Agenda building

Last updated

Agenda building describes the ongoing process by which various groups attempt to transfer their interests to be the interests of public policymakers. [1] Conceptualized as a political science theory by Cobb and Elder in 1971, [2] "the agenda-building perspective...alerts us to the importance of the environing social processes in determining what occurs at the decision-making stage and what types of policy outcomes will be produced.” It focuses on the relationship between society and policy maker. [3]

Contents

Classic democratic theory focused on the assumption that calls on “public policymakers to advance the interests of civically engaged constituents, by an autonomous press [4] ” (i.e. classic theory focuses on the policy makers and media), however, it failed to account for points at which larger society of stakeholders could define the range of alternatives available for policy making. [2]

Key Assumptions

Agenda building rests on two primary assumptions (Cobb & Elder):

"Firstly, the attention capabilities of government are necessarily limited. There are always more matters vying for attention than can be actively considered. Secondly, policy problems are not a priori givens but rather are matters of definition. Whether a particular situation or set of circumstances constitutes a problem and is an appropriate matter of "public" concern depends upon not just facts but upon beliefs and values. [5] "

Other assumptions include, but are not limited to:

Key Hypotheses

Scholars applying the agenda-building approach to research questions frequently identify the sources of the agenda building and the compare the resulting discourse to the sender's message, whether it is media coverage or policy. For example, Nisbet, Brossard, & Kroepsch, [7] tracked media coverage; results showed that the George W. Bush administration was successful in driving coverage of the stem cell research controversy.

Major Stages

Cobb, Ross & Ross proposed four primary steps in agenda building: [1]

  1. Initiation, the issue or controversy must be articulated in some terms.
  2. Specification, a stakeholder group makes specific demands (e.g. policy).
  3. Expansion, stakeholder groups seek to gain the attention of decision makers and to define the issue in terms favorable to the group.
  4. Entrance, when the issue enters the formal agenda of the decision makers.

Compared to Agenda Setting

Agenda building, a concept found both in political science and communication scholarship, is distinct from, yet related to, agenda setting. However, the terms are frequently ill-defined: Berkowitz suggests, for example, applying the term agenda setting to situations regarding the effect of the media on the public and applying policyagenda building to situations that regard the perceptions of policymakers and how these perceptions are formed. [3]

Types of Agendas

Scholars generally agree on the basic principles of agenda building, but as also noted above, the terminology is not agreed upon. Denham proposes a direction-specific typology to studying agenda building, and he uses the terms 1) policy agenda building, 2) media agenda-building, 3) public agenda building, and 4) intermedia agenda building. [4] In all types, media is a key player.

  1. Policy agenda building (group -> media -> policy). Direct lobbying of policymakers certainly occurs, however, groups often marshal the power of the media to mobilize a larger public and force issues onto the public agenda. For example, anti-abortion groups presented President George W. Bush with an agenda that included a ban on fetal stem cell research; media attention spiked as the struggle between competing groups (anti-abortion and pro-research) played out in the media. [7] Greenpeace and a coalition of farming groups stopped trials of a genetically modified eggplant in the Philippines, however, pro-trial groups are active as well: Filipino newspapers have published stories featuring farmers calling for the technology to be commercialized and biology students calling for the ban to be overturned. [8]
  2. Media agenda building (constraints -> media-> policy) Many forces shape the media agenda; for example, journalistic routines (e.g. journalists rely on certain sources, often repeatedly), the need to produce daily content, organizational culture, fiscal constraints, etc. Perhaps particularly due to the increased constraints on journalistic practices, scholars of agenda building have paid particular attention to the public relations aspects of agenda building; concerted efforts on the part of public relations functions can impact news coverage, which can impact policy. For example, Berkowitz. [9] tracked local and national TV and newspaper coverage, finding that more than 70% of TV news featured information found in press releases and from official sources. Public relations efforts by then-presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain were key determinants of media coverage abroad. [10]
  3. Public agenda setting (media -> public -> policy). When the media alerts the public to an issue (frequently through investigative reporting). Lang and Lang [11] traced the power of the Washington Post Watergate investigation that led to President Nixon’s resignation; various media covered the issue, and soon the scandal was a daily headline, alarming the public into action.
  4. Intermedia agenda building (media-> media-> public and/or policymaker). Media outlets look to each other for cues regarding what to cover. For example, The New York Times influences other media outlets.

