Loose Cannons or Loyal Foot Soldiers? Toward a More Complex Theory of Interest Group Advertising Strategies
Recent court decisions have encouraged new types of interest groups to become involved in election campaigns. Yet questions remain about whether interest group sponsorship of advertising affects the content of the issues being discussed. The ability of interest groups to influence the campaign agend...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | American journal of political science 2016-07, Vol.60 (3), p.738-751 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 751 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 738 |
| container_title | American journal of political science |
| container_volume | 60 |
| creator | Franz, Michael M. Fowler, Erika Franklin Ridout, Travis N. |
| description | Recent court decisions have encouraged new types of interest groups to become involved in election campaigns. Yet questions remain about whether interest group sponsorship of advertising affects the content of the issues being discussed. The ability of interest groups to influence the campaign agenda has implications for the extent to which politicians can be held accountable by citizens. In this research, we present a new conceptual framework for explaining variation in interest group advertising strategies and examine the factors leading different types of interest groups to be loose cannons (diverging from the issue debates among candidates) or loyal foot soldiers (matching the candidates' issue debates). We find more evidence of loyal foot soldier behavior among new multi-issue interest groups and among Republican groups and candidates. Fears of interest groups "hijacking" campaign agendas appear unfounded. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/ajps.12241 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1804259275</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>24877492</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>24877492</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3611-7df897387d33535af8708687dee7c0b700ed866729a72f9e1fd1a0afbf0137be3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1PGzEQxS1UpKaUS--VLHGrtNQf6_X6hNIIAlVaEAmi6sVysmPYsOws9gbIf1_TpRw7l9Ho_d7M6BHyibNDnuqrW3fxkAuR8x0y4ipnmTJMvyMjxozIVKnke_IhxjVLc27kiNzNECPQiWtbbCPFQGe4dQ09QezpHJuqhhCP6AKfXKiooz8wJBrvuwae6eIWMGwpenrW9hAg9nQacNPRcfUIoa9j3d7QeR9cDzc1xI9k17smwv5r3yNXJ8eLyWk2O5-eTcazbCULzjNd-dJoWepKSiWV86VmZZFGAL1iS80YVGVRaGGcFt4A9xV3zPmlZ1zqJcg9cjDs7QI-bNJXdo2b0KaTlpcsF8oIrRL1ZaBWAWMM4G0X6nsXtpYz-xKmfQnT_g0zwXyAn-oGtv8h7fj7xfyf5_PgWccew5tH5KXWuRFJzwa9jj08v-ku3NlCS63s9c-pNQulL35_-2Uv5R-cR4__</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1804259275</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Loose Cannons or Loyal Foot Soldiers? Toward a More Complex Theory of Interest Group Advertising Strategies</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Franz, Michael M. ; Fowler, Erika Franklin ; Ridout, Travis N.</creator><creatorcontrib>Franz, Michael M. ; Fowler, Erika Franklin ; Ridout, Travis N.</creatorcontrib><description>Recent court decisions have encouraged new types of interest groups to become involved in election campaigns. Yet questions remain about whether interest group sponsorship of advertising affects the content of the issues being discussed. The ability of interest groups to influence the campaign agenda has implications for the extent to which politicians can be held accountable by citizens. In this research, we present a new conceptual framework for explaining variation in interest group advertising strategies and examine the factors leading different types of interest groups to be loose cannons (diverging from the issue debates among candidates) or loyal foot soldiers (matching the candidates' issue debates). We find more evidence of loyal foot soldier behavior among new multi-issue interest groups and among Republican groups and candidates. Fears of interest groups "hijacking" campaign agendas appear unfounded.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0092-5853</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1540-5907</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12241</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJPLB4</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Advertising ; Advertising campaigns ; Court decisions ; Elections ; Interest groups ; Military personnel ; Political advertising ; Political campaigns ; Political candidates ; Political debate ; Political interest groups ; Political participation ; Political parties ; Political theory ; Politicians ; Soldiers ; Statistical significance ; United States Senate</subject><ispartof>American journal of political science, 2016-07, Vol.60 (3), p.738-751</ispartof><rights>2016 Midwest Political Science Association</rights><rights>2015, Midwest Political Science Association</rights><rights>2016 by the Midwest Political Science Association</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3611-7df897387d33535af8708687dee7c0b700ed866729a72f9e1fd1a0afbf0137be3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3611-7df897387d33535af8708687dee7c0b700ed866729a72f9e1fd1a0afbf0137be3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/24877492$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/24877492$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Franz, Michael M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fowler, Erika Franklin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ridout, Travis N.</creatorcontrib><title>Loose Cannons or Loyal Foot Soldiers? Toward a More Complex Theory of Interest Group Advertising Strategies</title><title>American journal of political science</title><addtitle>American Journal of Political Science</addtitle><description>Recent court decisions have encouraged new types of interest groups to become involved in election campaigns. Yet questions remain about whether interest group sponsorship of advertising affects the content of the issues being discussed. The ability of interest groups to influence the campaign agenda has implications for the extent to which politicians can be held accountable by citizens. In this research, we present a new conceptual framework for explaining variation in interest group advertising strategies and examine the factors leading different types of interest groups to be loose cannons (diverging from the issue debates among candidates) or loyal foot soldiers (matching the candidates' issue debates). We find more evidence of loyal foot soldier behavior among new multi-issue interest groups and among Republican groups and candidates. Fears of interest groups "hijacking" campaign agendas appear unfounded.