The Interrelationship between Media and Political Agenda, [w:] Communication in the

Millenium. 8th International Symposium, red. E. Yüksel, Anadolu University, Anadolu

2010, p. 19-30

THE INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MEDIA

AND POLITICAL AGENDA

Ewa Nowak, Ph. D.

Maria Curie-Sklodowska University, Lublin, Poland

terewa@gmail.com

Ewa Nowak, a Doctor of Political Science, graduated from Maria Curie-Skłodowska

University in Lublin, lecturer at the Political Science Faculty of MCSU and Higher

School of Enterprise and Administration in Lublin. Her academic and research activity

focuses on political communication and electoral behavior, civil society and

europeanization – European public sphere. These are areas which she covered in her

books and articles.

Abstract The goal of this study is to establish to what extent and in what way

the media agenda influences the political (policy) agenda. The object of a particular

interest is the shifting salience between the media and the political agenda (the first

level of agenda setting) and defining circumstances in which the media agenda

influences political decisions – especially governmental - decisions. The theoretical

basis of the study is the agenda-setting theory – the elements of the first level of the

theory, that is the shifting salience of objects between the media and the political

agenda, and the elements of the fifth level of the theory – the consequences of the

shifting salience between the media and the political agenda concerning political life

and decisions. The concept of “the CNN-effect” will be used as a theoretical

explanation model as well. The empirical basis will be three-month media coverage -

the most important TV news programmes in Poland (TVP1, TVN and Polsat) and also

the most influential Polish dailies and the reports of Polish government meetings from

the same period. The comparison of the content (quantitative and qualitative content

analysis) of these two types of resources, using data from so-called real-world agenda

as a control factor, enable us to make a conclusion about the media agenda and the

political (policy) agenda interrelationships, especially to indicate the agenda of greater

potential influence.

THE INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MEDIA

AND POLITICAL AGENDA

“The pictures we have in our heads

about the way our world operates

fuel our behavioral reactions

which take place not in a world of images (a shadow world),

but in a very real world”.

W. Lippmann, Public Opinion, 1922

Introduction

Within agenda setting studies there is still little interest among scholars in

undertaking studies and making analyses concerning the shifting salience between the

media agenda and political agenda, particularly when it comes not only to the media

influence on political (election) behaviour and decisions making by citizens, but also to

policy-making by politicians exercising executive power, that is taking governmental

decisions.

Obviously the influence of media on politics is visible the most clearly during

election campaigns. The media form attitudes and affect the behaviour of citizens.

Although this topic was relatively often undertaken and investigated by scholars who

study the models of election behaviour and the media effect (for example: Lazarsfeld et.

al. 1944; Berelson et. al. 1954; Campbell et. al. 1960; McCombs, Shaw 1972; Wanta

1997; Mc Combs 2004) we still do not know everything about the range and power of

this phenomenon. The media political impact is realized also during an inter-election

period by structuring political communication process and, consequently – political

rivalry. What is more, the specifics of media broadcast as the main and often the only

source of information about politics (especially TV news) appoint the media as a natural

participant in political processes. Some scholars maintain the media effect on political

life is even broader and deeper, for example those who study “the CNN-effect”.

According to this idea, a broadcast can directly influence political events and decisions

(some classic examples involve: the military intervention in Somalia 1991-1992,

Operation Iraqi Freedom 2003 and the course of The Persian Gulf War 1990-1991).

The goal of this study is to establish to what extent and how

the media agenda influences the political (policy) agenda. The object of a particular

interest is the shifting salience between the media and the political agenda (the first

level of agenda setting) and defining circumstances in which the media agenda

influences political decisions and especially governmental decisions. The study is one

of the first attempts to integrate the agenda-setting theory and “the CNN-effect” concept

findings. Including a short, preliminary empirical analysis and the examples of Polish

political life, the paper strives to investigate the circumstances in which the news media

become „the factor of intervention‟ within political process.

