Political Coverage in the United States v. the United Kingdom: A Comparative Analysis

Abstract

Political polarization is rising and media trust is declining around the world, and many questions have emerged surrounding what role, if any, political news plays in impacting the public’s view of the media and their country’s political climate. The United States and the United Kingdom, two large Western democracies, have different political landscapes, with the U.S. having higher polarization and lower trust in the media than the U.K. Comparing both of these country’s political media can provide potential insight as to where problem spots in coverage exist, offer areas for improvement, and start working toward better news environments. This study examines how political coverage in the U.S. and the U.K. differs across 3 variables: visuals used, fact-checking techniques employed, and the tonality shown toward political candidates. A content analysis of 203 news articles from 3 U.S. publications and 3 U.K. publications was conducted to identify these differences. Results indicate that the types of visuals used differed significantly between the U.S. and the U.K., U.S. articles were more likely to include fact-checking in their coverage, and American news outlets had wider gaps in the levels of negative, positive, and neutral tonality exhibited toward political candidates than British outlets. These findings contribute to political communication, international journalism, and comparative journalism research by directly contrasting news coverage between the U.S. and the U.K., where research is more scant. The findings also can provide potential insight for future studies of how differences in media coverage affects the electorate.