Are There Academic Studies on Media Overexposure?
As a quick follow up to John’s post, the discussion today at Politico’s Arena is also on the topic of Obama’s recent media blitz. One of the questions that has come up in the media once again since Sunday is whether Obama is overexposed (see here, here; and here). With all this discussion, I was wondering whether there was any political science research on the topic. Has anyone ever done a study linking frequency of a chief executive’s media exposure to, for example, public approval of that executive and/or legislative success in particular policy areas?
Comments
Franklin Roosevelt once noted - in defending the relative infrequency of his “fireside chats” and other public speeches - that “the public psychology …cannot …be attuned for long periods of time to a constant repetition of the highest note in the scale.” Of course he was only dealing with print and radio at that point.
While I don’t study the “public presidency” per se the literature as I understand it suggests that salience is a mixed blessing for an issue’s chances of success in Congress. Some salience is helpful - too much, though, and positions harden (since members know that their core constituencies are watching their vote.)
There is little systematic evidence to show that even a popular president can use the “bully pulpit” to sway public opinion on behalf of a specific piece of legislation - George Edwards’s On Deaf Ears (Yale, 2006) is a good presentation of that thesis. And at this point few would argue that “going public” (cf Sam Kernell’s book) itself changes Congressional minds, either. However, there is room in the literature for a “bank shot”: there are circumstances in which presidents can use public pressure to change the bargaining calculations of legislators in ways that might improve the prospects for a specific legislative outcome.
Posted by: Andy Rudalevige![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.themonkeycage.org/nav-commenters.gif)
|
September 22, 2009 02:50 PM