University of Southern California



Communication 489 – Campaign Communication - Spring 2008

Dr. Gordon Stables ASC G6 stables@usc.edu (213) 740-2759

ASC 231 Tuesdays from 3:30- 6:20 pm

Course Description: This course is an advanced seminar in the application of communication theory to national political, specifically presidential, campaigns. The course will utilize a range of theoretical approaches to analyze past and present campaigns. The goal of the course is to provide students with a complex array of techniques to better analyze and appreciate the communicative nature of presidential campaigns. Each week the course will explore prominent dimensions of both historical and the current national campaigns. In this manner the course will be both historically rich and simultaneously engaged in the current campaign.

Student Objectives: Students will enhance their familiarity with a range of communication theories and be able to apply those insights to past and present presidential campaigns. Specifically, students should be able to trace how the evolving nature of mediated campaigns demands adjustments in communication strategies and techniques. Finally, students will gain experience with the dynamics of regularly blogging a political campaign.

Assignments:

1. Participation:

A) In-Class (5%)

This class meets in person only once a week. Those Tuesday sessions will be important times where the class can discuss the readings, current events in the campaigns and interact with representatives of campaign staffs. When we meet in person students are expected to be on time, attend the entire session and remain focused on course materials. Each in-class session should be understood as representing an entire week’s worth of reading, preparation and subsequent discussion.

B) Blogging (10%)

In order to best experience this campaign season, however, the course will also regularly ‘meet’ using the course blog at

Students will be expected to join a class community and blog their impressions during the semester. Students are not expected to have any blogging or campaign experience to take part in the course. It is important, however, that students are willing to participate both in class and on the website.

Students will be asked to take part in the class blogging in two ways. First, students will be expected to regularly (at least once a week) contribute a new post. These posts should follow the guidelines below and provide a means of students observing communicative dynamics in the current campaign and then sharing them with the blogging community. The blog will already include regular news updates from many of the national news organizations, so student posts should be to highlight news and their perspectives. Students should feel free to just post news stories, but this will not count as ‘posting’ for the week. The best posts are those which draw meaningful insights from class materials and apply those to the current campaign. Outstanding posts may also identify new insights into research or theories discussed in course materials.

Second, students will be asked to comment on other posts. These posts may be from other classmates or guests to the blog. On certain occasions the instructor will create ‘open threads’ to allow the blog community to discuss recent events, such as results from specific primaries. Comments should be designed to react and respond to the initial post in a professional manner. The best comments are those that advance and deepen the conversation advanced in a comment. Good discussion in the comment section can also lend itself to new posting threads. Students will also be expected to provide at least one meaningful comment per week.

General Blogging Trips by Darren Rowse of

1. Make your opinion known - People like blogs, they like blogs because they are written by people and not corporations. People want to know what people think, crazy as it sounds they want to know what you think. Tell them exactly what you think using the least amount of words possible.

2. Link like crazy. - Support your post with links to other web pages that are contextual to your post.

3. Write Les - Give the maximum amount of information with the least amount of words. Time is finite and people are infinitely busy. Blast your knowledge into the reader at the speed of sound.

4. 250 is enough - A long post is easier to forget and harder to get into. A short post is the opposite.

5. Make Headlines snappy - Contain your whole argument in your headline. Check out National newspapers to see how they do it.

6. Include bullet point lists - We all love lists, it structures the info in an easily digestible format.

7. Make your posts easy to scan - Every few paragraphs insert a sub heading. Make sentences and headlines short and to the point.

8. Be consistent with your style - People like to know what to expect, once you have settled on a style for your audience stick to it.

9. Litter the post with Keywords. - Think about what keywords people would use to search for your post and include them in the body text and headers. Make sure the keyword placement is natural and does not seem out of place.

10. Edit your post - Good writing is in the editing. Before you hit the submit button, re-read your post and cut out the stuff that you don’t need.

2. Exams (40% total, 20% each)

Two exams will take place during the course. The first, on March 11th, will cover the first unit of material. It will be an in-class format which asks students to identify important concepts and develop brief essays consistent with the class time allotted. The final exam will be similar in format and length. The final exam will build on material from the entire class, but it will be focused on specific items from the second half of the course.

