This week I would like to create a more open ended conversation around the interaction between public opinion and media. In our world of horse race focused media there is no doubt that public opinion is the source of our daily news coverage of the election. This is the case regardless of the fact that many are concerned about how well various polling agencies conduct their surveys and whether the polls are more important than, say, the issues (or the candidates) themselves. On the other hand polling is the best way for campaigns to know how they are doing and how to strategically move forward. Whether good or bad the polls often become THE story that the media focuses on during election time. For some great sites to use to follow polling you should check out realclearpolitics (click polls at the top), Gallup, and Pew (search through this site for an amazing amount of studies, trends and useful info). In terms of the election predictions (and predictions in general) by far the most nuanced and accessible evaluation of polling for projecting is done by Nate Silver from fivethirtyeight, now hosted by ESPN (for non-existant bonus points can anyone share why its called fivethirtyeight?). I read his blog daily during the election and think that the way that he and his colleagues evaluate all of the data is amazing and very useful. You can click here to see his Senate predictions based on his use of poll data.
Between elections, polling is used all the time but many argue that public opinion does not shape media coverage or political action, instead it is the other way around. Take a look at the video below, from 2000. Though it is a bit dated, the story is still absolutely applicable today.
Ultimately I would like you to discuss the relationship between public opinion and media today. Is it used well (if so please give some examples)? If not then why not? Is it helpful in understanding the election or would we be better off without polling or with less of it? More importantly how should public opinion polling be used by the media and by politicians? Any reactions to the sites/video above or other important uses/misuses of public opinion are welcome.
First of all, according to this great “reliable” source that is Wikipedia, Five Thirty Eight is named after the “number of electors in the US electoral college”.
In my opinion, media and politicians should not rely as much on public opinion and polls. Indeed, public opinion is unstable, malleable and not always expressed after reflection. For example, a lot of polls and surveys are in fact made following an event, often disruptive. The event is most likely to influence the public opinion. I do not believe that the horserace coverage of the elections is the most profitable to democracy. It is probably less costly and attracts viewers for the news corporations because it features conflict. But politicians are reinforcing this model when they rely as much on the polls.
I am not arguing for a complete rule-out of the study of public opinion. I just think it should be used with more caution, especially during election. The releases of the polls have themselves an effect on public opinion, even though this effect is hard to measure. In France, media are not allowed to release polls during the election day, because it could influence the citizens -in any way: you don’t feel like you need to vote if the candidate you support is winning, or you do not want be supporting a looser, or you feel more inclined to vote when a candidate is in difficulty-. Maybe this is a good example of a solution to consider regarding the regulation of the use of media opinion evaluation in politics?
People seem to be really interested in what everyone else thinks, which I think is what accounts for the heavy emphasis on public opinion in the media. To me, these surveys are used too frequently, and this makes people more and more obsessed with them, which in turn fuels their use in the media. It is a spiraling cycle that I am not sure will ever go away, which is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as people can get past the polling to real information of more substance. However, I do not think this is something most people are prone to do. I also think that public opinion polls can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people see the results of public opinion polls in the media as showing one side being more favored, some people might feel more inclined to go with that side simply because it is the most likely to be the more popular opinion. If more substantive information is presented alongside public opinion polls, people would be more likely to make more informed and independent decisions.
There is no doubt that public opinion has a large influence on the media as networks have a business obligation to please their consumers. Unfortunately the link to the video was not showing up on my computer, but I can think of many examples where this holds true. One huge illustration of this is the coverage of politicians during election time. This country is predominantly a two-party system. Citizens rarely give third party candidates a chance unless they link themselves to the Republican or Democratic Party. Because these two parties have been in control for much of history, people are reluctant to believe that any other party would be successful in our government. Consequently, third party candidates don’t receive nearly enough coverage in our media. Why would the media spend time and money covering a politician that voters most likely won’t vote in? Then in result of a lack of information regarding these candidates as they don’t show up on the news, voters are again less likely to pay them any attention because they isn’t any type of spotlight on them. Therefore, the polls almost always lean in favor of the two parties that have been in power forever and other parties very rarely ever stand a chance. If the media didn’t allow public opinion to drive their news stories, then I believe all candidates of all parties would be represented more fairly. We may even see more voters vote for these third parties as they learn more about their initiatives and agendas. All in all, I don’t believe polls accurately measure which candidates are best fit for our government as many voters don’t even know all candidates listed within that poll because of a lack of media coverage.
Horse race journalism during an election is inevitable. People love numbers and quantitative reasoning often stands out over qualitative. This can be harmful. Just like Kendra mentioned, some people may vote for a candidate just because they see he or she is ahead. Instead of researching candidates on their own, they are trusting in the majority opinion. If you do follow the polls closely during the election period, it is clear that the results drastically change every day, especially in tight races. If one person relies on the results of one poll on one day, they may be voting following the majority that may turn into the minority the next day. Polls and surveys can also sometimes be biased depending on what source they are coming from. Those who are not educated enough on that matter often trust polls that aren’t always accurately representing results. Overall I believe people need to stop trusting in the polls as much as they do because they are subject to change at any second during election season.
I think public opinion should be looked at with extreme caution. I personally think we would be better off without polling, or at least using less of it. Horse races and polling are not crucial nor are necessary for the election process. People become extremely caught up with what others are saying, and sometimes this causes a snowball effect or either negative or positive opinions. It is most legitimate if one could have his or her own view of an issue without the background noise of a poll or what the public is thinking. I think approval ratings are important for the fact that they may allow for some reform if the ratings are deemed too low. Nate Silver released an article on FiveThirtyEight called “The Polls Were Skewed Towards Democrats” in which he says “For much of this election cycle, Democrats complained the polls were biased against them. They said the polls were failing to represent enough minority voters and applying overly restrictive likely-voter screens. They claimed early-voting data was proving the polls wrong…the polls did have a strong bias this year — but it was toward Democrats and not against them.” (Silver, 2014). In reality, polls are skewed more than we think, and this is not limited to the Democratic party, it happens just as often in the Republican Party. FiveThrityEight calculates polling bias as the difference between the polled margin and the actual result. This article sheds light on polling bias and that polls cannot be taken as completely credible. Because of this, the election would be better off with less public opinion polling.
Personally I think that polling is vital. Especially speaking from the viewpoint of a future political candidate. They are important to understanding how the electorate feels, what issues they are most familiar with, which issues are most important to them, etc. Good, objective, unbiased public opinion from the media can work as a tool to push politicians into a change of direction and force them to act in ways of the people’s interest. It helps point out what issues politicians need to focus on the most, both while they campaign for office, and once they are elected. Obsessing over it however is something that the media unfortunately does and needs to avoid. They focus too much on the polls themselves rather than the deeper meaning behind the polls. If anything should present the findings of polls and use them to dig deeper into how the American electorate feels. It is also important to ensure that polling is done in ways that actually reflect the opinion of the public. I have seen too many polls done, in which there were only 200 or 500 or 1,000 respondents, which are nowhere near enough to reflect the feelings of mass grouping of people. Again though, with good unbiased, objective polling, the public can gain an avenue through the media of letting their leaders know how they feel. It is a vital part of our republican democracy.
I don’t know which has a stronger influence over the other, but I lean towards the media relying on the public and their opinions. I think of early screening of TV shows where a handful of random people sit and watch a show they have never seen, and then are asked what they liked and didn’t like about it. This is notable, because the opinion of the public does matter.
Another example of public opinion shaping either the media or politics, which I read from an article from Pew (thank you Pew for making me look smart!), is the public saving President Clinton’s job. As the research said, “The public stood by Clinton through each chapter of the saga: his grand jury testimony, his admission of lying, the revelations of the Starr report, and ultimately the Republican vote to impeach him. He ended the year with a 71% approval rating…. It is inconceivable to think that public opinion could have had such an impact in an era prior to the emergence of the media polls.”
With that being said, like Will Rogers once said, “All I know is just what I read in the newspapers.” Of course, we aren’t necessarily reading newspapers, but majority of our knowledge does come through the media, which helps shape our opinions. Public opinions influence the media, which influences the public’s opinion… What?
Now moving on to this fabricated dream world I often concoct… I would very much like to see what elections, election coverage, even voter turnout looks like without the use of polling. To me, polls are more like a popularity contest and there are those out there that base there initial voting on what the polls say (I will not name names, but I know a few in my family that do that… though if I said their names, you wouldn’t know them anyways…). The polls, themselves, aren’t even graded all that great, according to FiveThirtyEight. Most of them got mediocre/sub par grades. We, the public, are being influenced by some polls that may be giving a skewed perception of an overall story. Would we look deeper into elections if we did not have polls? Would we know more or less? Only one way to find out.
It seems to me that the media and public opinion share a mostly symbiotic relationship. They tend to influence each other interchangeably, and often thrive on each other. However, more times than not, it is the media that influences public opinion. The way the media presents a certain issue (or spins it) can definitely target a certain group(s) and subsequently influence them to think a certain way or believe a certain thing. Positive coverage encourages support, which typically means more positive polling, and vice-versa for negative coverage. I may be over-simplifying it, but I really do think it's a fairly easy and predictable equation. As Luke mentioned, polling is indeed vital. I don't think it's something that needs to be taken away or limited. Our government (at least on paper) treats the concerns and thoughts of its citizens as important. It's imperative for politicians to know what the people want or do not want, what sort of issues are important to them, and the direction that they want the country to proceed in, in order for them to be successful as legislators, leaders, etc. News media, which we've already discussed as being divided along party lines most of the time, uses public opinion/polling as a way to influence the public. It's simply just another political tool...
As a sidenote--I've paid more attention to public opinion/polling since taking this class and have been visiting RCP and FiveThirtyEight pretty regularly--in fact, I had both websites open during last night's election. They are great tools for geeking out!
Polling is very important for framing our national discourse and media coverage. Polling can also be an essential tool for campaigns as it relates to building legitimacy and drawing the broader public's attention to candidates and issues. However, the downside to this is that polls also gives the media and politicians an opportunity to ignore candidates (think Ron Paul 2008 and 2012) and issues that are important (think climate change). Despite this downside to public opinion polls, I still think that polling should be handle in a way very similar to how it is used today. Overall I believe that polling helps our democracy to function, and serves as a kind of balance to the moneyed interests that have undo influence on our leaders. Keeping politicians and the public informed on where the country stands on issues serves as a check on our local and national leaders, and holds their feet to the fire.
I would argue that the media has not used public opinion well. There seems to be this claim that the media relies on polling from the population which validates its apparent “accuracy” but what we fail to ascertain in this sense is who this population is that is dominating these opinions. This tends to be disparately portioned to a majority in society that has access to resources such as the internet and television. This majority is cut down even more to the people that are actually pay attention to these sources and taking the time to complete polls. As we have learned from fragmentation, there are so many resources available outside of news media and more so even within that these opinions can be based heavily on others opinions based on the source
As far as elections one thing the video mentioned really stuck out to me, that if politicians actually took public opinion into account there would be more left wing/liberal policies, but this is simply not the reality. Beyond this he goes on to say that economically liberals and conservative often have the same goals in mind but are painted in the media with regards to their civil liberties which heighten their divide. In this sense I feel that it has become more centered on the horse race and less on actual issues
Because of this I think we would be better off with less of it. Think about the small population that actually goes out to vote and how reflective that is of active citizenship is iin our country aka painstakingly low. I think as far as public opinion and politics, this same effect is bound to happen as there are a small minority of those avidly following politics and a larger majority that is persuaded and manipulated by media frames.
Most individuals are generally concerned with other people’s opinions and often look up to others to find out what they think about an important issue. Instinctively, people tend to look for a way to be a part of the group. I believe this is a big part of why the media relies on and puts heavy emphasis on public opinion polling. In a way, it gives an argument a more solid look. This is also in part why people rely more and more on public opinion polls. In fact, after taking this class and having the Midterm Elections at the same time, I started looking more and more into the polls and what they predict. I will be honest and say that I am skeptical of polls and the possible results they project, but today I was surprised. In one of my classes, my classmates predicted that Pat Quinn will win the race for an Illinois Governor, and this made me check out what the polls were saying. This morning, after CNN predicted that Rauner will win, I was surprised. Later, I found out that I wasn’t the only one surprised, and the polls did in fact get it right. I came to the conclusion that I should not ignore polling entirely. Going back to the subject, I feel as if polls and public opinion and the media fuel each other. The more surveys and polls are used and their importance is stressed, the more people rely on them. This is what happened in my case. On the positive side, polls provide good estimates of where the public stands on a particular issue or elections. However, people need to be reminded that these are just surveys, and they need to be backed up and compared to with data and solid information. Otherwise, you have people who decide to change their opinion just to jump on the “bandwagon”. Many become convinced that their single opinion will not change the majority projected by the poll, so they drop their initial stance. I believe this does not produce sufficient and truthful results and doesn’t really help our democracy. Overall, polls and the media’s use of polls and public opinion data can be both positive and negative. Very tricky!
People follow polls because they have a group mentality, they think “if a lot of people like this guy he must be good” so they hop on he bandwagon. It takes guts and passion to be part of the .56% of those who voted for the Ralph Nader in 2008. The mass media plays its part by ignoring people like Nader and reinforcing attitudes and motivating them to vote for someone more popular. Lets think about this in our own perspective, when it looked like Romney was winning in the pre-election polling, I’m sure I wasn’t the only one say “noooo!” It invokes an emotion and maybe that’s what polls are there for, and I bet a lot of people voted after they saw the poll. So there is bias in the media and polls help to inform and motivate people. I do not think that they are useful. I mean think about it, media is telling us how we think, why would they need to tell us unless they need us to see what the other side is thinking so that we may act.
I would argue that more often then not it is the media sources that drive public opinion. As was mentioned in the readings, it is not that the media influences the public what to think but more broadly what events, subjects, topics to think (or not think) about. This agenda setting has a profound affect on how we perceive the world as whole and how we identify and understand problems that do not affect us on a day-to-day basis.
