Of Horse Race and Policy Issues:
Of Horse Race and Policy Issues:
A Case Study of Gender
in Coverage of a Gubernatorial Election by
Two Major Metropolitan Newspapers
by
Shirley A. Serini, Ph.D.
Ball State University
and
Angela A. Powers, Ph.D.
Northern Illinois University
and
Susan Johnson, Graduate Student
Northern Illinois University
For Submission to The Association for Journalism and Mass
Communications
August 1996
Of Horse Race and Policy Issues:
A Case Study of Gender
in Coverage of a Gubernatorial Election by
Two Major Metropolitan Newspapers
Calling the race has gained significant importance in media
coverage--Who's ahead? Who's behind? Who's the favorite? Is this obsession
with tracking the contenders displacing coverage of issues? If so, is it an
across-the-board displacement, or does gender impact the balance?
While researchers have established that coverage of the horse race
aspect of presidential campaigns has overtaken coverage of the issues,[1] little
has been done to examine whether issues and horse race are balanced any
differently in a race that includes women. This case study, while not
generalizable, provides an important opportunity to examine the relationship
between a female candidate and the media. A Caucasian female candidate (Dawn
Clark Netsch) ran against a Caucasian male candidate (Richard Phelan) and an
African-American male candidate (Roland Burris) in the 1994 Illinois democratic
gubernatorial primary. Netsch won, even though Phelan was the initial favorite.
It is coverage of that race that is discussed here.
While numerous daily and weekly papers serve the state of Illinois,
this study focuses on coverage in the Chicago Sun Times and the Chicago Tribune.
Limiting the study in this way made it both manageable in terms of number of
stories, and feasible in terms of time and expense. The two newspapers have some
of the largest circulations in the state and are recognized as editorially
different--the Tribune appeals to a more conservative, white collar audience;
the Sun Times appeals to a more liberal, blue collar audience. The combination
of the two gives some balance to the concern that editorial bias may influence
coverage.[2]
Three questions are addressed here: 1) What is the relationship
between horse race coverage, policy issues coverage and the candidate in a race
in which a female runs against male candidates; 2) does that relationship change
during the campaign; and 3) from the perspective of the female candidate, what
can account for such change? Because type of coverage can affect the outcome of
the race, these are important questions for future female candidates as well as
for those who shape the news.
This paper begins with current research on political coverage and
the media with special emphasis on coverage of the horse race and policy issues.
That is followed by an examination of media coverage of female political
candidates.
Political Coverage and the Media
The relationship between media usage and voter's perceptions of
candidates, and candidate image and voting probabilities has been suggested in
previous research.[3] Choi and Becker, for example, found that voting confidence
is indirectly affected by media use.[4] Kennamer suggests that the probability
of voting is both directly and indirectly influenced by media attention.
Individuals form preferences for candidates based in part on the candidate's
behavioral images,[5] which are frequently encountered on television. Reliance
on television news was found to be related to voting probability by Elliott and
Sothirajah.[6] Weaver and Drew found media to be significant sources of
information about candidates.[7] St. Dizier found that, when available
information about a candidate is minimal, media endorsements are more
influential than political party identification. Rosenberg and Elliott found
newspapers, in particular, to be important disseminators of political
information.[8] Iyengar, Peters and Kinder found media to have "enormous"
consequences: "Candidates for political office not taken seriously by news
organizations quickly discover that neither are they taken seriously by anybody
else."[9] Erbring, Goldenberg and Miller found that media coverage serve as
"triggers" to stimulate perception.[10]
Increasingly, studies have shown that media concentrate more on
aspects of the contest--winning and losing, strategy and logistics, appearances
and excitement--than on the issues.[11] Recently, attention has been focused
specifically on this horse race coverage in lieu the issues, a phenomenon that
appears to have consequences for the outcome of the election.[12] Brady and
Johnston argue that while people do learn about the more serious issues during
the campaign, they learn about those issues "too slowly" because coverage of the
horse race takes precedence early in the primary.[13] In a study of research
done in the area of voting behavior, Kahn and Goldenberg find that there are
three important types of campaign coverage: horse race, issue, and trait
coverage, with horse race receiving the largest share. "The discussion of the
horse race, at the expense of issue coverage, occurs in both television and
newspaper coverage of presidential elections."[14] Johnson argues for the
importance of examining the horse race:
...the consequences of the media's fascination with the
horse race were hardly trivial in the 1988
primaries...horse-race
coverage undoubtedly had a profound influence on the course of
the
nominating campaigns.
