The Role of Media in the Political Polarization in American Politics

Political Polarization can be defined as the process by which political parties have become more internally consistent in ideology and more ideologically distant from one another. In other words, the Republican Party has become more conservative and the Democratic Party has become more liberal. As can be seen by the graphic below, democrats and republicans are more ideologically divided than they have been in the past.

One of the biggest reasons for this is thanks to the sources where people get their news and information relating to politics from, which causes people to develop different opinions and have different attitudes that ultimately combine to shape people’s political ideologies and beliefs. When it comes to political news, it is as if liberals and conservatives are from different planets altogether. There is barely any overlap in the sources they turn to and trust. In fact, as far as discussing politics with friends is concerned, be it online or someplace physical, liberals and conservatives are more likely than others to interact with like minded individuals, which can be a problem since they get so used to having others agreeing with them that as soon as they come across a conflicting opinion, they see it as a threat.

The problem is that members of Congress consume political news and information through the same sources mentioned above and hence are bound to have the different opinions as well. However, that means coming to an agreement on important issues that are discussed in Congress is a difficult process since members differ on views but are not willing to compromise on their positions, usually because they are trying to do what their constituents want. When they are presented with opinions and views that do not align with their own, at times, they draw the conclusion that the person and/or party with said opinion is a threat to the country’s well being. The only solution that they see is implementing their own policies since they believe that the other party’s policies are extremely misguided, which means that an impasse is reached since neither side wants to give in to the other party’s ideas. This ultimately means that as a whole, Congress becomes ineffective, inefficient, and indecisive by having many bills and policies in the pipeline but failing to pass them due to a lack of agreement among members. For example, here is a list of just a few issues that the new Congress faced in January of 2015, many of which were deferred from the previous year.

The problem is not that different media sources give out different types of news and information pertaining to political issues. The problem is the fact that people are so content hearing what they like to hear that they do not even entertain opposing ideas, and that is exactly why people tend to get their news and information from largely a single source. People are being bombarded with news they like to hear and are missing out on a wholesome experience, wherein they would be able to hear and understand both sides of the issue rather than simply arguments supporting their beliefs. Since media plays a critical role in the political socialization of people, it has the power to affect the way people think, and currently, people are not thinking as much as they are being pleased. People should instead try and seek out as many different types of news they can from various sources, in order to challenge their opinions and beliefs, while keeping abreast of the goings-on in the American democracy.

Sources –

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/10-issues-congress-faces-january

http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/

http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/27/16553698/pew-political-typology-polarization

5 Responses to "The Role of Media in the Political Polarization in American Politics"

Holden Powers says:

April 9, 2018 at 12:38 pm

Akshit,

You make some very good points regarding the polarization of parties in American politics. One point which I think needs some more attention is how representatives use the media as a way to push their name our to the world as well as please their political party.

When representatives go on the news, they are not only representing themselves, their constituents, but also the party. If a representative says or does something which is against his/her party values, then they will be criticized by their colleagues, the media, the party, and their constituents. However, because the divide between Democrat and Republican is so large, they can not take a stance in the middle because it would not align with the ideologies they are trying to represent.

Recently, you can see this type of behavior shown by many Republicans after the numerous gun incidents which have occurred in the U.S. Republicans tend to have a pro-gun stance, however, there are some representatives who have changed their mind since these gun violence tragedies have occurred in the U.S. Recently, the thought of banning bump-stocks is against the ideology of the Republican party who have a large NRA following. As a result, these representatives have taken a risk by going against their party ideals. It is examples like this which makes me think that this gap of political polarization will eventually come closer over time. However, the media has not helped bridge the divide and doesn’t seem to want to.
Cassandra Martin says:

April 9, 2018 at 9:13 pm

Hi Akshit,

I really appreciate your analysis of the relationship between the media and political polarization. Your use of outside sources and figures was very informative, and was a great visual aid for polarization trends. I think one way you could’ve furthered your discussion would be by outlining how the voting models, particularly the retrospective voting model, correspond to trends on how often politicians will vote consistently with their party ideology, specifically on high-profile issues or close to elections. This would be a more investigative approach to the tendency of partisanship than just stating they are doing it to abide by their constituents’ wishes.