Missing from Denhams’s typology is an account of how policymakers directly use media to build their own agendas (policymaker -> media -> public). Political actors need journalists to spread their message just as much as journalists need stories to write. [12] Cook calls this “the negotiation of newsworthiness;” together journalists and sources (and occasionally others) interact to determine what is covered in the press, and how that content is presented. [13] Policymakers hold a particular structural advantage in promoting their interests, particularly because they are reliable sources of news. [14]

The Future: Agenda Building in the Digital Age

Regardless of agenda-building type, modern scholarship is beginning to expand the scope of what is considered media, and how the expanded universe of media will impact agenda building. Popular interactive platforms such as blogs, Facebook, and Twitter have become the conduit for the large-scale public interaction. The increased role of citizens signals a new direction for agenda-building research, given that the Internet has distributed the means of information production and fragmented the information environment, marking a shift in the power from legacy media to build monolithic agendas to anyone with the ability to get online. [15]

Several studies show that agenda building effects occur in the digital age. YouTube influenced coverage of California's Proposition 8, and, possibly, impacted the referendum. [16] Parmalee focused on agenda-setting and Twitter by interviewing journalists; he found that Twitter is a regular part of their routine. [17] Wallsten compared media coverage and blog discussion; results showed that journalists concerns matched blogger concerns. [18] Jacobson found that comments on Rachel Maddow's Facebook page influenced the broadcast. [19] In the scientific context, Runge, Brossard, Scheufele, & Xenos [20] found that social media played a key role in defining the "pink slime" issue, and the industry had to defend what they normally call “lean finely textured beef.”

There is also anecdotal evidence of digital agenda building:

The algorithm as agenda-builder

Scholars are now starting to address what agenda building means, and what impact it has, when both machines and human beings set the agenda. Algorithms, such as the ranking algorithms in use at Facebook, apply previous online behavior to predict future interests to serve personalized content; the underlying, unseen algorithm manifests itself in the form of what information is presented to the viewer. [25] The impact of algorithmic editorial decision-making, particularly at Facebook, is immense: “...the results of [the] automated linking process shape the social lives and reading habits of more than 1 billion daily active users - one-fifth of the world’s adult population...it can be tweaked to make us happy or sad; it can expose us to new and challenging ideas or insulate us in ideological bubbles. [26] " Facebook downplays its role as publisher, but given that Facebook has become a major distributor of news, that platforms such as Facebook are “just the pipes” is an increasingly untenable stance to take. [27]

Controversy

Algorithmic determinism of news has not been without controversy. For example, Facebook recently came under fire for censoring the “Napalm girl” photo of Phan Thị Kim Phuc (they blamed the algorithm), [28] it conducted an emotional contagion experiment on users without their knowledge, [25] and it has been accused of liberal bias [29]

Related Research Articles

Media bias is the bias of journalists and news producers within the mass media in the selection of many events and stories that are reported and how they are covered. The term "media bias" implies a pervasive or widespread bias contravening of the standards of journalism, rather than the perspective of an individual journalist or article. The direction and degree of media bias in various countries is widely disputed.

Public policy is an institutionalized proposal or a decided set of elements like laws, regulations, guidelines, and actions to solve or address relevant and real-world problems, guided by a conception and often implemented by programs. The implementation of public policy is known as public administration. Public policy can be considered to be the sum of a government's direct and indirect activities and has been conceptualized in a variety of ways.

Advocacy is an activity by an individual or group that aims to influence decisions within political, economic, and social institutions. Advocacy includes activities and publications to influence public policy, laws and budgets by using facts, their relationships, the media, and messaging to educate government officials and the public. Advocacy can include many activities that a person or organization undertakes, including media campaigns, public speaking, commissioning and publishing research. Lobbying is a form of advocacy where a direct approach is made to legislators on a specific issue or specific piece of legislation. Research has started to address how advocacy groups in the United States and Canada are using social media to facilitate civic engagement and collective action.

Public opinion, or popular opinion, is the collective opinion on a specific topic or voting intention relevant to society. It is the people's views on matters affecting them. The term originates from France, and first appeared in the 17th century, though writers had identified the importance of the opinion of the people long before this. Prior to the advent of mass media, public fora such as coffee houses and gentlemen's clubs were used as exchanges of opinion and some reputable locations had great influence.