The horse race has dominated election coverage for at
least the last five elections and can alter the course of a
campaign (p.
307).[15]
Johnson also found that horse-race coverage changes during the
campaign, concluding that "some candidates clearly benefited and others were
hurt by the patterns of horse-race coverage."[16]
Kahn and Goldenberg argue that gender differences in the media can
be of consequence "because the amount of coverage a candidate receives is
related to the voter's recognition of that candidate."[17] It is for that reason
that the study of media coverage of women in politics is important, and it is to
that emerging body of literature that this study will contribute.
Media Coverage of Female Political Candidates
Implicit in an understanding of the portrayal of female political
candidates in the media is an understanding of the portrayal of women in the
media. Research on the portrayal of women in the news finds that media reinforce
the stereotype that a woman's feminine appearance is her primary asset.[18] Yet
Sapiro argues that women, as politicians, enter the "rough-and-tumble" world of
men that involves "competition, aggressiveness, power, independence, rational
decision-making among hard choices, and corruption."[19] To play in a man's
arena, women learn to play by men's rules. For example, in an analysis of the
Nebraska gubernatorial race that pitted two female candidates against each
other, Hardy-Short found the race to be very similar to a race between two male
candidates.[20]
Access to media becomes an important issue for women. In a
ground-breaking study in the 1970s, Tuchman found that "news media are more
accessible to some social movements, interest groups and political actors than
to others."[21] And women, she found, were virtually ignored in print and
broadcast news. Approximately 20 years later, Friedan found that was still
true.[22] In a commentary on the 1994 candidacy of Margarte Beckett for Labour
Party leader, Ross found it to be true in the United Kingdom as well.[23] Women
as a group are de-legitimized by media, yet when a woman attempts to run for an
office, effective and extensive use of media is critical to her ability to
succeed.
In a study of Geraldine Ferraro's vice presidential race, Norton
and Sanders looked for bias in media coverage but found little.[24] Yet Kahn and
Goldenberg found that female candidates receive less news coverage than male
candidates; media concentrate more on the viability of female candidates and
less on the issues; viability coverage is more positive for the male candidates
than the female candidates; and the media pay more attention to races with male
candidates than to races with female candidates.[25] Treatment of women by media
can have a critical impact on the outcome of an election in which a female
candidate is running.[26]
Methodology
This study examines coverage of the 1994 Illinois democratic
gubernatorial primary in the Chicago Sun Times and the Chicago Tribune. These
papers were chosen because they have two of the largestest circulation areas in
the state; because combined they reach a broad segment of population, including
both blue collar and white collar workers; and because they differ editorially.
This paper combines the two newspapers; for a cross analysis of coverage in the
two papers see [title of presented paper] by the same authors.[27]
Using content analysis, all stories that mention the three major
Democratic gubernatorial candidates from November 7 through March 15 were
assessed. Two other Democratic candidates were excluded from the analysis
because their coverage was negligible. Because the incumbent was a Republican,
Republican candidates were not included. To do so would be to introduce the
concern that the incumbent is treated different from the opposing party,[28]
which was beyond the scope of this study.
This paper focuses on two categories of coverage: horse race
stories and policy issue stories. Stories dealing with the campaign as a contest
were classified as horse race (169 total) and stories about candidates'
positions on policy or issues of public policy were classified as policy issues
(143 total). The unit of analysis was the story. One coder performed the
analysis. Testing to determine whether there is a significant difference between
proportions was also done.
This study segments the horse race into eight categories of
coverage: campaign strategy, polls/projections, endorsements, finances/funding,
candidate debates, campaign appearances, attacks on the incumbent and other.
The other category, which represents twelve cases, includes running mates, voter
profiles, and political consultants. While these categories differ somewhat
from those established by others,[29] they describe the data of this state-wide
election more accurately.
The policy issue category includes stories about candidates'
positions on policy or about issues of public policy. It contains what other
researchers referred to as the "substantive" issues, which, in this case,
include fiscal issues, crime, education, health care, social services, the
candidates' records in their current elected offices, jobs and others. The
other category includes gambling, consumer fraud, anti-Semitism and minority
hiring.
