What did viewers of the 2016 general election presidential debates learn about the candidates? A new APPC study analyzes debate learning and the effect of post-debate TV coverage.
In an issue brief, part of a new series, Annenberg Public Policy Center research director Dan Romer reviews the evidence on the effectiveness of pictorial warning labels on cigarette packs.
A new Annenberg Public Policy Center study of the first 2016 presidential debate finds that what Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump they say about the issues – and don’t say – affects what viewers learn about their plans.
The Internet Archive and APPC announced a collaboration to help journalists and the public better understand how TV news and talk shows present the presidential debates and what the public learns from them.
In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Kathleen Hall Jamieson said debates were an essential way for voters to learn about the presidential candidates, and that Donald Trump should participate in all three debates against Hillary Clinton.
In a new white paper, "Presidential Debates: What's Behind the Numbers?" researchers from the Annenberg Public Policy Center take a close look at the data on the audience, ratings, and motivations of viewers of general-election presidential debates.
People watching presidential debates on TV learn less about the candidates if they are simultaneously following social media such as Facebook and Twitter than debate viewers who aren’t using social media at the same time, a study has found.