Is polling for public opinion used well by media sources? Yes and no. While it is incredible that polling companies and individuals like Nate Silver can use mathematical models and precise polling strategies to predict elections and gauge public opinion about certain issues over time, I feel that media sources may abuse such information. For example, instead of weighing the pros and cons of candidates on their platforms, the media focuses on the horse race. Due to this, the general public comes to believe that politics is such about elections and polling. (It’s not, by the way.)
I think that polling takes away from understanding an election for the average American. On the other hand, in 2014 it is imperative that candidates and their campaign staff employ and correctly interpret polls to target certain audiences and thus win a race. But, for the average American polling does little to critically inform our voting behavior and creates a diversion from actually researching candidates. In the future, if media sources were to use poll data as supplementary material rather than the driving material of their reporting, the general public would benefit greatly.
I do believe that the media influences public opinion. Referencing what we read the other week, “The Unites States is the only democracy that organizes its national election campaign around the news media”. Thomas Patterson briefly discusses this matter in chapter 15 in our Media Power in Politics textbook. Walter Lippmann touched further on this topic by stating that a political society that is press-based “is not workable”. News is practically another manner of manipulation (chapter 35). As for the polling issue, I do not think that elections should do away with polling altogether, but they should be taken with a grain of salt, so to say. I think polls should be referenced less due to the uncertainty that people might change their minds, they haven’t learned all they need to know about candidates, or they might simply be dishonest. According to the video, poll-pandering politicians are a myth. According to Lewis, politicians are not poll driven. However, Justin Lewis does confirm and strengthen the resolve I had previously mentioned by stating that the media constructs the news that the public views. News media also has the option of choosing what questions they want to ask. I agree with the fact that media shapes what the public knows about an issue. It is a concern that I am not quite sure can be changed, especially since news networks have many programs dedicated to specific reporters. With these television shows, they can spend an hour (more or less) discussing what they believe is right or wrong with politics and politicians.
Public opinion has a significant role in politics and how political moves are measured. Ideally, our “democratic” government should rely on public opinion, and representatives should act in favor their constituents. The cynic in me would like to believe that our government runs as seen in House of Cards, but we know that that is more than likely untrue (or not...). Polling public opinion, whether during election season or not, is important for measuring how to make an impact with a political move, especially if it may be perceived as unfavorable. Yes, polling is naturally going to lean towards the side the sponsor of the poll leans, but they are do give some insight into the public’s thoughts on certain topics and issues. With that being said, the media does over-sensationalize polls, especially during election season. It is unnecessary to watch every step of the horserace, but it is necessary to monitor its progression.
I too would have to agree with the notion that it is indeed a symbiotic relationship. The simplicity and accessibility of polling data within the media allows the mainstream to participate in and get a feel for the political climate in a manner that is informative but also presented in a layman’s format. But because of its fairly simplistic presentation of media coverage, that potentially allows for a certain degree of manipulation casting coverage in a favorable or unfavorable light. I also think the presentation of coverage in this can potentially be a catalyst for groupthink on a massive scale, especially in regard to the constituent who may not have the knowledge to come to certain conclusions in the political arena without a certain degree of establishment in ideals from an existing majority. All in all, I think the benefit of polling data is entirely determined by how one is able to process this information either as an informed individual with presuppositions born of their own reasoning, or general ideas based mainly on a herd mentality
I think polling helps people understand the issues better and sort of what people are paying attention to. During the election, I followed Professor Epstein’s suggestion to follow fivethirtyeight’s coverage of the election. But then I found myself just searching through their site and looking into their other polling and content. I think it helps give people numbers to put to the issues, which is how a lot of people are able to learn and understand the greater issues. I definitely think public opinion polling should be used by the media and politicians because it gives the politicians a better sense of how good of a job they’re actually doing. If you rely solely on elections to see how pleased people are with your politics, I think that’s a mistake. I think sites like fivethirtyeight provide a service to readers that is otherwise lacking. They look at quantitative figures and I think during elections and when you’re looking at the impact of a politician, it’s what people need.
I think that public opinion polls are a great tool for both political insiders and outsiders to communicate. It makes sense that they provide a good amount of information that allows politicians to better adhere the publics’ interest, or at least be aware of where the public stands on particular issues. Generally, I think that it leads to a more democratic society, regardless of what model of representation politicians follow: trustee or delegate. However that is not to say that there aren't any flaws, such as the methods of pollsters and how the media may skew the actual opinions of the people. I think it is still better than nothing, but improvements are needed. But while improvement are being made to the polling process I think that all polling should be taken with a 'grain of salt' by politicians and the media. Otherwise, as it seems to be occurring lately, polls can be used in strategic ways promote agendas not necessarily backed by public opinion.