For this analysis, the two broad categories of horse race and
policy issue were further broken down into three time frames: period one, the
time following the candidates' announcements to run for office, November 7,
1993, through January 31, 1994; period two, the time following the candidates'
announcements of platforms, February 1-28, 1994; and period three, the time
immediately prior to the election, March 1-15, 1994. The election was held
March 15.
The results for all three candidates will be presented first.
Gender will be discussed in the context of the entire race in the discussion
section.
Results
Horse Race. Overall, Netsch, the Caucasian female candidate, was
mentioned in 74.6% of the horse-race stories; Phelan, the Caucasian male
candidate, was mentioned in 64.5% and Burris, the African-American male
candidate, was mentioned in 63.9% of the stories.
Horse race coverage did change during the campaign (see Table 1).
The three candidates started out exactly even, with 65.6% of the stories
mentioning them. There is a significant difference between Burris' and Netsch's
horse race coverage during period two: While Burris was ahead in the polls,
Netsch had the largest number of horse race stories (87.5% to Phelan's 75.0% and
Burris' 71.2%). Also the difference in Netsch and Phelan's proportions for
horse race during period three is significant: during the last two weeks of the
campaign, Netsch, by then the front runner, had 80.4%, Burris 67.9% and Phelan
57.1% of the horse race stories. There is also a significant difference in the
increase in Netsch's coverage between periods one and two (65.6% to 86.5%), and
periods one and three (65.6% to 80.4%); and for the decrease in Phelan's
coverage between periods two and three (75% to 57.1%).
In overall coverage, campaign strategy and polls/projections were
the largest categories, appearing in 30.2% and 27.8%, respectively, of the
horse-race stories. Endorsements appeared in 14.8% of the stories,
finances/funding in 12.4%, candidate debates in 8.9%, campaign appearances in
6.5%, attacks on the incumbent in 4.1% and other in 7.1% (see Figure 1).
Two categories resulted in significant relationships: campaign
strategy and endorsements (see Table 2). Netsch was mentioned in the largest
percentage of campaign strategy stories (80.4%), while Phelan was mentioned in
68.6% and Burris was mentioned in 58.8%. The relationship between Netsch and
Burris is significant at the .01 level. In endorsement stories, Netsch has 76%,
Phelan 64% and Burris 48%. The relationship between Burris and Netsch is
significant at the .05 level.
Policy Issue. Coverage of policy issue stores, however, presented
a different picture. Phelan was the front runner--he was mentioned in 70.6% of
the policy stories. Netsch (59.4%) and Burris (51.7%) lagged behind (see Figure
3).
This, too, changed during the campaign, and several of the
differences are significant (see Table 3). Between November 7 and January 31,
Phelan was mentioned in 72.7% of the policy stories, Netsch in 46.9% and Burris
in 34.8% of the stories. During the month of February the polls showed Burris in
the lead. At that time, Phelan was mentioned in 83.6%, Netsch in 73.5%, and
Burris 65.3% During the last two weeks, however, Netsch and Burris were tied at
59.4% and Phelan fell to the rear with 28.1%.
There is a significant difference between Burris' and Phelan's
policy coverage during periods one, two and three; and between Netsch's and
Phelan's policy coverage during period one. The difference between Burris'
policy coverage between periods one and two, and periods one and three is also
significant. There is a significant difference in Netsch's policy coverage
between periods one and two; and in Phelan's policy coverage between periods one
and three, and two and three.
The two major categories of policy issues were fiscal (26.6%) and
crime (23.8%), followed by education (14.7%), other (11.9%), health care (9.1%),
social services (5.6%), candidates' records during office (5.6%), and jobs
(3.5%) (see Figure 2). Again, several of the differences between candidates are
significant (see Table 4). Phelan and Netsch were tied for mentions in fiscal
issue stories (73.7%), with Burris at 34.2%. Phelan led in the crime, health
care, social services, and jobs categories. Netsch led in the education
stories. In the candidates' records category, Burris and Phelan tied at 50%
with Netsch trailing at 25%. In the other category, Burris held a slight lead
over Phelan and Netsch.
Discussion
Not only did the horse race coverage of the three major candidates
for the Democratic gubernatorial race change over time, but coverage of policy
issues also changed. Of particular importance are the changes that occurred in
Netsch's coverage, and in her coverage in relation to the other candidates.
