What Politicians Learn from the Mass Media and Why They React to It: Evidence from Elite Interviews

  • Julie Sevenans


This chapter explores the informational function of the mass media in politicians’ work. More precisely, it focuses on instances where political elites actively use media coverage in their political work—called “political agenda-setting processes”. It tries to understand what role the media precisely play in these instances. The central claim is that the interpretation of media effects on political agendas is dependent on two factors: (1) what politicians learn from the media when they react to it and (2) which motivations underlie politicians’ reactions to media information. The author develops a theoretical model that integrates the various possible learning and motivational mechanisms. By means of in-depth interviews, she tests whether political elites themselves confirm the existence of these mechanisms.


  1. Baumgartner, F. R., Jones, B. D., & Leech, B. L. (1997). Media attention and congressional agendas. In S. Iyengar & R. Reeves (Eds.), Do the media govern? Politicians, voters, and reporters in America (pp. 349–363). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  2. Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707–731.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boydstun, A. E. (2013). Making the news: Politics, the media, and agenda setting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cohen, J., Tsfati, Y., & Sheafer, T. (2008). The influence of presumed media influence in politics: Do politicians’ perceptions of media power matter? Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(2), 331–344. doi: 10.1093/poq/nfn014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cook, F. L., Tyler, T. R., Goetz, E. G., Gordon, M. T., Protess, D., Leff, D. R., Molotch, H.L., et al. (1983). Media and agenda setting: Effects on the public, interest group leaders, policy makers, and policy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47(1), 16–35. doi: 10.1086/268764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, A. (2009). Journalist–source relations, mediated reflexivity and the politics of politics. Journalism Studies, 10(2), 204–219. doi: 10.1080/14616700802580540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Delshad, A. B. (2012). Revisiting “Who influences whom?” Agenda setting on biofuels. Congress & the Presidency, 39(2), 177–198. doi: 10.1080/07343469.2012.674082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eissler, R., Russell, A., & Jones, B. D. (2014). New avenues for the study of agenda setting. Policy Studies Journal, 42, S71–S86. doi: 10.1111/psj.12048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elmelund-Præstekær, C., & Wien, C. (2008). What’s the fuss about? The interplay of media hypes and politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 247–266. doi: 10.1177/1940161208319292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Green-Pedersen, C. (2010). Bringing parties into parliament: The development of parliamentary activities in Western Europe. Party Politics, 16(3), 347–369. doi: 10.1177/1354068809341057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Herbst, S. (1998). Reading public opinion: How political actors view the democratic process. Studies in communication, media, and public opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Jones, B. D., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2005). The politics of attention: How government prioritizes problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Melenhorst, L. (2015). The media’s role in lawmaking: A case study analysis. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 20(3), 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Page, B. I., & Shapiro, R. Y. (1983). Effects of public opinion on policy. The American Political Science Review, 77(1), 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Sevenans, J. (2017). One concept, many interpretations: The media’s causal roles in political agenda-setting processes. European Political Science Review, published online 18 April 2017. doi: 10.1017/S1755773917000078.
  16. Strøm, K. (1990). A behavioral theory of competitive political parties. American Journal of Political Science, 34(2), 565–598. doi: 10.2307/2111461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Strömbäck, J., & Van Aelst, P. (2013). Why political parties adapt to the media: Exploring the fourth dimension of mediatization. International Communication Gazette, 75(4), 341–358. doi: 10.1177/1748048513482266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Tan, Y., & Weaver, D. H. (2007). Agenda-setting effects among the media, the public, and congress, 1946–2004. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 729–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. van der Pas, D. (2014). Making hay while the sun shines: Do parties only respond to media attention when the framing is right? The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19(1), 42–65. doi: 10.1177/1940161213508207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Van Aelst, P., & Walgrave, S. (2016). Information and arena: The dual function of the news media for political elites. Journal of Communication. doi: 10.1111/jcom.12229.Google Scholar
  21. Vliegenthart, R., Walgrave, S., Baumgartner, F. R., Bevan, S., Breunig, C., Brouard, S., Bonafont, L.C., et al. (2016). Do the media set the parliamentary agenda? A comparative study in seven countries. European Journal of Political Research, 55(2), 283–301. doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vos, D. (2014). Which politicians pass the news gates and why? Explaining inconsistencies in research on news coverage of individual politicians. International Journal of Communication, 8, 24.Google Scholar
  23. de Vreese, C. H. (2005). News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal & Document Design, 13(1), 51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wolfsfeld, G., & Sheafer, T. (2006). Competing actors and the construction of political news: The contest over waves in Israel. Political Communication, 23(3), 333–354. doi: 10.1080/10584600600808927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie Sevenans
    • 1
  1. 1.University of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations