Content area
Abstract
This work examines the relationship between Presidential speech content, media coverage, and public opinion. The speeches examined were the State of the Union Messages of Presidents Eisenhower through Bush (1953-1992).
The study first attempts to demonstrate the reciprocal relationship between public opinion, environmental factors, and speech content, both rhetorical (symbols) and substantive (issues). Media coverage of the speech is then added as an intervening variable. The media outlets examined were the New York Times, Time magazine, and television news. Lastly, the study attempts to explain variations in media coverage of presidential speeches and to test various models of presidential-press relations.
Some elements of speech content appear to be related to environmental factors, but public approval and other political factors before the speech do not appear to be so. Elements of speech content do not by themselves appear to translate directly into increased public support. It does appear, however, that information about the speech, as reflected in the tone and nature of media coverage, can make at least a small difference in popular support for the president, albeit indirectly.
Most of the speech content variables were not significantly related to tone of media content, and of environmental factors, only presidential approval appears a strong predictor of media coverage, at least in the New York Times. There were no significant differences between the coverage of Democratic and Republican presidents' speeches, contrary to the "liberal bias" model. Coverage of post-1974 presidents' speeches was significantly more negative than those before, suggesting the "credibility gap" hypothesis about the media becoming more negative after the Vietnam-Watergate era has merit. Lastly, coverage of these speeches appeared related to the elite debate, though again this finding applied more to the New York Times.
These findings suggest that what presidents say, and how they say it, is important for public, elite, and media reactions. However, it also appears that the prevailing political context surrounding the speech is important for understanding the response to these speeches. In short, the State of the Union Message, and its reception, is invariably linked to the "state of the president."
