Agenda Setting Theory
McCombs and Shaw, 1972
Approach: Objective
Focus: Mass, Political Communication and Journalism
1. Research in Agenda Setting
2. Macro-level vs. Micro-level Agenda Setting
3. Implications
4. Levels of Agenda Setting
The influence of news media:
• Media does not determine what we think as it does not have all power to control it.
• Agenda-setting: Media might decide what we think about.
• Framing: Media might decide the way we think as it influences the connections we make.
Summary
Media successfully tells news consumers what to think about
Framing – News consumers interpret the news.
Agenda setting: The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their
news agenda to the public agenda.
Those in ‘need for orientation’ are most affected by the media agenda.
First level of agenda setting: what to think about
Second level of agenda setting: transfer of salience of a DOMINANT set of attributes.
Agenda setting: The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their
news agenda to the public agenda.
• It determines what issues are important to the public.
• How? By letting these issues stand out and capture the public’s attention.
• Focuses more on news content as a whole.
• What kind of influence has the media over the public opinion.
• Not only telling you what to think, but also what is important to think about.
1. Research in Agenda Setting
Cohen (1963)
“The press might not be successful in telling people what to think, but what to think about”.
• Agenda setting hypothesis:
• There is a cause-effect relationship between the media content and voter perception.
• Not a deliberate attempt.
1
,• The media put an emphasis on some topics, but not in others.
#A
Chapel Hill Study (1968)
• Context: elections
• What they studied: 9 news media, 24 days, political news
◦ Important and less important themes/issues
• Participants: 100 respondents (all undecided/floating voters)
• Method: They asked them to says the main things the government should do something
about.
◦ Foreign policy
◦ Law and order
◦ Fiscal policy
◦ Public welfare
◦ Civil rights
• Results: Strong correlation (or similarity) between the public and media agenda (e.g., order
of themes) >> +0.97!
#B
Agenda Setting Model
• Media Agenda: The pattern of news
coverage across major print and broadcast
media.
• Salience: Emphasizing certain issues.
• Elements emphasized by the media
are seen as important.
• Media bridges between world and pictures in our heads.
• The world outside and the pictures in our heads.
• Public Agenda: The most important public issues.
2. Micro vs. Macro Agenda Setting
A. Macro-level: The opinion of the public is influenced by the media.
B. Micro-level: The opinion of the individuals is influenced by a specific set of media.
#A
Macro-level Agenda Setting
• Focus: opinion of public, that are influenced by the media.
• Advantages:
2
, ◦ Comparison in a country
• Media Agenda: the pattern of news coverage
across major print & broadcast media.
A. Accumulation: repetition of messages
B. Consonance: all media showing similar
message.
Salience = Emphasising certain issues.
• Public Agenda: the most important public issues.
A. Cognitive Effects: influence citizens perception of reality.
B. Consensus: citizens are likely to agree on what is the most important issue in society.
Media Agenda Public Agenda
Accumulation: Cognitive Effects:
Repetition of messages Media influence citizens’ perception of
• Messages accumulate as they are reality.
repeatedly shown by the media.
Consonance: Consensus:
All media show similar messages Citizens agree about what is more
important in society.
Several media outlets report the same • People have the same idea of what is
issue in the same way Media show similar important.
messages. • It is easier for politicians to make certain
policies.
#A.1
Correlation and Causality
• Actual facts can affect both media and public agenda.
• It is not a direct a relationship – correlation does not
mean causation, it does not mean that it will be talked by
citizens.
• To examine causality, you have to think about the
relationships in both ways, test them around.
• You have to study at some point of time:
1. Media Agenda → Public Agenda – What
issues are important in media, then later, public
opinion.
2. Public Agenda → Media Agenda – What
issues are important for public agenda, them
3
, later, media agenda. public agenda can affect media agenda.
#B
Micro-level Agenda Setting
• Focus: opinion of individuals, that are
influenced by a specific set of media
• Individual differences – You do not
assume that the effects are the same for
everybody
• Advantages
• Comparison between individuals
• Experiments
• Researchers can investigate:
A. How people differ in their need for orientation.
B. How influence is affected by obtrusive and unobtrusive issues.
#B.1
Need for Orientation
• Need for orientation: a measure of the extent
to which individuals need for orientation
motivated them to let the media shape their
views.
• Factors that determine the level of need for
orientation:
A. Relevance: how relevant is an issue
B. Uncertainty: how much the person is uncertain about an issue.
• Effects:
• Research shows effect are stronger and larger on public agenda.
• Less pronounced for people with low need for orientation.
Index of curiosity: a measure of the extent to which individuals need for orientation motivates
them to let the media shape.
#B.2
Obtrusive and Unobtrusive Issues
• Obtrusive issues: issues that are easy to see in our daily lives (e.g. murder, people).
• Unobtrusive issues: issues that are NOT easy to see in our daily lives (e.g. natural disasters).
