“What's Newt Doing in People Magazine?” The Changing Effect of National Prominence in Congressional Elections.

POLITICAL campaigns; MASS media; PRACTICAL politics; UNITED States. Congress; LEGISLATORS

It is conventional wisdom in politics to believe that press coverage is beneficial. However, forms of press coverage are not created equal. Specifically, we argue that national media prominence is not inherently beneficial and can be detrimental to members of Congress. Using a measure of national prominence based on the number of national television appearances of House incumbents, this study finds national prominence was generally not a significant positive factor in incumbent popularity from 1982 to 1988. Moreover, after the anti-Washington, anti-incumbent mood burgeoned in the interim, national prominence became an important factor for incumbents, such that those who were more prominent in the elections of 1990–1996 were penalized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Political Behavior is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)