I believe that polling is important, but I don't think we should focus as much as we do. I think it should be reported on every once in a while, with it mainly being put at the bottom of the television screen and show it that way. As for how media can effect public opinion polling, I think the media has a huge sway on how it effects the public's opinion. You only have to look towards history to see that. The greatest example that comes to mind is how the Spanish-american war. The media played a huge part in persuading the public opinion to take action when the USS Main exploded. Getting back on topic, do i think it is used well, and should it be used at all? I think that it could be used more effectively with less focus on it, because it can get in the way. I think media would be used better to focus more on the issues the politicians are talking about rather then how politicians can get up in the polls.
First of all, according to this great “reliable” source that is Wikipedia, Five Thirty Eight is named after the “number of electors in the US electoral college”.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, media and politicians should not rely as much on public opinion and polls. Indeed, public opinion is unstable, malleable and not always expressed after reflection. For example, a lot of polls and surveys are in fact made following an event, often disruptive. The event is most likely to influence the public opinion. I do not believe that the horserace coverage of the elections is the most profitable to democracy. It is probably less costly and attracts viewers for the news corporations because it features conflict. But politicians are reinforcing this model when they rely as much on the polls.
I am not arguing for a complete rule-out of the study of public opinion. I just think it should be used with more caution, especially during election. The releases of the polls have themselves an effect on public opinion, even though this effect is hard to measure. In France, media are not allowed to release polls during the election day, because it could influence the citizens -in any way: you don’t feel like you need to vote if the candidate you support is winning, or you do not want be supporting a looser, or you feel more inclined to vote when a candidate is in difficulty-. Maybe this is a good example of a solution to consider regarding the regulation of the use of media opinion evaluation in politics?
People seem to be really interested in what everyone else thinks, which I think is what accounts for the heavy emphasis on public opinion in the media. To me, these surveys are used too frequently, and this makes people more and more obsessed with them, which in turn fuels their use in the media. It is a spiraling cycle that I am not sure will ever go away, which is not necessarily a bad thing, as long as people can get past the polling to real information of more substance. However, I do not think this is something most people are prone to do. I also think that public opinion polls can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy. If people see the results of public opinion polls in the media as showing one side being more favored, some people might feel more inclined to go with that side simply because it is the most likely to be the more popular opinion. If more substantive information is presented alongside public opinion polls, people would be more likely to make more informed and independent decisions.
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that public opinion has a large influence on the media as networks have a business obligation to please their consumers. Unfortunately the link to the video was not showing up on my computer, but I can think of many examples where this holds true. One huge illustration of this is the coverage of politicians during election time. This country is predominantly a two-party system. Citizens rarely give third party candidates a chance unless they link themselves to the Republican or Democratic Party. Because these two parties have been in control for much of history, people are reluctant to believe that any other party would be successful in our government. Consequently, third party candidates don’t receive nearly enough coverage in our media. Why would the media spend time and money covering a politician that voters most likely won’t vote in? Then in result of a lack of information regarding these candidates as they don’t show up on the news, voters are again less likely to pay them any attention because they isn’t any type of spotlight on them. Therefore, the polls almost always lean in favor of the two parties that have been in power forever and other parties very rarely ever stand a chance. If the media didn’t allow public opinion to drive their news stories, then I believe all candidates of all parties would be represented more fairly. We may even see more voters vote for these third parties as they learn more about their initiatives and agendas. All in all, I don’t believe polls accurately measure which candidates are best fit for our government as many voters don’t even know all candidates listed within that poll because of a lack of media coverage.
ReplyDeleteHorse race journalism during an election is inevitable. People love numbers and quantitative reasoning often stands out over qualitative. This can be harmful. Just like Kendra mentioned, some people may vote for a candidate just because they see he or she is ahead. Instead of researching candidates on their own, they are trusting in the majority opinion. If you do follow the polls closely during the election period, it is clear that the results drastically change every day, especially in tight races. If one person relies on the results of one poll on one day, they may be voting following the majority that may turn into the minority the next day. Polls and surveys can also sometimes be biased depending on what source they are coming from. Those who are not educated enough on that matter often trust polls that aren’t always accurately representing results. Overall I believe people need to stop trusting in the polls as much as they do because they are subject to change at any second during election season.