4
McCombs and Shaw, 1972
Approach: Objective
Focus: Mass, Political Communication and Journalism
1. Research in Agenda Setting
2. Macro-level vs. Micro-level Agenda Setting
3. Implications
4. Levels of Agenda Setting
The influence of news media:
• Media does not determine what we think as it does not have all power to control it.
• Agenda-setting: Media might decide what we think about.
• Framing: Media might decide the way we think as it influences the connections we make.
Summary
Media successfully tells news consumers what to think about
Framing – News consumers interpret the news.
Agenda setting: The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their
news agenda to the public agenda.
Those in ‘need for orientation’ are most affected by the media agenda.
First level of agenda setting: what to think about
Second level of agenda setting: transfer of salience of a DOMINANT set of attributes.
Agenda setting: The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their
news agenda to the public agenda.
• It determines what issues are important to the public.
• How? By letting these issues stand out and capture the public’s attention.
• Focuses more on news content as a whole.
• What kind of influence has the media over the public opinion.
• Not only telling you what to think, but also what is important to think about.
1. Research in Agenda Setting
Cohen (1963)
“The press might not be successful in telling people what to think, but what to think about”.
• Agenda setting hypothesis:
• There is a cause-effect relationship between the media content and voter perception.
• Not a deliberate attempt.
1
,• The media put an emphasis on some topics, but not in others.
#A
Chapel Hill Study (1968)
• Context: elections
• What they studied: 9 news media, 24 days, political news
◦ Important and less important themes/issues
• Participants: 100 respondents (all undecided/floating voters)
• Method: They asked them to says the main things the government should do something
about.
◦ Foreign policy
◦ Law and order
◦ Fiscal policy
◦ Public welfare
◦ Civil rights
• Results: Strong correlation (or similarity) between the public and media agenda (e.g., order
of themes) >> +0.97!
#B
Agenda Setting Model
• Media Agenda: The pattern of news
coverage across major print and broadcast
media.
• Salience: Emphasizing certain issues.
• Elements emphasized by the media
are seen as important.
• Media bridges between world and pictures in our heads.
• The world outside and the pictures in our heads.
• Public Agenda: The most important public issues.
2. Micro vs. Macro Agenda Setting
A. Macro-level: The opinion of the public is influenced by the media.
B. Micro-level: The opinion of the individuals is influenced by a specific set of media.
#A
Macro-level Agenda Setting
• Focus: opinion of public, that are influenced by the media.
• Advantages:
2
, ◦ Comparison in a country
• Media Agenda: the pattern of news coverage
across major print & broadcast media.
A. Accumulation: repetition of messages
B. Consonance: all media showing similar
message.
Salience = Emphasising certain issues.
• Public Agenda: the most important public issues.
A. Cognitive Effects: influence citizens perception of reality.
B. Consensus: citizens are likely to agree on what is the most important issue in society.
Media Agenda Public Agenda
Accumulation: Cognitive Effects:
Repetition of messages Media influence citizens’ perception of
• Messages accumulate as they are reality.
repeatedly shown by the media.
Consonance: Consensus:
All media show similar messages Citizens agree about what is more
important in society.
Several media outlets report the same • People have the same idea of what is
issue in the same way Media show similar important.
messages. • It is easier for politicians to make certain
policies.
#A.1
Correlation and Causality
• Actual facts can affect both media and public agenda.
• It is not a direct a relationship – correlation does not
mean causation, it does not mean that it will be talked by
citizens.
• To examine causality, you have to think about the
relationships in both ways, test them around.
• You have to study at some point of time:
1. Media Agenda → Public Agenda – What
issues are important in media, then later, public
opinion.
2. Public Agenda → Media Agenda – What
issues are important for public agenda, them
3
, later, media agenda. public agenda can affect media agenda.
#B
Micro-level Agenda Setting
• Focus: opinion of individuals, that are
influenced by a specific set of media
• Individual differences – You do not
assume that the effects are the same for
everybody
• Advantages
• Comparison between individuals
• Experiments
• Researchers can investigate:
A. How people differ in their need for orientation.
B. How influence is affected by obtrusive and unobtrusive issues.
#B.1
Need for Orientation
• Need for orientation: a measure of the extent
to which individuals need for orientation
motivated them to let the media shape their
views.
• Factors that determine the level of need for
orientation:
A. Relevance: how relevant is an issue
B. Uncertainty: how much the person is uncertain about an issue.
• Effects:
• Research shows effect are stronger and larger on public agenda.
• Less pronounced for people with low need for orientation.
Index of curiosity: a measure of the extent to which individuals need for orientation motivates
them to let the media shape.
#B.2
Obtrusive and Unobtrusive Issues
• Obtrusive issues: issues that are easy to see in our daily lives (e.g. murder, people).
• Unobtrusive issues: issues that are NOT easy to see in our daily lives (e.g. natural disasters).
4
