The Mass Communicator logo
Header pattern

Distinguished Lecture Series Highlights the Severity of Polarization in Politics

Internationally renowned media researcher Shanto Iyengar, Ph.D., addressed the topic of “Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Measures of Polarization” at the College of Media & Communication’s William S. Morris III Distinguished Lecture Series on Jan. 30.

Iyengar, the Harry and Norman Chandler Chair in Communication and a professor of political science at Stanford University, shared the results of his research regarding the increase in the polarization of the American electorate.

Looking at social identity and discrimination towards opposing partisans, Iyengar said he found that “political party cues exert powerful effects on non-political judgments and behaviors” and that the “degree of discrimination based on partisanship has exceeded the degree of discrimination based on race.”

Iyengar has also studied how American society’s elite class has used the growing polarization to pursue confrontation rather than cooperation. He said he discovered that individuals’ hostility for opposing partisans sends a clear signal to elected officials, and they act accordingly.

Iyengar said, when it comes to political candidates, there is a “tremendous premium on someone who has no connection to Washington.” He noted that the American public does not want a candidate who has held office in Congress and is considered “part of the establishment.”

Iyengar said he attributes the trend to the fact that over the last 20 years, he has observed political parties moving further apart on the policy spectrum, with the Republican Party becoming more conservative and the Democratic Party becoming more liberal.

“The media tend to single out the most extreme instances and so they get amplified as a result,” Iyengar said. He explained that he holds the mainstream media accountable for adding to the polarization based on its representation of political candidates.

“It’s mainly the way in which the political parties campaign, and the media tend to accentuate the negative,” Iyengar said. “There’s a lot of advertising, a lot of attack, and a lot of mean-spirited commentary out there.”

Iyengar noted that with the current mass media coverage, American society is in a face-to-face era, because political candidates’ nonverbal qualities “have a great impact on whether or not people are going to vote for them.”

“The news media really set the political agenda,” Iyengar said. “The kinds of issues that are highlighted by the news media become the issues people take into account when they’re casting a vote, and that can have overpowering consequences.”

However, Iyengar said that with their focus on the candidates’ physical appearance and personal features, the mainstream media often “fail to provide the public with the actual facts they need about candidates.”

“I’m trying to refocus the debate,” Iyengar said. “Previously, people were just talking about ideology. I’m trying to say we need to think about feelings.” mc

(Rachel Blevins is a sophomore journalism major from Mineral Wells, Texas. Jacob Copple is the CoMC Coordinator for Photo & Video from Lubbock.)

Click It to see our Morris Lectureship
Shanto Iyengar and David Perlmutter speaking and laughing
Dr. Shanto Iyengar
Dr. Shanto Iyengar speaking at the podium

Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Measures of Polarization

Shanto Iyengar, Harry and Norman Chandler Chair in Communication and Professor of Political Science Stanford University

“When defined in terms of social identity and affect toward co-partisans and opposing partisans, the polarization of the American electorate has dramatically increased.

“We document the scope and consequences of affective polarization of partisans using implicit, explicit and behavioral indicators.

“Our evidence demonstrates that hostile feelings for the opposing party are ingrained or automatic in voters' minds, and that polarization based on party is just as strong as polarization based on race.

“We further show that party cues exert powerful effects on non-political judgments and behaviors. Partisans discriminate against opposing partisans and do so to a degree that exceeds discrimination based on race.

“We note that the willingness of partisans to display open animus for opposing partisans can be attributed to the absence of norms governing the expression of negative sentiment and that increased partisan affect provides an incentive for elites to engage in confrontation rather than cooperation.”