1
In a typical year, U.S. Presidents give 600 speeches. They issue 60 executive orders and
take positions on as many as 500 pieces of Congressional legislation. Each year the president
puts forward 100,000 pages of regulatory changes.
In a typical year, members of Congress introduce 6000 pieces of legislation.
Congressional committees hold more than 1000 hearings and engage in 1500 hours of floor
debate. Across the country, state legislatures and county and city commissions collectively
consider more than 2.5 million ordinances and statutes every year.
In an election year, upwards of one million candidate seek political offices in the U.S.
ranging from dog catcher to president.
From all this – and countless other governmental and political acts and events – the
typical U.S newspaper has room for no more than 15 stories per day, and the typical network
newscast no more than 5 minutes of coverage.
It is a daunting task to filter the entire supply of political happenings into a manageable
set of covered events. But, then, so too is the process of deciding how to cover those chosen
events. From an uncountable set of possible angles, journalists must arrive at the one they will
use to present the story at hand.
How do the media operate to bring us the political coverage we receive? This is, of
course, a fundamental question for understanding not only the media, but our politics. This
paper advances a theory of media coverage of politics based on understanding the basic
motivations of journalists and the importance of political consensus to their work. The theory is
tested using a sample of newspaper coverage of several issues debated in Congress.
Convention