Theory and methodology of research

The agenda-setting theory focuses mainly on the shifting salience between the

media and the public agenda. However, the subsequent stages of theory, which are

constantly being developed thanks to empirical studies, have introduced the new

dimensions of interrelationships between the media, public and political agenda. Apart

from the first level of agenda setting, that is an objects‟ agenda, there are the attribute

agenda and the process of agenda building, which are regarded as the second level of

theory (compare McCombs 2008; Wanta 2006). When the analysis goes one step

further, it concerns the outcome of political communication process on policy-making

and political efforts to the political communication. Some studies involve the agenda

of nations, the area of research that has just started to be explored (Wanta 2006).

Since the Chapel Hill study (1972), researchers have conducted over 400

empirical studies on agenda setting (Bryant, Oliver, 2008). However, within this field,

there has definitely been conducted less research devoted to the role of the news media

in shaping public policy in comparison to numerous studies on the news media role in

moulding public opinion. Though we can obviously encounter some evidence of the

media influence on politics (McCombs, 2008). This problem is (among others) explored

by the fifth stage of the agenda-setting theory which was formulated at the end of the

20th century and focuses on the consequences of agenda setting. This aspect of the

agenda-setting theory explores the consequences of the media focus on certain issues (or

the set of issues). By drawing attention to some questions and ignoring others, the

media set the standards for assessing political figures, public policies and politics as

such (McCombs 2008). The priority of attention toward some problems and issues is

investigated by using the cognitive psychology concept of priming, which was

theoretically and empirically adapted into the field of political communication. and

gives us a possibility to explore how media reports influence political attitudes and the

actions of citizens and politicians (for example: (Iyengar, Simon, 2006).

Similar findings follow from the selective reinforcement concept (J. Curran,

2002), which is based on the tradition of Lazarsfeld and associated (1944) research, but

applied critically. Within this concept, it is stressed that the media can (also) trigger the

change of socio-political attitudes through selective reinforcement. The point is that

public opinion can be modified through selective reinforcement and deinforcement of

pre-existing dispositions or elements of popular culture. As a result, it is realized by the

manipulation of feelings, concerns, fears and attitudes.

The agenda-setting theory and empirical studies are the part of a very broad and

meaningful field of the media effect research. However, within the news media, effect

research is almost totally non-existent or very difficult to undertake and draw reasonable

conclusion, because of its unpredictability. For example, the NBC story from 1987

concerning the Ethiopian famine resulted in a flood of donations, but other stories, for

example about famine and disasters in Sudan, Rwanda and Burundi, did not (Gans,

2003). Of course we can take into account the findings of e.g. the selective perception

and media limited effect theories, but we still do not have the universal model of the

news media effect especially on politics and political process. So, there are not many

studies within [..] news media political effect, that is how the media influence the

political agenda, political decision-making and political process in general (see:

Valenzuela, McCombs, 2009).

However we can find some studies devoted to this aspect of political

communication research which is […] called “the CNN-effect”, but it is insufficient and

relatively underdeveloped both empirically and theoretically. But also these studies that

combine and integrate “the CNN-effect” concept with the agenda-setting theory (…)

have not yet appeared and the indispensable, adequate methodology has not been

developed so far.

The CNN-effect concept was established on the ground of the events of 1991 –

the first bombing of Baghdad, when CNN de facto became a diplomatic channel used

both by President George Bush and by Saddam Hussein (Willis 2007; the critics of the

CNN–effect concept by P. Robinson, 2002). However, one of the first studies

convincingly proving how the media influence the course of events was elaborated by

Gladys Lang and Kurt Lang in 1981 in the case study devoted to Watergate. This study

also theoretically justifies the necessity of making analyses and research about the

media impact on the course of political events. The same authors introduced also the

agenda-building concept (1983) which explains the interrelationship between the media

and politics with its agenda. They argue that issues are the elements and results of the

debate between the media and politicians in which reports (news) and actions, events or

decisions influence and stimulate each other (Lang, Lang 1983).

The CNN-effect concept or thesis is currently regarded as having only the status

of assertion, not demonstration. Comprehensive and profound, large-scale empirical

investigations within this field has not been conducted yet. Eric Louw claims that the

CNN-effect thesis is based on two main assumptions: 1) the media enjoy influence and

power within policy-making; 2) mass public opinion (mediated by the media) influences

policy formulation (Louw 2007). The same author also indicates three variables which

determine the extent to which the media have an impact upon policy formulation.

According to the scholar, it depends on: 1) how united the governing elites are; 2) the

scale of controversies around the political elite; 3) the extent to which the executive has

a firm policy. As a result, according to P. Robinson's thesis, the media usually promote

foreign policy (Robinson 2002), and if political elites are united around the directions of

politics, the media have little or no impact on policy formulation.

However, these findings cannot be directly applied to internal political decision-

making and the media impact upon internal political process. Firstly, we can expect

much more differentiated opinions, views and interests when it comes to domestic

politics and policy within political elites. Secondly, even if a government has a firm

policy and is tightly united around its public goals, there could be some circumstances

under which a member of the executive unwittingly finds oneself under the pressure of

the media, e.g. when human life or health is under threat, when there are crises, when

the media show events or actions as scandals.

Considering the media effect on politics another meaningful problem should be

taken into account, namely the difference between the media coverage of events and the

events as such together with their consequences for politics. Herbert J. Gans introduced

the problem as “the messenger effect” (2003). He claims that researchers must check

whether or to what extent repercussions follow from events or news stories about them.

However, it is also clear that sometimes the right message at the right time can instigate

an action. Within this field of investigation, the main problem is the distinction between

the media and real life effects on politics. Also W. Wanta proposes to explore the media

influence on politics by using so-called real world agenda (2006). The application of the

elements of political decision-making theory and rational choice theory (Pietraś 1998,

Brown 2005), may also be useful for solving the problem of real world events and the

media effect; for example in determining who the real decision-maker was, what his

goals, options and motivations were. However, even these methods cannot guarantee

certain findings, but only probable conclusions.

To sum up the theoretical considerations, it seems justified to maintain that

investigating the media political impact, the agenda-setting concept is useful for

exploring long-term influences. On the other hand, the CNN-effect concept is concerned

adequate to investigate short-term impact, as it explores whether and how media

coverage causes (directly and indirectly) political actions and decisions. Consequently,

integrating the agenda setting and the CNN-effect concept can give a comprehensive

look at the media political effect.

Consequently, the methodology adopted in the study combines the findings of

two concepts – agenda setting and the CNN-effect. Within agenda setting it is possible

to find out the correlations between the media and the political agenda, when taking into

account also real world agenda (about the methodology of agenda setting research and

the correlations of media-policy-real world agenda see in details: Wanta, 2006). The

CNN-effect is examined by means of qualitative methods, especially by combining

content analysis and case studies. Case studies are regarded as particularly useful when

various sources of data have to be used, a contemporary phenomenon in its authentic

context is studied, or when boundaries between a phenomenon in its reality and its

social (or media) context are not clear (Wimmer, Dominick, 2008).

The proposed study is methodologically based on the following model:

Level 1: – the analysis of the correlation between the media and the political agenda, in

this case policy agenda, especially governmental agenda (i. e. issues and decisions the

government dealt with in the analyzed period);

1 A: the shifting salience of the media agenda toward policy – the governmental

agenda (whether the issues reported the most often by the media influenced

subjects of the governmental actions and decisions);

1 B: the shifting salience of policy – the governmental agenda toward the media

agenda (whether the acts and decisions of the government most concern were

also the most often reported issues by the media);

Level 2: the qualitative analysis of the “common issues” (i. e. the issues of the common

concern of the media and the policy agenda) – a case study (how a media report

influenced/modified the policy-making process or stimulated the course of events).

Within the case study, an analysis is conducted according to the model as follows: the

time; the issue; the media report; the reaction of government/institution/public opinion;

the consequences for “real world events” (compare: Willis 2007; Wimmer, Dominick

2008).

Referring to the foregoing findings of the research methods, the proposed study

is based on the following assumptions:

Hypothesis 1: The media agenda influences the policy - governmental agenda;

H 1. A. Media report concerning a given issue triggers its inclusion into the policy

agenda (a long-term impact)

H 1. B. Media report concerning a given issue compels the government to take some

policy action about this issue (short-term impact);

Hypothesis 2: The policy – governmental agenda influences the media agenda; the

political issues of the utmost concern for the government are the most frequently

reported by the media.

Materials, procedure and results

The hypotheses 1. and 2. presented above were verified on the basis of media

broadcasts and press materials (TV news programmes; daily press), and the documents

concerning Polish government actions and decisions. All these materials date from the

period from February 1st till April 27

th, 2010. The analysis was carried out on the TV

news programmes of four Polish channels – public TVP1 (“Wiadomości”), TVP2

(“Panorama) and private Polsat (“Wydarzenia”) and TVN (“Fakty”) as well as on the

front-page articles gathered from three most influential Polish dailies (“Rzeczpospolita”,

“Gazeta Wyborcza”, “Dziennik Gazeta Prawna”) from the same period of 2010. When

it comes to governmental decision-making, the conducted analysis involved

Government Reports from the period from February 2nd

to April 23rd

, 2010 (12 reports).

When it comes to real world agenda the data regarding criminality toward policemen is

also included.

Tab. 1. The most frequently reported issues

- TV news and daily press in Poland

- (February 2010)

The issue The

number

of

reports –

news

devoted

to the

issue

1. Polish Politics 248

2. Crimes, court of law

activities

168

3. Social and moral issues 82

4. Disasters, tragedies, accidents 81

5. Ecology, environment and

nature

62

6. Culture and entertainment 59

7. Health and medicine 58

8. Economy 39

9. Law and Legislation 30

10. Media 30

11. War and army 27

12. Curiosities 22

13. History 17

14. Religion, ethics, church 14

15. Science and education 14

16. Roads and transport 5

17. Policy* 5

Source: The data from TV-news programs

analysis:

Wiadomości, Wydarzenia, Panorama, Fakty, 1-

28 February 2010,

Press-Service Monitoring Mediów sp. z o. o.,

Warszawa 2010.

* When we take into account total frequency

of ‘Policy’ issue reporting during 2009, it

was most frequently reported in February

2009, that is almost three times more than

during other months.

Tab. 2. The most frequently reported issues

- TV news and daily press in Poland

(March, April 2010)

The issue The

number of

reports –

news

devoted to

the issue

1. Smoleńsk disaster and its

consequences

131

2. Presidential election in

Poland/Polish Politics

104

3. 70-th anniversary of Polish

officers extermination in Katyń

(Katyń massacre)

47

4. Volcano eruption on Island and its

consequences

28

5. John Paul II death anniversary 19

6. Terrorist attacks in Moscow 18

7. Easter news 18

8. World economic crisis 23

9. Gambling scandal (most

frequently reported: 9-

29.03.2010)

13

10. Kyrgyzstan crisis 13

11. Catholic Church abuse scandal 12

12. Drugs abuse scandal during

Olympic Games in Canada (Polish

skis runner Kornelia Marek)

10

13. Assaults on policemen (most

frequently reported: 10.02.2010 -

08.03.2010)

8

Source: Source: Own study based on:

Polish daily press reports: “Gazeta Wyborcza”,

“Rzeczpospolita”, “Dziennik Gazeta Prawna”

and TV news programs: “Wiadomości”,

„Wydarzenia”, “Panorama”, “Fakty” analysis

from the period 01.03.2010–27.04. 2010.

Tab. 3. The governmental policy agenda – the subjects of the government actions

and decisions

Policy issue Number of items in the

Government Decisions Reports

1. Investments/Science/Municipal/Sport 5

2. Agriculture/funding 4

3 Bureaucratic/Officials 4

4 Environmental protection 4

5 International agreements 4

6 Policy (decisions from: 16.02.2010; 26.03.2010;

30.03.2010)

3

7 Civil law/Amendments 3

8 Taxes 3

9 Road safety 2

10 Defence policy/Poland-USA relationship 2

11 Special Economic Zones 2

12 Family and Health Benefits 2

13 Public Health 2

14 Banking and Insurance 2

15 Governmental European Committee 1

16 Foreigners 1

17 Regular Army 1

18 Public transport 1

19 Prison system 1

20 Telecommunications 1

21 State Budget Expenses 1

22 Criminal Code Amendement 2

23 Public Safety 2

24 Regional development 1

25 Responsibility for war crimes 1

26 Public Property Privatisation 2

27 Polish Army in Afghanistan 1

28 Gambling (23.03.2010) 1

29 Smoleńsk plain crash/Aid Casualties 1

Source: own study based on: Government Reports 02.02.2010 – 23.04.2010 (12 reports).

Taking into considerations the results from Tables 1. and 2., it becomes visible

that the media and policy (governmental) agendas have almost nothing in common.

Apart from two issues „Policy‟ and „Gambling (Affair)‟, the media and the government

have rather different areas of activities and interests and there are only some incidental

associations between them.

Having examined the policy – governmental agenda (as foreground) and

compared it with the media agenda, one comes to a clear-cut conclusion that the issues

of the utmost importance for government policy were generally not reflected in the

news reports (also when the investigation involved temporal sequence there was no

observable influence), or at least not to that extent were they the subjects of

governmental decisions and considerations. Taking into account the gathered data we

cannot confirm the Hypothesis 2 that the policy – governmental agenda influences the

media agenda and that the political issues of the utmost concern for the government are

the most frequently reported by the media. Governmental projects concerning bills,

amendments of bills, international agreements and other state decisions are almost not

present and invisible in the news media, especially when compared with top issues

within the media from the same period. Consequently, it can be deduced, that the media

are not interested in ordinary, usual cases and topics, even though they are (or can be) of

the great importance for social, economic and also political life.

When examining the media agenda (as foreground) and comparing it with the

policy agenda, a little evidence that a news report has an impact on the policy agenda

was found. However, when the investigation included a temporal sequence there was

some observable influence of the media agenda on the policy agenda proven, but it was

detectable only within one issue - “Policy” (with connections to issue „Criminal law

amendment‟, which was partly devoted to Policemen assaults).

But, among the data presented above there are two issues “Policy” and

“Gambling Scandal” that the media and government have in common. Nevertheless,

these two have different specifics. The reports about „Gambling Scandal‟ are the

consequence of the real world agenda, namely revealing incorrectness in legislative

process of Gambling Bill, which took place in October 1st, 2009. During the

investigated period: 01.02–7.04.2010, and especially in March 2010, the extensive

media coverage followed from the appointment of special parliamentary inquiry

commission for gambling scandal investigation. This commission dealt with the scandal

in March 2010. Some witnesses – first-rank politicians - were questioned and the

proceedings were presented on TV but the governmental decisions, which were

connected with the disclosure of this scandal, concerned reality. So, the coincidence of

the media report agenda and the policy agenda is tightly connected with the influence of

the real-world event and the activity of the parliamentary inquiry commission (however

the media report is not without meaning of course).

The „Policy‟ topic, on the other hand, is the case thanks to which we can observe

not only the shifting salience between the media and policy agenda, but also, when

using a qualitative analysis to find the evidence of the direct (short-term) media

influence on policy-making (the course of a real world event), and especially to identify

a media report as the intervention factor within the course of events and decision-

making, what is presented below.

Case study: the legislative consequences of the policeman’s murder

Time: February 10th

, 2010;

Issue: policeman's murder – an assault in the centre of Warsaw; the policeman off duty

opposed to acts of hooliganism; the young offenders (18-year old) stabbed him; as a

result, 42 years-old Andrzej Struj died;

The media report:

- the intense media publicity concerning the issue (10.02.-08.03.2010; see: Tab. 1. and

Tab. 2.) about the assault on the policeman A. Struj;

- the media debate about the law regarding the assaults on policemen and the use of

arms by policemen; citing statistics about the assaults on policemen (for example:

“During the last 12 years 125 policemen died on duty”; Co roku ponad pół tysiąca

napadów na policjantów, 2010; at the same time see Tab. 4. below);

- funeral of policeman Andrzej Struj reports, when Polish President Lech Kaczyński

attended (TV news programmes);

- the reports about the new directive of the Polish National Police Headquarters (Polish:

Komenda Główna Policji, KGP) concerning carrying arms off duty;

- the reports about the criminal law amendment of KGP – the toughening of the

punishment for the attack on a functionary;

- the reports about others attacks on policemen, especially performed by young

offenders;

- the report about the project of criminal law amendments put forward by Polish right-

wing political party, Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość), regarding the ban on

carrying knives by citizens in public space.

The reaction of government/institution/public opinion:

-president Lech Kaczyński attended the policeman‟s funeral - gave a speech and

decorated him posthumously;

-the government's approval for the amendments of Criminal Code and Police Act;

public opinion motion – mass presence at the funeral; the increased activity of Internet-

users on discussion forums (for example: http://www.tvn24.pl/12690,1644052,0,1,byl-

prawdziwym-policjantem--zginal-bohatersko,wiadomosc.html).

The consequences for real world events/actions:

- the government introduction of the amendments of Criminal Code and Police Act - the

toughening of the punishment for the attack on a functionary (30.03.2010);

- the directive of the Commander in Chief of Polish National Police regarding the right

to be awarded with and use arms by policemen (17.03.2010).

Sources of the case study: Own study - the analysis of the Polish press reports: “Gazeta Wyborcza”,

“Rzeczpospolita”, “Dziennik Gazeta Prawna” and TV news programmes: “Wiadomości “TVP1, “Fakty”

TNV, “Wydarzenia” Polsat from the period 01.03. 2010–27.04. 2010; The data from TV-news programs

analysis: “Wiadomości”, “Wydarzenia”, “Panorama”, “Fakty”, 1-28 February 2010, Press-Service

Monitoring Mediów sp. z o. o., Warszawa 2010; Government Reports 02.02.2010–23.04.2010 (12

reports); 24-hour TV station - TVN-24 and the Internet portal: www.tvn24.pl; The Official Journal of The

Polish National Police, 17.03.2010; The official Internet portal of the Polish National Police

Headquarters: www.policja.pl.

Tab. 4. Crimes toward policemen 2003-2009 in Poland (assaults when using arm or other dangerous tool,

committed by adults and juveniles)

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Adults

criminals

417 430 523 614 464 341 363

Juvenile

criminals

9 7 20 22 17 7 7

Source: The Report of The State Police Headquarters as regards Article 222 § 1 of Polish Criminal Law,

Warszawa, April 2010.

Tab. 5. The issues devoted to Policy in TV-news programs (2008-2010)

09.08 10.08 11.08 12.08 01.09 02.09 03.09 04.09 05.09.

1 5 5 7 3 16 13 6 9

06.09. 07.09. 08.09. 09.09 10.09 11.09 12.09 01.10 02.10

6 12 7 3 7 7 5 3 24

Source: Source: The data from TV-news programs analysis:

Wiadomości, Wydarzenia, Panorama, Fakty, 1-28 February 2010,

Press-Service Monitoring Mediów sp. z o. o., Warszawa, April 2010.

The case presented above is the example in which it is possible to observe the

influence of the media coverage on policy – governmental decision making, especially

when it comes to amending law.

Taking into account the real world agenda - criminal statistics regarding

assaults on policemen during the period which preceded the investigated case, and that

the level of criminality remains at relatively the same or even lower level from 2003 to

2009 (when committed by adults, and is even decreasing as regards juveniles; see Tab.

4.), it seems very interesting that also media agenda as regards policy issue remains

from 2008 to January 2009 on the same low level, and in February 2009 (when the

policeman A. Struj has died) becomes suddenly very high, that is the intensity of media

report about policy issue becomes very strong.

It seems justified to assert that the project of criminal law amendment was

introduced not as the consequence of the increasing of criminality level, but of heavy

media publicity and specific news framing – namely, policemen as powerless victims of

liberal law, when the offender (criminal) profits from better protection (as a suspect)

than the offended policeman limited by strict arms use rules. That is why, especially

when we compare the period of the highest intensity of the media coverage and

governmental decisions concerning “Policy issue”, with this example it seems

empirically grounded to conclude that the intense media report about a given issue

trigger its inclusion into the policy agenda by the government (H 1. A.) and that intense

media report concerning a given issue compels the government to take a political action

(H 1. B.).

Discussion

As it could be observed, the presented data indicate that the media agenda and

the policy (governmental) agenda have very little in common when it comes to daily,

ordinary events, issues, problems and policy topics which follow plans and predictions.

