mass media: agenda-setting - setting the order of importance

Mass media: cultural effects

Agenda setting

Setting the order of importance

The idea that the media set the order of importance of issues seems fairly obvious - the news media turn their attention to what they consider newsworthy and what they turn their attention to is by definition news. In that simple sense, it would seem, the media set the agenda for us. We perceive as the big issues of the day those issues that the media focus on.

It may not be quite as simple as that, though. It does raise a number of questions, for example:

Why do the media focus on certain issues and not others?

In part that is due to the news values which underlie the decisions the media professionals make.

To what extent is the agenda set for the media?

In some cases, organizations and individuals play the media at their own game by taking advantage of news values - for example, abseiling lesbians in the House of Lords could hardly be ignored; the Government may choose to announce the details of an embarrassing report on the same day that the latest unemployment figures are announced - the unemployment figures fit the media's schedules, they're ready to receive them and give them due prominence and so the embarrassing report may be overlooked. Some political parties and pressure groups seem to have acquired great skill in news management.

Do the media really set the agenda?

It sounds like it should be fairly obvious that they do, but is there really any evidence that they do? Even if we could find a correspondence between the issues that the media give prominence to and the public's perception of those issues' importance, would that necessarily mean that the media set the agenda? Couldn't it perhaps be the case that it is the public's concerns about issues that shape the politicians' and the media's agenda?

A couple of examples of possible agenda setting

How the media may set the terms of reference of a debate on current issues

A detailed discussion of factors affecting agenda setting

Agenda setting

Setting the order of importance

See also:

Introduction to Mass Media Effects

Glossary of media studies terms

	Why do the media focus on certain issues and not others?
	In part that is due to the news values which underlie the decisions the media professionals make.

	To what extent is the agenda set for the media?
	In some cases, organizations and individuals play the media at their own game by taking advantage of news values - for example, abseiling lesbians in the House of Lords could hardly be ignored; the Government may choose to announce the details of an embarrassing report on the same day that the latest unemployment figures are announced - the unemployment figures fit the media's schedules, they're ready to receive them and give them due prominence and so the embarrassing report may be overlooked. Some political parties and pressure groups seem to have acquired great skill in news management.

	Do the media really set the agenda?
	It sounds like it should be fairly obvious that they do, but is there really any evidence that they do? Even if we could find a correspondence between the issues that the media give prominence to and the public's perception of those issues' importance, would that necessarily mean that the media set the agenda? Couldn't it perhaps be the case that it is the public's concerns about issues that shape the politicians' and the media's agenda?