Agenda setting describes the "ability to influence the importance placed on the topics of the public agenda". The theory suggests that the media has the ability to shape public opinion by determining what issues are given the most attention, and has been widely studied and applied to various forms of media. The study of agenda-setting describes the way media attempts to influence viewers, and establish a hierarchy of news prevalence. Nations judged to be endowed with more political power receive higher media exposure. The agenda-setting by media is driven by the media's bias on things such as politics, economy and culture, etc. The evolution of agenda-setting and laissez-faire components of communication research encouraged a fast pace growth and expansion of these perspectives. Agenda-setting has phases that need to be in a specific order in order for it to succeed.

Alternative media are media sources that differ from established or dominant types of media in terms of their content, production, or distribution. Sometimes the term independent media is used as a synonym, indicating independence from large media corporations, but this term is also used to indicate media enjoying freedom of the press and independence from government control. Alternative media does not refer to a specific format and may be inclusive of print, audio, film/video, online/digital and street art, among others. Some examples include the counter-culture zines of the 1960s, ethnic and indigenous media such as the First People's television network in Canada, and more recently online open publishing journalism sites such as Indymedia.

Misinformation is incorrect or misleading information. It differs from disinformation, which is deliberately deceptive and propagated information. Rumors are information not attributed to any particular source, and so are unreliable and often unverified, but can turn out to be either true or false. However, definitions of the terms might vary between cultural contexts. Even if later retracted, misinformation can continue to influence actions and memory.

Civic journalism is the idea of integrating journalism into the democratic process. The media not only informs the public, but it also works towards engaging citizens and creating public debate. The civic journalism movement is an attempt to abandon the notion that journalists and their audiences are spectators in political and social processes. In its place, the civic journalism movement seeks to treat readers and community members as participants.

In politics, a political agenda is a list of subjects or problems (issues) to which government officials as well as individuals outside the government are paying serious attention to at any given time.

Public engagement or public participation is a term that has recently been used to describe "the practice of involving members of the public in the agenda-setting, decision-making, and policy-forming activities of organizations/institutions responsible for policy development." It is focused on the participatory actions of the public to aid in policy making based in their values.

In the social sciences, framing comprises a set of concepts and theoretical perspectives on how individuals, groups, and societies organize, perceive, and communicate about reality. Framing can manifest in thought or interpersonal communication. Frames in thought consist of the mental representations, interpretations, and simplifications of reality. Frames in communication consist of the communication of frames between different actors. Framing is a key component of sociology, the study of social interaction among humans. Framing is an integral part of conveying and processing data daily. Successful framing techniques can be used to reduce the ambiguity of intangible topics by contextualizing the information in such a way that recipients can connect to what they already know.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Science communication</span> Public communication of science-related topics to non-experts

Science communication encompasses a wide range of activities that connect science and society. Common goals of science communication include informing non-experts about scientific findings, raising the public awareness of and interest in science, influencing people's attitudes and behaviors, informing public policy, and engaging with diverse communities to address societal problems. The term "science communication" generally refers to settings in which audiences are not experts on the scientific topic being discussed (outreach), though some authors categorize expert-to-expert communication as a type of science communication. Examples of outreach include science journalism and health communication. Since science has political, moral, and legal implications, science communication can help bridge gaps between different stakeholders in public policy, industry, and civil society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political communication</span> Subfield of communication and political science

Political communication is a subfield of communication and political science that is concerned with how information spreads and influences politics, policy makers, the news media, and citizens. Since the advent of the World Wide Web, the amount of data to analyze has exploded and researchers are shifting to computational methods to study the dynamics of political communication. In recent years, machine learning, natural language processing, and network analysis have become key tools in the subfield. It deals with the production, dissemination, procession and effects of information, both through mass media and interpersonally, within a political context. This includes the study of the media, the analysis of speeches by politicians, those that are trying to influence the political process, and the formal and informal conversations among members of the public, among other aspects. The media acts as a bridge between government and public. Political communication can be defined as the connection concerning politics and citizens and the interaction modes that connect these groups to each other. Whether the relationship is formed by the modes of persuasion, Pathos, Ethos or Logos.

