The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media.¶
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
Cited by¶
9 citations across 9 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Presupposition Smuggling
- In agenda-setting, items phrased with embedded presuppositions ("how shall we implement Plan X?" versus "should we?") shape what can be discussed.
This sourceEstablishes how media framing of items determines what is salient and discussable.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
Supplies the founding agenda-setting claim that media coverage determines which issues are important — the frame of the sentence — but not the presuppositional question-wording mechanism the sentence asserts.
“In reflecting what candidates are saying during a campaign, the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the “agenda” of the campaign.”
- In agenda-setting, items phrased with embedded presuppositions ("how shall we implement Plan X?" versus "should we?") shape what can be discussed.
- Salience-as-Significance
- Mass media and agenda-setting. Coverage volume of a topic predicts the public's ranking of that topic's importance: editorial decisions about which stories to run are read as decisions about what matters.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
McCombs and Shaw hold that readers learn not only about a given issue but also “how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position”, and conclude that the mass media may well determine which issues are important, setting the agenda of the campaign. Perceived importance tracking coverage, and selection read as a statement of what matters, are the two propositions the sentence draws from the work. The work's formulation is the amount of information in a news story and its position, which is less specific than the sentence's coverage volume of a topic.
“Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position.”
- Mass media and agenda-setting. Coverage volume of a topic predicts the public's ranking of that topic's importance: editorial decisions about which stories to run are read as decisions about what matters.
Domain-specific¶
- Agenda Building
- The mechanism has several structural features that distinguish agenda building from the adjacent but narrower concept of agenda setting. Agenda setting names the downstream effect of media salience on public concern
SupportedVerified against the publisher's abstract
“the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the “agenda” of the campaign.”
- The mechanism has several structural features that distinguish agenda building from the adjacent but narrower concept of agenda setting. Agenda setting names the downstream effect of media salience on public concern
- Agenda Distortion
- Agenda distortion names the structural pattern, grounded in McCombs and Shaw's 1972 agenda-setting research
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
“the mass media may well determine the important issues—that is, the media may set the “agenda” of the campaign.”
- Agenda distortion names the structural pattern, grounded in McCombs and Shaw's 1972 agenda-setting research
- Agenda-setting
- The empirical signature, established by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw in their 1972 Chapel Hill study of the 1968 presidential election
This sourceMcCombs and Shaw's study pairing survey responses about issue importance with an analysis of news content. Argues that readers take an issue's importance from the amount and position of news about it, so the mass media may set the campaign agenda.
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
“Readers learn not only about a given issue, but also how much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its position.”
- The empirical signature, established by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw in their 1972 Chapel Hill study of the 1968 presidential election
Mechanisms¶
- Editorial Priority Calendar
- It reflects the real power of coverage decisions — what a communications team foregrounds shapes what its audience treats as important, the core claim of agenda-setting theory.
This sourceShows that media emphasis and placement shape which issues audiences regard as important, the agenda-setting function.
- It reflects the real power of coverage decisions — what a communications team foregrounds shapes what its audience treats as important, the core claim of agenda-setting theory.
- Figure-Ground Reversal Test
- Agenda-setting theory names the stakes: what the press consistently backgrounds shapes what audiences come to believe matters, whether or not anyone intended it.
This sourceShows that the press's selection and emphasis of issues shapes the importance audiences attach to those issues.
- Agenda-setting theory names the stakes: what the press consistently backgrounds shapes what audiences come to believe matters, whether or not anyone intended it.
- Media Agenda Framing
- Its failure mode is the shadow of its power: agenda-setting shapes not just what people think about
This sourceShows that news selection and display shape which issues audiences regard as important.
- Its failure mode is the shadow of its power: agenda-setting shapes not just what people think about
- Omission Pattern Analysis
- Agenda-setting theory is the honest version of the claim: patterns of inclusion and omission shape which topics an audience treats as important, independent of anyone's intent.
This sourceShows that media selection and prominence shape the importance audiences attach to issues.
- Agenda-setting theory is the honest version of the claim: patterns of inclusion and omission shape which topics an audience treats as important, independent of anyone's intent.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 5 of 9 citations: 1 supported, 4 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:3888b3b4e1b0 · see in the full table