Political Information and Foreign Policy Preferences
Scholars of American and British politics have long since puzzled over the fluctuating
nature of the ‘special relationship’ between the two countries, no more so than at present with the
remarkably strong alliance that seems to have grown between Prime Minister Tony Blair and
President George W. Bush (Riddell, 2003). Despite the clear message in the opinion polls that at
least a sizeable minority of the British public have serious concerns about the level of support
afforded Bush by the Prime Minister, Blair continues to seek to use his considerable powers of
oratory and persuasion to convince the British public that he is right to stand squarely behind the
Americans, particularly on the War on Terror (Kramer, 2003). It seems particularly appropriate
in these circumstances, and against the background of the war in Iraq (Shawcross, 2004), which
seems likely to continue to dominate political debate in the two countries for sometime yet to
come, to examine the developing political perspectives of a comparable group of citizens in each
country.
However, UK and US studies find that foreign policy information can be particularly
limited for citizens (Almond, 1960; Butler and Stokes, 1969; Holsti, 1996), which in turn
increases reliance on cognitive shortcuts including the affective cues of the most recognizable
national leaders, emotion, ideological and symbolic predispositions. Political figures such as the
UK Prime Minister and US president provide a particularly important role in foreign affairs as
recognizable cues in a mediated environment in which citizens are likely to possess little of their
own policy information (Powlick and Katz, 1998). Studies find that foreign policy preferences
are often shaped less by full information of the policy environment than by affective evaluation
and feelings of confidence in national leadership (Mondak, 1993; Peffley, Langley, and Goidel,
1995).
1
Convention