Echo Chamber” from Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Appendix to Chapter 5 entitled “Effects of an Echo Chamber” from Echo Chamber: Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Media Establishment Appendix 5.1 (see page 86 of Echo) Distribution of PTR Listeners: 1996, Waves 1-3 Appendix 5.2 (see page 87 of Echo) Distribution of PTR Listeners: 1996, Waves 4-5 Appendix 5.3 (see page 88 of Echo) Adherence to Instructions: PTR 1996 Experiment Appendix 5.1 (see page 86 of Echo) Distribution of PTR Listeners: 1996, Waves 1-3 PTR Surveys 1996 Five-Wave Panel Survey From February 21 to March 5, 1996, we conducted a survey of regular and non- regular listeners of PTR as a part of a large-scale national study of political talk radio during the presidential election year. The study included a five-wave national survey, content analysis of Rush Limbaugh's talk radio show, examination of 50 political talk shows on each of three days during the Republican primaries, and review of 2,647 print articles mentioning talk radio from fall 1993 to fall 1995 (Cappella, Jamieson, & Turow, 1996). The talk shows were divided into four groups: Limbaugh, Conservatives, Moderates, and Liberals. Survey respondents were divided into four groups -- (1) non- listeners; (2) regular listeners to Limbaugh only; (3) regular listeners to conservative shows but not to Limbaugh; (4) regular listeners to moderate or liberal shows (and not to Limbaugh). A fifth group of regular listeners – those listening to Limbaugh and a second show -- was excluded from study. Regular listeners were those who listened to political talk radio at least twice a week. In the initial survey, 1,203 were sampled; an over-sample of regular listeners pushed the final sample to 1666. Care was taken to define to respondents what we meant by political talk radio -- "where the host talks mostly about politics, government, and public affairs. Sometimes listeners are invited to call in to discuss these issues on the air." Some studies of talk radio have not distinguished political talk radio from other forms of talk radio that can include discussions of health, car maintenance, personal psychology, relationships, and sports, among other topics. Previous research on PTR identified those listening to Rush Limbaugh and those listening to PTR in general. Our procedures indicate that many regular listeners to Limbaugh are also regular listeners of other PTR. Of the 18% of the initial sample who listen to at least one show regularly, roughly 1 in 6 of these regulars is listening to two or more shows. These findings mean that previous surveys of "Limbaugh listeners" are really surveys of a mix of Limbaugh and other listeners. Also previous surveys of "PTR Listeners" are surveys of Limbaugh listeners and listeners to other hosts. Those listening to other PTR hosts were further divided into two subgroups: regular consumers of Conservative PTR and regular consumers of Liberal//Moderate PTR (see Cappella, Jamieson, & Turow, 1997, for discussion of how the groups were established). Four groups are studied in our survey: three groups of regular listeners -- Limbaugh only (N=213), Conservative PTR (N=139), and Liberal/Moderate PTR (N=283) -- and a group of non-listeners (N=988). These groups allow us to ask whether distinct audiences of PTR are similar or different in knowledge, political involvement, attitudes, media consumption, attitudes toward media, and so on. The focus in this paper is on interpersonal trust. Table 1. Distribution of Population and Sample by Regular Talk Radio Exposure Description of Group % in # in Base # in Over- Total # (Regular=2X/wk; Population Sample Sample Responses non:<2X/wk) Regular Listeners 7% 86 127 213 Limbaugh only Regular Listeners Other 7% = 86 336 422 = PTR = Conservative PTR 2.3% 139 + Liberal/Moder PTR + 4.7% +283 Regular Listeners 4% 43 0 43 Limbaugh and Other Hosts Non-listeners to PTR 82% 988 0 988 Total 100% 1203 463 1666 Appendix 5.2 (see page 86 of Echo) Distribution of PTR Listeners: 1996, Waves 4-5 Waves 4 and 5 The three-panel survey of talk radio listeners and their non-listening counterparts was followed during the fall presidential election with two additional waves. The fourth wave took place October 17-27, 1996 immediately following the second presidential debate between Bill Clinton and Robert Dole. The fifth wave was carried out in the period November 12-18, 1996, in the week following the presidential election. The surveys were coordinated with content analyses of the mainstream media as well as PTR’s discussions of the debate and the election. The surveys were on political knowledge, candidate evaluations, judgments about the candidates, performance during the debates, consumption of political information, political participation during the campaign, and respondent’s framing of both the debate performances and the