The Effect of Newspaper Entry and Exit on Electoral Politics Matthew Gentzkow, Jesse M. Shapiro, and Michael Sinkinson Web Appendix

Similar documents
Habit Formation in Voting: Evidence from Rainy Elections Thomas Fujiwara, Kyle Meng, and Tom Vogl ONLINE APPENDIX

America s Diversity Explosion: What it means for Presidential Politics. WILLIAM H. FREY Brookings Institution and University of Michigan

Media, Polarization, and the 2016 Election. Matthew Gentzkow

the 54th Annual Conference of the Association of Collegiate School of Planning (ACSP) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania November 2 nd, 2014

CIRCLE The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement. Electoral Engagement Among Minority Youth

The American Electorate of the 21st Century. Morley Winograd and Michael D. Hais NDN Fellows and Co-authors of Millennial Makeover

The 2018 FIU Cuba Poll: How Cuban-Americans in Miami View U.S. Policies toward Cuba

Summary and Comparison of the Data Used by the TTO and CRS Reelection Analyses

Purpose. The purpose of our paper is to analyze changes in the American electorate and how they are changing the American party system itself.

Student Population Projections By Residence. School Year 2016/2017 Report Projections 2017/ /27. Prepared by:

CIA Interrogation: Torture or Technique?

THE AP-GfK POLL July, 2016

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE 2018 MIDTERM ELECTION

The Red & Blue Nation

Analysis of Highland Lakes Inflows Using Process Behavior Charts Dr. William McNeese, Ph.D. Revised: Sept. 4,

Wildlife Ad Awareness & Attitudes Survey 2015

Liberals with steady 10 point lead on Conservatives

Distancei = BrandAi + 2 BrandBi + 3 BrandCi + i

Journal of Sports Economics 2000; 1; 299

Navigate to the golf data folder and make it your working directory. Load the data by typing

Title: 4-Way-Stop Wait-Time Prediction Group members (1): David Held

E-1. U.S. GDP Growth, U.S. GDP Growth During the Election Year U.S. GDP Growth During the Term of the Incumbent President

BUSH MARGIN WIDENS AGAIN, DESPITE VULNERABILITIES

CIRCLE The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning & Engagement. Civic Engagement Among Minority Youth

Today. Decline of Parties. Machines New Deal Realignment. In Electorate In Nominations In Government?

Lesson 20: Estimating a Population Proportion

Daron Shaw Department of Government University of Texas at Austin

Public Reaction Mixed to Proposals for A.C., Meadowlands, Racetracks

Results of a National Survey: Views of the American Public about the Use of Torture

HART RESEARCH ASSOCIATES/PUBLIC OPINION STRATEGIES Study # page 1

Chapter 2 Displaying and Describing Categorical Data

Factorial Analysis of Variance

GROWING INEQUALITY AND ITS IMPACTS: Bulgaria and Romania

Liberal Budget Gains Disappear

Real-Time Electricity Pricing

PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE AND THE PRESS NOVEMBER 1997 VALUES UPDATE SURVEY -- FINAL TOPLINE -- Nov 5-9, 1997 Nov 13-17, 1997 N = 1,165

Should bonus points be included in the Six Nations Championship?

Lesson 20: Estimating a Population Proportion

27Quantify Predictability U10L9. April 13, 2015

South Africa: Seeds of Electoral Change?

Policy Management: How data and information impacts the ability to make policy decisions:

What HQ2 Finalist Cities Think about Amazon Moving to Town. Table of Contents

Deciding When to Quit: Reference-Dependence over Slot Machine Outcomes

Is Tiger Woods Loss Averse? Persistent Bias in the Face of Experience, Competition, and High Stakes. Devin G. Pope and Maurice E.

NFL1. Do you think television shows, in general, are getting better or getting worse?

