Public opinion and the media form the foundation of the United States' representative democracy. They are the subject of enormous scrutiny by scholars, pundits, and ordinary citizens. This Oxford Handbook takes on the "big questions" about public opinion and the media--both empirical and normative--focusing on current debates and social scientific research. Bringing together the thinking of a team of leading academic experts, its chapters provide a cutting assessment of contemporary research on public opinion, the media, and their interconnections. Emphasizing changes in the mass media and communications technology--the vast number of cable channels, websites and blogs, and the new social media, which are changing how news about political life is collected and conveyed--they describe the evolving information interdependence of the media and public opinion. In addition, TheOxford Handbook of American Public Opinion and the Media reviews the wide range of influences on public opinion, including the processes by which information communicated through the media can affect the public. It describes what has been learned from the latest research in psychology, genetics, and studies of the impact of gender, race and ethnicity, economic status, education and sophistication, religion, and generational change on a wide range of political attitudes and perceptions. The Handbook includes extensive discussion of how public opinion and mass media coverage are studied through survey research and increasingly through experiments using the latest technological advances.
The Oxford Handbooks of American Politics are a set of reference books offering authoritative and engaging critical overviews of the state of scholarship on American politics. Each volume focuses on a particular aspect of the field. The project is under the General Editorship of George C. Edwards III, and distinguished specialists in their respective fields edit each volume. The Handbooks aim not just to report on the discipline, but also to shape it as scholars critically assess the scholarship on a topic and propose directions in which it needs to move. The series is an indispensable reference for anyone working in American politics.

No longer preoccupied with the East-West divide, contemporary foreign policymakers now have to confront regional conflicts, peace-enforcing and humanitarian missions, and a host of other global problems and issues in areas such as trade, health, and the environment. During the Cold War a widely-shared consensus on national interest and security in the United States and western Europe affected news reporting, public opinion, and foreign policy. But with the end of this Cold War frame of reference, foreign policy making has changed. As we enter the new century, the question is how and to what extent will the new realities of the post-Cold War world_as well as advances in communication technology_influence news reporting, public attitudes, and, most of all, foreign policy decisions on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. In this volume, American and European scholars examine change and continuity in these important aspects of the foreign policy process at the beginning of the 21st century.

While we've long known that the strategies of terrorism rely heavily on media coverage of attacks, "Selling Fear" is the first detailed look at the role played by media in "counter"terrorism--and the ways that, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration manipulated coverage to maintain a climate of fear.
Drawing on in-depth analysis of counterterrorism in the years after 9/11--including the issuance of terror alerts and the decision to invade Iraq--the authors present a compelling case that the Bush administration hyped fear, while obscuring civil liberties abuses and concrete issues of preparedness. The media, meanwhile, largely abdicated its watchdog role, choosing to amplify the administration's message while downplaying issues that might have called the administration's statements and strategies into question. The book extends through Hurricane Katrina, and the more skeptical coverage that followed, then the first year of the Obama administration, when an increasingly partisan political environment presented the media, and the public, with new problems of reporting and interpretation.
"Selling Fear "is a hard-hitting analysis of the intertwined failures of government and media--and their costs to our nation.

Public opinion and the media form the foundation of the United States' representative democracy. They are the subject of enormous scrutiny by scholars, pundits, and ordinary citizens. This Oxford Handbook takes on the 'big questions' about public opinion and the media-both empirical and normative-focusing on current debates and social scientific research. Bringing together the thinking of a team of leading academic experts, its chapters provide a cutting assessment of contemporary research on public opinion, the media, and their interconnections. Emphasizing changes in the mass media and communications technology-the vast number of cable channels, websites and blogs, and the new social media, which are changing how news about political life is collected and conveyed-they describe the evolving information interdependence of the media and public opinion. In addition, the volume reviews the wide range of influences on public opinion, including the processes by which information communicated through the media can affect the public. It describes what has been learned from the latest research in psychology, genetics, and studies of the impact of gender, race and ethnicity, economic status, education and sophistication, religion, and generational change on a wide range of political attitudes and perceptions. The Handbook includes extensive discussion of how public opinion and mass media coverage are studied through survey research and increasingly through experiments using the latest technological advances. The Oxford Handbooks of American Politics are a set of reference books offering authoritative and engaging critical overviews of the state of scholarship on American politics. Each volume focuses on a particular aspect of the field. The project is under the General Editorship of George C. Edwards III, and distinguished specialists in their respective fields edit each volume. The Handbooks aim not just to report on the discipline, but also to shape it as scholars critically assess the scholarship on a topic and propose directions in which it needs to move. The series is an indispensable reference for anyone working in American politics.

Richard Neustadt's seminal work "Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership" has endured for nearly four decades as the core of academic study of the American presidency. Now, building on and challenging many of the arguments in Neustadt's work, "Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-first Century" offers reflections and implications from what we have learned about presidential power as the new century dawns.

These essays -- including a new contribution by Neustadt himself -- forge a solid reexamination of Neustadt's "Presidential Power" that address questions raised but not resolved by his work. A notable aspect of this volume's analysis is the transformed institution of the presidency in the wake of the impeachment hearings of the country's last twentieth-century president, Bill Clinton. From the portrayal of presidents as persuaders to the politics of presidential transitions, each of the constituent essays in this volume provides an engaging look at the state of the American presidency.