I think public opinion should be looked at with extreme caution. I personally think we would be better off without polling, or at least using less of it. Horse races and polling are not crucial nor are necessary for the election process. People become extremely caught up with what others are saying, and sometimes this causes a snowball effect or either negative or positive opinions. It is most legitimate if one could have his or her own view of an issue without the background noise of a poll or what the public is thinking. I think approval ratings are important for the fact that they may allow for some reform if the ratings are deemed too low. Nate Silver released an article on FiveThirtyEight called “The Polls Were Skewed Towards Democrats” in which he says “For much of this election cycle, Democrats complained the polls were biased against them. They said the polls were failing to represent enough minority voters and applying overly restrictive likely-voter screens. They claimed early-voting data was proving the polls wrong…the polls did have a strong bias this year — but it was toward Democrats and not against them.” (Silver, 2014). In reality, polls are skewed more than we think, and this is not limited to the Democratic party, it happens just as often in the Republican Party. FiveThrityEight calculates polling bias as the difference between the polled margin and the actual result. This article sheds light on polling bias and that polls cannot be taken as completely credible. Because of this, the election would be better off with less public opinion polling.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think that polling is vital. Especially speaking from the viewpoint of a future political candidate. They are important to understanding how the electorate feels, what issues they are most familiar with, which issues are most important to them, etc. Good, objective, unbiased public opinion from the media can work as a tool to push politicians into a change of direction and force them to act in ways of the people’s interest. It helps point out what issues politicians need to focus on the most, both while they campaign for office, and once they are elected.
ReplyDeleteObsessing over it however is something that the media unfortunately does and needs to avoid. They focus too much on the polls themselves rather than the deeper meaning behind the polls. If anything should present the findings of polls and use them to dig deeper into how the American electorate feels.
It is also important to ensure that polling is done in ways that actually reflect the opinion of the public. I have seen too many polls done, in which there were only 200 or 500 or 1,000 respondents, which are nowhere near enough to reflect the feelings of mass grouping of people. Again though, with good unbiased, objective polling, the public can gain an avenue through the media of letting their leaders know how they feel. It is a vital part of our republican democracy.
I don’t know which has a stronger influence over the other, but I lean towards the media relying on the public and their opinions. I think of early screening of TV shows where a handful of random people sit and watch a show they have never seen, and then are asked what they liked and didn’t like about it. This is notable, because the opinion of the public does matter.
ReplyDeleteAnother example of public opinion shaping either the media or politics, which I read from an article from Pew (thank you Pew for making me look smart!), is the public saving President Clinton’s job. As the research said, “The public stood by Clinton through each chapter of the saga: his grand jury testimony, his admission of lying, the revelations of the Starr report, and ultimately the Republican vote to impeach him. He ended the year with a 71% approval rating…. It is inconceivable to think that public opinion could have had such an impact in an era prior to the emergence of the media polls.”
With that being said, like Will Rogers once said, “All I know is just what I read in the newspapers.” Of course, we aren’t necessarily reading newspapers, but majority of our knowledge does come through the media, which helps shape our opinions. Public opinions influence the media, which influences the public’s opinion… What?
Now moving on to this fabricated dream world I often concoct… I would very much like to see what elections, election coverage, even voter turnout looks like without the use of polling. To me, polls are more like a popularity contest and there are those out there that base there initial voting on what the polls say (I will not name names, but I know a few in my family that do that… though if I said their names, you wouldn’t know them anyways…). The polls, themselves, aren’t even graded all that great, according to FiveThirtyEight. Most of them got mediocre/sub par grades. We, the public, are being influenced by some polls that may be giving a skewed perception of an overall story. Would we look deeper into elections if we did not have polls? Would we know more or less? Only one way to find out.
It seems to me that the media and public opinion share a mostly symbiotic relationship. They tend to influence each other interchangeably, and often thrive on each other. However, more times than not, it is the media that influences public opinion. The way the media presents a certain issue (or spins it) can definitely target a certain group(s) and subsequently influence them to think a certain way or believe a certain thing. Positive coverage encourages support, which typically means more positive polling, and vice-versa for negative coverage. I may be over-simplifying it, but I really do think it's a fairly easy and predictable equation.
ReplyDeleteAs Luke mentioned, polling is indeed vital. I don't think it's something that needs to be taken away or limited. Our government (at least on paper) treats the concerns and thoughts of its citizens as important. It's imperative for politicians to know what the people want or do not want, what sort of issues are important to them, and the direction that they want the country to proceed in, in order for them to be successful as legislators, leaders, etc. News media, which we've already discussed as being divided along party lines most of the time, uses public opinion/polling as a way to influence the public. It's simply just another political tool...
As a sidenote--I've paid more attention to public opinion/polling since taking this class and have been visiting RCP and FiveThirtyEight pretty regularly--in fact, I had both websites open during last night's election. They are great tools for geeking out!
