Influence of Partisanship on the Perception of Media Bias: An Analysis in the Context of the Mexican Presidential Elections of 2018 and 2024
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29105/rpgyc12.23-369Keywords:
Elections, media, media bias, partisanship, perceptionAbstract
Media coverage of electoral processes constitutes a fundamental source of information that citizens rely on when making their voting decisions. According to the hostile media effect hypothesis, it is assumed that even when electoral coverage displays characteristics of fairness, objectivity, and impartiality, part of the public, particularly those with stronger partisan attachments, may still perceive media bias. This article seeks to determine the extent to which television and radio coverage of Mexico’s 2018 and 2024 presidential elections exhibited bias, as well as whether partisan identification shaped perceptions of media bias in both electoral processes. To this end, the study draws on data from the National Electoral Institute’s (INE) media monitoring and the Comparative National Elections Project (CNEP) surveys conducted during the 2018 and 2024 campaigns. The findings show that media coverage was equitable in both electoral processes, but biased in terms of editorialization, particularly in 2024. Furthermore, partisan proximity explained perceptions of media bias in both radio and television in 2018, and only on television in 2024, an effect observed especially among those who identified with Morena, the winning party in both elections.
Downloads
References
Avery, J. M. (2009). Videomalaise or Virtuous Circle? The Influence of the News Media on Political Trust. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14(4), 410–433. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161209336224
Bachl, M. (2017). Selective exposure and hostile media perceptions during election campaigns. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29(2), 352–362. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw014
D'Alessio, D., & Allen, M. (2000). Media Bias in Presidential Elections: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Communication, 50(4), 133–156, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02866.x
Dalton, R. J, Beck, P. A., & Huckfeldt, R. (1998). Partisan Cues and the Media: Information Flows in the 1992 Presidential Election. American Political Science Review, 92(1), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/2585932
de León, E., Vermeer, S., & Trilling, D. (2023). Electoral News Sharing: a Study of Changes in News Coverage and Facebook Sharing Behaviour during the 2018 Mexican Elections. Information, Communication & Society, 26(6), 1193–1209. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1994629
de Vreese, C. H. (2012). New avenues for framing research. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 365–375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426331
de Vreese, C. H. (2005). The Spiral of Cynicism Reconsidered. European Journal of Communication, 20(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323105055259.
Díaz Jiménez, O. F., & León Ganatios, L. E. (2022). El cambio y la continuidad en el sistema mexicano de partidos: las elecciones federales de 2018 y 2021. Revista Mexicana de Análisis Político y Administración Pública, 10(20), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.15174/remap.v10i20.370
Díaz Jiménez, O., & Muñiz, C. (2017). Los efectos de la comunicación política en el compromiso político de los jóvenes en la elección presidencial mexicana de 2012. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 62(229), 181–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0185-1918(17)30008-9
Echeverría, M. (2018). Sesgo partidista en medios informativos. Una crítica metodológica y propuesta. Comunicación y Sociedad (30), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v0i30.6277
Feldman, L. (2018). The Hostile Media Effect'. En K. Kenski & K. H. Jamieson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Communication, Oxford Handbooks (pp. 549–564). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.011_update_001
Flores González, R., Saldierna Salas, A. R., & Gil Morales, C. (2017). Sesgo noticioso en la cobertura de elecciones locales. Los casos de las campañas a la gubernatura de los estados de Nuevo León y Colima. Revista Mexicana de Opinión Pública, (24), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.24484911e.2018.24.61187
Gerth, M., & Siegert, G. (2012). Patterns of consistence and constriction: How news media frame the coverage of direct democratic campaigns. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 279–299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426326
Gunther, A. C. (2017). Hostile media effect. En. P. Rössler (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of media effects (pp. 1–10). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Gunther, A. C. Christen, C. T., Liebhart, J. L., & Chia, S. C. (2001). Congenial Public, Contrary Press, and Biased Estimates of the Climate of Opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(3), 295–320. https://doi.org/10.1086/322846
Gunther, A. C., Miller, N., & Liebhart, J. L. (2009). Assimilation and Contrast in a Test of the Hostile Media Effect. Communication Research, 36(6), 747–764. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209346804
Hansen, G. J., & Kim, H. (2011). Is the Media Biased Against Me? A Meta-Analysis of the Hostile Media Effect Research. Communication Research Reports, 28(2), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.565280
Haugsgjerd, A., & Karlsen, R. (2024). Election Campaigns, News Consumption Gaps, and Social Media: Equalizing Political News Use When It Matters? The International Journal of Press/Politics, 29(2), 507–529. https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612221112014
Huge, M., & Glynn, C. J. (2010). Hostile media and the campaign trail: Perceived media bias in the race for governor. Journal of Communication, 60, 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01473.x
Humanes, M. L., Mellado, C., & Márquez-Ramírez, M. (2017). La presencia del método objetivo en los contenidos noticiosos de la prensa de Chile, México y España. Comunicación y Sociedad, (29), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v0i29.5738
Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J. (2019). The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States. Annual Review of Political Science, 22(1), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051117-073034
Juárez, J. (2013). Si diga, ¿por cuál vota?: Editorialización y exposición selectiva en radio y televisión en la campaña presidencial 2012. Revista Científica de la Asociación Mexicana de Derecho a la Información, (7), 77–81.
