{"title":"在总统初选中复制媒体报道的发现、审查和减少模式","authors":"Z. Scott","doi":"10.1080/17457289.2021.1942016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Media coverage has long been thought crucial to shaping the electoral fortunes of presidential primary candidates in the post-reform era, making how the media allot coverage a topic of paramount importance. Sides and Vavreck (2013. The Gamble: Choice and Change in the 2012 Presidential Election. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) make a notable contribution to the study of media coverage in primaries with their “discovery, scrutiny, and decline” (DSD) model. This model, based on the 2012 Republican primary, suggests that the media’s preference for novelty leads to a cyclical identification of new and interesting candidates, a surge in coverage of that candidate, and a culminating drop of coverage back to baseline levels. But the generalizability of the DSD model beyond the 2012 GOP primary has not yet been thoroughly tested. This paper conducts such a test using the Presidential Primary Communication Corpus (PPCC) which contains news stories by The New York Times and the Washington Post of each candidate in the nine primaries from 2000 to 2020. The evidence is most supportive of the DSD model in the 2008 and 2012 Republican primaries and the 2004 and 2020 Democratic primaries but less supportive in the remaining five. This paper concludes with a discussion of why some campaigns don’t match the DSD model’s expectations.","PeriodicalId":46791,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","volume":"31 1 1","pages":"354 - 364"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Replicating the discovery, scrutiny, and decline model of media coverage in presidential primaries\",\"authors\":\"Z. Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17457289.2021.1942016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Media coverage has long been thought crucial to shaping the electoral fortunes of presidential primary candidates in the post-reform era, making how the media allot coverage a topic of paramount importance. Sides and Vavreck (2013. The Gamble: Choice and Change in the 2012 Presidential Election. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) make a notable contribution to the study of media coverage in primaries with their “discovery, scrutiny, and decline” (DSD) model. This model, based on the 2012 Republican primary, suggests that the media’s preference for novelty leads to a cyclical identification of new and interesting candidates, a surge in coverage of that candidate, and a culminating drop of coverage back to baseline levels. But the generalizability of the DSD model beyond the 2012 GOP primary has not yet been thoroughly tested. This paper conducts such a test using the Presidential Primary Communication Corpus (PPCC) which contains news stories by The New York Times and the Washington Post of each candidate in the nine primaries from 2000 to 2020. The evidence is most supportive of the DSD model in the 2008 and 2012 Republican primaries and the 2004 and 2020 Democratic primaries but less supportive in the remaining five. This paper concludes with a discussion of why some campaigns don’t match the DSD model’s expectations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties\",\"volume\":\"31 1 1\",\"pages\":\"354 - 364\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2021.1942016\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Elections Public Opinion and Parties","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2021.1942016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
长期以来,媒体报道一直被认为对塑造改革后时代总统初选候选人的选举命运至关重要,因此媒体如何分配报道成为一个至关重要的话题。Sides and Vavreck(2013)。《赌博:2012年总统选举中的选择与改变》。普林斯顿,新泽西州:普林斯顿大学出版社)以他们的“发现,审查和下降”(DSD)模型对初选媒体报道的研究做出了显著的贡献。这个基于2012年共和党初选的模型表明,媒体对新奇事物的偏好导致了对新候选人和有趣候选人的周期性识别,对该候选人的报道激增,最终报道下降到基线水平。但DSD模型在2012年共和党初选之后的普遍性还没有得到彻底的测试。本文利用2000年至2020年9个初选中各候选人的《纽约时报》和《华盛顿邮报》报道的“总统初选传播语料库”(PPCC)进行了验证。在2008年和2012年的共和党初选以及2004年和2020年的民主党初选中,证据最支持DSD模型,但在其余五个初选中支持度较低。本文最后讨论了为什么有些活动不符合DSD模型的期望。
Replicating the discovery, scrutiny, and decline model of media coverage in presidential primaries
ABSTRACT Media coverage has long been thought crucial to shaping the electoral fortunes of presidential primary candidates in the post-reform era, making how the media allot coverage a topic of paramount importance. Sides and Vavreck (2013. The Gamble: Choice and Change in the 2012 Presidential Election. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press) make a notable contribution to the study of media coverage in primaries with their “discovery, scrutiny, and decline” (DSD) model. This model, based on the 2012 Republican primary, suggests that the media’s preference for novelty leads to a cyclical identification of new and interesting candidates, a surge in coverage of that candidate, and a culminating drop of coverage back to baseline levels. But the generalizability of the DSD model beyond the 2012 GOP primary has not yet been thoroughly tested. This paper conducts such a test using the Presidential Primary Communication Corpus (PPCC) which contains news stories by The New York Times and the Washington Post of each candidate in the nine primaries from 2000 to 2020. The evidence is most supportive of the DSD model in the 2008 and 2012 Republican primaries and the 2004 and 2020 Democratic primaries but less supportive in the remaining five. This paper concludes with a discussion of why some campaigns don’t match the DSD model’s expectations.