{"id":16707,"date":"2019-08-11T05:32:52","date_gmt":"2019-08-11T05:32:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/?p=16707"},"modified":"2020-06-09T12:42:24","modified_gmt":"2020-06-09T12:42:24","slug":"news-study-finds-partisan-news-coverage-has-a-bigger-impact-on-viewers-without-strong-media-preferences","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/news-study-finds-partisan-news-coverage-has-a-bigger-impact-on-viewers-without-strong-media-preferences\/","title":{"rendered":"News study finds partisan news coverage has a bigger impact on viewers without strong media preferences"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s a classic question in contemporary politics: Does partisan news media coverage shape people\u2019s ideologies? Or do people decide to consume political media that is already aligned with their beliefs?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A new study led by MIT political scientists tackles this issue head-on and arrives at a nuanced conclusion: While partisan media does indeed have \u201ca strong persuasive impact\u201d on political attitudes, as the researchers write in a newly published paper, news media exposure has a bigger impact on people without strongly held preferences for partisan media than it does for people who seek out partisan media outlets.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short, certain kinds of political media affect a cross-section of viewers in varying manners, and to varying degrees \u2014 so while the influence of partisan news is real, it also has its limits.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cDifferent populations are going to respond to partisan media in different ways,\u201d says Adam Berinsky, the Mitsui Professor of Political Science and director of the Political Experiments Research Lab (PERL) at MIT, and a co-author of the study.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cPolitical persuasion is hard,\u201d Berinsky adds. \u201cIf it were easy, the world would already look a lot different.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The paper, \u201cPersuading the Enemy: Estimating the Persuasive Effects of Partisan Media with the Preference-Incorporating Choice and Assignment Design,\u201d is now available in advance online form from the\u00a0American Political Science Review<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition to Berinsky, the authors are Justin de Benedictis-Kessner PhD \u201917, an assistant professor of political science at Boston University; Mathew A. Baum, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School; and Teppei Yamamoto, an associate professor in MIT\u2019s Department of Political Science.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Breaking down the problem<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

A substantial political science literature has debated the question of media influence; some scholars have contended that partisan media significantly shapes public opinion, but others have argued that \u201cselective exposure,\u201d in which people watch what they already agree with, is predominant.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt\u2019s a really tricky problem,\u201d Berinsky says. \u201cHow do you disentangle these things?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new research aims to do that, in part, by disaggregating the viewing public. The study consists of a series of experiments and surveys analyzing the responses of smaller subgroups, which were divided according to media consumption preferences, ideology, and more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That allows the researchers to tease apart the cause-and-effect issues surrounding media consumption by looking more specifically at the impact of media on people with different ideologies and different levels of willingness to view media. The researchers call this approach the Preference-Incorporating Choice and Assignment design, or PICA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For instance, one experiment within the study gave participants the option of reading web posts from either the conservative Fox News channel; MSNBC, which has several shows leaning in a significantly more liberal-left direction; or the Food Network. Other participants were assigned to watch one of the three.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By examining viewer responses to the content, the scholars found that people who elected to read materials from partisan news channels were less influenced by the content. By contrast, participants who gravitated to the Food Network but were assigned to watch cable news, were more influenced by the content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How big is the effect? Quantitatively, the researchers found, a single exposure to partisan media can change the views of relatively nonpolitical citizens by an amount equal to one-third of the average ideological gap that exists between partisans on the right and left sides of the political spectrum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, the influence of cable news depends on who it is reaching. \u201cPeople do respond differently based on their preferences,\u201d Berinsky says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And while the impact of partisan cable news on people who elect to watch it is smaller, it does exist, the researchers found. For instance, in another of the study\u2019s experiments, the researchers tested cable news\u2019 effects on viewers\u2019 beliefs about marijuana legislation. Even among regular cable-news viewers, partisan content influenced people\u2019s views.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Overall, Yamamoto states, the PICA method is novel because it \u201callows us to make inferences about what is never [otherwise] directly observable,\u201d that is, the impact of partisan media on people who would normally choose not to consume it. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMost people just don\u2019t want news\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To put the findings in the context of daily news viewership in the U.S., consider the recent congressional hearings in which special counsel Robert Mueller testified about his presidential investigation. Fox News led the cable ratings with an average of 3 million viewers during most of the day, while MSNBC had an average of 2.4 million viewers. Overall, 13 million people watched. But the Super Bowl, for example, regularly pulls in around 100 million viewers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cMost people just don\u2019t want to be exposed to political news,\u201d Berinsky notes. \u201cThese are not bad people or bad citizens. In theory, a democracy is working well when you can ignore politics.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One implication of the larger lack of interest in politics, consequently, is that any audience gains that partisan media outlets experience can produce relatively greater influence \u2014 since that growth would apply to formerly irregular consumers of news, who may be more easily influenced. Again, though, such audience gains are likely to be limited, due to the reluctance of most Americans to consume partisan media.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe only learned those people are persuadable because we made them watch the news,\u201d Berinsky says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The study was supported by a National Science Foundation grant and the Political Experiments Research Lab at MIT; Berinsky\u2019s contribution was partly supported by a Joan Shorenstein Fellowship.<\/p>\n
","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It\u2019s a classic question in contemporary politics: Does partisan news media coverage shape people\u2019s ideologies? Or do people decide to consume political media that is already aligned with their beliefs? A new study led by MIT political scientists tackles this issue head-on and arrives at a nuanced conclusion: While partisan media does indeed have \u201ca […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":16709,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,36,32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-16707","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news","category-political-science","category-social-science"],"featured_image_urls":{"full":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",1200,800,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-200x200.jpg",200,200,true],"medium":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-300x200.jpg",300,200,true],"medium_large":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-768x512.jpg",750,500,true],"large":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-1024x683.jpg",750,500,true],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",1200,800,false],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",1200,800,false],"ultp_layout_landscape_large":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",1200,800,false],"ultp_layout_landscape":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",855,570,false],"ultp_layout_portrait":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",600,400,false],"ultp_layout_square":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",600,400,false],"newspaper-x-single-post":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-760x490.jpg",760,490,true],"newspaper-x-recent-post-big":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-550x360.jpg",550,360,true],"newspaper-x-recent-post-list-image":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1-95x65.jpg",95,65,true],"web-stories-poster-portrait":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",640,427,false],"web-stories-publisher-logo":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",96,64,false],"web-stories-thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/08\/MIT-Political-Polarization_1.jpg",150,100,false]},"author_info":{"info":["RevoScience"]},"category_info":"News<\/a> Political Science<\/a> Social Science<\/a>","tag_info":"Social Science","comment_count":"0","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16707","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16707"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16707\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/16709"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16707"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16707"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.revoscience.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16707"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}