Friday, October 9, 1998
Media offer quick answer to complex questions of morality,
law
Q&A: Too often news oversimplifies events in quest to get
ratings
By Andrea Perera
Daily Bruin Senior Staff
Karen Kauffman is a professor in the political science
department. Her area of study includes public opinion and voting
behavior. This is her first year teaching at UCLA.
How do you think the members of the media have handled
themselves covering the issues related to the Clinton
investigation?
Well, I think the media has handled this particular political
scandal consistent with the way they handle most political issues.
It certainly doesn’t seem any different from what we’ve come to
expect.
What issues do you feel the media are concentrating on?
Well, at this moment I think that the media is focusing on the
partisan-gamesmanship aspect of the Congressional vote, of the
inquiry, of the possible impeachment.
That to me is a particular concern because it gives people the
impression that every time one of these votes are taken that there
are people that are winners and that there are losers when clearly
this issue has much more serious implications for the country than
that.
Do you feel these are pertinent issues? I guess I would say,
pertinent to the media as opposed to the public?
It’s not that who the winners and losers are isn’t important.
It’s just that sometimes the magnitude of the decisions that are
being made and what the long-term effects on the country and on the
world are gets lost when the coverage is only focusing on the very
narrow, partisan competition that is taking place.
What do you believe motivates reporters when they deal with what
can only be termed a scandal?
The news media tend to cover events they think people are
interested in and as a result, scandals, especially sex scandals
get an awful lot of coverage. Sex scandals that involve the
president of the United States have to be considered, from the
standpoint of most reporters, fairly intriguing television or
newspaper reading.
What should be the media’s focus? What do you see as the
public’s interest?
I guess I’ll tell you what I don’t think should be the focus. I
think that the kind of media coverage that I’ve seen is doing the
American public a disservice because it’s emphasizing the partisan
conflict and it’s not emphasizing the facts at hand, the process at
hand and the ramifications of the process at hand.
Nothing good happens when this process turns into a partisan
shouting match.
The type of coverage that we are seeing now, when we are always
seeing winners and losers, where we are creating a set of
expectations about what would be a good outcome and what would be a
bad outcome and always tallying it as though it’s a big contest
(between Democrats and Republicans) to see who wins really doesn’t
capture the gravity of the circumstances and, I think, focuses the
American public on the less important aspects.
How strong an effect do you think that the media’s coverage is
having on public opinion? Polls say that, despite what the media is
covering in the scandal, support for the president is high. Do you
think that the media really does have a strong effect on public
opinion?
You know, the media has the greatest influence on an issue when
the issue is new. Over time, people tend to, especially if they
think about the issue, develop more crystallized views. At this
point, most Americans know how they feel about this. The nature of
the media coverage may engage them, it may turn them off, but I
don’t know how much it is likely to change their opinions at this
point.
Most of the facts are out and most people seem to have a fairly
good idea about where they feel on this issue.
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]