It's the Media, Stupid - How Media Activity Shapes Public Spending

Bruns, Christian and Himmler, Oliver (2007): It's the Media, Stupid - How Media Activity Shapes Public Spending.

Abstract

Politicians seeking reelection need voters to know what they have done for them. Thus, incentives may arise to spend more money where media coverage is higher. We present a simple model to explain the allocation of public spending across jurisdictions contingent on media activity. An incumbent seeking to maximize the probability of reelection will shift more money to jurisdictions where an extra dollar gains more votes because a larger share of the electorate is informed about his policy. This prediction is tested using US data on county-level public spending, Designated Market Areas (DMAs) and location of licensed television stations. Instrumenting for the possible endogeneity of media activity to public spending, 2SLS results confirm a positive effect of media coverage on county-level public spending. Spatial regression rules out the possibility of confounding media effects with spatial autocorrelation.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: public spending, information, television, elections
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making; H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty

References

Adams, W.C. (1980), Local Television News Coverage and the Central City, Journal of Broadcasting 24(2), 253-265.

Alesina, A., R. Baqir and W. Easterly (1999), Public Goods And Ethnic Divisions, Quarterly Journal of Economics 114(4), 1243-1284.

Ansolabehere, S., E.C. Snowberg and J.M. Snyder (2006), Television and the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. Elections, Legislative Studies Quarterly 31(4), 469-490.

Besley, T. and R. Burgess (2002), The Political Economy of Government Responsiveness: Theory and Evidence from India, Quarterly Journal of Economics 117(4), 1415-1452.

Dixit, A. and J. Londregan (1996), The Determinants of Success of Special Interests in Redistributive Politics, Journal of Politics 58, 1132-1155.

Gentzkow, M. (2006), Television and Voter Turnout, Quarterly Journal of Economics 121(3), 931-972.

Kaniss, P.C. (1997), Making Local News, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kelejian, H. H. and Prucha, I. (1998), A Generalized Spatial Two Stage Least Squares Procedure for Estimating a Spatial Autoregressive Model with Autoregressive Errors, Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 17 (1), 99-121.

Levitt, S. and J. Snyder (1997), The Impact of Federal Spending on House Election Outcomes, Journal of Political Economy 105(1), 30-53.

Lindbeck, A. and J. Weibull (1987), Balanced-Budget Redistribution as the Outcome of Political Competition, Public Choice 52, 273-297.

Napoli, P.M. and M.Z. Yan (2007), Media Ownership Regulations and Local News Programming on Broadcast Television: An Empirical Analysis, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 51(1), 39-57.

Oliver, P.E. and D.J. Myers (1999), How Events Enter the Public Sphere: Conflict, Location and Sponsorship in Local Newspaper Coverage of Public Events, American Journal of Sociology 105(1), 38-87.

Persson, T. and G. Tabellini (2000), Political Economics, Cambridge: MIT Press.

Popkin, S.L. (1991), The Reasoning Voter, Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Prior, M. (2006), The Incumbent in the Living Room: The Rise of Television and the Incumbency Advantage in US House Elections, The Journal of Politics 68(3), 657-673.

Randsell, T. (2004), Factors Determining California's Share of Federal Formula Grants, Public Policy Institute of California, 2nd Edition.

Roper, B.W. (1985), Public Attitudes Towards Television and Other Media in a Time of Change. New York: Television Information Office.

Strömberg, D. (2004a), Mass Media Competition, Political Competition, and Public Policy, Review of Economic Studies 71(1), 265-284.

Strömberg, D. (2004b), Radio`s Impact on Public Spending, Quarterly Journal of Economics 119(1), 189-221.