When Politicians React to the Media: How the Attitudes and Goals of Political Elites Moderate the Effect of the Media on the Political Agenda



The media’s role in shaping politicians’ priorities (political agenda-setting) is usually examined at the institutional level. However, we do not know how politicians’ individual-level characteristics—specifically their attitudes and goals—moderate their responsiveness to the media in real-life. The current study is the first to examine this by using the Israeli case. Results highlight the arena function of the media: the more politicians represent their party-line over public demands, the more responsive they are to media agenda. This indicates that party representatives try to promote their party in the media, which become an arena for partisan conflicts. However, no relationship is found between the degree to which politicians feel overwhelmed by information and media responsiveness.


  1. Akirav, O. (2010). Candidate selection and a crowded parliament: The Israeli Knesset, 1988–2006. The Journal of Legislative Studies, 16(1), 96–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andeweg, R. B., & Thomassen, J. J. (2005). Modes of political representation: Toward a new typology. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 30(4), 507–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boydstun, A. E., Hardy, A., & Walgrave, S. (2014). Two faces of media attention: Media storm versus non-storm coverage. Political Communication, 31(4), 509–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Converse, P. E., & Pierce, R. (1986). Political representation in France. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, A. (2007). Investigating journalist influences on political issue agendas at Westminster. Political Communication, 24(2), 181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edwards, G. C., & Wood, B. D. (1999). Who influences whom? The President, Congress, and the media. American Political Science Review, 93(2), 327–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Green-Pedersen, C., & Stubager, R. (2010). The political conditionality of mass media influence: When do parties follow mass media attention? British Journal of Political Science, 40(3), 663–677.Google Scholar
  10. Helfer, L. (2016). Media effects on politicians: An individual-level political agenda-setting experiment. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(2), 233–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. R. (1987). News that matters: Television and American opinion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Jacobs, L. R., & Shapiro, R. Y. (2000). Politicians don’t pander: Political manipulation and the loss of democratic responsiveness. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  14. Lindblom, C. E. (1959). The science of “muddling through”. Public Administration Review, 19(2), 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Midtbø, T., Walgrave, S., Van Aelst, P., & Christensen, D. A. (2014). Do the media set the agenda of parliament or is it the other way around? Agenda interactions between MPs and mass media. In K. Deschouwer & S. Depauw (Eds.), Representing the people: A survey among members of statewide and substate parliaments (pp. 188–208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1963). Constituency influence in Congress. American Political Science Review, 57(1), 45–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Popkin, S. L. (1994). The reasoning voter: Communication and persuasion in presidential campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Sevenans, J., Walgrave, S., & Vos, D. (2015). Political elites’ media responsiveness and their individual political goals: A study of national politicians in Belgium. Research & Politics, 2(3), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sheafer, T. (2001). Charismatic skill and media legitimacy: An actor-centered approach to understanding the political communication competition. Communication Research, 28(6), 711–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sheafer, T., Shenhav, S. R., & Balmas, M. (2014). Political actors as communicators. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp. 211–229). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  21. Sheafer, T., & Weimann, G. (2005). Agenda building, agenda setting, priming, individual voting intentions, and the aggregate results: An analysis of four Israeli elections. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 347–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shenhav, S. R., Oshri, O., Ofek, D., & Sheafer, T. (2014). Story coalitions: Applying narrative theory to the study of coalition formation. Political Psychology, 35(5), 661–678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shenhav, S. R., & Sheafer, T. (2008). From inter-party debate to inter-personal polemic: Media coverage of internal and external party disputes in Israel, 1949–2003. Party Politics, 14(6), 706–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Simon, H. A. (1985). Human nature in politics: The dialogue of psychology with political science. American Political Science Review, 79(2), 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Soroka, S. N. (2002a). Agenda-setting dynamics in Canada. Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  26. Soroka, S. N. (2002b). Issue attributes and agenda-setting by media, the public and policymakers in Canada. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14(3), 264–285.Google Scholar
  27. Soroka, S. N., Penner, E., & Blidook, K. (2009). Constituency influence in parliament. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 42(3), 563–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Van Aelst, P. (2014). Media, political agendas and public policy. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp. 231–248). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  29. Van Aelst, P., Brants, K., Van Praag, P., de Vreese, C., Nuytemans, M., & Van Dalen, A. (2008). The fourth estate as superpower? An empirical study of perceptions of media power in Belgium and the Netherlands. Journalism Studies, 9(4), 494–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Van Aelst, P., & Walgrave, S. (2016). Information and arena: The dual function of the news media for political elites. Journal of Communication, 66(3), 496–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Noije, L., Oegema, D., & Kleinnijenhuis, J. (2008). Loss of parliamentary control due to mediatization and Europeanization: A longitudinal and cross-sectional analysis of agenda building in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. British Journal of Political Science, 38(3), 455–478.Google Scholar
  32. Vliegenthart, R., & Walgrave, S. (2011a). Content matters: The dynamics of parliamentary questioning in Belgium and Denmark. Comparative Political Studies, 44(8), 1031–1059.Google Scholar
  33. Vliegenthart, R., & Walgrave, S. (2011b). When the media matter for politics: Partisan moderators of the mass media’s agenda-setting influence on parliament in Belgium. Party Politics, 17(3), 321–342.Google Scholar
  34. Walgrave, S. (2008). Again, the almighty mass media? The media’s political agenda setting power according to politicians and journalists in Belgium. Political Communication, 25(4), 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Walgrave, S., Soroka, S., & Nuytemans, M. (2008). The mass media’s political agenda-setting power: A longitudinal analysis of media, parliament, and government in Belgium (1993 to 2000). Comparative Political Studies, 41(6), 814–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Walgrave, S., & Van Aelst, P. (2006). The contingency of the mass media’s political agenda setting power: Toward a preliminary theory. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wanta, W., & Foote, J. (1994). The President-news media relationship: A time series analysis of agenda-setting. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 38(4), 437–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wood, B. D., & Peake, J. S. (1998). The dynamics of foreign policy agenda setting. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations