In America and the Politics of Insecurity, Andrew Rojecki assesses the response of citizens and politicians to a series of crises that confronted the United States during the first decade of the twenty-first century. This period brought Americans face to face with extraordinarily difficult problems that were compounded by their origin in seemingly uncontrollable global forces. Rojecki establishes a theoretical framework for understanding how these new uncertainties contribute to increasingly polarized political discourse. Analyzing three domains of American insecurity-economic, environmental, and existential-Rojecki examines responses to the Great Recession by groups like the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street; considers why the growing demand for fossil fuels makes people disregard global warming; and explores the desire for security measures that restrict personal freedom in the age of terrorism. Ultimately, he explains why the right has thus far held an edge over the left in the politics of insecurity. Rojecki concludes that in order to address these broad-scale political problems, we must reframe domestic issues as reactions to undiagnosed global conditions. Bringing the psychology of uncertainty together with contemporary case studies, this book is a sweeping diagnostic for-and antidote to-ineffective political discourse in a globalized world that imports bads as well as goods.

Living in a segregated society, white Americans learn about African Americans not through personal relationships but through the images the media show them. "The Black Image in the White Mind" offers the most comprehensive look at the intricate racial patterns in the mass media and how they shape the ambivalent attitudes of Whites towards Blacks. Using the media, and especially television, as barometers of race relations, Robert M. Entman and Andrew Rojecki explore but then go beyond the treatment of African Americans on network and local news to incisively uncover the messages sent about race by the entertainment industry - from prime-time dramas and sitcoms to commercials and Hollywood movies. While the authors find very little in the media that intentionally promotes racism, they find even less that advances racial harmony. They reveal instead a subtle pattern of images that, while making room for Blacks, implies a racial hierarchy with Whites on top and promotes a sense of difference and conflict. Commercials, for example, feature plenty of Black characters. But unlike Whites, they rarely speak to or touch one another. In prime time, the few Blacks who escape sitcom buffoonery rarely enjoy informal, friendly contact with White colleagues - perhaps reinforcing social distance in real life. Entman and Rojecki interweave such astute observations with candid interviews of White Americans that make clear how these images of racial differences insinuate themselves into Whites' thinking. Despite its disturbing readings of television and film, the book's cogent analyses and proposed policy guidelines offer hope that America's powerful mediated racial separation can be successfully bridged.

Some of the most important strategic decisions of our times can be traced to compelling official fictions such as Kennedy's "missile gap" and Reagan's "window of vulnerability." Exploring links between nuclear arms policy and the visibility of oppositional groups in the media, Andrew Rojecki assesses the extent to which antinuclear movements have succeeded in debunking official fictions, raising public consciousness, and reorienting government policy.

Silencing the Opposition examines how two cycles of political protest -- the test ban movement of the first Eisenhower and the Kennedy administrations and the nuclear freeze movement of Reagan's first term -- were represented by the media. Rojecki finds that the space devoted to the opposition as well as the quality of the coverage varied widely from the first to the second period, reflecting vastly different climates of public opinion and foreign policy.

Rojecki determines that a subtle shift in political culture has reduced the grounds of legitimacy for citizen protest. This shift finds its roots in the rationalization of policy making that characterizes large government agencies, think tanks, and university departments. As public debate over nuclear politics has become increasingly restricted, the potential for ordinary citizens to influence policy has become more and more circumscribed while nuclear weapons have continued to proliferate.