Phelan started as the front-runner. He was replaced by Burris in
January and Netsch in February, with Netsch as the eventual victor. Despite this
change, Phelan continued to receive the strongest policy coverage through the
end of February. It wasn't until the final two weeks that he dropped to about
half of the other two candidates, who were tied. In essence, he received the
more substantive coverage throughout all but the last two weeks of the campaign.
In response to a non-traditional ten-day media blitz in
mid-January, Netsch's horse-race coverage escalated. The blitz was
non-traditional in two ways: First, she spent a large percentage of her war
chest--the money used to buy advertising--a month prior to when conventional
wisdom dictates. The war chest is traditionally saved for the last three weeks
of the campaign. In doing so, she beat the competition in terms of unopposed
mega-exposure during the traditionally slow post-holiday advertising time, which
helped her to build name recognition early. Second, Netsch positioned herself as
one of the good ol' boys in a commercial that showed her prowess at shooting
pool. The copy read that she was a straight-shooter; the nonverbal text said
that she was man-like.
In a race that had been rather lack-luster with little truly
newsworthy hooks, Netsch ignited a flame of interest. She spoke the language of
campaign sports like a pro--and it had the news interest of dog-bites-person.
Reporters knew that language and spoke it with what appeared to be great
pleasure. She was no longer a candidate; she was a woman who could hold her own
among men playing pool. She, in essence, had to symbolically become a man to
play the man's game of politics.
With the combination of television advertising followed by a tidal
wave of positive analysis of her campaign strategy that continued through the
end of the campaign, Netsch's name recognition escalated and carried her to the
finish. Yet, perhaps the most interesting outcome of her strategy was the affect
it had on the coverage of policy issues. Kahn and Goldenberg argue that there
are male and female issues. The stereotyping of those issues is done on the
basis of which gender is perceived to be most competent in handling that issue,
and they specify education as a women's issue.[30]
Prior to Netsch's strategy, fiscal issues and crime had been the
two largest categories of coverage--an agenda set primarily by Phelan, whose
campaign platform was based on the traditionally male issue of crime. Netsch was
running on a very hazy platform--no one was quite sure what her vision was.
Simultaneous with her pool-shark advertising campaign in January, she introduced
a strong education platform. The other two candidates were not prepared to
address education and scurried to put a stand together. She effectively used the
window of high exposure created by the pool-shark ad to refocus the campaign on
education issues. Education grabbed and held one of the most important issue
positions throughout the rest of the campaign.
In the time period immediately following the implementation of her
advertising strategy (February 1-28), Netsch significantly increased not only
her share of policy issue coverage from 46.9% to 73.5% (.005 level
significance), but she dramatically closed the gap between her coverage of
policy issues and Phelan's 83.7% (.005 level significance). However, Phelan
received the lion's share of policy coverage until the end of February, despite
his significant slippage in the polls. The Caucasian male was, in other words,
still given the more credible coverage by the media even when he was no longer
the front-runner. (On January 31, the Tribune reported that Burris was ahead
with 39% of the vote, Phelan had 16% and Netsch had 14%.[31]) It wasn't until
the last two weeks that the by-then two front-runners, Netsch and Burris, tied
with nearly double the issue coverage of Phelan. In the final two weeks prior
to the election, Phelan finally disappeared (28.1% of policy issue coverage).
During the same time period--February 1-March 15--Netsch captured a significant
lead in terms of horse race coverage. The focus on her and on her
issue--education--for the last six weeks of the campaign gave her the momentum
to win the election.
Conclusions
This study suggests that Caucasian women do not receive the same
coverage as Caucasian men when they compete against each other in an election.
The results of this content analysis show that the female candidate received
less policy issue coverage then the Caucasian male candidate, even when his
ratings in the polls dropped. This suggests a tendency on the part of the media
to give the traditional Caucasian male candidate more credible editorial
treatment.
It also reaffirms the importance of horse race coverage as opposed
to policy issue coverage. The lack of policy issue coverage did not hinder
Netsch's ability to win the nomination. Nor did it help the Caucasian male
candidate, in spite of the fact that he had the lion's share of policy coverage
throughout the campaign. Conversely, the horse race coverage appeared to help
Netsch in terms of exposure to both her name and her key issue.