II. Campaign Analysis Papers (45% total, 15% each) - Each student will write three 7-10 page papers during the course. The papers should all utilize common font and margin settings (such as Times New Roman 12 point fonts and 1 inch margins). Each paper should follow a consistent style manual (APA or MLA are the preferred options) and should reflect a writing style consistent with junior-level college work. The expectations for senior level writing include:

Structure - Quality papers should demonstrate a clear writing plan and basic structure. A clear thesis should be evident early on the first page to preview the fundamental elements of the essay. This section should also preview the organizational structure of the project. Each section should reflect an organizing principle which utilizes previews, summaries, and transitions. You shouldn’t be trying to build suspense in these essays. If you don’t provide a sense of your final direction in the first two to three paragraphs, you are too weakening the focus of the essay. Good essays also should include a quality conclusion that draws together the basic details. Simply finishing your last point doesn’t accomplish this task.

Focus on specific arguments - Your essays are all designed to analyze specific political contexts so it is important that you closely detail the relevant articles and texts, including properly citing them, and provide specific analysis. You are free to use your own perspectives to accent these essays, but ultimately they need to provide analysis of the specific artifacts in question as their primary task.

Writing Style - In any essay, the medium of your language is the technique that you will use to make your arguments. Even in our visual culture, the ability to make a professional argument in writing is an essential skill, especially in an argumentation course. When your language begins resembles the spoken word it loses its authority and it distracts from your contentions. These essays are intentionally short to provide you with time to edit and revise your work. Junior level college writing should be free of

o (Thinking out loud comments in parenthesis)

o Misspelled words or words that are poorly spell-checked and come back as different words. There is a huge credibility problem for your writing when these errors appear.

o Conversational or sarcastic tones. This is a formal essay and it should be treated as such. President Bush is the appropriate way to first refer to him, regardless of your views.

Use of a style manual - Papers should feature consistent use of a style manual. In some cases students still need to familiarize themselves with a manual. Common errors include a lack of alphabetical listing of citations, incomplete citation information (i.e., you need authors in all cases) and the inclusion of the appropriate URL).

Use of qualified sources – In cases where you need or want to make an authoritative claim, you should utilize a well-qualified source. Suggestions involve experts in the field, scholarly journals, and other professional sources, including our texts. The easiest google results, especially including Wikipedia, should be treated as starting points for reference and not references. When essay topics refer to specific concepts covered in the readings, it is important that these essays display a competent grasp of the material.

Evidence should be carefully analyzed before usage. Materials cited as proof of your claims should be timely, relevant, and well scrutinized. Materials should reflect your awareness of the ideological foundations of all evidence (i.e., using materials from Karl Rove supporting the Republicans is acceptable; however, the use of that material should reflect your awareness that this source is highly partisan).

Bibliography & Citations - Citations must be provided for all researched information. Any use of additional material, even as background, must be cited within the body of the paper and then again in a works cited or bibliography. The format for these citations should consistently reflect a style manual.

A) Debate Analysis Paper (15%)

In this paper you will analyze both the argumentative and media strategies associated with specific candidates in the presidential primary debates leading up to Super Tuesday. Specifically, you will select one candidate and analyze their argumentative approaches to the debate (i.e., what primary themes or issues did they seek to emphasize? In what cases did they attempt to evolve or clarify their issue stances?) as well as their strategies to manage media coverage (i.e., spin the debate). These papers should be designed to start with the debates themselves (and the media coverage) as the basic texts and then provide an additional level of detail for that candidate. Due February 12th.

B) Campaign Advertisement Paper (15%)

In this paper you will be asked to compare the basic script and production of a historical campaign television advertisement with a television advertisement from the current election cycle. The advertisements should share common characteristics (i.e, based on a similar issue or theme. You should utilize The Living Room Candidate and CSPAN’s Campaign Ads websites to locate appropriate advertisements. The ads should be first analyzed to understand their significance in that election cycle and then the ads should be compared across election cycles. The goal of this essay is to identity the similarities and differences of specific campaign issues across election cycles. Due March 25th.

C) Technology in Campaign ’08 Paper (15%)

Your final class paper is an analysis of the role of new technological forms on one of the presidential campaigns. Specifically, you should analyze the role of new interactive technologies, in this campaign. You should analyze the form, content, and significance of these technologies. You should also consider the strategic importance of how these technological forms are influencing the fundamental challenge of persuading voters.

You may select any of the primary candidates, even if they have withdrawn from the race. Due April 29th.

Evaluation Criteria

Grades:

Students will earn grades based on the following assignments. Specific instructions for each assignment will be provided in class. Final course grades are assigned on the following scale

|94-100 % = A |80-83 % = B- |67-69 % = D+ |

|90-93 % = A- |77-79 % = C+ |64-66 % = D |

|87-89 % = B+ |74-76 % = C |60-63 % = D- |

|84-86 % = B |70-73 % = C- |59 % and below = F |

Daily Schedule:

|Date of |Topics & Readings |Key Dates in the Presidential Election |

|Class | | |

|Week 1 |Introduction to the Communicative and rhetorical Nature of Campaigns (Why Do |1/3: Iowa |

| |Campaigns Matter?) | |

|15-Jan | |1/ 5: Wyoming (R) |

| |Required | |

| |TF Ch. 1 – Communication and Political Campaigns: A Prologue |1/8: New Hampshire |

| | | |

| | |1/15: Michigan |

| |Suggested | |

| |“The Idealized Presidential Candidate” Judith Tent, et al, (2005). |1/19: Nevada, South Carolina (R) |

| | | |

| |“Presidential Rhetoric and the Power of Definition” |1/21: Congressional Black Caucus Political |

| |David Zarefsky, (2004). |Education & Leadership Institute /CNN debate|

| | |in Myrtle Beach, SC. |

|Week 2 |Communicative Dimensions of Campaigns |1/26: South Carolina (D) |

| | | |

|22-Jan |TF Ch. 2 – Communicative Functions of Political Campaigns | |

| | | |

| |TF Ch. 3 – Communicative Styles and Strategies of Political Campaigns | |

| | | |

| |“Avoidance or Engagement? Issue Convergence in U.S. | |

| |Presidential Campaigns, 1960–2000” Lee Sigelman & Emmett H. Buell, Jr. (2004). | |

| | | |

| |“Campaign Events, the Media and the Prospects of Victory: The 1992 and 1996 US | |

| |Presidential Elections” | |

| |Daron Shaw & Brian Roberts, (2000). | |

|Week 3 |Media Roles and Press Coverage of Campaigns |1/29: Florida |

| | | |

|29-Jan |TF Ch. 4 – Communicative Mass Channels of Political Campaigning |2/1: Maine (R) |

| | | |

| |“Taking Television Seriously: A Sound and Image Bite Analysis of Presidential |1/30: CNN/POLITICO/ LA Times GOP Debate at |

| |Campaign Coverage, 1992–2004” Erik P. Bucy & Maria Elizabeth Grabe, (2007). |the Reagan Library |

| | | |

| |“Voter learning in the 2004 presidential election: did the media matter?” Dan Drew, |1/31 CNN/ POLITICO/ LA Times Democratic |

| |David Weaver, (2006). |Debate in Los Angeles. |

|Week 4 |Political Debates |2/5: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, |

| | |California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware,|

|5-Feb |TF Ch. 8 – Debates in Political Campaigns |Georgia, Idaho (D), Illinois, Kansas (D), |

| | |Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New |

| |“Political Engagement Through Debates: Young Citizens' Reactions to the 2004 |Jersey, New Mexico (D), New York, North |

| |Presidential Debates,” Mitchell McKinney & Sumana Chattopadhyay, (2007). |Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah |

| | | |

| |“Who Watches Presidential Debates?” Kate Kenski, (2005). |2/9: Louisiana, Kansas (R) |

| | | |

| |“Presidential Debate Watching, Issue Knowledge, Character Evaluation, and Vote |2/10: Maine (D) |