</description><subject>Advertising</subject><subject>Advertising campaigns</subject><subject>Court decisions</subject><subject>Elections</subject><subject>Interest groups</subject><subject>Military personnel</subject><subject>Political advertising</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Political candidates</subject><subject>Political debate</subject><subject>Political interest groups</subject><subject>Political participation</subject><subject>Political parties</subject><subject>Political theory</subject><subject>Politicians</subject><subject>Soldiers</subject><subject>Statistical significance</subject><subject>United States Senate</subject><issn>0092-5853</issn><issn>1540-5907</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1PGzEQxS1UpKaUS--VLHGrtNQf6_X6hNIIAlVaEAmi6sVysmPYsOws9gbIf1_TpRw7l9Ho_d7M6BHyibNDnuqrW3fxkAuR8x0y4ipnmTJMvyMjxozIVKnke_IhxjVLc27kiNzNECPQiWtbbCPFQGe4dQ09QezpHJuqhhCP6AKfXKiooz8wJBrvuwae6eIWMGwpenrW9hAg9nQacNPRcfUIoa9j3d7QeR9cDzc1xI9k17smwv5r3yNXJ8eLyWk2O5-eTcazbCULzjNd-dJoWepKSiWV86VmZZFGAL1iS80YVGVRaGGcFt4A9xV3zPmlZ1zqJcg9cjDs7QI-bNJXdo2b0KaTlpcsF8oIrRL1ZaBWAWMM4G0X6nsXtpYz-xKmfQnT_g0zwXyAn-oGtv8h7fj7xfyf5_PgWccew5tH5KXWuRFJzwa9jj08v-ku3NlCS63s9c-pNQulL35_-2Uv5R-cR4__</recordid><startdate>201607</startdate><enddate>201607</enddate><creator>Franz, Michael M.</creator><creator>Fowler, Erika Franklin</creator><creator>Ridout, Travis N.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201607</creationdate><title>Loose Cannons or Loyal Foot Soldiers? Toward a More Complex Theory of Interest Group Advertising Strategies</title><author>Franz, Michael M. ; Fowler, Erika Franklin ; Ridout, Travis N.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3611-7df897387d33535af8708687dee7c0b700ed866729a72f9e1fd1a0afbf0137be3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Advertising</topic><topic>Advertising campaigns</topic><topic>Court decisions</topic><topic>Elections</topic><topic>Interest groups</topic><topic>Military personnel</topic><topic>Political advertising</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Political candidates</topic><topic>Political debate</topic><topic>Political interest groups</topic><topic>Political participation</topic><topic>Political parties</topic><topic>Political theory</topic><topic>Politicians</topic><topic>Soldiers</topic><topic>Statistical significance</topic><topic>United States Senate</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Franz, Michael M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fowler, Erika Franklin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ridout, Travis N.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>American journal of political science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Franz, Michael M.</au><au>Fowler, Erika Franklin</au><au>Ridout, Travis N.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Loose Cannons or Loyal Foot Soldiers? Toward a More Complex Theory of Interest Group Advertising Strategies</atitle><jtitle>American journal of political science</jtitle><addtitle>American Journal of Political Science</addtitle><date>2016-07</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>60</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>738</spage><epage>751</epage><pages>738-751</pages><issn>0092-5853</issn><eissn>1540-5907</eissn><coden>AJPLB4</coden><abstract>Recent court decisions have encouraged new types of interest groups to become involved in election campaigns. Yet questions remain about whether interest group sponsorship of advertising affects the content of the issues being discussed. The ability of interest groups to influence the campaign agenda has implications for the extent to which politicians can be held accountable by citizens. In this research, we present a new conceptual framework for explaining variation in interest group advertising strategies and examine the factors leading different types of interest groups to be loose cannons (diverging from the issue debates among candidates) or loyal foot soldiers (matching the candidates' issue debates). We find more evidence of loyal foot soldier behavior among new multi-issue interest groups and among Republican groups and candidates. Fears of interest groups "hijacking" campaign agendas appear unfounded.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/ajps.12241</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0092-5853 |
| ispartof | American journal of political science, 2016-07, Vol.60 (3), p.738-751 |
| issn | 0092-5853 1540-5907 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1804259275 |
| source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Access via Wiley Online Library; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
| subjects | Advertising Advertising campaigns Court decisions Elections Interest groups Military personnel Political advertising Political campaigns Political candidates Political debate Political interest groups Political participation Political parties Political theory Politicians Soldiers Statistical significance United States Senate |
| title | Loose Cannons or Loyal Foot Soldiers? Toward a More Complex Theory of Interest Group Advertising Strategies |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T01%3A26%3A23IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Loose%20Cannons%20or%20Loyal%20Foot%20Soldiers?%20Toward%20a%20More%20Complex%20Theory%20of%20Interest%20Group%20Advertising%20Strategies&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20political%20science&rft.au=Franz,%20Michael%20M.&rft.date=2016-07&rft.volume=60&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=738&rft.epage=751&rft.pages=738-751&rft.issn=0092-5853&rft.eissn=1540-5907&rft.coden=AJPLB4&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/ajps.12241&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E24877492%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1804259275&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=24877492&rfr_iscdi=true |