English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

This essay explores the ethics of how the press covers presidential nomination campaigns. It considers the implications of a predictive model that demonstrates how the nomination process limits voters' choices. Nominees may be predicted with a high degree of success before voting begins. Horse-race press coverage of the pre-primary period dramatically characterizes the process as unstable and up for grabs. By doing so, the press paradoxically contributes to the stability and, therefore, is complicit in limiting voter choice. The essay argues for telling the story of the impact of policy and governance on citizens lives.

Primary Instability Paradox: The Ethics of Media Coverage in Presidential Nominations