commander in chief: a content analysis of candidates’ images in the media
DESCRIPTION
ComMANder in Chief: A Content Analysis of Candidates’ Images in the Media. By: Sarah Colleen Rompola. Research Question. How have presidential candidates’ performances of masculinity in photographs changed over time?. Thesis. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
ComMANder in Chief: A Content Analysis of Candidates’ Images in the Media
By: Sarah Colleen Rompola
Research Question
How have presidential candidates’ performances of masculinity in photographs changed over time?
Thesis
Through time, newsmagazine images show changes in presidential candidates’ performances of masculinity that reflect hegemonic ideologies of gender portrayal.
Review of Past Literature Masculinity
Connell (2005) Definitions of Masculinity
Coe et al. (2007) Social and historical construct Judged as masculine or not in comparison to others
Study focused on language and rhetoric Kimmel (2006)
Focused on masculinity of past presidents in detail
Review of Past Literature Media and Presidential Elections
Gollin (1980), Ramsden (1996) Role of media constantly changing Depiction in media often how candidate is understood by voters
Graber (1972) (1976) People are more likely to determine if they like a president based on personal image
Most information audiences receive is about human qualities of candidates
Review of Past Literature Media and Presidential Election
Miller and Krosnick (2000) Media primes recall
Mendelsohn (1996) Voters form political opinions based on what first comes to mind
Media stresses personal qualities, understate party identification
Review of Past Literature Person Perception and Performance Fragments
Moriarty and Popovich (1991) Candidates try toshape how their performances and personal character are perceived
Erickson (2000) President performs the role of president rather than “living” the presidency
Moriarty and Garramone (1986) Political candidates are actors playing political roles
Candidates’ image established by how candidate portrays himself and then how the media represents candidates portrayal
Social Construction Theory Berger and Luckmann (1967)
Reality is socially constructed Habitualized actions retain meaning, narrow choices
Institutionalization of actions and ideas Legitimation reinforces norms that go unquestioned
Best (2005), Loseke (2007) expand theory to social problem frameworks Media as claims-maker Media shapes what people think about; media helps builds institutions
Methodology
Content Analysis Began with election of 1960 Started analysis after respective candidate’s party convention
Newsweek Large worldwide circulation Convenience sample
Methodology Continued
Each photograph was coded for 12 characteristics
8 of these characteristics operationalize masculinity1. Torso2. Interaction3. Dress4. Setting5. Face6. Family Present7. Hands8. Arms
Methodology Continued
Operationalizing “more” masculine and “less” masculine performances
“More” masculine: standing tall, shaking hands, dignified dress, confident facial expression, interacting with a crowd
“Less” masculine: slumped over or shrugged shoulders, alone, hands at sides, worried facial expression
Sample
232 weekly issues of Newsweek 13 election seasons, 26 presidential candidates
1,359 total images 49.2% images represented Republican candidates
50.8% images represented Democratic candidates
Findings
Table 1. Changes in Presidential Candidates’ Torso Performance from 1960 to 2008.
Decade Bow Sit Tall
1960s 2 (1.5%) 34 (25.2%) 135 (73.3%)
1970s 5 (2.3%) 74 (34.7%) 134 (62.9%)
1980s 7 (1.9%) 106 (28.1%) 213 (70.0%)
1990s 16 (7.2%) 64 (29.0%) 141 (63.8%)
2000s 14 (3.4%) 136 (32.9%) 263 (63.7%)
Total 44 (3.2%) 414 (30.5%) 886 (65.2%)
Findings
Decade Alone Unseen CrowdCheering Crowd
1960s 20 (14.8%) 93 (68.9%) 22 (16.3%)
1970s 45 (21.1%) 130 (61.0%) 38 (17.8%)
1980s 77 (20.4%) 259 (68.7%) 41 (10.9%)
1990s 39 (17.6%) 140 (63.3%) 42 (19.0%)
2000s 79 (19.1%) 244 (59.1%) 90 (21.8%)
Total 260 (19.1%) 866 (63.7%) 233 (17.1%)
Table 2. Changes in Presidential Candidates’ Interaction in Images from 1960 to 2008.
Findings
Figure 1. Changes in Presidential Candidates’ Dress from 1960 to 2008.
Findings
Figure 2. Changes in Presidential Candidates’ Setting in Images from 1960 to 2008.
Findings
Figure 3. Changes in Presidential Candidates’ Facial Expressions from 1960 to 2008.
Discussion
Importance of significant findings
Lack of significant findings for some variables
Further Research and Improvements
Research Bias
Questions?