Specifically, the coverage of her strategy appeared to help her,
and this had two implications: First, the ability to emulate a man, to speak a
man's language, and to position herself as a man seems to be key to
understanding this long-shot victory. The polls, considered as part of horse
race coverage, showed her behind until the end, yet coverage of the polls did
not hamper her. Second, it presents a unique understanding of the role of
strategy in the campaign. The discussion of the strategy continued long after
the television blitz, which broadened the ad's reach to include newspaper
readers. The strategy category is larger than the polls category, even with
projections added to the latter. If coverage of polls is important, as research
seems to indicate, then news coverage of advertising strategy may be equally so.
This needs further study.
Finally, gender may be a larger factor in the selection of policy
stories than in selection of horse race stories. For the first three months of
the election, all three candidates were even in terms of overall horse-race
coverage. In the last seven weeks of the campaign, the innovative
strategist--Netsch--pulled ahead. The increase in coverage preceded the increase
in her ratings. This appears to be related more to the media's interest in her
advertising strategy than to her gender, although the two are interrelated. No
such explanation can be found for the disproportionate amount of policy coverage
between Netsch and Phelan, however, which would confirm the gender bias found in
earlier studies. This, too, needs further study.
These are troublesome findings from three perspectives: First, they
are a reaffirmation of media's preferential treatment of Caucasian male
candidates in the area of issues of substance; second, the demonstration that
coverage of horse race, in particular coverage of advertising strategy, appears
to have greater impact on the outcome of the election than does coverage of
policy issues; and third, the message that a woman will be more successful if
she presents herself as a man yet again--in 1994--erodes the potential for women
to be perceived as women and successful. The struggle for equality is not over
yet.
Notes
[1] See, for example, Thomas J. Johnson, "Filling Out the
Racing Form: How the Media Covered the Horse Race in the 1988
Primary,"
Journalism Quarterly 70 (Summer 1993): 300-310; Erika G. King,
"Thematic
Coverage of the 1988 Presidential Primaries: A Comparison of
USA Today
and the New York Times," Journalism Quarterly, 67 (Spring
1990): 83-87;
Jeanne Norton Rollbert, Luther w. "Sonny" Sanders and M.D.
Buffalo,
"Down to the Wire: How Six Newspapers Reported Public Opinion
Polls
during the 1988 Presidential Campaign," Newspaper Research
Journal (Fall
1990): 80-93; Lee Sigelman and David Bullock, "Campaign
Coverage,"
American Politics Quarterly 19 (January 1991): 5-32; James Glen
Stovall
and Jacqueline H. Solomon, "The Poll as a News Event in the
1980
Presidential Campaign," Public Opinion Quarterly, 48 (Fall
1984):
615-623.
[2]
See, for example, Keith Kenny and Chris Simpson, "Was
Coverage of the 1988 Presidential Race by Washington's Two
Major Dailies
Biased?" Journalism Quarterly 70 (summer 1993):345-355.
[3] See, for example, William R. Elliott and Jayanthi
Sothirajah, "Post-Debate Analysis and Media Reliance:
Influences on
Candidate Image and Voting Probabilities," Journalism
Quarterly, 70-2
(Summer 1993): 321-335; Dan Nimmo and Robert L. Savage,
Candidates and
Their Images, Pacific Palisades: Goodyear Publishing Company,
Inc.
(1976): 21-21; Normal R. Luttbeg, "Role of Newspaper Coverage
and
Political Ads in Local Elections," Journalism Quarterly 65.4
(Winter
1988): 881-88; S. Iyengar, M.D. Peters and D.R. Kinder,
"Experimental
Demonstrations of the 'Not So Minimal' Consequences of
Television News
Programs," American Political Science Review (1982) 76:
848-58; Lutz
Erbring, Edie N. Goldenberg, and Arthur H. Miller, "Front-Page
News and
Real-World Cues: A New Look at Agenda-Setting by the Media,"
American
Journal of Political Science 24.1 (Feb. 1980): 16-49.
[4] Hyeon Cheol Choi, and Samuel L. Becker, "Media Use,
Issue/Image Discriminations, and Voting," Communication
Research: An
International Quarterly, 14.3 (June 1987): 267-90.
[5] William Husson, Timothy Stephen, Teresa M. Harrison,
and B. J. Fehr, "An Interpersonal Communications Perspective on
Images
of Political Candidates," Human Communication Research, 14.3
(Spring
1988): 397-421.
[6] Elliott and Sothirajah, "Post-Debate Analysis."