Kiousis, S. (2004). Explicating media salience: A factor analysis of New York Times issue coverage during the 2000 U.S. presidential election. Journal of Communication, 54(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02614.x
López-Escobar, E., McCombs, M. E., & Rey, F. (1996). La imagen de los candidatos: el segundo nivel de la Agenda-Setting. Comunicación y Sociedad, 9(1 y 2), 39–65. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.9.35627
Lozano, J. C., Muñiz, C., & Sánchez, C. (2011). Temas y atributos en las elecciones presidenciales mexicanas del año 2006. La cobertura informativa de Televisa y TV Azteca. En C. Muñiz (Coord.), Comunicación, Política y Ciudadanía. Aportaciones actuales al estudio de la comunicación política (pp. 155–173). Fontamara.
Márquez Ramírez, M. (2012). Valores, roles y prácticas en conflicto: el papel de los periodistas mexicanos en las elecciones presidenciales del 2006. En A. Roveda Hoyos & C. Rico de Sotelo (Eds.), Comunicación y medios en las Américas. Entre la gobernanza y la gobernabilidad (pp. 181–207). Pontificia Universidad Javeriana.
Martínez, F. J. (2014). La información de campañas políticas en México. Temas de Comunicación, (28). https://doi.org/10.62876/tc.v0i28.2149
Martínez, F. J., & Godínez, F. A. (2013). La agenda de los telediarios en la contienda del 2012. Derecho a Comunicar, (7), 59–75.
Martínez, F. J., & Maltos, A. L. (2019). La elección federal en telediarios públicos. Revista Mexicana de Opinión Pública, (27), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.24484911e.2019.27.68549
Martínez, F. J., Giner, M., Jaramillo, G., & Leija, R. (2015). Pluralidad en los noticieros de la televisión mexicana: actores del sistema social. En C. Muñiz & J. D. Martínez (Eds.), Discursos mediáticos en contextos electorales (pp. 19–48). UANL.
Mason, L., & Wronski, J. (2018). One tribe to bind them all: How our social group attachments strengthen partisanship. Political Psychology, 39(S1), 257–277. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12485
Matthes, J. (2012). Framing politics: An integrative approach. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(3), 247–259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764211426324
McCombs, M. E. (2006). Estableciendo la agenda: El impacto de los medios en la opinión pública y en el conocimiento. Paidós.
McCombs, M. E., & Evatt, D. (1995). Los temas y los aspectos: explorando una nueva dimensión de la agenda setting. Communication & Society, 8(1), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.8.35616
McCombs, M. E., & Valenzuela, S. (2020). Setting the agenda: Mass media and public opinion. John Wiley & Sons.
McCombs, M. E., Llamas, J. P., López-Escobar, E., & Rey, F. (1997). Candidate images in Spanish elections: Second-level agenda-setting effects. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74(4), 703–717. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909707400404
Muñiz, C. (2019). Prácticas comunicativas y desafección política en el contexto de las campañas electorales. Análisis de su relación desde el modelo O-S-R-O-R. index.comunicación, 9(1), 81–107. https://doi.org/10.33732/ixc/09/01Practi
Muñiz, C. (2024). Framing de la campaña electoral presidencial mexicana de 2024: impacto de las candidaturas y fases de campaña en el uso de encuadres. Revista Panamericana de Comunicación, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.21555/rpc.v6i2.3300
Perryman, M. R., Foley, J., & Wagner, M. W. (2020). Is Bad News Biased? How Poll Reporting Affects Perceptions of Media Bias and Presumed Voter Behavior. International Journal of Communication, 14, 3903–3923.
Sanmartín, A. (2022). La imagen de Peña Nieto y López Obrador en la campaña presidencial de México 2012: segundo nivel de la Agenda Setting en la televisión mexicana. [tesis de doctorado, Universidad Complutense de Madrid]. Docta Complutense. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/4012
Schuck, A. R. T., Boomgaarden, H. G., & de Vreese, C. H. (2013). Cynics all around? The impact of election news on political cynicism in comparative perspective. Journal of Communication, 63(2), 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12023
Sindermann, C. (2024). Who thinks the media is hostile?! An examination of individual differences predicting the hostile media effect concerning news media coverage of individuals with a migratory background in Germany. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 43(47), 36246–36258. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-07005-1
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. En W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Brooks/Cole.
Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: Biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 577–585. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.49.3.577
Veenstra, A. S., Lyons, B. A., & Flannagan, I. A. D. (2017). Intraparty hostility: Social identity, sub-identity, and the hostile media effect in a contested primary. Journal of Political Marketing, 16(3-4), 365–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2017.1334255
Wei, R., Chia, S. C., & Lo, V. (2011). Third-person Effect and Hostile Media Perception Influences on Voter Attitudes toward Polls in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(2), 169–190. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edq044
White, D. M. (1950). The “Gate-Keeper”: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27(4), 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990500270040
Yioutas, J., & Segvic, I. (2003). Revisiting the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal: The convergence of Agenda-Setting and Framing”. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 80(3), 567–582. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900308000306
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Carlos Muñiz Muriel, Sergio Rivera Magos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Esta obra está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0 Internacional.