The exception is when some problems, affairs, scandals, and other phenomena occur

and not taking an action or decision can result in some serious consequences for human

health or life as well as when such issues emerge for which the pressure and excitement

of public opinion are very meaningful. In these cases, on the one hand, the media

spinning about the issue and public opinion press the government to take a decision or

action in general or earlier than it was planned. On the other hand, political actors also

strive to influence the media agenda (e.g. to gain the approval of public opinion as a

whole and its leaders), but these efforts become effective only when news about policies

concern the issues teaching human health or life threat, scandals, crises. The elements of

the policy agenda that are willingly reported by the news media must be controversial,

lead to revolutionary changes, concern or be connected with scandals, events or actions

in which human health or life is under threat. Other issues are also reported, but very

rarely become dominant topics.

As S. Valenzueala and M. McCombs (2009) claim, the comprehensive analysis

of the speeches given to Congress by different U. S. presidents (e.g. R. Nixon, J. Carter,

R. Reagan) revealed that in two out of four cases the media rather influenced than

followed the presidential agenda (Valenzueala, McCombs, 2009). These authors also

quote many examples of the influence of media reports on the decision-making

concerning social issues, especially as being the result of investigative journalism (see:

Valenzueala and M. McCombs, 2009). The efforts to clarify the interrelationship

between the media and policy agenda often bring contradictory evidence. Nevertheless,

some scholars suggest taking into account some variables when investigating who

influences whom – the media politicians or politicians the media. They include: the type

of issue, media outlet, the type of coverage, electoral or non-electoral context, existing

institutional rules, internal decision-making practices of political actors, the

government-opposition configuration, personal traits of political actors (Walgrave, van

Aelst, cited by: Valenzueala and M. McCombs, 2009). Other researchers suggest

exploring the studies on the policy agenda by using such factors as: the pressure of

public opinion, policy entrepreneurs, committee structures and protocols as well as

interest groups (Dearing & Rogers 1996; Berger, Hertog, Park, 2008). p. 155 and next.).

Although all these factors can be very useful when exploring mentioned

interrelationships, the disadvantage is that they might be too “soft” and imprecise to

provide reliable results. However, the studies conducted so far in this field have

indicated that the key role in identifying the policy agenda setting factors is played by

case studies of so-called focusing events. It means that the type of issue can be crucial

when investigating the policy agenda setting power of news. The so-called focusing

events or focal events are dramatic, defined as harmful or potentially harmful, and are

found out by policy makers and public virtually simultaneously (Birkland 2007, p 22. ).

But, again what does it mean? Another useful indication can be the features of issues,

that are more likely to influence the policy agenda when the scope of conflict (about

which they have been reported) is broadened (the concept of issue expansion, Birkland

2007, p. 17.) But making one step further, even though the event has the potential to

“hit” the policy agenda, it is not the same as it becomes in reality and, making next step

further again, it does not mean that the issues of media agenda influence the policy-

making. Definitely, more grounded are the arguments about the situation of political

(policy) decision, that is about policy certainty (if a politicians are decided or undecided

which course of action to choose) and about the type of media framing, which must be

the critical (creating or stimulating crises; Robinson 2002, p. 117-188). Another

question is “the decision-maker's problem”, i.e. why some policy-makers react to the

news content and others do not, that is, why and when they become personally affected

to change the course of events as a result of the media report. It seems that the answer to

these and other above-mentioned questions can give us studying the concepts of policy-

media interaction models (see for example: Robinson 2002), when adopted to the

internal policy sphere. Also the using methods worked out by scholars who make a

decisive analysis to investigate the policy-making process (Brown 2005; Negrine 1994)

can be useful. However within this idea much broader theoretical and empirical study is

needed.

The presented study is set in the field of media political effect research which

has been relatively poorly explored so far. This gap is probably caused by the

methodological difficulties regarding the nature of the interrelationship between the

media and policy-makers and, consequently, the answer to the question who influences

whom, when setting the media and policy agendas and determining the course of

political/policy events. The basic theoretical and methodological proposal of the study

is to combine agenda setting and the CNN-effect concepts. Empirical findings based on

this (combined) model revealed relatively poor correlations between the media and

policy agendas (with Polish examples). However, the observations regarding the

temporal sequence of the media and policy agendas disclosed the media issue report's

priority over policy topics. When using the second level quantitative analysis (case

study – The legislative consequences of policeman's murder) it is possible to point out

the evidence of the direct (short-term) media influence on policy-making and the course

of real world events. The obtained empirical findings allow us to formulate the assertion

about media reports constituting a significant direct (or intervention) factor for policy-

making (deciding) and to observe the potential dominance of the media agenda over

policy agenda.

