The Utility of Staying on Message: Competing Partisan Frames and Public Awareness of Elite Differences on Political Issues

Abstract

Pundits, journalists, and citizens alike often bristle at the idea of politicians ``staying on message," believing that the practice undermines democracy. Scholars have had little to say with respect to whether the issue frames the news media report politicians using to characterize public questions affect how individuals view political battles between Republicans and Democrats over time. In this paper, I explore how the consistency with which partisan political elites frame issues influences whether individuals see important differences between the two major parties. Examinations of content analysis of Newsweek's coverage of three issues (abortion, tax, and energy policies) from 1975-2000 suggest that as the two parties provide increasingly internally homogenous, but externally competitive issue frames, individuals are more likely to believe there is more than the proverbial ``dime's worth of difference" between the two major parties. The evidence supports Sniderman and Bullock's(2004) theory of ``menu dependence" in American politics.