To succeed in foreign policy, U.S. presidents have to sell their versions or framings of political events to the news media and to the public. But since the end of the Cold War, journalists have increasingly resisted presidential views, even offering their own spin on events. What, then, determines whether the media will accept or reject the White House perspective? And what consequences does this new media environment have for policymaking and public opinion? To answer these questions, Robert M. Entman develops a powerful new model of how media framing works—a model that allows him to explain why the media cheered American victories over small-time dictators in Grenada and Panama but barely noticed the success of far more difficult missions in Haiti and Kosovo. Discussing the practical implications of his model, Entman also suggests ways to more effectively encourage the exchange of ideas between the government and the media and between the media and the public. His book will be an essential guide for political scientists, students of the media, and anyone interested in the increasingly influential role of the media in foreign policy.
This study examines the role that public attitudes have played over the last generation in the making of United States foreign policy. It focuses on four prominent foreign interventions: the Vietnam War, the Nicaraguan Contra funding controversy, the Persian Gulf War, and the Bosnia crisis.
The new edition of this leading reader for courses in American foreign policy offers students an up-to-date, highly accessible introduction to the broad array of domestic factors influencing U.S. policymakers. Editor James M. McCormick has carefully selected two dozen current insightful and sometimes controversial essays by a distinguished group of leading experts-- scholars, journalists and public officials--including 11 new and 7 updated contributions. In his introduction, McCormick evaluates the challenges facing U.S. foreign policy makers in recent years and assesses the Obama Administration's successes and failures in its efforts to pursue a new direction in American foreign policy. The volume is then divided into three major parts with an opening essay by the editor to place each part in context and then a selection of essays that analyzes the topic in that part in more detail. Part I, "The Societal Environment," contains a series of articles on the position of interest groups, the impact of military experience, the effect of public opinion, and the role of elections and political parties on foreign policy. Part II, "The Institutional Setting," examines how various political institutions, such as Congress, the presidency, and various bureaucracies (e.g., the National Security Council, the intelligence community) shape American foreign policy. Part III, "Decision makers and Their Policymaking Positions," provides various case analyses over several administrations to illustrate how individuals and bureaucracies affect the foreign policy decision making at the highest levels of government.
Ole Holsti, one of the deans of US foreign policy analysis, examines the complex factors involved in the policy decision-making process including the beliefs and cognitive processes of foreign policy leaders and the influence public opinion has on foreign policy. The essays, in addition to being both theoretically and empirically rich, are historical in breadth--with essays on Vietnam--as well as contemporary in relevance--with essays on public opinion and foreign policy after 9/11.
Strategic public diplomacy, once commonly called propaganda, has existed since the twelfth century, when Richard I, crusading sovereign of England, plucked the eyes from his prisoners and returned them to his arch-rival Saladin--an unmistakable message intended to mold the image that Richard's foreign enemies had of him. Although their methods have grown more sophisticated and gentrified since the Middle Ages, the goal of governments employing strategic public diplomacy has remained essentially the same: to influence public or elite opinion in a foreign country for the purpose of turning the foreign policy of the target country to advantage. The first systematic analysis of the growing foreign public relations industry in the U.S., this remarkable text traces the impact that the political "image management" of other nations has had on the American foreign policy agenda. Documenting the evolution of these campaigns in both scale and sophistication, this book includes an analysis of the Justice Department's foreign agent registration records, numerous interviews with journalists, consultants, and key government officials, and a systematic assessment of media content to gauge the effectiveness of these attempts at news management. The author presents and tests elements of a general model of agenda-related communication effects, presenting case studies that illustrate the extent to which the American media are saturated with foreign diplomatic messages, including the recent effort of the Kuwaiti government-in-exile to influence public opinion in the U.S. during the Gulf War, and concludes with an inventory and discussion of the issues raised by the "export" of the knowledge-base and skills underlying new, sophisticated communication strategies now being employed on behalf of foreign interests. Based on fifteen years of exhaustive research, this book is ideal for courses in foreign policy, media, and politics.
With engaging new contributions from the major figures in the fields of the media and public opinion The Oxford Handbook of American Public Opinion and the Media is a key point of reference for anyone working in American politics today.
In Faces of Internationalism, Eugene R. Wittkopf examines the changing nature of public attitudes toward American foreign policy in the post-Vietnam era and the role that public opinion plays in the American foreign policymaking process. Drawing on new data--four mass and four elite opinion surveys undertaken by the Chicago Council of Foreign Relations from 1974 to 1986--combined with sophisticated analysis techniques, Wittkopf offers a pathbreaking study that addresses the central question of the relationship of a democracy to its foreign policy. The breakdown of the "consensus" approach to American foreign policy after the Cold War years has become the subject of much analysis. This study contributes to revisionist scholarship by describing the beliefs and preferences that have emerged in the wake of this breakdown. Wittkopf counters traditional views by demonstrating the persistence of U.S. public opinion defined by two dominant and distinct attitudes in the post-Vietnam war years--cooperative and militant internationalism. The author explores the nature of these two "faces" of internationalism, focusing on the extent to which elites and masses share similar opinions and the political and sociodemographic correlates of belief systems. Wittkopf also offers an original examination of the relationship between beliefs and preferences.
The American public has consistently declared itself less concerned with foreign affairs in the post-Cold War era, even after 9/11, than at any time since World War II. How can it be, then, that public attentiveness to U.S. foreign policy crises has increased? This book represents the first systematic attempt to explain this apparent paradox. Matthew Baum argues that the answer lies in changes to television's presentation of political information. In so doing he develops a compelling "byproduct" theory of information consumption. The information revolution has fundamentally changed the way the mass media, especially television, covers foreign policy. Traditional news has been repackaged into numerous entertainment-oriented news programs and talk shows. By transforming political issues involving scandal or violence (especially attacks against America) into entertainment, the "soft news" media have actually captured more viewers who will now follow news about foreign crises, due to its entertainment value, even if they remain uninterested in foreign policy. Baum rigorously tests his theory through content analyses of traditional and soft news media coverage of various post-WWII U.S. foreign crises and statistical analyses of public opinion surveys. The results hold key implications for the future of American politics and foreign policy. For instance, watching soft news reinforces isolationism among many inattentive Americans. Scholars, political analysts, and even politicians have tended to ignore the soft news media and politically disengaged citizens. But, as this well-written book cogently demonstrates, soft news viewers represent a largely untapped reservoir of unusually persuadable voters.
In this cogent text, Laura Neack argues that foreign policy making, in this uncertain era of globalization and American global hegemony, revolves around seeking and maintaining power. Now in a thoroughly revised and updated edition, the book reviews both old and new lessons on how foreign policy decisions are made and executed. To make sense of these lessons, Neack employs a rich array of new and enduring international case studies organized in a set of concise, accessible chapters. Following a levels-of-analysis organization, the author considers all elements that influence foreign policy, including the role of leaders, bargaining, national image, political culture, public opinion, the media, and non-state actors.