Government Communications,Political Trust and Compliant Social Behaviour: The Politics of Covid-19 in Britain

It is commonly said that the lockdowns and social distancing necessary to control coronavirus pandemics will only work if the general population trusts its government, believes the information it provides, and has confidence in its policies. This article traces the British government’s record in providing information about its policies and performance, and compares this with the public’s use of the mainstream news media. It then considers how these two sources of information affected trust in government and public compliance with social distancing and lockdown rules. Lastly, it compares Covid-19 with Brexit and draws conclusions about how beliefs and behaviour are formed when individuals are personally faced with a serious threat.     

The 2019 Portuguese general elections

Abstract

The 2019 Portuguese general elections have led to the formation of another minority government of the Socialist Party. Right-wing parties suffered a resounding defeat. The election had two key consequences. First, after four years of contract parliamentarism with an extreme-left party, the Socialists returned to their historical position of pivotal party in the system. Socialist leader Costa refused to replicate alliances with parties to his left. Second, the 2019 election witnessed the emergence of three new parties, Chega, Iniciativa Liberal and Livre. The election of Chega marks a watershed moment in Portuguese democratic history, as for the first time an extreme-right populist party has gained representation in the country.     

媒体介入对刑事诉讼的影响及坚持的原则

随着大众传播媒体的迅速发展,因其所具有的传播速度快、受众面广、公开及时等特点,已经越来越深入社会生活的方方面面。在刑事司法领域,媒体介入,特别是刑事侦查和审判阶段的介入,已然成为社会所热议的焦点和专家学者所研究的热点。媒体介入是一把双刃剑,在刑事诉讼活动中既能表现出监督司法机关诉讼活动、培养民众法律意识和法制观念等有利的一面,又能体现出阻碍侦查活动、妨碍诉讼活动的正常进行,甚至出现"媒体审判"等不利的一方面。必须通过重点分析媒体介入对刑事诉讼的影响,才能提出媒体介入刑事诉讼所应坚持的原则,以便协调舆论媒体与司法机关之间的关系。     

Newspaper Coverage of Three Presidential Campaigns in Chile: Personalisation and Political Strategies

We investigate the evolution of political campaign coverage through a content analysis of the topics highlighted in newspapers' agendas during three presidential elections in Chile. Results show an expected increase in the space allocated to the politicians' private lives (privatisation) by 2009, but no change in the attention given to individual politicians' political traits (political competence). Coverage of candidates' campaign strategies had increased markedly in media agendas by 1999, and by 2009 in politicians' agendas. These changes are consistent with some of the recent transformations of political communication in Western democracies, within the framework of the so‐called ‘mediatisation’ of politics.     

Rallying Votes? A Multilevel Approach to Understanding Voter Decision-Making in the 2016 Presidential Nominating Contests

The 2016 presidential nominating process presented the American public with an interesting and tumultuous set of contests. Despite the unique nature of both the Democratic and Republican contests, the candidates stuck to the usual campaign activities to help influence voters. However, one of these campaign tactics, campaign visits, has been vastly understudied. Using a uniquely compiled dataset and a hierarchical linear model, I am able to test how campaign effects, including visits, as well as an individual’s predispositions impacted vote choice in the 2016 presidential nominating contests. The results demonstrate that the 2016 presidential nominating contests were decided based on a combination of both campaign activities and individual-level predictors.     

Be there or be square – The impact of participation and performance in the 2017 Dutch TV debates and its coverage on voting behaviour

TV debates are often seen as the most important events that provide the electorate with information about leading candidates and key issues during electoral campaigns. Research provides evidence for various debate effects, showing both a direct and indirect influence on voting decisions. There is, however, only scant evidence on the relative impact of TV debates when examining these effects at the same time. To fill this gap, our study aims to analyse whether and to what extent a candidate's participation in a debate, their performance in the debate or the related media coverage influence the electorate when examined simultaneously. We consider the case of the 2017 Dutch general elections, which offers an almost ideal setting due to the broadcast of several TV debates of different formats and candidate compositions throughout the campaign period. To distinguish the effects of single debates, we use original Dutch panel survey data. We find a weak overall influence of the debates; the most significant effects are decreasing vote intentions for the two main competitors (VVD and PVV) after both candidates refused to participate in the first TV debate, and a ‘winner-effect’ for one of the two main candidates in a head-to-head debate.     

Researching Fact Checking: Present Limitations and Future Opportunities

The fact checking field has grown tremendously in the past decade, as has academic interest in the practice, with dozens of studies testing the effectiveness of corrections. However, research on fact checking is not yet optimised to help fact checkers address the global challenges of mis- and disinformation. In this paper, we review the literature on fact checking’s effects and identify two key gaps. First, we discuss the limited diversity and external validity of existing studies, which have overwhelmingly been conducted in Western countries and under artificial, experimental conditions. Second, we argue that research has narrowly focussed on the short-term, corrective effects of individual fact checks, largely ignoring the multiple ways fact checkers conceive of their impact. Thus, research has overlooked the cultural and systemic changes that fact checkers pursue. We conclude by highlighting opportunities for further research and for improving communication between academics and fact checkers.     

以民主促民生——以太原市“向人民汇报·请人民评议”活动为例

民主是保障民生的重要手段,只有民主得到落实,个人的权利和利益才能得到保证。2012年2月太原市开展的＂向人民汇报.请人民评议＂活动,群众发动之广、参与人数之多、社会影响之大、整体效果之好为近年来所罕见。该评议活动创新了人民当家作主的实现形式,实现了民主广度和深度的均衡、协商民主与远程民主的互动、程序民主和实质民主的统一,为社会主义民主政治建设提供了新的路径。     

Why Do Some Terrorist Attacks Receive More Media Attention Than Others?

Abstract

Terrorist attacks often dominate news coverage as reporters seek to provide the public with information. Yet, not all incidents receive equal attention. Why do some terrorist attacks receive more media coverage than others? We argue that perpetrator religion is the largest predictor of news coverage, while target type, being arrested, and fatalities will also impact coverage. We examined news coverage from LexisNexis Academic and CNN.com for all terrorist attacks in the United States between 2006 and 2015 (N?=?136). Controlling for target type, fatalities, and being arrested, attacks by Muslim perpetrators received, on average, 357% more coverage than other attacks. Our results are robust against a number of counterarguments. The disparities in news coverage of attacks based on the perpetrator’s religion may explain why members of the public tend to fear the “Muslim terrorist” while ignoring other threats. More representative coverage could help to bring public perception in line with reality.     

The Messenger Overwhelming the Message: Ideological Cues and Perceptions of Bias in Television News

Survey research has demonstrated that citizens perceive ideological bias in television news, specifically with regard to CNN and Fox News Channel (FNC), which allegedly represent the liberal and conservative viewpoint, respectively. In this paper I argue that attaching the CNN and FNC labels to news stories sends an ideological cue to the viewer regarding the content of the story. Utilizing an experimental design that allows manipulation of the network attribution of actual FNC and CNN content, I am able to demonstrate that the CNN and FNC labels function as ideological signals to the viewer, with this signal being most pronounced among ideologues whose views are supposedly at odds with those attributed to the network.