Advocacy groups, also known as interest groups, special interest groups, lobbying groups, pressure groups, or public associations use various forms of advocacy and/or lobbying in order to influence public opinion and ultimately public policy. They play an important role in the development of political and social systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Media coverage of climate change</span>

Media coverage of climate change has had effects on public opinion on climate change, as it conveys the scientific consensus on climate change that the global temperature has increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases.

Policy entrepreneurs are individuals who exploit opportunities to influence policy outcomes so as to promote their own goals, without having the resources necessary to achieve this alone. They are not satisfied with merely promoting their self-interests within institutions that others have established; rather, they try to create new horizons of opportunity through innovative ideas and strategies. These persistent individuals employ innovative ideas and nontraditional strategies to promote desired policy outcomes. Whether from the private, public or third sector, one of their defining characteristics is a willingness to invest their own resources – time, energy, reputation and sometimes money – in hope of a future return. While policy entrepreneurs may try to block changes proposed by others, entrepreneurial activities usually seek to change the status quo rather than preserve it. It should be stressed, however, that although the literature has focused mainly on entrepreneurs who have led successful changes in policy, not all policy entrepreneurship ends in success. Finally, policy entrepreneurship is but one form of political participation. It is a process that involves individuals who are willing to take risks, identify policy problems and solutions, and use their political skills and timing to achieve a specified outcome". Most accounts and case studies address these individuals in a national context but the emergence of transnational policy entrepreneurs is increasingly apparent.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Media independence</span> Absence of external control on a media institution

Media independence is the absence of external control and influence on an institution or individual working in the media. It is a measure of its capacity to "make decisions and act according to its logic," and distinguishes independent media from state media.

Social media as a news source is the use of online social media platforms rather than moreover traditional media platforms to obtain news. Just as television turned a nation of people who listened to media content into watchers of media content in the 1950s to the 1980s, the emergence of social media has created a nation of media content creators. Almost half of Americans use social media as a news source, according to the Pew Research Center.

Social media use in politics refers to the use of online social media platforms in political processes and activities. Political processes and activities include all activities that pertain to the governance of a country or area. This includes political organization, global politics, political corruption, political parties, and political values.

