Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

The recent Ebola outbreak in West Africa stirred up so much controversy in the United
States that other nations took note of the American media response (Pitzke, 2014). TV stations
and newspapers ran headlines like Ebola Could Spread Like Flu: Top Researcher, Ebola
Threatens World Peace, and CNNs infamous Ebola: The ISIS of Biological Agents? (Libov,
2014; Landry, 2014; Ginn, 2014) Attention-grabbing words like pandemic and crisis led
many U.S. citizens to believe they were in personal danger of contracting Ebola, despite the low
risk. The United States media reaction is the perfect case study for agenda-setting theory.
The principal researchers for agenda-setting theory, Maxwell McCombs and Donald
Shaw, argue that society judges as important what media judges as important (Griffin, pg. 378).
This is similar to Bernard Cohens (1963) observation that while the media isnt typically
successful in telling a public what to think, they can effectively tell them what to think about.
Their fundamental case study looked at the Nixon-Humphrey election in 1968 (Griffin,
pg. 379). During the election, McCombs and Shaw determined how to measure the medias
agenda. The two would look at different newspapers, magazines and televised news from Chapel
Hill, North Carolina. and judge what topics were important by looking at the length and
placement of each story (379-78). Beyond the media, they also measured what issues the public
found most important by polling voters (380). They found that the two agendas were nearly
identical.Their conclusion was this:
In choosing and displaying news, editors, newsroom staff, and broadcasters play an
important part in shaping political reality. Readers learn not only about a given issue by also how

Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

much importance to attach to that issue from the amount of information in a news story and its
position. In reflecting what
candidates are saying during a campaign,the mass media may well determine the important
issuesthat is, the media may set the agenda of the campaign.
According to McCombs and Shaws two levels of agenda-setting, the media first transfer
the salience of items on the news agenda to the public agenda, then transfer the salience of
selected attributes to prominence in individual minds (380-81, 383). In other words, the media
select issues that they believe are important, then make them important to us (278). There are
cues that show how important a media outlet believes a topic is: if a story has a relatively large
heading or front-page coverage, its a major issue (379). If the media portray something as a
major issue, McCombs and Shaw believe the public will interpret it as a major issue.
This doesnt mean that people base their attention solely on what the media says is
important. In fact, when there are times a public sees something notable they value or are
concerned by, they can demand it be given attention by the media through interest aggregations
(386). The challenge becomes giving the the audience both what they want and what they need.
For example, its possible that an audience only wants to hear good, encouraging news and they
refuse to hear anything else. If a large number of viewers demand more positive stories, the
outlet ought to bring them some, but without compromising the newsworthy stories they may not
want to hear.
Eventually, McCombs saw more power in the media beyond telling consumers what to
think about. Through the process of framing, media can draw attention to a very specific attribute
of a subject. Instead of looking at Ebola as a whole, a writer can frame it by looking at Ebola

Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

prevention or the science of disease. The angle the media wants to draw the most attention to is
the one that is both longer and given a more prominent spot in paper or program (382-83).
Through framing, the media can alter how a public sees an issue by showing a certain angle. This
not only tells them what to think about, but also how to think about it (383).
News media have long claimed that they are interested in telling the audience what it
wants and needs to know. In the days when newspapers, radio, and television dominated the
information audiences were exposed to, it was much easier for the media to set the agenda. They
had access to news before anyone else and could frame it however they liked. Many media
outlets became partisan, to the point where people are well aware of which sources lean more
toward the Republican or Democrat viewpoints on events and topics. The average citizen had a
choice: tune into one station, or tune into the other. This is the concept of selective exposure:
people listen to what they already agree with and ignore dissenting views because they can
choose sources that line up with their pre-existing beliefs.
Although the agenda-setting theory has grown into a foundational element of media
effects research (Graber, 2005) and the research subsequent to McCombs and Shaws original
study branched the theory into five areas of investigation, the world is very different now than it
was in the 1960s and 70s. Some scholars say that recent developments in social media have
changed the landscape of agenda-setting, and therefore the theory must be re-examined. (Johnson
2013)
With the advent of social media, there are many more options for selective exposure.
People dont have to read newspapers or watch television at all to get news. Instead, they can go
to their favorite websites and even blogs. Social media gives more evidence for the selective-

Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

exposure hypothesis that people choose media that reinforce their own beliefs. No matter how
liberal or conservative someone is, there is a niche audience on social media there to welcome
them. Because of this, radical views have a place to grow. A news site such as Mr. Conservative
can gather a fanbase of 1.5 million users on Facebook by posting stories framed in a way that
appeals to ultra-conservatives.
Today, the agenda-setting theory can be used to understand the medias terror-framed
coverage on Ebola. While its true that many people have died from the disease in West Africa,
the outbreak is not as widespread as it appears on nightly newscasts. Only three cases have been
confirmed in the United States, and quarantines as well as medical procedures have sufficiently
contained the spread. However, an October poll from The Washington Post showed 60% of
voters were concerned about an Ebola epidemic occurring in the U.S. (Washington Post- ABC
News 2014). Within the span of a few weeks, news coverage of Ebola skyrocketed, as did
anxiety. Suddenly, everyone was talking about it.
There are six criteria for social science theories: explanation of data, prediction of future,
relative simplicity, testable hypothesis, practical utility, and quantitative research. Agendasetting matches these criteria remarkably well. The theory predicts that the media agenda will
influence the public agenda, and explains why media affects some people more than others. It
uses empirical studies with quantitative data and is relatively simple. Finally, the theory is
practical. Journalists and others in the media industry can use the agenda-setting theory in
everyday situations. (385)
Like any theory, agenda-setting comes with unique strengths and weaknesses. One major
strength is its wide range of use. Agenda-setting is likely the most frequently used approach to

Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

studying media effects. (Graber 2005) The theory is also scientifically balanced and a
springboard for further research. Its an applicable enough theory that a researcher could study
multiple topics with it. In addition, agenda-setting helps organize the knowledge we have of
media and its effects on society. (Johnson 2013)
Despite the numerous positive aspects of the theory, agenda-setting theory research has
some downfalls. Researchers so far have not found a conclusive causal relationship between
public salience and media coverage. In fact, there have been several inconsistencies in the
implementation of frames. (Graber 2005) One prominent weakness in the theory is the need for
further research. Some of the foundational assumptions of agenda-setting theory, such as the
prominence of specific television stations as news sources, are changing with social media and
the growing development of selective exposure and social media. (Johnson 2013) Its difficult to
influence a wide number of people now the same way as it could be done decades ago.
With all of its strengths and weaknesses, agenda-setting theory remains an important part
of media research. It helps researchers understand effects and it offers insight into human
behavior. Both audiences and media must be aware of whats going on: the audience, so they can
make informed decisions based on a variety of sources and personal convictions, and the media,
so they can report ethically and accurately. The way a story is framed can have a big impact on
the public perception, just like in the case of Ebola. While many outlets approached the outbreak
with angles that perpetuated fear, some of the media chose to think about it differently and
disperse fear rather than fuel it. At the same time, some people bought into the alarming
coverage, while others were aware that there was a bigger picture. Everyone who makes and
consumes media has a responsibility.

Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

References
Cohen, B. (1963). The press and foreign policy. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Ginn, C. (2014, October 6). Legal View. Cable News Network
Graber, Doris (2005.) Political Communication Faces the 21st Century. Journal of
Communication 55(3):479-507
Griffin, E. (2006). A first look at communication theory (8th ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Johnson, T.J. (2013.) Agenda Setting in a 2.0 World: New Agendas in Communication.
Landry, C. (2014, September 18). Security Council: Ebola threatens world peace. Retrieved
November 6, 2014.
Libov, C. (2014, September 19). Ebola Could Spread Like Flu: Top Researcher. Retrieved
November 6, 2014.
McCombs, M; Shaw, D (1972). "The agenda-setting function of mass media". Public Opinion
Quarterly
McCombs, M. (2003). The agenda-setting role of the mass media in the shaping of public
opinion.
Pitzke, M. (2014, October 14). Ebola-Angst: Amerika ist infiziert. Retrieved November 6, 2014.
Rogers, E; Dearing, J (1988). "Agenda-setting research: Where has it been, where is it going?".
Communication Yearbook 11: 555594.
Swan, J. (2014, October 14). Proof Obama Administration Involved in Massive Ebola Cover-Up.
Retrieved November 6, 2014.

Hinderaker and Huncherick

COM-340
Agenda-Setting Theory

Washington Post- ABC News. (2014). Midterm Elections Poll [October 23-26, 2014]. Retrieved
from http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2014/10/29/NationalPolitics/Polling/release_372.xml