election outcome. The fourth wave surveyed 1,376 people and the fifth included 973. Those agreeing to be surveyed received a $10 phone card. The survey was carried out by PRSA. The goal was to follow people from the primaries through the conclusion of the election. In order to be sure that there was a sufficiently large sample to carry out analysis of the election period alone, those sampled during the primary season were supplemented by additional people. Table 2 below indicates how many persons continued from the initial sample and how many were new. Additional sample came from persons who were screened during April 26 to May 10 as a part of a subsidiary methodological study relating to the first three waves. During this component of the survey, a sample of 200 regular Limbaugh listeners was obtained in order to compare them to the earlier sample of Limbaugh listeners and to those remaining in the Limbaugh group at wave 3. In addition, in this group we also screened for those who were not regular listeners and those who were regular listeners but not to Limbaugh. These two groups provided the additional sample during the election resulting from panel attrition. Table 2. Distribution of subjects in waves 4 and 5 from wave 1 and from oversample. GROUP WAVE 4 WAVE 5 FROM OVER FROM WAVE SAMPLE 1 Non-Listener 858 595 489 369 Limbaugh 207 158 109 98 Reg 111 83 41 70 Conservative Reg Liberal 68 45 24 44 Reg Moderate 132 92 25 107 As in our previous report on PTR, the number of those claiming to be regular listeners of liberal hosts is too small to analyze as a separate group. They will be grouped with the listeners of moderate hosts and treated as a single group. The definition of non-listener and regular listener depends in part on when the categorization is made, as well as the definition of “regular.” As in our previous surveys a regular listener is one who listens at least two times a week. Obviously people change their listening habits over time and so some criterion needs to be set. (We chose the following times: wave 1 and the Limbaugh oversample at wave 3. At Wave 4 we found that some 32 of our 489 non-listeners were listening regularly and some 31 of our other regular listeners were listening less than twice a week. We retained their initial categorizations as regular listeners or non-listeners because they had so identified themselves at a specified point in the survey. We adopt a “bright line” distinction between groups.) Appendix 5.3 (see page 88 of Echo) Adherence to Instructions: PTR 1996 Experiment PTR Experiment 1996 During the week of May 12-18, 1996, more than 400 people in the Philadelphia metropolitan area participated in research evaluating radio programs. They were offered a cash payment for their participation. Involvement required them to listen to five hours of political talk radio taken off the air. People were randomly assigned to listen to one or another type of PTR ranging from non-political talk (such as NPR’s “Car Talk”) to the highly partisan Rush Limbaugh). They were surveyed before and after on a variety of issues related to social attitudes, perceptions of the programs and hosts, participation in political matters, and knowledge of politics and social issues. Although PTR has become one of the most common programming formats in radio today, and one of the most controversial, little is known about its consequences. Much of our information is either anecdotal or based solely on survey results where the directions of causality are impossible to know. Is PTR a polarizing force for social attitudes in modern political media or is it little more than entertainment, easily ignored? Does the audience of PTR add to its political knowledge base because of its listening or is listening a typical behavior of an already knowledgeable audience? Are the messages and attitudes of PTR hosts attractive to those with no prior exposure or do they contain the seeds of their own rejection? Does PTR influence by altering the audience’s interpretation or by directly manipulating attitudes? To answer these and other questions an experiment was undertaken. In the experiment, people listened to five hours of audio tapes -- one each day -- which we gave them. The tapes had been pre-recorded with various types of political talk radio content spanning the spectrum from liberal to conservative. Our intent was to simulate exposure to political talk radio of different types for people who had had experience with PTR and for people who had not. We were especially interested in the effects of different types of PTR on people of different political stripes and with different experience with the format. One of the problems with survey studies of PTR is that the audience that listens to a particular host self selects the program on the basis of content, whether the content is actually sampled by the listener or just presumed.