Political bias is a bias or perceived bias involving the slanting or altering of information to make a political position or political candidate seem more attractive. With a distinct association with media bias, it commonly refers to how a reporter, news organisation, or TV show covers a political candidate or a policy issue.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Cobb, Roger; Ross, Jennie-Keith; Ross, Marc Howard (1976-01-01). "Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process". The American Political Science Review. 70 (1): 126–138. doi:10.2307/1960328. JSTOR   1960328.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Cobb, Roger W.; Elder, Charles D. (1971-01-01). "The Politics of Agenda-Building: An Alternative Perspective for Modern Democratic Theory". The Journal of Politics. 33 (4): 892–915. doi:10.2307/2128415. JSTOR   2128415. S2CID   154854950.
  3. 1 2 Berkowitz, D. (1994). Kennamer, J. (ed.). Public Opinion, The Press, and Public Opinion. Westport, CT: Praeger. pp. 81–102.
  4. 1 2 3 Denham, Bryan E. (2010-10-01). "Toward Conceptual Consistency in Studies of Agenda-Building Processes: A Scholarly Review". Review of Communication. 10 (4): 306–323. doi:10.1080/15358593.2010.502593. S2CID   143947009.
  5. ↑ Elder, Charles D.; Cobb, Roger W. (1984-09-01). "Agenda-Building and the Politics of Aging". Policy Studies Journal. 13 (1): 115–129. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.1984.tb01704.x. ISSN   1541-0072.
  6. ↑ Jones, B; Baumgartner, F (2005). The Politics of Attention. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN   9780226406534.
  7. 1 2 Nisbet, Matthew C.; Brossard, Dominique; Kroepsch, Adrianne (2003). "Framing Science: The Stem Cell Controversy in an Age of PressPolitics". The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 8 (2): 36–70. doi:10.1177/1081180x02251047. S2CID   145318193.
  8. ↑ Laursen, Lucas (2013-09-01). "Greenpeace campaign prompts Philippine ban on Bt eggplant trials". Nature Biotechnology. 31 (9): 777–778. doi:10.1038/nbt0913-777a. ISSN   1087-0156. PMID   24022142. S2CID   205271090.
  9. ↑ Berkowitz, Dan (1987). "TV News Sources and News Channels: A Study in Agenda-Building". Journalism Quarterly. 64 (2–3): 508–13. doi:10.1177/107769908706400231. S2CID   144138416.
  10. ↑ Kim, Ji Young; Xiang, Zheng; Kiousis, Spiro (2011). "Agenda building effects by 2008 presidential candidates on global media coverage and public opinion". Public Relations Review. 37 (1): 109–111. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.09.009.
  11. ↑ Lang, Gladys Engel; Lang, Kurt (1983-01-01). The Battle for Public Opinion: The President, the Press and the Polls During Watergate. Columbia Univ Pr. ISBN   9780231055482. ASIN   023105548X.
  12. ↑ Strömbäck, Jesper; Nord, Lars W. (2006-06-01). "Do Politicians Lead the Tango? A Study of the Relationship between Swedish Journalists and their Political Sources in the Context of Election Campaigns". European Journal of Communication. 21 (2): 147–164. doi:10.1177/0267323105064043. ISSN   0267-3231. S2CID   143579922.
  13. ↑ Cook, T. (2006). Governing With the News, Second Edition. University of Chicago Press. ISBN   9780226026688.
  14. ↑ Bennett, W. Lance (1990-06-01). "Toward a Theory of Press-State Relations in the United States". Journal of Communication. 40 (2): 103–127. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02265.x. ISSN   1460-2466.
  15. ↑ Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks - How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  16. ↑ Sayre, Ben; Bode, Leticia; Shah, Dhavan; Wilcox, Dave; Shah, Chirag (2010-07-01). "Agenda Setting in a Digital Age: Tracking Attention to California Proposition 8 in Social Media, Online News and Conventional News". Policy & Internet. 2 (2): 7–32. doi:10.2202/1944-2866.1040. hdl: 10822/559283 . ISSN   1944-2866.
  17. ↑ Parmelee, John H. (2014-05-01). "The agenda-building function of political tweets". New Media & Society. 16 (3): 434–450. doi:10.1177/1461444813487955. ISSN   1461-4448. S2CID   38603678.
  18. ↑ Wallsten, Kevin (2007-11-01). "Agenda Setting and the Blogosphere: An Analysis of the Relationship between Mainstream Media and Political Blogs". Review of Policy Research. 24 (6): 567–587. doi:10.1111/j.1541-1338.2007.00300.x. ISSN   1541-1338.
  19. ↑ Jacobson, Susan (2013-07-01). "Does Audience Participation on Facebook Influence the News Agenda? A Case Study of The Rachel Maddow Show". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 57 (3): 338–355. doi:10.1080/08838151.2013.816706. ISSN   0883-8151. S2CID   143652236.
  20. ↑ Runge, K.; Brossard, D.; Scheufele, D.; Xenos, M. (2015). "Pink slimed: A time series analysis of news coverage and social media response during the 2012 'lean finely textured beef' controversy". Paper Presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Politics in the Life Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
  21. ↑ On The Media (2002). "Blogging Lott". WNYC. Retrieved 2016-09-26.
  22. ↑ "The Long Strange Leak Of Mitt Romney's 47% Video". Buzzfeed. 2012. Retrieved 2016-09-26.
  23. ↑ Baysinger, T. "How BuzzFeed Became the Outlet That Made the Stanford Rape Victim's Letter Go Viral". June 7, 2016. Advertising Week. Retrieved 2016-09-26.
  24. ↑ Smith, Doug (August 16, 2016). "Judge in Stanford rape case asks for move to civil cases". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2016-09-26.
  25. 1 2 Kramer, A.; Guilory, J.; Hancock, J. (2014). "Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 111 (24): 8788–8790. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1320040111 . PMC   4066473 . PMID   24889601.
  26. ↑ Oremus, Will (January 3, 2016). "Who controls your Facebook feed". Slate. slate.com.
  27. ↑ Herbst, Jeffrey (April 13, 2016). "The Algorithm is an Editor". The Wall Street Journal.
  28. ↑ Ingram, Mathew (September 9, 2016). "Here's why Facebook removing that Vietnam War photo Is so Iimportant". Fortune Magazine.
  29. ↑ Tufekci, Zeynep (2016-05-19). "The Real Bias Built In at Facebook". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2016-09-26.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.