Public opinion polls are everywhere. Journalists report their results without hesitation, and political activists of all kinds spend millions of dollars on them, fueling the widespread assumption that elected officials "pander" to public opinion--that they tailor their policy decisions to the results of polls.
In this provocative and engagingly written book, the authors argue that the reality is quite the opposite. In fact, when not facing election, contemporary presidents and members of Congress routinely ignore the public's policy preferences and follow their own political philosophies, as well as those of their party's activists, their contributors, and their interest group allies. Politicians devote substantial time, effort, and money to tracking public opinion, not for the purposes of policymaking, but to change public opinion--to determine how to craft their public statements and actions to win support for the policies they and their supporters want.
Taking two recent, dramatic episodes--President Clinton's failed health care reform campaign, and Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America"--as examples, the authors show how both used public opinion research and the media to change the public's mind. Such orchestrated displays help explain the media's preoccupation with political conflict and strategy and, the authors argue, have propelled levels of public distrust and fear of government to record highs.
Revisiting the fundamental premises of representative democracy, this accessible book asks us to reexamine whether our government really responds to the broad public or to the narrower interests and values of certain groups. And with the 2000 campaign season heating up, "Politicians Don't Pander" could not be more timely.
"'Polling has turned leaders into followers, ' laments columnist Marueen Dowd of "The New York Times." Well, that's news definitely not fit to print say two academics who have examined the polls and the legislative records of recent presidents to see just how responsive chief executives are to the polls. Their conclusion: not much. . . . In fact, their review and analyses found that public opinion polls on policy appear to have increasingly less, not more, influence on government policies."--Richard Morin, "The Washington Post"

While we've long known that the strategies of terrorism rely heavily on media coverage of attacks, "Selling Fear" is the first detailed look at the role played by media in "counter"terrorism--and the ways that, in the wake of 9/11, the Bush administration manipulated coverage to maintain a climate of fear.
Drawing on in-depth analysis of counterterrorism in the years after 9/11--including the issuance of terror alerts and the decision to invade Iraq--the authors present a compelling case that the Bush administration hyped fear, while obscuring civil liberties abuses and concrete issues of preparedness. The media, meanwhile, largely abdicated its watchdog role, choosing to amplify the administration's message while downplaying issues that might have called the administration's statements and strategies into question. The book extends through Hurricane Katrina, and the more skeptical coverage that followed, then the first year of the Obama administration, when an increasingly partisan political environment presented the media, and the public, with new problems of reporting and interpretation.
"Selling Fear "is a hard-hitting analysis of the intertwined failures of government and media--and their costs to our nation.

Richard Neustadt's seminal work "Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership" has endured for nearly four decades as the core of academic study of the American presidency. Now, building on and challenging many of the arguments in Neustadt's work, "Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-first Century" offers reflections and implications from what we have learned about presidential power as the new century dawns.

These essays -- including a new contribution by Neustadt himself -- forge a solid reexamination of Neustadt's "Presidential Power" that address questions raised but not resolved by his work. A notable aspect of this volume's analysis is the transformed institution of the presidency in the wake of the impeachment hearings of the country's last twentieth-century president, Bill Clinton. From the portrayal of presidents as persuaders to the politics of presidential transitions, each of the constituent essays in this volume provides an engaging look at the state of the American presidency.

Public opinion polls are everywhere. Journalists report their results without hesitation, and political activists of all kinds spend millions of dollars on them, fueling the widespread assumption that elected officials "pander" to public opinion--that they tailor their policy decisions to the results of polls.
In this provocative and engagingly written book, the authors argue that the reality is quite the opposite. In fact, when not facing election, contemporary presidents and members of Congress routinely ignore the public's policy preferences and follow their own political philosophies, as well as those of their party's activists, their contributors, and their interest group allies. Politicians devote substantial time, effort, and money to tracking public opinion, not for the purposes of policymaking, but to change public opinion--to determine how to craft their public statements and actions to win support for the policies they and their supporters want.
Taking two recent, dramatic episodes--President Clinton's failed health care reform campaign, and Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America"--as examples, the authors show how both used public opinion research and the media to change the public's mind. Such orchestrated displays help explain the media's preoccupation with political conflict and strategy and, the authors argue, have propelled levels of public distrust and fear of government to record highs.
Revisiting the fundamental premises of representative democracy, this accessible book asks us to reexamine whether our government really responds to the broad public or to the narrower interests and values of certain groups. And with the 2000 campaign season heating up, "Politicians Don't Pander" could not be more timely.
"'Polling has turned leaders into followers, ' laments columnist Marueen Dowd of "The New York Times." Well, that's news definitely not fit to print say two academics who have examined the polls and the legislative records of recent presidents to see just how responsive chief executives are to the polls. Their conclusion: not much. . . . In fact, their review and analyses found that public opinion polls on policy appear to have increasingly less, not more, influence on government policies."--Richard Morin, "The Washington Post"