IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v5y2016i4p56-d79353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boomers versus Millennials: Online Media Influence on Media Performance and Candidate Evaluations

Author

Listed:
  • Terri Towner

    (Department of Political Science, Oakland University, Rochester, MI 48309, USA)

  • Caroline Lego Munoz

    (Department of Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ 07666, USA)

Abstract

Facebook posts, YouTube videos, tweets and wooing political bloggers have become standard practice in marketing political campaigns. Research has demonstrated the effect of new media on a host of politically-related behavior, including political participation, knowledge acquisition, group formation and self-efficacy. Yet, issues related to media trust, media performance and candidate evaluations have not been fully explored. In addition, much of the political marketing research looks exclusively at the Millennial age cohort, ignoring other age groups, particularly Baby Boomers. This case study addresses whether attention to traditional (i.e., television, hard-copy newspapers and radio) and online media sources (i.e., political candidate websites, television network websites, online newspapers, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Tumblr and political blogs) about the 2012 U.S. presidential campaign influences Millennials and Baby Boomers’ media trust and performance ratings, as well as candidate evaluations. Panel surveys were completed by both age cohorts, Millennials ( n = 431) and Baby Boomers ( n = 360), during the last two weeks of the presidential election. Findings indicate that traditional sources, specifically television, rather than online sources are significantly linked to media trust and performance ratings among both Boomers and Millennials. Attention to traditional media for campaign information predicts Boomers’ candidate evaluations, whereas Millennials’ candidate evaluations are influenced by online sources, such as Facebook and candidate websites.

Suggested Citation

  • Terri Towner & Caroline Lego Munoz, 2016. "Boomers versus Millennials: Online Media Influence on Media Performance and Candidate Evaluations," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:56-:d:79353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/5/4/56/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/5/4/56/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bartels, Larry M., 1993. "Messages Received: The Political Impact of Media Exposure," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 87(2), pages 267-285, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. José M. Lamirán-Palomares & Tomás Baviera & Amparo Baviera-Puig, 2019. "Identifying Opinion Leaders on Twitter during Sporting Events: Lessons from a Case Study," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-18, May.
    2. Hye-Ryeong Shin & Jeong-Gil Choi, 2021. "The Moderating Effect of ‘Generation’ on the Relations between Source Credibility of Social Media Contents, Hotel Brand Image, and Purchase Intention," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-16, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. McNamara, Trent & Mosquera, Roberto, 2024. "The political divide: The case of expectations and preferences," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    2. Sang Jun Eun & Jin Yong Lee & Hye-Min Jung & Jin-Seok Lee, 2016. "Determinants of Attitude toward the Public Health Spending and Its Relationship with Voting Behavior in the 2012 South Korean Presidential Election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Raphael Boleslavsky & Christopher Cotton, 2015. "Information and Extremism in Elections," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 165-207, February.
    4. Juan Carlos Berganza, 2000. "Politicians, voters and electoral processes: an overview," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 24(3), pages 501-543, September.
    5. Oberholzer-Gee, Felix & Waldfogel, Joel, 2005. "Strength in Numbers: Group Size and Political Mobilization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(1), pages 73-91, April.
    6. Campante, Filipe R. & Hojman, Daniel A., 2013. "Media and polarization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 79-92.
    7. Christine Fauvelle-Aymar & Abel François, 2003. "Campagne électorale, préférences politiques et participation. Une étude empirique sur les élections législatives françaises de 1997," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques j04009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    8. Daniel Muise & Nilam Ram & Thomas Robinson & Byron Reeves, 2023. "Identification, Impacts, and Opportunities of Three Common Measurement Considerations when using Digital Trace Data," Papers 2310.00197, arXiv.org.
    9. Felix Oberholzer-Gee & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Electoral Acceleration: The Effect of Minority Population on Minority Voter Turnout," NBER Working Papers 8252, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Matthew Gabel & Kenneth Scheve, 2005. "Estimating the Effect of Elite Communications on Public Opinion Using Instrumental Variables," Working Papers 2005-02, University of Kentucky, Institute for Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.
    11. Brian Robert Calfano, 2010. "Prophetic at Any Price? Clergy Political Behavior and Utility Maximization," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 91(3), pages 649-668, September.
    12. Nathan Canen & Francesco Trebbi, 2016. "Endogenous Network Formation in Congress," NBER Working Papers 22756, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Kosuke Imai & Teppei Yamamoto, 2010. "Causal Inference with Differential Measurement Error: Nonparametric Identification and Sensitivity Analysis," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 543-560, April.
    14. Jonathan McDonald Ladd & Gabriel S. Lenz, 2009. "Exploiting a Rare Communication Shift to Document the Persuasive Power of the News Media," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 394-410, April.
    15. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Nordin, Mattias, 2015. "Local Television, Citizen Knowledge and Political Accountability: Evidence from the U.S. Senate," Working Paper Series 2015:5, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    17. David Bartolini & Agnese Sacchi & Domenico Scalera & Alberto Zazzaro, 2023. "Voters’ Distance, Information Bias and Politicians’ Salary," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 9(2), pages 637-664, July.
    18. Joshua Clinton & John Lapinski, 2004. "Targeted advertising and voter turnout: An experimental study of the 2000 presidential election," Natural Field Experiments 00226, The Field Experiments Website.
    19. Baccini, Leonardo & Sudulich, Maria Laura & Wall, Matthew, 2016. "Internet effects in times of political crisis: online newsgathering and attitudes towards the European Union," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 62302, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Allison Astorino-Courtois, 2000. "Can Peace Be Marketed? a Preliminary Analysis of Israelis and Palestinians," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 18(1), pages 97-122, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:56-:d:79353. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.