Polling is very important for framing our national discourse and media coverage. Polling can also be an essential tool for campaigns as it relates to building legitimacy and drawing the broader public's attention to candidates and issues. However, the downside to this is that polls also gives the media and politicians an opportunity to ignore candidates (think Ron Paul 2008 and 2012) and issues that are important (think climate change). Despite this downside to public opinion polls, I still think that polling should be handle in a way very similar to how it is used today. Overall I believe that polling helps our democracy to function, and serves as a kind of balance to the moneyed interests that have undo influence on our leaders. Keeping politicians and the public informed on where the country stands on issues serves as a check on our local and national leaders, and holds their feet to the fire.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that the media has not used public opinion well. There seems to be this claim that the media relies on polling from the population which validates its apparent “accuracy” but what we fail to ascertain in this sense is who this population is that is dominating these opinions. This tends to be disparately portioned to a majority in society that has access to resources such as the internet and television. This majority is cut down even more to the people that are actually pay attention to these sources and taking the time to complete polls. As we have learned from fragmentation, there are so many resources available outside of news media and more so even within that these opinions can be based heavily on others opinions based on the source
ReplyDeleteAs far as elections one thing the video mentioned really stuck out to me, that if politicians actually took public opinion into account there would be more left wing/liberal policies, but this is simply not the reality. Beyond this he goes on to say that economically liberals and conservative often have the same goals in mind but are painted in the media with regards to their civil liberties which heighten their divide. In this sense I feel that it has become more centered on the horse race and less on actual issues
Because of this I think we would be better off with less of it. Think about the small population that actually goes out to vote and how reflective that is of active citizenship is iin our country aka painstakingly low. I think as far as public opinion and politics, this same effect is bound to happen as there are a small minority of those avidly following politics and a larger majority that is persuaded and manipulated by media frames.
Most individuals are generally concerned with other people’s opinions and often look up to others to find out what they think about an important issue. Instinctively, people tend to look for a way to be a part of the group. I believe this is a big part of why the media relies on and puts heavy emphasis on public opinion polling. In a way, it gives an argument a more solid look. This is also in part why people rely more and more on public opinion polls. In fact, after taking this class and having the Midterm Elections at the same time, I started looking more and more into the polls and what they predict. I will be honest and say that I am skeptical of polls and the possible results they project, but today I was surprised. In one of my classes, my classmates predicted that Pat Quinn will win the race for an Illinois Governor, and this made me check out what the polls were saying. This morning, after CNN predicted that Rauner will win, I was surprised. Later, I found out that I wasn’t the only one surprised, and the polls did in fact get it right. I came to the conclusion that I should not ignore polling entirely. Going back to the subject, I feel as if polls and public opinion and the media fuel each other. The more surveys and polls are used and their importance is stressed, the more people rely on them. This is what happened in my case. On the positive side, polls provide good estimates of where the public stands on a particular issue or elections. However, people need to be reminded that these are just surveys, and they need to be backed up and compared to with data and solid information. Otherwise, you have people who decide to change their opinion just to jump on the “bandwagon”. Many become convinced that their single opinion will not change the majority projected by the poll, so they drop their initial stance. I believe this does not produce sufficient and truthful results and doesn’t really help our democracy. Overall, polls and the media’s use of polls and public opinion data can be both positive and negative. Very tricky!
ReplyDeletePeople follow polls because they have a group mentality, they think “if a lot of people like this guy he must be good” so they hop on he bandwagon. It takes guts and passion to be part of the .56% of those who voted for the Ralph Nader in 2008. The mass media plays its part by ignoring people like Nader and reinforcing attitudes and motivating them to vote for someone more popular. Lets think about this in our own perspective, when it looked like Romney was winning in the pre-election polling, I’m sure I wasn’t the only one say “noooo!” It invokes an emotion and maybe that’s what polls are there for, and I bet a lot of people voted after they saw the poll. So there is bias in the media and polls help to inform and motivate people. I do not think that they are useful. I mean think about it, media is telling us how we think, why would they need to tell us unless they need us to see what the other side is thinking so that we may act.
ReplyDeleteI would argue that more often then not it is the media sources that drive public opinion. As was mentioned in the readings, it is not that the media influences the public what to think but more broadly what events, subjects, topics to think (or not think) about. This agenda setting has a profound affect on how we perceive the world as whole and how we identify and understand problems that do not affect us on a day-to-day basis.
ReplyDeleteIs polling for public opinion used well by media sources? Yes and no. While it is incredible that polling companies and individuals like Nate Silver can use mathematical models and precise polling strategies to predict elections and gauge public opinion about certain issues over time, I feel that media sources may abuse such information. For example, instead of weighing the pros and cons of candidates on their platforms, the media focuses on the horse race. Due to this, the general public comes to believe that politics is such about elections and polling. (It’s not, by the way.)
I think that polling takes away from understanding an election for the average American. On the other hand, in 2014 it is imperative that candidates and their campaign staff employ and correctly interpret polls to target certain audiences and thus win a race. But, for the average American polling does little to critically inform our voting behavior and creates a diversion from actually researching candidates. In the future, if media sources were to use poll data as supplementary material rather than the driving material of their reporting, the general public would benefit greatly.
