Matching Items (4)
Description
Do fact-checks influence individuals' attitudes and evaluations of political candidates and campaign messages? This dissertation examines the influence of fact-checks on citizens' evaluations of political candidates. Using an original content analysis, I determine who conducts fact-checks of candidates for political office, who is being fact-checked, and how fact-checkers rate political candidates' level of truthfulness. Additionally, I employ three experiments to evaluate the impact of fact-checks source and message cues on voters' evaluations of candidates for political office.
ContributorsWintersieck, Amanda (Author) / Fridkin, Kim L (Thesis advisor) / Kenney, Patrick (Committee member) / Ramirez, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
California's Proposition 8 revoked the right to marriage for that state's gay and lesbian population. Proposition 8 was a devastating defeat for gay marriage movements across the nation. The primary rhetorical strategy of the No on 8 campaign was a reliance on a Civil Rights analogy that constructed the gay and lesbian movement for marriage as a civil right akin to those fought for by African Americans in the 1950s and 1960s. Analogizing the gay and lesbian struggle for gay marriage with the racial struggles of the Civil Rights Movement exposed a complicated relationship between communities of color and gay and lesbian communities. This project reads critical rhetoric and intersectionality together to craft a critical intersectional rhetoric to better understand the potentialities and pitfalls of analogizing the gay rights with Civil Rights. I analyze television ads, communiques of No on 8 leadership, as well as state level and national court decisions related to gay marriage to argue alternative frameworks that move away from analogizing and move towards coalition building.
ContributorsKelsey, Michelle L (Author) / Brouwer, Daniel C (Thesis advisor) / Carlson, A. Cheree (Committee member) / Milller, Keith (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
In 1985 Schotland made the observation that judicial campaigns were becoming “nosier, nastier, and costlier.” Because judicial campaigns are one of very few occasions in which individuals receive information about the bench (Schaffner and Diascro 2007), there is a possibility that such negativity in judicial elections could harm individual perceptions of the legitimacy of state supreme courts (Gibson 2008). This dissertation seeks to uncover the amount of negativity present in judicial campaigns, and to understand the effects of such negativity on perceptions of state courts’ specific and diffuse legitimacy.
To accomplish this goal I first conduct a content analysis of all televised judicial advertisements aired from 2005-2016. While other scholars have examined the use of attack advertisements in judicial elections (Hall 2014), my study is the first to consider ads airing before and after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling that removed spending limits for political groups. I find that neither the use of attack nor contrast advertisements appears to be increasing, though the sponsors of such ads have changed such that candidates and political parties air far fewer negative advertisements, but political groups air more negative ads than they did before Citizens United.
I then conduct a unique experiment to examine the effects of negativity on perceptions of specific and diffuse legitimacy. Unlike previous studies, I include a treatment group for contrast advertisements, which are advertisements containing elements of negativity about a target, as well as positive information about the target’s opponent. I find that, perceptions of the court’s diffuse legitimacy are only moderately influenced by exposure to negative ads. I do however find that contrast advertisements appear to depress perceptions of the court’s diffuse legitimacy by a significant amount for individuals with high knowledge of the courts.
To accomplish this goal I first conduct a content analysis of all televised judicial advertisements aired from 2005-2016. While other scholars have examined the use of attack advertisements in judicial elections (Hall 2014), my study is the first to consider ads airing before and after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling that removed spending limits for political groups. I find that neither the use of attack nor contrast advertisements appears to be increasing, though the sponsors of such ads have changed such that candidates and political parties air far fewer negative advertisements, but political groups air more negative ads than they did before Citizens United.
I then conduct a unique experiment to examine the effects of negativity on perceptions of specific and diffuse legitimacy. Unlike previous studies, I include a treatment group for contrast advertisements, which are advertisements containing elements of negativity about a target, as well as positive information about the target’s opponent. I find that, perceptions of the court’s diffuse legitimacy are only moderately influenced by exposure to negative ads. I do however find that contrast advertisements appear to depress perceptions of the court’s diffuse legitimacy by a significant amount for individuals with high knowledge of the courts.
ContributorsThompson, Joshua Robert (Author) / Hoekstra, Valerie (Thesis advisor) / Fridkin, Kim (Committee member) / Ramirez, Mark (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
As political campaigning becomes increasingly digital and data-driven, data privacy has become a question of democratic governance. Yet, Congress has yet to pass a comprehensive federal data privacy law and even the strongest subnational data privacy laws exempt political campaigns from regulation. <br/><br/>This thesis examines how data privacy laws impact data-driven and digital political campaigning. Specifically, it investigates what information is incorporated into the political data ecosystem, how data privacy laws regulate the collection of this data, and how actors in the political data ecosystem respond to these laws. It examines both sector-specific federal law and subnational data protection regulation through a case study of California. This research suggests that although the California Consumer Privacy Act and California Privacy Rights Act are landmark steps in American data protection, subnational data privacy law remains inhibited by the federal market-based approach.
ContributorsScovil, Daiva Julija (Author) / Gary, Marchant (Thesis director) / K, Royal (Committee member) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor, Contributor) / Historical, Philosophical & Religious Studies, Sch (Contributor, Contributor) / Watts College of Public Service & Community Solut (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2021-05