| |Choice,” William L. Benoit, Glenn J. Hansen (2004). | |

|Week 5 |Advertisements |2/12: District of Columbia, Maryland, |

|12-Feb | |Virginia |

| |TF Ch. 5 – Communicative Types and Functions of Televised Political Advertising | |

| | | |

| |TF Ch. 10 – Advertising in Political Campaigns | |

| | | |

| |“Beyond Negativity: The Effects of Incivility on the Electorate,” Deborah Jordan | |

| |Brooks & John G. Geer (2007). | |

| | | |

| |“Campaign Advertising and Democratic Citizenship,” Paul Freedman, Michael Franz, | |

| |Kenneth Goldstein (2004). | |

| | | |

| |Debate Analysis Paper Due | |

|Week 6 |Political Speeches |2/ 19: Hawaii (D), Washington, Wisconsin |

|19-Feb | | |

| |TF Ch. 6 – Public Speaking in Political Campaigns | |

| | | |

| |TF Ch. 7 – Recurring Forms of Political Campaign Communication | |

| | | |

| |“Partisan Patterns in Presidential Campaign Speeches: 1948-2000,” Sharon Jarvis, | |

| |(2004). | |

| | | |

| |Acceptance Speech at the 1980 Republican Convention, Ronald Reagan, July 17, 1980 | |

| | | |

| |Acceptance Speech to the Democratic National Convention, Bill Clinton, July 16, | |

| |1992 | |

|Week 7 |Technology's Role Part - 1– Blogs | |

|26-Feb | | |

| |TF Ch 11 – The Internet and Political Campaign | |

| | | |

| |“The power and politics of blogs,” Henry Farrell · Daniel Drezner (2008). | |

| | | |

| |“New competencies in democratic communication? Blogs, agenda setting and political | |

| |participation,” Deva Woodly, (2008). | |

| | | |

| |“The political j-blogger: ‘Normalizing’ a new media form to fit old norms and | |

| |practices” Jane Singer, (2005). | |

|Week 8 |Technology part 2 – Web 2.0 |3/ 4: Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, Vermont |

| | | |

|4-Mar |“Tracking the 2004 Presidential Campaign Web Sites: Similarities and Differences,” |3/ 8: Wyoming (D) |

| |Boubacar Souley & Robert Wicks, (2005). | |

| | | |

| |“The Repersonalization of Presidential Campaigning in 2004” Bruce E Gronbeck, | |

| |Danielle R Wiese, (2005). | |

| | | |

| |The YouTube-ification of politics: Candidates losing control, CNN, (July 18, 2007). | |

| | | |

| |Online Politics 101 | |

| | | |

|Week 9 |Exam 1 |3/11: Mississippi |

| | | |

|11-Mar |Second half – TBA | |

| 18-Mar |No class – Spring Break | |

|Week 10 |Getting Out the Vote: Recording and Mobilizing Public Opinion | |

|25-Mar | | |

| |TF Ch. 9 – Interpersonal Communication in Political Campaigns | |

| | | |

| |“The Myth of "Security Moms" and "NASCAR Dads": Parenthood, Political Stereotypes, | |

| |and the 2004 Election,” Laurel Elder, Steven Greene (2007) | |

| | | |

| |“The Bush Effect: Polarization, Turnout, and Activism in the 2004 Presidential | |

| |Campaign”, Alan I Abramowitz; Walter J Stone, (2006). | |

| | | |

| |“Deciphering Karl Rove’s playbook: Campaign tactics and response strategies,” Art | |

| |Silverblatt, et al, (2006). | |

| | | |

| |“Public attitudes toward polls: Evidence from the 2000 U.S. Presidential election,” | |

| |Vincent Price and Natalie Jomini Stroud, (2005). | |

| | | |

| |Campaign Advertisement Paper Due | |

|Week 11 |Identity Politics – Part 1 – Geography & Gender | |

|1-Apr | | |

| |“Partisan and Ideological Polarization in the California Electorate,” Gary Jacobson,| |

| |(2004). | |

| | | |

| |“Battleground States versus Blackout States: The Behavioral Implications of Modern | |

