Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T14:46:33.632Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Broadcast Television, Partisanship, and the Incumbency Advantage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2014

Markus Prior
Affiliation:
Princeton University, New Jersey
Get access

Summary

Just as television grew across the country and established itself as Americans' most important source of news (at least according to their own assessment), the American political scene began to experience important changes. After a period of stability in the aggregate distribution of partisanship in the 1950s and early 1960s, which Converse (1976) called a “steady-state period,” partisanship began to decline in the mid-1960s, voters became more likely to vote for different parties in presidential and congressional elections, and incumbents in Congress received more support from voters who did not identify with their party.

At least since The American Voter (Campbell et al. 1960), party identification had been considered a fundamental and highly stable component of people's political identity. It was also the most important determinant of their voting decisions. Knowing only a voter's party identification allowed scholars to predict his or her vote with remarkable accuracy. But in the mid-1960s, partisanship began to weaken. After dropping for another decade, it eventually rebounded (Bartels 2000). An explanation for these ups and downs in the importance of the most central predictor of voting behavior remains elusive. Such an explanation gains added significance because weaker impact of partisanship is often thought to go along with a greater role for individual candidates in deciding elections (and vice versa). And for better or worse, the strength of partisanship among voters is related to the salience of partisan divisions at the elite level.

Type
Chapter
Information
Post-Broadcast Democracy
How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections
, pp. 163 - 213
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×