Name May 3, 2007 Math Probability and Statistics

B. Single Taxpayers (122,401 obs.) A. Married Taxpayers Filing jointly (266,272 obs.) Density Distribution. Density Distribution

Cobb Community Transit

National Wildlife Federation. Lori Weigel, Public Opinion Strategies. Al Quinlan, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner

A Virtual Dead Heat In Campaign s Final Days

2016 National Post-Election Study

Gonzales Research & Marketing Strategies

Introduction. Forestry, Wildlife and Fisheries Graduate Seminar Demand for Wildlife Hunting in the Southeastern United States

FOR RELEASE: THURSDAY, MARCH 2 AT 4 PM

MORE AMERICANS BET ON LEGALIZING SPORTS WAGERING THAN OPPOSE IT

Anabela Brandão and Doug S. Butterworth

Executive Summary. TUCSON TRANSIT ON BOARD ORIGIN AND DESTINATION SURVEY Conducted October City of Tucson Department of Transportation

12. School travel Introduction. Part III Chapter 12. School travel

Legendre et al Appendices and Supplements, p. 1

Uber ridership up since last year

Running head: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION 1

Behavior under Social Pressure: Empty Italian Stadiums and Referee Bias

Surging New Democrats pull into the lead

Transportation Issues Poll for New York City

Analysis of Variance. Copyright 2014 Pearson Education, Inc.

EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: Monday October 1 at 4:00 p.m.

Taking Your Class for a Walk, Randomly

Lesson 14: Modeling Relationships with a Line

1 PEW RESEARCH CENTER

Key Findings from a Statewide Survey of Wyoming Voters October 2018 Lori Weigel

a) List and define all assumptions for multiple OLS regression. These are all listed in section 6.5

Predicting the Total Number of Points Scored in NFL Games

UNITED STATES NATIONAL PUBLIC OPINION DECEMBER 2017

The Effects of Altitude on Soccer Match Outcomes

CHAPTER 16 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SPORTS PLAYOFF SYSTEM

Almost Half Say Smartphone Makers Not Doing Enough To Fight Addiction

PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS JULY 2007 POLITICAL SURVEY / MEDIA UPDATE FINAL TOPLINE July 25-29, 2007 N=1,503

22 Upper Ground, London, SE1 9PD + 44 (0)

Professionals Play Minimax: Appendix

Plurality Approve of Fed Response to Saudi Arabia

Two Machine Learning Approaches to Understand the NBA Data

Equation 1: F spring = kx. Where F is the force of the spring, k is the spring constant and x is the displacement of the spring. Equation 2: F = mg

RANDOMIZE Q.1 AND Q.2/Q.2a ASK ALL: Q.1 All in all, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in this country today?

2018 OFFICES TO BE ELECTED

March 7-11, N= 1,362 Republican N= 698

International Discrimination in NBA

NATIONAL: SUPPORT FOR CIRCUS ANIMAL BAN

Lesson 14: Games of Chance and Expected Value

March 14, Public Opinion Survey Results: Restoration of Wild Bison in Montana

FOR RELEASE: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 15 AT 7:30 AM

POLL April 30-May 3, 2015 Total N= 1027 Registered N = 868

Stalemate Continues: CONSERVATIVES HOLD SLIGHT ADVANTAGE AMONG EARLY VOTERS

Bush Bounce Begins, But Cheney Could Cause Concern

Has the NFL s Rooney Rule Efforts Leveled the Field for African American Head Coach Candidates?

Surf Survey Summary Report

EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: Thursday, March 29 at noon

1999 On-Board Sacramento Regional Transit District Survey

PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS LATE OCTOBER 2008 POLITICAL SURVEY FINAL TOPLINE October 23-26, 2008 N=1500

Jersey Admits New York Giants and Jets Just Happen to Play in Jersey

Compression Study: City, State. City Convention & Visitors Bureau. Prepared for

Transcription:

The Effect of Newspaper Entry and Exit on Electoral Politics Matthew Gentzkow, Jesse M. Shapiro, and Michael Sinkinson Web Appendix 1

