Does Trump Coverage Matter?

trump pic

Are you following national politics?

Then I invite you to think about the news coverage of Donald Trump from 2 perspectives.

First: think of your gut feelings. Second, think of the empirical evidence.

Ready? Let’s begin.

Trump receives a boatload of news coverage.

And, amazingly enough, this is despite the fact that several reporters have promised to disengage from coverage of Trump.

Yet, coverage persists.

Each day I review the opinions in the New York Times.

Each day pundits deplore the demagoguery of Trump.

And each day, Trump receives more coverage than any other presidential hopeful.

Take a look at the opinions and editorial and page one coverage: it’s Trump, Trump, Trump.

It isn’t praise—it’s outrage.

That’s the gut reaction—unless you are among the minority that supports his racist views.

He’s a racist idiot.

He’s compared with Senator Joe McCarthy without hyperbole.

But what about the evidence?

Folks who have studied news coverage throughout the decades suffer from cognitive dissonance and disassociation when it comes to Trump coverage.

The braggart gets a boatload of attention.

The question is: does it matter?

Does it matter that someone gets a lion’s share of coverage even when it’s negative?

Here’s what media researchers have said since the Nixon and Kennedy race:

No matter whether the news is positive, negative or neutral, the sheer amount of attention makes a difference.

In other words: the mere fact that pundits pay attention to Trump’s rants makes a difference.

Why?

When we consume news, we get a sense of what’s important: where is the attention notched?

If we read over and over again about Trump, then we sense that his presence is important.

Like it or not, his presence becomes part of everyday discourse.

And the very presence of Trump signals importance.

Some scholars argue that because news channels pay attention, then readers assume the attention paid is earned: it’s salient.

So: even if the news coverage has a negative slant, it’s less important than the fact that Trump gets attention.

So: attention yields attention.

The more something is covered, the more we think it’s important.

Problem is, most folks avoid the fine print: the tenor of the story.

Instead, we remember that something or someone got attention. And in Trump’s case, that translates to importance.

Better to ignore him altogether, if coverage invokes salience.

#nativescience

Image from http://www.cartoonaday.com/donald-trump-for-president-caricature/

Advertisements

About Cynthia Coleman Emery

Professor and researcher at Portland State University who studies science communication, particularly issues that impact American Indians. She is enrolled with the Osage tribe.
This entry was posted in american indian, communication, framing, journalism, native press, Native Science, writing and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Does Trump Coverage Matter?

  1. hocuspocus13 says:

    Your information is incorrect but what could one expect since your source is New York Times a failing near bankrupted newspaper

    Over 80% of Americans side with Donald Trump

    Like

  2. Russ L says:

    Donald Trump is the quintessential “Ugly American”.

    Like

  3. Stevie B says:

    Good post, I will ignore trump and hope this stops blowing up my social media feed.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s