[7] David Weaver and Dan Drew, "Voter Learning in the 1990
Off-Year election: Did the Media Matter?" Journalism Quarterly,
70.2
(Summer 1993): 356-368.
[8] William L. Rosenberg and William R. Elliott, "Media
Reliance, Political Campaign Knowledge and Activity," paper
presented at
the Annual Meeting of the International Communication
Association, San
Francisco, CA, May 25-29, 1989.
[9] Iyengar and Kinder, "Experimental Demonstrations," p.
855
[10] Erbring, Goldenberg, and Miller, "Front Page News,"
p. 45
[11] See, for example, Johnson; Thomas E. Patterson, The
Mass Media Election (New York: Praeger, 1980); Guido H. Stemple
III,
"The Prestige Press Cover the 1960 Presidential Campaign,"
Journalism
Quarterly, 38 (Spring 1961): 157-163; Guido H. Stemple III,
"The
Prestige Press in Two Presidential Elections," Journalism
Quarterly, 42
(Winter 1965): 15-21); Guido H. Stemple III, "The Prestige
Press Meets
the Third Party Challenge," Journalism Quarterly, 46 (Winter
1969):
699-706; Guido H. Stemple III and John W. Windhauser, "The
Prestige
Press Revisited: Coverage of the 1980 Presidential Campaign,"
Journalism
Quarterly, 61 (Spring 1984): 49-55; Doris A. Graber, "Press
Coverage
Patterns of Campaign News: The 1968 Presidential Race,"
Journalism
Quarterly 53 (Autumn 1976): 499-507; C. Richard Hofstetter,
"News Bias
in the 1972 Campaign: A Cross Media Comparison," Journalism
Monographs
58 (November 1978).
[12] Kim Fridkin Kahn and Edie N. Goldenberg, "Women
Candidates in the News: An Examination of Gender Differences in
the U.S.
Senate Campaign Coverage," Public Opinion Quarterly, 55 (1991):
180-199,
p. 187.
[13] Henry E. Brady and Richard Johnston, "What's the
Primary Message: Horse Race or Issue Journalism?" in Media and
Momentum:
The New Hampshire Primary Nomination Politics, ed. Gary R.
Orren and
Nelson W. Polsby (Chatham House Publishers, Inc: New Jersey)
1987:
127-186. p. 184
[14]
Kahn and Goldenberg, "Women Candidates in the News," p.
187.
[15]
Johnson, "Filling Out the Racing Form."
[16]
Johnson, "Filling Out the Racing Form," p. 306.
[17] Kahn and Goldenberg, "Women Candidates in the News,"
p. 185.
[18] See, for example, Ramona Rush and Sonia
Gutierrez-Villalobos, "From Making of Myths into Hardening of
Realities"
(Paper presented at the Association for Education in Journalism
and Mass
Communication, Minneapolis, MN, August 1990); Orly Shachar,
"What Did
You Do During the War, Mother? Propagandistic Communication in
Crisis
Situations: Press Images of Israeli Women in Wartime" (Paper
presented
at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass
Communication,
Minneapolis, MN, August 1990).
[19] Virginia Sapiro, The Political Integration of Women:
Roles, Socialization, and Politics (Champaign: University of
Illinois)
1983: 30.
[20]
Hardy-Short, Dayle C., "Non-Traditional Tradition in the
Heartland: Women's Choices in the Nebraska Gubernatorial
Campaign,"
(Paper presented at the Joint Meeting of the Central States
Speech
Association and the Southern Speech Communication Association,
St.
Louis, MO, 1987).
[21] Gaye Tuchman, Making News: A Study in the
Construction of Reality (New York: The Free Press), 1978.
[22] Betty Friedan, "Women, Men & Media," remarks at The
Freedom Forum World Center, Arlington, VA, July 1, 1991.
[23] Karen Ross, "Gender and Party Politics: How the Press
Reported the Labour Leadership Campaign, 1994. Media, Culture &
Society,
17 (1995): 499-509.
[24]
Jeanne M. Norton and Luther W. Sanders, "The Ferraro
Financial Furor: How the Television Networks Covered It,"
(Paper
presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Association for
Education in
Journalism and Mass Communication, San Antonio, TX, 1987).
[25]
Kahn and Goldenberg, "Women Candidates in the News."