1 Sources of Voting Data Our primary source for county-level voting data is a set of data files generously provided by James Snyder, which in turn are based on ICPSR Study 8611, Congressional Quarterly, and other public sources. From these files we obtain vote totals by party and year at the county level for presidential, congressional, senate, and gubernatorial elections from 1868-1990. For years 1990 and onward for senate and gubernatorial elections, and for years 2000 and 2004 for presidential elections, we use data on county-level vote totals from files purchased from David Leip through uselectionatlas.org. For years 1990-1996, we use data on county-level vote totals for presidential elections from USA Counties 1998. We do not have a source for county-level vote totals in congressional elections after 1990. From the files provided by Snyder, we obtain vote totals by party and year at the congressional district level for congressional elections, as well as the major party affiliation of the incumbent candidate (if any), from 1868-2004. When the winning candidate ran on both a major and minor party ticket, we coded the major party as the incumbent candidate s party in the subsequent election. The files provided by Snyder contain a crosswalk from counties to congressional districts by year for 1868-1988. We use this crosswalk to match newspaper locations to congressional districts. A small number of county-years are not matched to congressional districts. We do not have a source for matching counties to congressional districts after 1988. We obtain data on the number of eligible voters by county and year for 1868-1972 from ICPSR 8611. These data are constructed through a linear interpolation of decennial Census figures using age, race, sex and citizenship criteria. We supplement these data through 2004 using a linear interpolation of decennial Census figures that follows the methodology of ICPSR 8611. For the year 1972, in which our calculations overlap with ICPSR 8611, the two estimates are close on average. We obtain data on the timing of redistricting at the state level through 1980 from Martis (1982) Historical Atlas of United States Congressional Districts. 2 Additional Summary Statistics Table 1 breaks down the events in our data by the number of papers before and after. We observe a large number of entries and exits of monopoly newspapers, as well as a large number of changes in the structure of competitive markets. Figure 1 gives an overview of our data. Panel A shows the number of daily newspapers by year. Panel B shows the number of counties with one, two, and three or more newspapers. Figure 2 shows the distribution of these net entries and net exits by year. The figure makes clear that the number of events declines throughout the twentieth century, but remains nontrivial even in recent years. 2

3 Estimates for Gubernatorial and Senate Elections In table 2, we report results on the effect of newspaper entry and exit on gubernatorial elections. Because we are only able to include county years in which gubernatorial and presidential elections coincide, our sample size for this exercise is smaller than in the analysis of presidential or congressional elections. In column (1), we report effects of entry/exit events on gubernatorial turnout. Aside from the dependent variable, the specification is identical to columns (2) and (3) of table 5 of the main paper. The results look similar to the results for congressional turnout reported in table 5 of the main paper, with marginally significant positive effects in the newspaper period, smaller effects in the radio period, and positive but less precisely estimated effects in the television period. As expected given the smaller sample, the standard errors are larger than in the estimates for congressional turnout. In column (2), we report effects of entry/exit events on the Republican vote share. These specifications parallel columns (3) and (4) of table 6 of the main paper. As with other types of elections, we find no statistically significant evidence of persuasive effects and can rule out positive coefficients greater than about a tenth of a percentage point. In table 3, we report results on the effect of newspaper entry and exit on senate elections. Prior to the passage of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 1913, Senators were not directly elected. We therefore restrict this analysis to the radio period (1932-1952) and television period (1956-2004) as defined in the main paper. Moreover, because senators serve terms of 6 years, not every county has a senate election in every presidential year. Our dependent variables the change in turnout and Republican share in Senate election are therefore only defined for presidential election years in which a given county had a senate election in both the current and previous presidential election year. Note that the current and previous elections we are differencing will not typically be for the same Senate seat. In column (1), we report effects of entry/exit events on senate turnout. In column (2), we report effects on the Republican vote share. In neither case do we find evidence of statistically significant effects. 4 Additional Results Table 4 shows how the effect of newspapers on party vote shares varies with market competition. Column (1) shows that as predicted, the effect of entries and exits on the balance of readership interacts strongly with the number of papers. Monopoly entries shift the readership share by approximately one. Second newspapers shift it by about 46 percentage points and third and later entrants by about 27 percentage points. Columns (2) and (3) present effects on presidential and congressional vote shares respectively. In no case do we detect a significant effect of events. If anything, the coefficient on duopoly papers tends to be larger than the coefficient on monopoly papers, possibly reflecting the role of endogenous positioning. However, we cannot reject the hypothesis that all the coefficients are equal to zero, either individually or jointly. 3