References:

Berelson B. R, Lazarsfelsd P F., PcPhee W. N. (1954). Voting. A Study of Opinion Formation in a

Presidential Campaign. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Beger B. K., Hertog J. K., Park D. J. (2008). The Polical Role and Influence of Business Organizations: A

Communication Perspective In W. B. Gudykunst (ed.). Communication Yearbook 26. New York: Taylor

& Francis

Birkland T. A. (2007). After Disaster: Agenda Setting, Public Policy and focusing events. Washington:

Georgetown University Press.

Brown R. (2005). Rational Choice and Judgment. Decision Analysis for the Decider, Hoboken-New

Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Publication.

Bryant J., Oliver M. B. (2008). Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Communication series.

New York: Taylor & Francis.

Campbell A., Converse P., Miller W., Stokes D. (1960). The American Voter. New York: John Wiley &

Sons Inc.

Co roku ponad pół tysiąca napadów na policjantów (Every year over a half thousand of assaults on

policemen [ŁOs/sk/k]; http://www.tvn24.pl/12690,1642866,0,4,co-roku-ponad-pol-tysiaca-napadow-na-

policjantow,wiadomosc.html; 12.02.2010.

Curran J. (2002). Media and Power. Communication and Society. New York: Routledge

Cwalina W., Falkowski A. (2005). Marketing polityczny. Perspektywa psychologiczna. Gdańsk:

Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.

Dearing J. W., Rogers E. M. (1996). Agenda Setting. Communication Concepts, London: Sage

Publications.

Gans, H. J. (2003). Democracy and the News. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Iyenghar S. , Simon A. F. (2000), “New Perspectives and evidence on political communication and

campaign effects”, Annual Review of Psychology, 51, pp. 149-169.

Jamieson K. H., Waldman P. 2003, The Press Effect. Politicians, Journalists, and the Stories that Shape

the Political World. Oxford-New York Oxford University Press

Lang G. E., Lang K. (1981). Mass Communication and Public Opinion: Strategies for research. In M.

Rosenberg, R. H. Turner, (eds.) Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, New York-Basic Books

(pp. 653-682).

Lang G. E., Lang K. (1983). The Battle for Public Opinion: The President, the Press and the Polls during

Watergate. New York: Columbia University Press.

Louw E. (2007). The media and Political Process. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage

Publications.

McCombs M. (2008). Ustanawianie agendy. Media masowe i opinia publiczna. Kraków: Wydawnictwo

Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.

McCombs M. (2004). Stetting the Agenda. The Mass Media and Public Opinion, Cambridge: Polity

Press.

Mc Combs M., Shaw D. (1972). “The Agenda Setting Function of Mass Media”. The Public Opinion

Quarterly, 36 (2), 176-187.

McLeod D. M., Kosicki G. M. (2008). Political Communication Effects. In Media Effects – Advances in

Theory and Research. Communication Series, J. Bryant, M. B. Oliver, New York: Taylor&Francis.

Negrine R. M. (1994). Politics and the Mass Media in Britain. New York-London: Routledge.

McCombs M. (2008). Ustanawianie agendy. Media masowe i opinia publiczna. Kraków: Wydawnictwo

Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.

Pietraś Z. J. (1998). Decydowanie polityczne. Warszawa-Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Robinson P. (2002). The CNN Effect: the Myth of News, Foreign Policy, and Intervention. London:

Routledge.

Valenzueala S., McCombs M. (2009), The Agenda Setting Role of the News Media. In Stack D. W.,

Salwen M. B. (eds.). An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Reserch. New York:

Routledge.

Wanta W. (1997). The Public and the National Agenda. How People learn about important Issues.

Mahwah New Yersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

Wanta W. (2006). Terrosim in Africa: A Study of First and Second Level Agenda Setting. Manuscript

presented to the Political Communication Division at the International Communication Association

annual Convention, Dresden, June 2006.

Willis J. (2007). The media effect: how the news influences politics and government. Westport: Praeger

Publishers.

Wimmer R. D., Dominick J. R. (2008). Mass media. Metody badań. Kraków: Wydawnictwo

Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.