Weaving It In: How Partisan Media React to Events
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Weaving it in: How partisan media react to events Anonymized version September 1, 2021 Abstract What strategies do partisan media use to fit real-world events into ideological narratives? I look at whether they connect events to related political issues (e.g. hurricanes and climate change), and whether each side is able to fit events into its existing set of issue positions. I focus on talk radio|a medium with a larger reach than Twitter. I analyze almost 2 million hours of radio from hundreds of talk shows, and find that partisan content makers do not ignore ideologically inconvenient events or their political implications, in the way they have been found to ignore scandals and other political \bad news". Instead, after an event, both ideological sides give far more attention to related political issues. At the same time, liberal and conservative shows feature starkly different mixes of positions on those issues, and events do little to change those mixes. In other words, partisan media re-interpret events to fit their existing stance on the topic, weaving them in. keywords: partisan media, agenda-setting, ideology, issues, talk radio These things have become very politicized as you know, folks. Hurricanes and hurricane forecasting is much like much else that the left has gotten its hands on [...]. The forecast and the destruc- tion potential doom and gloom is all to heighten the belief in climate change. |Rush Limbaugh, September 11, 2018 A significant share of Americans get their political information and opinions from non-mainstream media, such as opinion blogs, podcasts and talk radio shows (Schaffner et al., 2019; Pew Research Center, 2019). Producers of these types of media often appear to be less bound by journalistic norms of objectivity and balance. Instead, many have an ideological bias that informs the content they create (Baum and Groeling, 2008; Sobieraj and Berry, 2011). Moreover, the \big three" cable news channels|Fox News, CNN and MSNBC|have also developed a consistent political leaning (Ad Fontes Media, 2019; Martin and Yurukoglu, 2017). Together, these outlets make up the landscape of so-called partisan media in the United States. And while we know more and more about the potentially polarizing effects of such media, we have less systematic knowl- edge about the content they create. How exactly do they manage to report on current affairs in a way that is ideologically consistent? In this paper, I investigate two strategies that partisan media might use in response to newsworthy events. The first strategy (\partisan agenda-setting") is about whether content producers make the connection between the event and related political topics. For example, conservative outlets may be less likely to discuss climate change in their reporting on a storm. The second strategy (\partisan position-taking") is not to let real-world events affect the ideological narrative about those topics. In this case, the outlet reports on the event and its political implications, but re-frames what happened in a way that is consistent with its ideological slant. For example, after a hurricane hits the US, conser- vative hosts may justify a skeptical position on climate change by framing the event as irrelevant to the existence of climate change. While the first strategy 1 would affect whether a related political issue is discussed, the second affects how it is talked about. I look for these strategies in a massive data set on US talk radio, covering almost 2 million hours of content. I focus on partisan discussion of three issues (climate change, gun policy and immigration) in response to relevant events. I find that newsworthy events cause a spike in discussion of related political issues, regardless of the show's leaning. The effects are large, with 40%{400% increases in topic mentions. In other words, downplaying the connection between an event and a political issue (e.g. hurricanes and climate change) is a surprisingly rare strategy among partisan outlets. However, I also find that political talk shows are strongly ideologically sorted in the way they discuss these issues, and events do very little to change this. On both sides, the balance of stances about climate change and immigration does not shift after an event. In the case of gun policy, only conservative shows move somewhat: an extra 8% of mentions of the topic take an anti-gun position. In sum, based on a study of three political topics, I find that partisan me- dia producers do not selectively downplay the connection between newsworthy events and political issues. Instead, they typically re-interpret the event to fit into their existing ideological narrative about an issue. This adds nuance to earlier evidence showing that partisan outlets do strategically avoid certain events and topics|e.g., scandals affecting \their" side, campaign issues owned by the \other" side, or controversial foreign policy (Baum and Groeling, 2008; Groeling, 2008; Puglisi, 2011; Stroud, 2011). Perhaps the connection between certain events and political topics