The Dynamics of Agenda Convergence and the Paradox of Competitiveness in Presidential Campaigns

• Date: 01 September 2010
• DOI: 10.1177/1065912909331426
• Author: Danny Hayes
• Published date: 01 September 2010
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly
63(3) 594 –611
The Dynamics of Agenda Convergence
© 2010 University of Utah
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
and the Paradox of Competitiveness in
DOI: 10.1177/1065912909331426
http://prq.sagepub.com
Presidential Campaigns
Danny Hayes1
Abstract
The mass media’s representation of campaign discourse influences whether voters have the opportunity to scrutinize
the candidates’ issue priorities and policy proposals. But it is not clear whether candidate and media issue emphases
are more or less similar at an election’s most consequential moments—when it is competitive. In a study of the 1992
and 1996 presidential campaigns, the author finds that as the polls narrow, the media are less likely to reflect candidate
discourse. Paradoxically, voters are deprived of an accurate representation of candidate dialogue when they need it
most, with media behavior making it difficult for citizens to cast informed bal ots in close contests. The results also
show that whether the media serve as a conduit for, or filter of, candidate messages depends on a variety of factors,
especially electoral context.
Keywords
campaign agendas, agenda convergence, mass media, elections
One of the central features of a functioning demo cracy is
The level of distortion arguably carries more weight at
that citizens are afforded the opportunity to pass judgment
certain moments in a campaign than others. If the media
on elected officials in regularly scheduled elections. Polit-
tend to ignore campaign dialogue when an election is
ical campaigns enable voters to discharge this duty, giving
uncompetitive—with the outcome virtually settled and
them access to the raw materials necessary to reach a ver-
the differences between candi dates unlikely to be
dict. Candidates for public office put forth ideas to address
consequential—then such a pattern may be innocuous. If,
the electorate’s concerns, and voters render judgment,
on the other hand, media coverage diverges from candidate
thereby influencing the composition of the government.
discourse as a race tightens—when voters’ assessments of
For most observers, the representation of the public will is
the candidates’ ideas could influence the outcome—then
most effective when citizens make their choices on the
the media would clearly be undermining the public’s
basis of candidates’ issue priorities and proposed policy
ability to decide the election on the basis of policy
solutions, the elements of campaign rhetoric most central
considerations. The existing research on candidate–media
to governing.
agenda convergence has not addressed this issue, and the
In modern campaigns, however, citizens rarely hear
literature offers conflicting expectations about how the
directly from the candidates. A tiny fraction of the
media will respond to increasingly competitive contests.
electorate ever sees a stump speech in person, and only
In this article, I explore candidate discourse and
some people are exposed to campaign advertising. The
media coverage across the course of the 1992 and 1996
vast majority of what the public encounters about
presidential campaigns to determine whether and how
candidates and their ideas emanates from the news. As a
competitiveness influences the level of agenda
result, voters’ ability to make informed choices depends
convergence. Using an unusually rich content analysis of
in part on whether reporters and journalists faithfully
thousands of newspaper and television stories and
represent discourse from the campaign trail. When the
hundreds of candidate speeches, I examine the dynamics
media reflect candidate issue agendas, citizens have an
opportunity to evaluate aspirants for office on the basis
1Syracuse University, New York
of their chosen platforms. When campaign dialogue is
Corresponding Author:
distorted, the public’s judgment cannot represent an
Danny Hayes, Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science,
assessment of the candidates’ policy priorities and
Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University
prescriptions.
Email: dwhayes@maxwell.syr.edu.

