Abstract
This is a response to Pauwels' critique of our 2007 Electoral Studies article about the relationship between media content and anti-immigrant party support. We argue here, that Pauwels' criticism falls short in three respects: (1) it is based on a selective presentation of our and others' arguments; (2) it fails to distinguish between cross-sectional and longitudinal explanations of anti-immigrant party support; and (3) it presents an overly simplified re-analysis which fails to take into account the dynamic properties of the time-series. Certainly, Pauwels' article contains some interesting suggestions for future research, but his assessment offers no strong evidence for a different interpretation of the relationship between media and anti-immigrant party support than the one given in our original article.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 719-723 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Electoral Studies |
| Volume | 29 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Dec 2010 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Keywords
- Anti-Immigrant parties
- Media
- Response
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Why the media matter after all: A response to Pauwels'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver