized and ahistorical presentation of issues are
said to lead to issues being understood as little more than labels without
consequences. Abstract issues that are difficult to portray visually, and
those requiring specialized knowledge seldom found among news staffs,
may have difficulty getting onto the media agenda. Lack of meaningful
agenda setting may have systemic consequences in restricting govern-
mental decisions to immediate appearances and short-term payoffs.
Adoption of the media agenda, being most common among those least
attached to the political system, has implications for greater system
instability.
The media agenda undoubtedly does affect audience judgments of the
importance of issues. More research is needed, however, on the processes
by which the agenda is set, including the struggles of contending powers
to control language as well as priorities of the agenda. It matters a great
deal, for example, whether an insurgent army is framed in the press as
“brave freedom fighters” or as “hired guns,” and perhaps even more
whether the audience adopts that frame (McLeod et al., 1990).

Provision of Platforms for Advocacy

Democratic change depends on consideration of a wide range of views
and proposals. The media thus could be judged on how well they provide
for “intelligible and illuminating platforms” from which politicians and
spokespersons of various causes can make appeals (Gurevitch & Blumler,
1990). Public access cable channels have very low viewership, and main-
stream media are apt to grant access only if the group takes direct action
whose illegality or unusual character makes it newsworthy. Even main-
stream groups are forced to conform to media practices by “running the
news value gauntlet” (Blumler, 1990). The ideologies of objectivity and
press autonomy contribute to resist access; journalists tend to see advo-
cacy as a threat to a free press and to control over their own jobs.