---

Hayes
595
of issue attention within the campaigns. I find
and retains their audience (Bennett 1996; Cook 2005).
considerable variation in the extent to which the media
Transmitting the candidates’ messages is less important
reflect campaign issue emphases and show that when an
than gaining prestige and adhering to professional
election grows more competitive, the media are less
standards of objective journalism (Zaller 1999). To be
likely to report candidate discourse from the campaign
sure, journalists need candidates to make news for them,
trail; levels of convergence are highest when the gap in
a symptom of the news media’s heavy reliance on
the polls is largest. In addition, several other features of
official sources in political reporting (Bennett 1990;
the campaign also influence levels of convergence.
Bennett, Lawrence, and Livingston 2007; Sigal 1973).
The findings have implications for both mass- and
But in their role as gatekeepers, reporters and editors
elite-level politics. Paradoxically, voters are deprived of
exercise considerable discretion over which statements
an accurate representation of candidate dialogue when
are worthy of publication and which are worthy of
they need it most, suggesting that patterns of media
oblivion (Flowers, Haynes, and Crespin 2003).
behavior make it more difficult for citizens to cast
Given the diverging incentives of the two groups, it is
informed ballots in close elections. Candidates, in turn,
not surprising that much research shows that candidates
face a difficult task in using the media to influence the
have one agenda, the media have another, and never the
criteria by which voters make their choice since reporters
twain shall meet. Vavreck’s (2006) study of stump
are increasingly less likely to respond to their campaign
speeches, advertising, and New York Times coverage
messages when the polls narrow. More generally, the
from 1952 through 2000, for instance, finds that the
results improve our understanding of the circumstances
topics candidates talk about and what reporters write
under which the media serve as a conduit for, or filter of,
about are only rarely the same (also see Petrocik, Benoit,
candidate messages.
and Hansen 2003-2004). Similarly, in-depth investigations
of recent elections show the media often pursue their own
Candidates, the Media, and Agendas
agendas at the expense of the candidates’ (Farnsworth
and Lichter 2007; Semetko et al. 1991), a theme resonant
Candidates and the media have a rancorous and symbi-
with Patterson’s (1994) general treatment of press
otic relationship. Candidates routinely complain about
coverage of presidential campaigns.
the difficulty of getting their message through the media
Others, however, have argued that public opinion
filter (e.g., Hart 1994; Racicot 2004). Reporters, mean-
encourages convergence by exerting a centripetal force
while, regularly grumble about the staged and repetitive
on candidate and media agendas. Because candidates and
nature of campaigns and the lack of access to candidates
journalists may be unwilling to focus on issues that lack
(Bruni 2002; Farhi 2004; Witcover 1999). The bitterness
public salience, they alight on similar sets of topics—
is borne of the two groups’ divergent incentives (Arterton
those that are of the greatest interest for voters. As a
1984; Zaller 1999), twinned with the uncomfortable real-
result, candidate and media agendas are unlikely to
ity that both are “locked in each other’s embrace” (Fenno
diverge much. The best evidence for this “transaction
1996, 226), needing one another to achieve their goals.
model” perspective comes from two studies of the 1992
Candidates, interested in winning election, want to
presidential election (Dalton et al. 1998; Just et al. 1996)
transmit a message that persuades skeptics and mobilizes
that find strong correlations between the issue content in
supporters (Shaw 1999). Campaigns thus can be viewed
candidate discourse and news coverage.
as fights over the issue agenda. The strategies of “issue
It remains unclear, however, why the media at times
ownership” (Ansolabehere and Iyengar 1994; Petrocik
are more responsive to candidate agendas than at others.
1996) and “selective emphasis” (Budge and Farlie 1983),
Ridout and Mellen (2007), for instance, show in a study of
for example, suggest that when candidates train the
five 2002 U.S. Senate races that issue convergence was
public’s attention on advantageous issues, they tend to do
relatively high in some states but low in others. Other than
better at the polls (though see Sides 2007). And because
noting that print coverage is much more likely than local
a campaign’s message may be more influential when
TV news to reflect the content of candidate advertising,
amplified by news coverage (Hayes 2008a), candidates
the authors offer no explanation for the variation across
work hard to have their issue agendas reflected in the
races. Flowers, Haynes, and Crespin (2003) provide
press and broadcast media.
evidence that media coverage in primary elections is more
News people, however, have little concern for the
likely to respond to front-running candidates’ attempts to
desires of candidates. Driven by the norms...