The Press Effect: Politicians, Journalists, and the Stories that Shape the Political World (Paperback)

by Kathleen Hall Jamieson (Author), Paul Waldman (Author) "The reports that journalists offer their readers, listeners, and viewers are not called "stories" by accident..." (more)
Key Phrases: United States, New York Times, George Bush (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly
"The greatest generation was used to storming beachheads. Baby boomers such as myself was used to getting caught in a quagmire of Vietnam where politics made decisions more than the military sometimes." These garbled sentences, from a speech George W. Bush gave a month after September 11, were not dissimilar to those the President had delivered earlier. Yet the U.S. press, which had vigilantly chronicled all of Bush's earlier malapropisms, had decided the president had changed and was now eloquent. This fascinating, well documented and entertaining critique of the national press makes the case that the mainstream media doesn't so much report the news as create it, especially when journalists "transform the raw stuff of experience into presumed fact and arrange facts into coherent stories." University of Pennsylvania communications professor Jamieson and research fellow Waldman focus mainly on how the press reported the 2000 election, the Supreme Court's decision on the Florida vote and its response to national politics after 9/11. In each instance, they uncover and substantiate how the national press shapes the news. During the election, for instance, the press adapted a "frame" for each candidate, presenting Bush as "not too bright" and Gore as "untrustworthy." This "frame" defined most of the coverage, they say. Jamieson and Waldman's analysis is eye opening, and much of it is highly provocative. Intelligent and timely, this is an important addition to the literature on media and current events.
Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal
Amateur psychologist, soothsayer, patriot-these are some of the roles adopted by journalists in covering political news, according to Jamieson and Waldman (Annenberg Public Policy Ctr.). By forcing the news into "frames" that correspond to these roles, reporters determine which elements of a story to play up and which to ignore. To illustrate this disturbing phenomenon, the authors cite numerous recent examples, from media complicity in spreading campaign fabrications to the influence of journalists on the outcome of the 2000 presidential election. The only appropriate role for the news media to adopt, the authors maintain, is that of "custodian of fact." Too often, they argue, reporters simply analyze the strategies used by opposing sides rather than sorting out the facts behind the issues. While acknowledging that the truth can be elusive, the authors cite a few exemplary cases of journalistic integrity and fact finding. This important book, which demonstrates that media distortion is far too complex and insidious to be explained by mere liberal or conservative bias, belongs in all journalism collections.
Susan M. Colowick, North Olympic Lib. Syst., Port Angeles, WA
Copyright 2002 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 240 pages
• Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA (January 1, 2003)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0195173295
• ISBN-13: 978-0195173291
• Product Dimensions: 7.7 x 5 x 0.6 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #83,897 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #61 in

  Books > Nonfiction > Government > Elections

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

8 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Solid, well researched, and balanced, April 24, 2003

By	"reverend_matt" (Saint Louis, MO United States) - See all my reviews

This review is from: The Press Effect: Politicians, Journalists, and the Stories that Shape the Political World (Hardcover)

Jamieson and Waldman offer a highly critical overview of media coverage, focusing on the 2000 Presidential election, but also touching on historical issues such as the Nixon Presidency and the Gulf of Tonkin incident. They are equally critical of the coverage given to Bush and Gore, in an impressive display of non-partisanship that is lacking in our media today. They encourage reporters to research the statements by candidates and to not simply accept the frame given to them by interested parties but to investigate and to put a truly fair and balanced frame around it. One issue that they note but could have gone into more detail on is that the media almost universally present issues as a for/against disagreement, whereas in reality there are often (I might argue almost always) more than two points of view on a given issue and the press ignores all but the two that are most easily reduced to sound bites.

7 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A must read for all journalists, January 7, 2003

By A Customer

This review is from: The Press Effect: Politicians, Journalists, and the Stories that Shape the Political World (Hardcover)

The press is in crisis--it no longer serves its most important role, which is to cut through political spin to get at the facts. Jamieson and Waldman make a convincing case that the press is so intent on creating compelling storylines that it has lost its critical edge.

For all journalists out there--please read it!

4.0 out of 5 stars Specifics we forgot, June 23, 2008

By	Karl Hess (Cleveland, OH) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This is nicely written, not wordy or loaded with polysci jargon. She reviews national events, mostly political, and how the media covered or created them.

It is rather painful but enlightening to see how some of the "what everybody knows" about a particular candidate started off as speculation by someone, then got quoted as fact by the rest of the pack.

Another reminder of how gullible people are so the media can lead us around by the nose and how important it is to be extremely skeptical about the way the media characterize candidates. Also I'm reminded how important it is to have sources from outside the US media market such as BBC.