In table 5 we present estimates of the effect of entries and exits of partisan papers on the Republican share of the two-party vote, using a stricter definition of partisanship than that employed in the main results. Here, we define a paper as Republican (Democratic) if and only if it declares a Republican (Democratic) affiliation in all years of its existence. We therefore consider as non-partisan any newspaper that ever declares itself to be Independent or otherwise unaffiliated. We find no statistically significant evidence of effects on presidential or congressional vote shares. The point estimate shows a larger effect on presidential vote shares and a smaller effect on congressional vote shares than in our main specifications, with the standard errors larger due to the smaller number of events. In table 6 we present estimates that separate the effect on turnout of an increase in the number of newspapers from the effect of a decrease. In this specification we interact the change in the number of newspapers with a dummy for whether the change is positive or negative. We find no statistically significant difference between the effects of increases and decreases. In table 7 we present estimates using alternative methods to adjust our estimates for serial correlation. In rows (2) and (3) only the method of adjusting the standard errors changes. In rows (4) through (6) the method of computing point estimates changes as well. In all cases the point estimates and standard errors are similar to those in our baseline models. Figure 3 shows the effect of the entry and exit of partisan papers on the Republican share of circulation. Figure 4 presents a graphical analysis of the effect of newspapers on the incumbency advantage, parallel to the main figures in the paper. 4

Table 1: Market structure transition matrix After Before 0 1 2 3 4+ 0 newspapers 1419 294 53 48 1 newspaper 574 831 103 20 2 newspapers 39 1061 532 86 3 newspapers 8 60 657 292 4+ newspapers 0 8 69 354 Notes: Table shows number of county-years in sample experiencing a given transition. Time period is 1868-2004. Table 2: The effect of newspapers on gubernatorial elections Effect of having at least one newspaper: Newspaper period 0.0073 (1868-1928) (0.0036) Radio period -0.0003 (1932-1952) (0.0035) Television period 0.0088 (1956-2004) (0.0087) Gubernatorial Gubernatorial Turnout Vote Share (1) (2) Effect of (#Rep - #Dem) papers -0.0016 (0.0014) F test of equality of coefficients 1.279 p value 0.2787 R 2 0.562 0.679 Number of counties 1163 896 Number of county-years 25393 8212 Notes: Standard errors in parentheses are clustered by county. All specifications include state-year fixed effects. Demographic controls are changes in county demographics as defined in section 2.4, with dummies included for missing data. 5

Table 3: The effect of newspapers on senate elections Effect of having at least one newspaper: Radio period 0.0050 (1932-1952) (0.0058) Television period -0.0006 (1956-2004) (0.0036) Senate Senate Turnout Vote Share (1) (2) Effect of (#Rep - #Dem) papers Radio period -0.0004 (1932-1952) (0.0036) Television period -0.0003 (1956-2004) (0.0037) F test of equality of coefficients 0.694 0.000 p value 0.4050 0.9870 R 2 0.645 0.852 Number of counties 1488 1488 Number of county-years 10591 9854 Notes: Standard errors in parentheses are clustered by county. All specifications include state-year fixed effects. Demographic controls are changes in county demographics as defined in section 2.4, with dummies included for missing data. 6

Table 4: Vote share effects by number of newspapers Circulation Presidential Congressional Rep Share - Dem Share Vote Share Vote Share (1) (2) (3) (#Rep - #Dem) newspapers: 1 newspaper 0.9472 0.0007 0.0025 (0.0055) (0.0017) (0.0031) 2 newspapers 0.4586 0.0011 0.0043 (0.0045) (0.0012) (0.0025) 3+ newspapers 0.2715-0.0003 0.0008 (0.0067) (0.0011) (0.0020) F test of equality of coefficients 7455.9 0.582 0.940 p value 0.000 0.559 0.391 R 2 0.911 0.736 0.351 Number of counties 1181 1195 1191 Number of county-years 11281 15401 14295 Notes: Standard errors in parentheses are clustered by county. Time period is 1868-1928. Models are estimated in first differences. All specifications include state-year fixed effects and demographic controls as defined in section 2.4, with dummies included for missing data. 7

