This study sought to more fully explicate the key variables involved in Noelle-Neumann's spiral of silence theory, which states that fear of isolation keeps individuals from expressing opinions perceived to be in the minority. We tested the theory in the context of public discussion about affirmative action policies, a domain seemingly ideal due to its moral and value-laden characteristics. Data from 217 randomly selected adults in October 1998 indicate that fear of isolation indeed prevents one from publicly voicing perceived minority opinions. Willingness to speak out on a controversial ballot initiative was predicted also by demographics, media use, and importance of the issue. However, it was perceived consonance of one's opinion with family and friends—rather than society at large—that predicted willingness to speak out.

No abstract

This study theorizes that news coverage of political issues not only influences people's thinking about the issues but also activates associated racial or ethnic stereotypes held by individuals and influences whether these perceptions are applied in politically meaningful ways, such as in the formation of issue positions or evaluations about whether certain political, economic, or legal outcomes are positive for U.S. society. To test these ideas, an experiment was conducted in which the news frame of immigration was systematically altered—as either material or ethical in nature—within controlled political information environments to examine how individuals process, interpret, and use issue information in forming political judgments. The findings provide strong support for the perspective that news coverage of issues, by priming subjects to focus on some considerations and relationships and not others, influences the strength of the associations between individuals' racial cognitions and their political evaluations.

Public perception of a biased news media, particularly media biased in a liberal direction, has increased over the past 3 presidential elections. To examine what might be influencing this public opinion, the authors look at shifts in public perception of media bias, press coverage of the topic of media bias, and the balance in valence coverage of presidential candidates—all during the 1988, 1992, and 1996 presidential elections. Their results suggest that the rise in public perception that news media are liberally biased is not the result of bias in valence news coverage of the candidates, but, rather, due to increasing news self-coverage that focuses on the general topic of bias in news content. Furthermore, the increased claims of media bias come primarily from conservative elites who have proclaimed a liberal bias that is viewed as including the entire media industry.

No abstract