[26] Kahn and Goldenberg, "Women Candidates in the News,"
p. 185.
[27] [authors of this paper; title of that paper]
[28] See, for example, Fico
[29]
See, for example, Johnson, "Filling Out the Racing Form";
King, "Thematic Coverage"; Sigelman and Bullock, "Campaign
Coverage."
[30] Kahn and Goldenberg, "Women Candidates in the News,"
pp. 193-4.
[31]
"Primary Season Ready to Kick into High Gear," Chicago
Tribune, Jan. 1994, sec. 1, pp. 1,8.
Table 2
Candidate Coverage by Breakdown of Horse Race Categories*
Candidates
Category_________Burris_____Phelan_____Netsch______N
Campaign Strategy 58.8%a 68.6% 80.4%a 51
Polls/Projections 65.9 55.3 68.1 47
Endorsements 48.0b 64.0 76.0b 25
Finances/Funding 66.7 66.7 85.1 21
Candidate Debates 100.0 93.3 100.0 15
Campaign Appearances 81.8 72.7 90.0 11
Attacks on Gov. Edgar 71.4 85.7 85.7 7
Other 58.3 66.7 58.3 12
aSignificant at the .01 level (Burris and Netsch)
bSignificant at the .05 level (Burris and Netsch)
*Unit of analysis is first mention in a story. Some stories
contained mentions of two or more candidates so percentages do not add up to
100%
Table 3
Coverage of Policy Issues Over Time*
Candidates 11/7/93-1/31/94 2/1/94-2/28/94
3/1/94-3/15/94
Roland Burris 34.8%afg 65.3%cf 59.4%dg
Dawn Clark Netsch 46.9bh 73.5h 59,4e
Richard Phelan 72.7abi 83.7cj 28.1deij
aSignificant at the .0005 level (Burris and Phelan period 1)
bSignificant at the .005 level (Netsch and Phelan period 1)
cSignificant at the .05 level (Burris and Phelan period 2)
dSignificant at the .005 level (Burris and Phelan period 3)
eSignificant at the .005 level (Netsch and Phelan period 3)
fSignificant at the .0005 level (Burris periods 1 and 2)
gSignificant at the .01 level (Burris periods 1 and 3)
hSignificant at the .005 level (Netsch periods 1 and 2)
iSignificant at the .0005 level (Phelan periods 1 and 3)
jSignificant at the .0005 level (Phelan periods 2 and 3)
*Unit of analysis is first mention in a story. Some stories
contained mentions of two or more candidates so percentages do not add up to
100%.
Table 4
Candidate Coverage by Breakdown of Policy Issue Categories*
Candidates
Category Burris Phelan
Netsch N
Fiscal 34.2%ab 73.7%a 73.7%b 38
Crime 50.0c 76.5cd 41.2d 34
Education 47.6e 61.9f 100.0ef 21
Health Care 76.9 92.3 69.2 13
Social Services 62.5 87.5 62.5 8
Jobs 80.0 100.0 100.0 5
Other 60.0g 56.0 44.0g 25
aSignificant at the .0005 level (Burris and Phelan)
bSignificant at the .0005 level (Burris and Netsch)
cSignificant at the .01 level (Burris and Phelan)
dSignificant at the .005 level (Phelan and Netsch)
eSignificant at the .0005 level (Burris and Netsch)
fSignificant at the .0005 level (Phelan and Netsch)
gSignificant at the .05 level (Burris and Netsch)
*Unit of analysis is first mention in a story. Some stories
contained mentions of two or more candidates so percentages do not add up to
100%.
Table 1
Coverage of Horse Race Over Time*
Candidates 11/7/93-1/31/94 2/1/94-2/28-94
3/1/94-3/15/94
Roland Burris 65.6% 71.2%a 67.9%
Dawn Clark Netsch 65.5cd 86.5ac 80.4bd
Richard Phelan 65.6 75.0e 57.1be
N 61 52 56 = 169
aSignificant at the .05 level (Burris and Netsch period 2)
bSignificant at the .005 level (Netsch and Phelan period 3)
cSignificant at the .005 level (Netsch periods 1 and 2)
dSignificant at the .05 level (Netsch periods 1 and 3)
eSignificant at the .05 level (Phelan periods 2 and 3)
*Unit of analysis is first mention in a story. Some stories
contained mentions of two or more candidates so percentages do not add up to
100%
|