is too significant to be ignored; or perhaps some events leave more room for re-interpretation|for instance, when they are not directly about politicians' qualities or performance. These results suggest that in partisan media, newsworthy events tend to amplify an already ideologically consistent discussion of related issues. When events are reported on in this way, rather than a shared experience, they may become a polarizing factor. This is illustrated by a curious finding about hurri- 2 cane impacts. Usry et al. (2019) uncover that in North Carolina, after hurricane Florence made landfall, highly educated and partisan Republicans became less likely to see climate change as a threat. Educated partisans are also more likely to listen to like-minded partisan media (Stroud, 2011). The current study shows that Republican partisans in North Carolina likely would have heard far more climate-skeptical messaging just after the hurricane than before. Tragedies such as hurricanes or school shootings have a special potential for becoming shared national experiences; the sort of experiences that cut across groups and layers in society. These events can be part of the \social glue" that holds a democracy together (Sunstein, 2018). For partisan media audiences, ide- ological interpretations of the event could well interfere with its binding power| making it divisive instead of unifying. Political talk radio in the US Though it does not currently spark the same research interest as social media or hyperpartisan news websites, talk radio is a tremendously impactful medium in the US. The number of Americans who tune in to terrestrial (offline) radio in a given week has remained stable around 90% for over a decade (dropping off slightly in 2020 due to a decline in time spent driving; Pew Research Center 2021a). Terrestrial News/Talk stations together reach about 18% of the adult American public, or 45.3 million people, each week (Radio Advertising Bureau, 2021). This is a slightly larger weekly audience reach than Twitter (Pew Re- search Center, 2021a). Many radio shows further expand their listenership by making content available online (Calmes, 2015); the weekly reach of online audio is 62% of American adults (Pew Research Center, 2021b). Though there are no numbers on the overall listenership of political talk radio, it is telling that out of the ten most-listened-to talk radio hosts in the US (Talkers magazine, 2019), eight are political.1 Finally, radio listeners are very 1According to the classifier developed in this paper. The other two, Dave Ramsey and George Noory, host a financial and a paranormal talk show. 3 politically engaged|in part because are older than the average American. In 2018, for instance, 75% of radio listeners said they definitely intended to vote in the midterm election, compared to 63% of non-listeners (US Census Bureau, 2019; Schaffner et al., 2019). 2 In spite of its audience sizes, large-n studies of political talk radio are rare, because audio is so challenging to store and process at scale. Even studies that analyze many hours of content still cover only one or a handful of shows (Barker, 2002; Berry and Sobieraj, 2013). This is a likely reason why research on the politics of talk radio has tapered off since the early 2000s, while listenership has remained strong. Strategies in partisan media content In this paper, I analyze talk radio content to investigate how partisan content- makers respond to real-world events. How do they make sure their reporting is in line with their ideological stances? I examine two strategies: partisan agenda- setting, and partisan position-taking. The first revolves around the choice of topics to talk about in the aftermath of an event. The second has to do with the way these topics are discussed|in other words, spin. Partisan agenda-setting Partisan agenda-setting comes in two variants. One involves strategically giving less attention to events; the other involves strategically choosing which political topics to connect them to. In the first variant, a media outlet spends less time on events that are less compatible with its ideological slant|for instance, because the event reflects negatively on Democrats or Republicans, or because event details are (at least at first glace) difficult to match with the outlet's ideological story. Groeling 2Survey-based media consumption measures raise concerns about people overreporting their media use (Guess, 2015; Prior, 2009). Of the sources cited here, the Pew Research Center, the Radio Advertising Bureau and Schaffner et al. rely on survey data. Nielsen uses a combination of portable audio recording devices and weekly diaries. Talkers magazine ratings come from industry experts combining a variety of data sources. 4 (2013) calls this \selection bias" (as opposed to \presentation bias"). For ex- ample, compared to the presumably neutral baselines of Associated Press and Reuters, both Fox News and the left-leaning blog DailyKos clearly give more attention to stories that fit their partisan narrative (so does the right-leaning blog FreeRepublic, but only under certain specifications; Baum and Groeling 2008).