THE MEDIA AND POLITICS: It's More Than the News.

• Author: BELL, STEVE
• Position: Elections coverage evaluation

"... We cannot afford to ignore the overwhelming evidence that the media--old and new combined--is dramatically changing the democratic process."

TO PARAPHRASE the old Bill Clinton political commercial, "It's the media, stupid!" In fact, it's almost conventional wisdom now that the media played a pivotal role in Campaign 2000. Pregnant chads aside, there never before has been a campaign in which the media--and not just the news media--so dominated the attention, and many say dictated the behavior, of both the voters and the candidates.

On election night, the news media played the kind of role that inspires the public to think the worst of the messenger. When the networks "called" Florida for Al Gore early in the evening, it might have affected voter turnout in the Florida Panhandle and further west across the country. Partisans of George W. Bush certainly think so.

Consider that, at the same time, well before polls were closed beyond the eastern time zone, the networks also were projecting that Gore had won Pennsylvania and Michigan. These reports had the appearance of indicating a Gore victory in the election itself, thus reducing the incentive for Bush supporters to bother going to the polls. Did that tip the scales for Gore in what turned out to be razor-thin outcomes in several states in the Midwest and West? Who knows?

Much later on election night, the same networks called Bush the winner in Florida. Although they retracted the call a short time later, many Gore partisans believe that second miscall gave the Bush claim of victory a "sense of legitimacy." After all, Gore had to place a second call to Bush withdrawing his concession statement, and from then on he seemed to be fighting the perception that he was the one trying to "manipulate" the Florida vote count.

If anything, media coverage of the post-election contest was just as suspect in the minds of partisans on both sides. The challenge and contest phases featured some outstanding reporting and commentary. Nevertheless, more often than not, it appeared to be a contest of "talking heads" being packaged in the most contentious and incendiary way possible.

If there was an argument to be made that politics and perfidy were at work, it often found both print and electronic platforms, magnifying the bitterness and suspicion on both sides. Only on the night Gore made his generous concession speech, and Bush responded in kind, did a theme of moderation and search for consensus prevail.

In truth, no one knows the impact of the media-inspired events on Election Day, or the aftermath. Still, a growing number of Americans are convinced that something is wrong with the entire election process, and they have the media in their crosshairs.

What is becoming increasingly clear is that "the media" needs to be defined in terms that go far beyond the news media. Less than 20 years ago, members of the establishment news media were the dominant "gatekeepers" when it came to election information flow. True, there were campaign commercials, some of them clearly influential in shaping voter perceptions. Candidates for president also produced their own audience-participation programs, carefully controlled to get out only the message they intended.

However, when it came to the daily drumbeat of campaign coverage and candidate messages, the flow was regulated primarily by journalists representing a relatively few newspapers, magazines, and the three commercial networks. What they defined as "news" was pretty much what was available to the American public.

This was not so in Campaign 2000. During the campaign, voters had far more information and opinion options than ever before. There were 24-hour news and talk options, with many of the talking heads competing for shock-value soundbites. For the first time, more Americans got election news from the cable networks than from ABC, NBC, and CBS. The Internet offered literally hundreds of additional options, many of them reflecting partisan points of view that ranged from the outrageous to the slanderous. Then, there were the late-night comedy routines.

There is considerable evidence that the traditional news media were not even the most influential source when it came to voter information, and...