The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning
veebr 2015 · University of Chicago Press
E-raamat
256
lehekülge
family_home
Sobilik
info
Teave selle e-raamatu kohta
Turn on the television or sign in to social media during election season and chances are you’ll see plenty of negative campaigning. For decades, conventional wisdom has held that Americans hate negativity in political advertising, and some have even argued that its pervasiveness in recent seasons has helped to drive down voter turnout. Arguing against this commonly held view, Kyle Mattes and David P. Redlawsk show not only that some negativity is accepted by voters as part of the political process, but that negative advertising is necessary to convey valuable information that would not otherwise be revealed.
The most comprehensive treatment of negative campaigning to date, The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning uses models, surveys, and experiments to show that much of the seeming dislike of negative campaigning can be explained by the way survey questions have been worded. By failing to distinguish between baseless and credible attacks, surveys fail to capture differences in voters’ receptivity. Voters’ responses, the authors argue, vary greatly and can be better explained by the content and believability of the ads than by whether the ads are negative. Mattes and Redlawsk continue on to establish how voters make use of negative information and why it is necessary. Many voters are politically naïve and unlikely to make inferences about candidates’ positions or traits, so the ability of candidates to go on the attack and focus explicitly on information that would not otherwise be available is crucial to voter education.
The most comprehensive treatment of negative campaigning to date, The Positive Case for Negative Campaigning uses models, surveys, and experiments to show that much of the seeming dislike of negative campaigning can be explained by the way survey questions have been worded. By failing to distinguish between baseless and credible attacks, surveys fail to capture differences in voters’ receptivity. Voters’ responses, the authors argue, vary greatly and can be better explained by the content and believability of the ads than by whether the ads are negative. Mattes and Redlawsk continue on to establish how voters make use of negative information and why it is necessary. Many voters are politically naïve and unlikely to make inferences about candidates’ positions or traits, so the ability of candidates to go on the attack and focus explicitly on information that would not otherwise be available is crucial to voter education.
Teave autori kohta
Kyle Mattes is assistant professor of political science at the University of Iowa. David P. Redlawsk is professor of political science at the Eagleton Institute’s Center for Public Interest Polling at Rutgers University. He is coauthor of several books, including Why Iowa?, also published by the University of Chicago Press.
Hinnake seda e-raamatut
Andke meile teada, mida te arvate.
Lugemisteave
Nutitelefonid ja tahvelarvutid
Installige rakendus Google Play raamatud Androidile ja iPadile/iPhone'ile. See sünkroonitakse automaatselt teie kontoga ja see võimaldab teil asukohast olenemata lugeda nii võrgus kui ka võrguühenduseta.
Sülearvutid ja arvutid
Google Playst ostetud audioraamatuid saab kuulata arvuti veebibrauseris.
E-lugerid ja muud seadmed
E-tindi seadmetes (nt Kobo e-lugerid) lugemiseks peate faili alla laadima ja selle oma seadmesse üle kandma. Failide toetatud e-lugeritesse teisaldamiseks järgige üksikasjalikke abikeskuse juhiseid.