Another concern I had with this post was how you identified Congress as being ineffective. The framers aimed to construct a government where it would be difficult to make change, as this prevented the constant major shift in policy based solely on who is in office. While it is certainly frustrating that so many steps are required to make change of any sort, it is debatable whether this makes Congress and the government as a whole ineffective, because they are actually designed to prevent uncontrollable change. Therefore, while polarization is a significant reason that many bills are not passed, a low number of policies being enacted does not indicate an unsuccessful government.

I think your point that people need to stop listening to sources which will only confirm their current opinions is completely correct. Without listening to the other side of the debate, people are not well-informed, and polarization will only become worse, since as you mentioned, opposing opinions will only be viewed as threats, and not valid considerations. Partisanship is a noteworthy issue in our democracy, and political leaders should work together to narrow the gap between parties if they want the government to be truly focused on finding the best possible solutions for issues in our society. This goals will not be possible without the cooperation of the media to have standards of validation for their stories, so that the public feels that they can trust the media.
Michael De La Cruz says:

April 12, 2018 at 1:52 pm

Akshit, I agree with your viewpoints in your post and I think this is a very quality post.

Nowadays, it is so easy to surround yourself with information that reaffirms your beliefs. I believe this to be a blessing and a curse. It’s definitely a blessing because in modern America, communities of the same ideology can be formed though connections on the internet. This allows for more cohesive group behavior and allows for action to be taken faster than in the past. People also aren’t as easily swayed from their viewpoints and if they are skeptical then they could just research the information on their own independent from other people.

It’s also a curse for these very same reasons. The ability to mobilize marginalized groups within our society could prove detrimental to our democracy because the views of these groups, if allowed to permeate our society, could put the political liberties of certain citizens at risk. As information becomes more readily available, we must keep an eye out for individuals who wish to use this information in a cynical way.
Kelly Gough says:

April 12, 2018 at 11:09 pm

Akshit,

Thank you for this interesting and insightful post.

I agree that the divide in political parties has become even greater due to the sources that people are getting their news from. It seems that the news outlets are always chasing the news that will give them the most viewers and reaffirm their current viewers previous beliefs. Because of this, I think they tend to take stances that are more extreme than they would if they simply shared the news to make sure that people were aware of the issues surrounding them.

I found your point about liberal and conservative parties being more likely to share things they read/heard with their friends with similar issues thus reaffirming their views to be quite interesting. I wonder why this is not as likely with the Republican Party. It is quite perplexing for me to think about. I don’t know that I agree that when people from this party have someone disagree with them they see it as a “threat” but I do believe that they use it as a talking point the next time they go to speak with the other like-minded individuals again. It is really important to me that both parties feel comfortable sharing their opinion as I believe that is how new ideas and solutions are formed. There needs to be some conflict and disagreement in order for peoples ideas to be challenged.

Thank Akshit for your post. Well done (in my opinion).

Kelly
Samuel Lambeth says:

April 14, 2018 at 1:26 pm

Akshit,

You mention some key and interesting points in regards to the media influence on the general population. Your post reminded me of a specific headlines broadcasted in the news not too long ago. The title of the recently published article even exemplifies what you explained in your post, Obama rips Fox News viewers: ‘You are living on a different planet’. The mentioned article was written by FOX in regards to President Obama’s comment made on January 12, 2018. The title is already framed with negative connotations by using the word “Rips.” In the article, FOX reminds its followers of the times that the president has a history of “attacking his administration.” Since newsworthy updates originate form limited sources, usually the government employees, these media agencies have little room to modify the actual happenings. As a result, Media agencies, such as FOX and CNN, attempt to please their constituents by influencing citizens and framing their political ideology views on current events. Great job on your post!

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/01/12/obama-rips-fox-news-viewers-are-living-on-different-planet.html

Comments are closed.