| dc.description.abstract | The presidential debates have become an election year staple. Ostensibly the debates and the coverage around them is supposed to educate voters about the differences between candidates. But the explosion of cable television and the 24-hour news cycle through the decades has created an almost insatiable appetite for content-- including political debates. In his 1962 book The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America, historian Daniel J. Boorstin argued that because of the demand for content, much of the news, including press conferences and press releases, is "pseudo-news" created for the purpose of being reported, rather than an occurring event. This examines coverage of the 2016 presidential debates to consider how much of it reflects the policy differences expressed by the two candidates compared to how much of it is merely filling airtime with inconsequential information. About 100 transcripts of the news program CNN Newsroom broadcast pre- and post-debate were audited for content related to the debate. This analysis considered what topics were discussed in each show, as well as which stories were considered the most important in each show. The audit suggests that topics discussed in coverage more often revolved around prediction, hypothesis or irrelevant information-- pseudo-news-- rather than issues raised during the debate that could help voters understand policy differences between the two candidates. | |
