The research presented in this manuscript contrasts a text-only and graphical display of news, to assess the personal and environmental factors affecting news preferences. This research was conducted in two stages. First, an online experiment and survey of 1,000 participants assessed the effects of political attitudes, personal demographics, and visual cues on news selection behaviors. Second, an eyetracking study evaluated the ocular and cognitive behaviors associated with the processing of each news display. Analyses specifically examined which factors influence (i) an individual's preferences for hard and soft news, (ii) an individual's preferences for specific news sources, and (iii) how stable or susceptible to change these preferences are over time. Results indicate that visual design, political attitudes, and personal demographics all affect the type of news and source selected. Specifically, a graphical news layout encourages the selection of soft news categories, though this is moderated by education. A graphical layout also enables more repeat selections to the same source. Furthermore, eyetracking shows that a graphical news format produces lower levels of attention and cognitive processing. Broader implications for the future of news display and news acquisition are discussed.

Still and moving images are crucial factors in contemporary political conflicts. They not only have representational, expressive or illustrative functions, but also augment and create significant events. Beyond altering states of mind, they affect bodies and often life or death is at stake. Various forms of image operations are currently performed in the contexts of war, insurgency and activism. Photographs, videos, interactive simulations and other kinds of images steer drones to their targets, train soldiers, terrorise the public, celebrate protest icons, uncover injustices, or call for help. They are often parts of complex agential networks and move across different media and cultural environments. This book is a pioneering interdisciplinary study of the role and function of images in political life. Balancing theoretical reflections with in-depth case studies, it brings together renowned scholars and activists from different fields to offer a multifaceted critical perspective on a crucial aspect of contemporary visual culture.

This book offers a theoretically driven, empirically grounded survey of the role visual communication plays in political culture, enabling a better understanding of the significance and impact visuals can have as tools of political communication. The advent of new media technologies have created new ways of producing, disseminating and consuming visual communication, the book hence explores the theoretical and methodological underpinnings of visual political communication in the digital age, and how visual communication is employed in a number of key settings. The book is intended as a specialist reading and teaching resource for courses on media, politics, citizenship, activism, social movements, public policy, and communication.

This 2007 book studies the impact of the media on politics in the United States during the last half-century.

How the 2016 news media environment allowed Trump to win the presidency The 2016 presidential election campaign might have seemed to be all about one man. He certainly did everything possible to reinforce that impression. But to an unprecedented degree the campaign also was about the news media and its relationships with the man who won and the woman he defeated. Words that Matter assesses how the news media covered the extraordinary 2016 election and, more important, what information—true, false, or somewhere in between—actually helped voters make up their minds. Using journalists' real-time tweets and published news coverage of campaign events, along with Gallup polling data measuring how voters perceived that reporting, the book traces the flow of information from candidates and their campaigns to journalists and to the public. The evidence uncovered shows how Donald Trump's victory, and Hillary Clinton's loss, resulted in large part from how the news media responded to these two unique candidates. Both candidates were unusual in their own ways, and thus presented a long list of possible issues for the media to focus on. Which of these many topics got communicated to voters made a big difference outcome. What people heard about these two candidates during the campaign was quite different. Coverage of Trump was scattered among many different issues, and while many of those issues were negative, no single negative narrative came to dominate the coverage of the man who would be elected the 45th president of the United States. Clinton, by contrast, faced an almost unrelenting news media focus on one negative issue—her alleged misuse of e-mails—that captured public attention in a way that the more numerous questions about Trump did not. Some news media coverage of the campaign was insightful and helpful to voters who really wanted serious information to help them make the most important decision a democracy offers. But this book also demonstrates how the modern media environment can exacerbate the kind of pack journalism that leads some issues to dominate the news while others of equal or greater importance get almost no attention, making it hard for voters to make informed choices.

Political Rhetoric, Social Media, and American Presidential Campaigns explores how social media influenced presidential campaign rhetoric. The author discusses media use in American presidential campaigns as well as social media campaigns for Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton, and Donald Trump. This book addresses how presidential candidates adapted their rhetorical performances for newspapers, radios, television, and the Internet. Scholars of rhetoric and political communication will find this book particularly useful.

The first book-long analysis of the 'mediatization of politics', this volume aims to understand the transformations of the relationship between media and politics in recent decades, and explores how growing media autonomy, journalistic framing, media populism and new media technologies affect democratic processes.