| |Presidential Campaigns,” Gimpel, et al, (2007). | |

| | | |

| |“One nation (pretty darn) divisible: national identity in the 2004 conventions” Mary| |

| |Stuckey, (2005). | |

| | | |

| |“Politics and the single woman: the "sex and the city voter" in campaign 2004,” | |

| |Karrin Vasby Anderson, Jessie Stewart, (2005). | |

|Week 12 |Identity Politics – Part 1 – Race and Religion | |

| | | |

|8-Apr |“Recasting the American Dream and American Politics: Barack Obama's Keynote Address | |

| |to the 2004 Democratic National Convention” Robert C. Rowland; John M. Jones, | |

| |(2007). | |

| | | |

| |“The Latino Vote in the 2004 Election,” David L Leal, et al, (2005). | |

| | | |

| |“Civil Religion in America,” Robert N. Bellah (1967) | |

| | | |

| |“Religious Influences in the 2004 Presidential Election” | |

| |James L Guth, et al (2006). | |

|Week 13 |Argumentative Controversies | |

| | | |

|15-Apr |“Winners, Losers, and Election Context: Voter Responses to the 2000 Presidential | |

| |Election,” Stephen Craig, (2006). | |

| | | |

| |“The 2000 Presidential Election in Historical Perspective,” Robert S. Erikson, | |

| |(2001). | |

| | | |

| |“Ending the 2000 presidential election: Gore's concession speech and Bush's victory | |

| |speech,” Kurt Ritter, Buddy Howell, (2001). | |

|Week 14 |Humor and Satire in Political Campaigns |4/ 22: Pennsylvania |

| | | |

|22-Apr |“In Defense of Jon Stewart,” Robert Hariman, (2007). | |

| | | |

| |“The Political Sins of Jon Stewart” Roderick Hart, (2007). | |

| | | |

| |“The Daily Show Effect: Candidate Evaluations, Efficacy, and American Youth,” Jody | |

| |Baumgartner, Jonathan S Morris, (2006). | |

| | | |

| |“The role of humor in political argument” Chris Smith and Ben Voth, (2002). | |

|Week 15 |Future of Political Discourse | |

| | | |

|29-Apr |TF – Epilogue | |

| | | |

| |Technology Paper Due | |

|Final Exam |Tuesday, May 13 2-4 p.m | |

Course Policies

Academic Integrity - The Annenberg School for Communication is committed to upholding the University's academic integrity code. It is the policy of the School of Communication to report all violations of the code. Any serious violation or pattern of violations of the academic integrity code will result in the student's expulsion from the Communication major or minor. The University presumes that you are familiar with its standards and policies; should you be found to have committed a violation, ignorance of these standards and policies will not be accepted as an excuse. You should be familiar with the following resources:

* "Guide to Avoiding Plagiarism" addresses issues of paraphrasing, quotations and citations in written assignments, drawing heavily upon materials used in the university's Writing Program (by Student Judicial Affairs)

* "Understanding and Avoiding Academic Dishonesty" addresses more general issues of academic integrity, including guidelines for adhering to standards concerning examinations and unauthorized collaboration (by Student Judicial Affairs)

* The "2008-2009 SCampus" (the student handbook) contains the university's Student Conduct Code and other student-related policies.

Late & Unfinished Work – Students must complete all assignments in order to earn a grade in the course. Any material turned in late will be reduced one letter grade per calendar day late. Each speaking assignment must be given on the day assigned. No make up sessions will be available.

Grievance Procedure - Occasionally, students are dissatisfied with some dimension of a course. In such cases, students should first provide a written argument in support of their position to the instructor and request a meeting with the instructor. All grade appeals on specific assignments must be made within one week of the return of the assignment.

Special Assistance - Any student requesting academic accommodations based on a disability is required to register with Disability Services and Programs (DSP) each semester. A letter of verification for approved accommodations can be obtained from DSP. Please be sure that the letter is delivered as early in the semester as possible. DSP is located in STU 301 and is open 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and can be reached at (213) 740-0776.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download