Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Political Economy of Mass Media
Political Economy of Mass Media
Political Economy of Mass Media
Maria Petrova
New Economic School
Here i{T,C},
ei is the share of those receiving the message,
yi is the share of those who adopt behavior of interest,
y0 is share of those who would adopt it without the message
Voting studies
Effect of Fox News on Bush vote share
11.6% (DellaVigna and Kaplan 2007)
Effect of NTV, the national channel independent from the
government, on
vote share of opposition parties in Russia: 7.7%
vote share of pro-government party in Russia: 66% (Enikolopov,
Petrova, Zhuravskaya 2010)
Effect of Washington Post free subscription on Democratic vote share
19.5% (Gerber, Karlan, Bergan 2009)
Effect of unexpected Democratic endorsements on Gore vote
share
6.5% (Knight and Chiang 2009)
Turnout studies
Effects of different GOTV technologies (Gerber and Green 2000):
15.6% persuasion rate for door-to-door canvassing
1.0% persuasion rate of 1-3 mailing cards
Effect of the introduction of television in 50s and 60s (Gentzkow
2006):
4.4% persuasion rate of exposure to television
Effect of newspaper entry in 19th and 20th century U.S. counties
(Gentzkow and Shapiro 2009)
12.9% persuasion rate of access to some local newspaper
Effect of local news in Spanish on turnout of Spanish population
7.6 % effect on individual turnout in midterm elections, 3.5% effect
in presidential elections
Mechanism of persuasion
Rational choice models, with media consumers
not fully discounting information from biased sources (e.g.
Genzkow and Shapiro 2006; Petrova 2008; Gehlbach and Sonin
2009)
Behavioral models, with consumers
underestimating the biases in media content (e.g., Cain et al. 2005;
Eyster and Rabin 2009),
thinking categorically (Mullainathan 2001; Mullainathan, Schwarzstein,
and Shleifer 2008), or
double counting repeated information(DeMarzo, Vayanos, and Zwiebel
2003)
More detailed survey in DellaVigna and Gentzkow (forthcoming)
Outside United States…
Convincing evidence of media effects is scarce
Effect of West German television on anti-communism
feelings in Eastern Germany (Hainmueller and Kern 2009)
Effect of RTLM radio on killing of Tutsi in Rwanda (Yanagizawa
2010)
Some studies which do not use field or natural experiments
Lawson and McCann (2005): media effects in Mexican 2000
elections
Ladd and Lenz (2009): Effect of unexpected change in
endorsement pattern of Sun and Daily Star on vote for Labour in
Britain
Reinikka and Svensson (2004): Effect of newspaper coverage of
funding arrangements on school enrollment in Uganda
Overall
Hot topic for empirical research; many gaps in the literature
Media effects in countries other than U.S.
Other democratic countries
Authoritarian states and dictatorship
Historical studies
Media effects in other circumstances
Civil wars
International conflicts
Regime changes
Media effects on other types of behavior
Consumption, investment
Protest behavior
Firm’s strategy
Example:
media effects in Russia in 1999
Motivation
based on Enikolopov, Petrova, Zhurvaskaya (2010)
Two stories
In August 1999, Putin, with popularity rating between 1
to 2%, was appointed as prime minister. Eight months
later, he was elected president by getting 52.9% of the
vote.
In December 1999 Parliamentary elections pro-government
party, Unity, which did not even exist two months prior to the
election, scored the second with 23.8% of the total vote
Mass media seem to play important role
The goal of the paper is to establish causal effect of
media on voting behavior
Identification - 1
Compute predicted availability of NTV, the only national
channel independent from the government in 1999
Use data on location and power of transmitters
Use ITM model (Hufford 2002, Olken 2008) which takes into
account geographic obstacles to signal propagation to predict
signal strength
Use signal strength and survey data to predict NTV availability
Compare subregions with different availability of NTV with
region fixed effects included
Use signal strength as instrument for NTV exposure in
individual-level analysis
Identification - 2
Look at the determinants of availability of NTV transmitters
System of transmitters was inherited from Soviet educational
channel
Transmitters were more likely to be located in large industrial
towns, so 3 basic variables explain their location
Availability of transmitters not correlated with pre-existing
political preferences after these 3 variables are taken into
account
Placebo experiment
In 1995 NTV was not able to use this national system of
transmitters
Check if NTV had any effect on voting in 1995
Results
Effects of predicted NTV availability
+6.3% on vote for opposition parties, positively covered by
NTV
- 8.9% on vote for pro-government party, criticised by NTV
-3.8% on turnout
On individual level, significant effect of NTV even
controlling for voting intentions 1 month before elections
Persuasion rates
7.7% for positive message
65.6% for negative message
Media bias
All the news that fits to print
What drives media slant?
Can we talk about media bias?
Who are the actors?
Media consumers
Media outlets
Potentially, some other group interested in media content
Government
Special interest groups
Advertisers
Journalists
Media bias
Discretion which media outlets have over content
Choice of topics
Choice of experts
Editorials
Endorsements
Reporting/non-reporting valuable information (e.g. the
state of the world)
Assume that some unbiased point is defined…
Bias can be viewed as deviation from this unbiased point
Some measures
Experts cited by different members of Congress
(Groseclose and Milyo 2005, Gasper 2009)
Language used by different members of Congress
(Gentzkow and Shapiro 2010)
Support of Supreme Court decisions by editorials (Ho
and Quinn 2008)
Recommendations of mutual funds with and without
advertising (Reuter and Zitzewitz 2006)
Empirical evidence
Gentzkow and Shapiro (2010):
Use a measure of media bias based on phrases used by
Democrats and Republicans in Congress, e.g. “war on terror”
vs “war in Iraq” or “tax cut” vs “tax relief”
Evidence for demand-side effect, 20% media bias is explained