Table 5: Effects of consistently partisan papers on Republican vote share Presidential Congressional Vote Share Vote Share (1) (2) (#Rep-#Dem) newspapers 0.0016 0.0019 (Consistently partisan papers only) (0.0012) (0.0023) Demographic controls? yes yes R 2 0.736 0.351 Number of counties 1195 1191 Number of county-years 15401 14295 Notes: Standard errors in parentheses are clustered by county. All specifications include state-year fixed effects. Demographic controls are changes in county demographics as defined in section 2.4, with dummies included for missing data. Consistently partisan papers are those that declare a Republican or Democratic affiliation in each year of their existence. Table 6: Turnout effects by increase/decrease Presidential Turnout Effect of a newspaper: increase 0.0038 (0.0013) Effect of a newspaper: decrease 0.0027 (0.0013) F test of equality of coefficients 0.364 p value 0.5465 R 2 0.579 Number of counties 1195 Number of county-years 15627 Notes: Standard errors in parentheses are clustered by county. All specifications include state-year fixed effects. Demographic controls are changes in county demographics as defined in section 2.4, with dummies included for missing data. 8

Table 7: Alternative adjustments for serial correlation Turnout Vote Share (1) Baseline 0.0034 0.0002 (0.0009) (0.0010) (2) Block bootstrap by county 0.0034 0.0002 (0.0008) (0.0010) (3) Cluster standard errors 0.0034 0.0002 by state-decade (0.0010) (0.0010) (4) County-level random effects 0.0034 0.0002 (0.0010) (0.0010) (5) AR(1) within county 0.0033 0.0001 (0.0009) (0.0010) (6) AR(2) within county 0.0032 0.0001 (0.0009) (0.0010) Notes: Rows (1), (2), and (5) reproduce specifications from the Appendix Table in the paper. Row (1) reproduces our main estimates. Row (2) computes bootstrapped standard errors using a block bootstrap at the county level. Row (3) clusters standard errors by state-decade. Row (4) estimates a model with a county-level random effect. Row (5) estimates a model allowing for an AR(1) error structure within county. Row (6) allows for an AR(2) error structure within county. 9

Figure 1: Summary statistics Panel A: Number of daily newspapers by year 1872 1876 1880 1884 1888 1892 1896 1900 1904 1908 1912 1916 1920 1924 1928 1932 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Number of Daily Newspapers 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Panel B: Number of counties by number of papers 1872 1876 1880 1884 1888 1892 1896 1900 1904 1908 1912 1916 1920 1924 1928 1932 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Number of Counties 0 500 1,000 1,500 3+ newspapers 2 newspapers 1 newspaper Notes: Panel A shows the number of English-language daily newspapers by year in presidential election years. Panel B shows the number of counties with a given number of newspapers in each presidential election year. 10

Figure 2: Number of entry and exit events by year 1872 1876 1880 1884 1888 1892 1896 1900 1904 1908 1912 1916 1920 1924 1928 1932 1936 1940 1944 1948 1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 Number of Counties 0 100 200 300 Losing Papers Gaining Papers Notes: Figure shows the number of counties experiencing an increase/decrease in the number of English-language daily newspapers between a given presidential election year and the previous presidential election year. 11

Figure 3: Republican share of readership and newspaper entries/exits 40 36 32 28 24 20 16 12 8 4 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 Change in Rep Dem Readership Share 0.2.4.6 Years Relative to Change in (#Rep #Dem) Notes: Figure shows coefficients from a regression of changes in the difference between the Republican and Democratic share of newspaper readership on a vector of leads and lags of changes in the difference in the number of Republican and Democratic newspapers. Models include state-year fixed effects. Error bars are ±2 standard errors. Standard errors are clustered by county. Time period is 1868-1928. 12

Figure 4: Incumbency advantage and newspaper entries/exits Panel A: Incumbency advantage and incumbency advantage predicted from demographics 40 36 32 28 24 Effect on Incumbent Vote Share.02.01 0.01.02.03.04 20 16 12 8 4 0 4 8 12 Years Relative to Event 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 actual predicted Panel B: Incumbency advantage controlling for demographics 40 36 32 28 24 Effect on Incumbent Vote Share.02.01 0.01.02.03.04 20 16 12 8 4 0 4 8 12 Years Relative to Event 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 Notes: Panel A shows estimated effect on the incumbency premium of a vector of indicators for the occurrence of an event at different time horizons. Panel B shows the estimated effect on the incumbency premium of a vector of indicators for the occurrence of an event at different time horizons, controlling for demographics. Models include state-year fixed effects. Error bars are ±2 standard errors. Standard errors are clustered by county. Time period is 1868-1928. 13