Talk:Political agenda

message: I agree with the anon edit of July 1, the last paragraph looks a bit dodgy. What on earth does this has to do with the Darwin awards?? I think it should be removed, or at least be subject to serious cleaning. \Mike(z) 09:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  

message: The article needs more examples of agenda-setting, and its current citations refer to only examples of agenda-setting. No source is given for the actual definition. Possible sources (which, as they don't completely match the given definition or each other, I have not included in the article): http://www.csulb.edu/~msaintg/ppa590/agenda.htm http://www.unc.edu/~fbaum/articles/Political_Agendas.pdf HoboMcJoe (talk) 05:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  General issues with the article 

message: Acemoglu, D., Robinson, J., & Torvik, R. (2016). The Political Agenda Effect and State Centralization. National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.3386/w22250
A 2016 publication in the National Bureau of Economic Research, this article talks about the relationship between political agendas and state concentration. Through, an in depth research study, it advances the idea that political agendas, and political concentration are tied together. The basic idea being that how centralized a state is may change political dynamics and thus the political agenda. The more centralized a state, the more public citizens may try to affect the public agenda. Therefore, elites may strategically choose to have a non-centralized state so not to induce public citizens to try and organize nationally to affect the political agenda
Boomgaarden, H. G., & Vliegenthart, R. (2007). Explaining the rise of anti-immigrant parties: The role of news media content. Electoral Studies, 26(2), 404-417. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2006.10.018
This source is from the academic journal on Electoral Studies. The methodology used was, a content analysis of the five most popular Dutch newspapers. It garnered roughly 170,000 articles and so the large sample adds to the validity of the claims it makes. The overall goal of this study was to correlate the evidence of more coverage of media stories on anti-immigration, to the rise of anti-immigrant political parties. It is therefore, relevant because it is studying how the political agenda on immigration is affected by the media. The findings show that the media coverage on anti-immigration issues directly correlates to how successful anti-immigrant parties are at getting their ideas on the political agenda.
Edwards, G. C., & Wood, B. D. (1999). Who Influences Whom? The President, Congress, and the Media. American Political Science Review, 93(02), 327-344. doi:10.2307/2585399
Published in The Cambridge University Press, this source is a study of the American President, Congress, and media in their role in affecting the political agenda. The methodology used involves evaluating a time series of the president and congress attention on five major issues important to American politics: crime, health, care, education, relations with Russia, and the Arab-Israeli conflict. In the end, the main conclusion is that most of the time the media, president and congress all play a significant role in reacting to events, and altering the political agenda. In the end, this research is relevant to the topic of political agendas because it shows how political agendas are affected by multiple influences, and that one actor like the president does not dominate the political system.
Julie Sevenans, Stefaan Walgrave & Gwendolyn Joanna Epping (2016) How Political Elites Process Information From the News: The Cognitive Mechanisms Behind Behavioral Political Agenda-Setting Effects, Political Communication, 33:4, 605-627, DOI: 10.1080/10584609.2016.1153543
A recent submission to the academic journal on “Political Communication”, this source provides a lot of information on the media’s relation to political agendas. It makes reference to numerous studies in different countries, showing that its conclusions are both generalizable and repeated. The methodology used in each study is essentially studying the behaviour of politicians in comparison to the media and this is mostly done via surveys. The general consensus of the studies examined is that the media does play a vital role in determining what ideas political groups lay out. It takes the assertion that media have an effect on political agendas, and actually goes out and proves it through research.
Werner Jann, Kai Wegrich (2007) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics, and Methods (4)45-48
In chapter 4 of the Handbook of Public Policy Analysis, Werner Jann and Kai Wegrish discuss agenda-setting as one of the many stages in the policy cycle. They define political agenda as nothing more than “the list of subjects or problems to which governmental officials, and people outside the government closely associated with those officials, are paying some serious attention at any given time” (Kingdon 1995, 3).  They go on to talk about the many actors that collectively play a role in influencing and shaping political agendas, and that no one actor has complete control over agenda-setting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keltiefraser (talk • contribs) 16:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some Useful References 

message: I think this article should be rewritten pretty much entirely, since it frames agendas as basically only used by 'political elites'. Starting with the list of references in the previous talk post and using some basic literature on the topic, I'd like to work on it. Any additional references could be welcome!! Hashtag complete idiot (talk) 08:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is not great