Intermedia Agenda Setting during the 2016 and 2020 U.S. Presidential Elections

Abstract

Intermedia agenda setting (IAS) theory suggests that different news sources can influence each other's agenda. While this theory has been well-established in existing literature, whether it still holds in today's high-choice media environment, which includes news producers of different credibility and ideology dispositions, is an open question. Through two case studies--the 2016 and 2020 U.S. presidential elections--we show that media are still largely aligned, especially in broad topics they choose to cover, and that the level of alignment along the credibility dimension is comparable to that along the ideology dimension. Furthermore, we find that the coverage of the Republican candidate is better aligned across different media types than that of the Democratic candidate, and that media divergence has increased along both dimensions from 2016 to 2020. Finally, we demonstrate that high-credibility media still plays a dominant role in the IAS process, yet with a cautious warning of its declining IAS power for the Democratic candidate over the course of four years.