Everything You Think You Know about Politics and Why You're Wrong

This author deserves high praise as she bases her findings on original data. Many political books only present an author's opinions, which are useful in their own way. This book presents academic interpretation of survey findings. This book explores how contrasting political information is useful in mobilizing support for candidates, yet false political information does tend to be recognized by voters for being incorrect and is rejected and leads to political backlashes against the candidate making the false statements. Further, the manner in which media reports campaigns is a major influence on how voters ultimately form their opinions. This is an excellent book grounded in documented evidence. Readers interested in politics will find this one of the best books ever on politics and the media.

I just finished listening to the audible.com version of this fascinating book by Kathleen Hall Jamieson. The book is filled with interesting and, at times, surprising facts about politics and political campaigning. What I particularly liked about this book is that its claims are based on research and hard evidence. The author is not just spouting her opinions, but backs up her assertions with evidence. It is clear that a lot of work went into the preparation of this text. The book is written in a lively, concise, and entertaining style and should appeal to all types of readers, even those that might not normally read a book on politics. If I had a criticism it is that the title overstates what the book really contains. While this book did change some of my beliefs about politics, it did not make a wholesale change in my understanding of our political system. But, catchy titles sell books so I am not going to fault the author or publisher (too much) for wanting to make this book commercially successful. My only other negative comment is that this book focuses almost entirely on politics and campaigning as they related to the presidency. Information on congressional and local politics is sparse. The audible.com version was read by the author is she does a very good job. She has a clear, upbeat tempo that makes it easy to listen to. Whether you're a political junkie who can't get enough of CSPAN, or someone that would just like to learn more about our political system, I think that you will enjoy reading (or listening to) this wonderful book.

Everything You Think You Know About Politics . . . And Why You're Wrong By Kathleen Hall Jamieson Basic BooksBy Dan WickDo you believe that presidential candidates rarely fulfill their campaign promises? That attack ads have increased in recent years? Or that campaigns are mostly hype, rarely conveying useful information to the voter? If so, Kathleen Hall Jamieson would like you to know that you're wrong.Dean of the Annenberg School for Communication and Director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania as well as a frequent and dispassionate commentator on the Jim Lehrer News Hour, Jamieson certainly knows whereof she writes. By providing a wide range of empirical studies about what actually occurs in national political campaigns, she effectively dispels myth and misperception.On Presidential promises, for example, that putative promiscuous promise breaker, Bill Clinton, fulfilled 69% of his campaign pledges, which compares favorably with Reagan's 63% or Nixon's 60%. On negative ads, Jamieson observes that in 1996, "the proportion of pure attack ads declined by nearly half from 1980, 1988, and 1992." Public grumbling about attack ads, she says, stems from media overreporting .Indeed, argues Jamieson, with the decline of political parties, the influence of the media on elections has greatly increased. Media coverage during the early political primaries tends to winnow the race to a contest between two major contenders so, while "the media may not be successful in telling us for whom to vote, . . .they are stunningly successful in telling us whom we may choose between."Useful information is consistently conveyed by candidates in television ads, in their (generally ignored) stump speeches, and especially in political debates. Jamieson says that candidates almost always cite evidence supporting their views, which the media usually ignores, leaving the false impression that politicians trade exclusively in slogan and assertion. Who knows more about politics, men or women? "The gender gap in political knowledge is real. . . .Men answer more questions about candidate positions correctly than do women." But, Jamieson argues, it may be that when political "information is at odds with their political preference, women may simply tally that fact, adjusting their preference accordingly, and . . . .fail to move that information into long-term memory." She uncharacteristically cites no evidence for this bit of wishful thinking.The February 2000 South Carolina primary illustrates three of the book's most significant themes, Jamieson says: "First, contrast mobilizes. Second, ...voters reject [negative personal attacks]. . . .Finally, media coverage helps shape personal perceptions." So when Bush claimed that McCain had gone way over the line by comparing Bush to (horror of horrors) Bill Clinton, South Carolina voters evidently agreed, according to Jamieson. But nowhere does she discu

Kathleen Hall Jamieson has written an outstanding book on election politics, spin reporting and the media. If you want to add to your acumen by knowing how and why campaigns work the way they do, read this book. The book enlightens us through a series of essays and her perceptions and prudence are dazzling additions to the collection. This is one author who is knowledgeable about her subject area, will teach you more than you already know, and will make you search out even more books on the subject. I admire this book and author for writing it. I highly recommend you buy it and keep it, over time you can go back to it and know it is better than a soothsayer's vision.

Kathleen Hall Jamieson is very, very smart, and very good at challenging conventional wisdom. In this book, she demolishes most of the tried-and-thought-true assumptions about politics, usually taking a more optimistic tack. The thrust of her argument is first, that the American public is not becoming less politically capable (for the most part), and second, that the media pursues its own agenda and distorts the news more than we like to admit. She makes both of these points in a somewhat messy manner, because her topics are all over the place, but it's hard to disagree with her at the end.