I do believe that the media influences public opinion. Referencing what we read the other week, “The Unites States is the only democracy that organizes its national election campaign around the news media”. Thomas Patterson briefly discusses this matter in chapter 15 in our Media Power in Politics textbook. Walter Lippmann touched further on this topic by stating that a political society that is press-based “is not workable”. News is practically another manner of manipulation (chapter 35).
ReplyDeleteAs for the polling issue, I do not think that elections should do away with polling altogether, but they should be taken with a grain of salt, so to say. I think polls should be referenced less due to the uncertainty that people might change their minds, they haven’t learned all they need to know about candidates, or they might simply be dishonest. According to the video, poll-pandering politicians are a myth. According to Lewis, politicians are not poll driven. However, Justin Lewis does confirm and strengthen the resolve I had previously mentioned by stating that the media constructs the news that the public views. News media also has the option of choosing what questions they want to ask. I agree with the fact that media shapes what the public knows about an issue. It is a concern that I am not quite sure can be changed, especially since news networks have many programs dedicated to specific reporters. With these television shows, they can spend an hour (more or less) discussing what they believe is right or wrong with politics and politicians.
Rebecka Bronkema
ReplyDeletePublic opinion has a significant role in politics and how political moves are measured. Ideally, our “democratic” government should rely on public opinion, and representatives should act in favor their constituents. The cynic in me would like to believe that our government runs as seen in House of Cards, but we know that that is more than likely untrue (or not...). Polling public opinion, whether during election season or not, is important for measuring how to make an impact with a political move, especially if it may be perceived as unfavorable. Yes, polling is naturally going to lean towards the side the sponsor of the poll leans, but they are do give some insight into the public’s thoughts on certain topics and issues. With that being said, the media does over-sensationalize polls, especially during election season. It is unnecessary to watch every step of the horserace, but it is necessary to monitor its progression.
I too would have to agree with the notion that it is indeed a symbiotic relationship. The simplicity and accessibility of polling data within the media allows the mainstream to participate in and get a feel for the political climate in a manner that is informative but also presented in a layman’s format. But because of its fairly simplistic presentation of media coverage, that potentially allows for a certain degree of manipulation casting coverage in a favorable or unfavorable light.
ReplyDeleteI also think the presentation of coverage in this can potentially be a catalyst for groupthink on a massive scale, especially in regard to the constituent who may not have the knowledge to come to certain conclusions in the political arena without a certain degree of establishment in ideals from an existing majority. All in all, I think the benefit of polling data is entirely determined by how one is able to process this information either as an informed individual with presuppositions born of their own reasoning, or general ideas based mainly on a herd mentality
I think polling helps people understand the issues better and sort of what people are paying attention to. During the election, I followed Professor Epstein’s suggestion to follow fivethirtyeight’s coverage of the election. But then I found myself just searching through their site and looking into their other polling and content. I think it helps give people numbers to put to the issues, which is how a lot of people are able to learn and understand the greater issues. I definitely think public opinion polling should be used by the media and politicians because it gives the politicians a better sense of how good of a job they’re actually doing. If you rely solely on elections to see how pleased people are with your politics, I think that’s a mistake. I think sites like fivethirtyeight provide a service to readers that is otherwise lacking. They look at quantitative figures and I think during elections and when you’re looking at the impact of a politician, it’s what people need.
ReplyDeleteI think that public opinion polls are a great tool for both political insiders and outsiders to communicate. It makes sense that they provide a good amount of information that allows politicians to better adhere the publics’ interest, or at least be aware of where the public stands on particular issues. Generally, I think that it leads to a more democratic society, regardless of what model of representation politicians follow: trustee or delegate. However that is not to say that there aren't any flaws, such as the methods of pollsters and how the media may skew the actual opinions of the people. I think it is still better than nothing, but improvements are needed. But while improvement are being made to the polling process I think that all polling should be taken with a 'grain of salt' by politicians and the media. Otherwise, as it seems to be occurring lately, polls can be used in strategic ways promote agendas not necessarily backed by public opinion.
ReplyDeleteI believe that polling is important, but I don't think we should focus as much as we do. I think it should be reported on every once in a while, with it mainly being put at the bottom of the television screen and show it that way. As for how media can effect public opinion polling, I think the media has a huge sway on how it effects the public's opinion. You only have to look towards history to see that. The greatest example that comes to mind is how the Spanish-american war. The media played a huge part in persuading the public opinion to take action when the USS Main exploded. Getting back on topic, do i think it is used well, and should it be used at all? I think that it could be used more effectively with less focus on it, because it can get in the way. I think media would be used better to focus more on the issues the politicians are talking about rather then how politicians can get up in the polls.
ReplyDelete