How Motivations for Watching TV Political Talk Shows Influence Viewers’ Experiences
The purpose of this study is to explain viewers’ entertainment and feelings of being informed when watching political talk shows on German TV, depending on their viewing motivations. First, an exploratory survey (N = 189) aims to identify the motivation. Results show that some participants had a strong interest in gaining political information by following such shows, while others simply watch them for entertainment purposes. Drawing on the concept of infotainment as well as on the elaboration likelihood model as a basis for entertainment and the feeling of being informed, four hypotheses are then tested in a 2 × 2 (focus on entertaining features versus focus on information × talk show containing a video clip versus talk show containing no video clip) experiment with 63 subjects. The results suggest that people felt better informed and were more entertained through political talk shows when watching them with a focus on entertaining features rather than with a focus on information. However, whether a talk show contained a video clip or not did not make any difference. The fact that a focus on entertaining features can induce a feeling of being informed reveals an interesting phenomenon, which is consistent with current developments in entertainment theory.
2002). Sex, lies, and war: How soft news brings foreign policy to the inattentive public. American Political Science Review, 96, 91–109.(
2003). Soft news and political knowledge: Evidence of absence or absence of evidence? Political Communication, 20, 173–190.(
1994). Need for Cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude bei Denkaufgaben(
[Need for cognition: A scale measuring engagement and happiness in cognitive tasks]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 25, 147–154.
1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.(
2001). Let us infotain you: Politics in the new media environment. In , Mediated politics: Communication in the future of democracy (pp. 160–181). New York: Cambridge University Press.(
2008). Politische Talkshows aus Zuschauersicht: Informiertheit und Unterhaltung im Kontext der Politikvermittlung(
[Political talk shows from the audience’s perspective: Subjective information and entertainment in the context of political communication]. München: Reinhard Fischer.
2011). Infotainment and citizens’ political perceptions: Who’s afraid of ‘Polònia’? Catalan Journal of Communication & Cultural Studies, 3, 45–61.(
2003). The West Wing as endorsement of the U.S. presidency: Expanding the bounds of priming in political communication. Journal of Communication, 53, 427–443.(
2005). Late-night learning: Do entertainment programs increase political campaign knowledge for young viewers? Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 49, 402–415.(
2008). Just laugh! You don’t need to remember: The effects of entertainment media on political information acquisition and information processing in political judgment. Journal of Communication, 58, 338–360.(
2005). Communication and citizenship: Mapping the political effects of infotainment. Mass Communication & Society, 8, 111–131.(
2010). Appreciation as audience response: Exploring entertainment gratifications beyond hedonism. Human Communication Research, 36, 53–81.(
1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123–205.(
2003). Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference on political knowledge. Political Communication, 20, 149–171.(
2010). Bericht der ARD über die Erfüllung ihres Auftrags, über die Qualität und Quantität ihrer Angebote und Programme sowie über die geplanten Schwerpunkte [§ 11e 2 Rundfunkstaatsvertrag](
[Report of the ARD about the performance of its mandate, about the quality and quantity of its offerings and programs as well as about the planned key aspects (§ 11e 2 Interstate Broadcasting Treaty)]Retrieved from www.daserste.de/service/Leitlinien10-091210-p.pdf
2010, September). Die „Hartz-Gesellschaft” – Ist Nehmen seliger denn Geben?(
[The “Hartz-Society”: Is taking more decent than giving?][Television talk show episode]. In , Anne Will. Berlin: Will Media GmbH/ARD.
2006). Geschwätz oder Diskurs? Die Rationalität politischer Talkshows im Fernsehen(
[Chatter or discourse? The rationality of political talk shows on television]Köln: Herbert von Halem.
2008). Your moment of Zen? Exploring the possibility of political enlightenment via infotainment. Ohio Communication Journal, 46, 95–108.(
2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.(
2001). The social desirability scale-17 (SDS-17): Convergent validity, discriminant validity, and relationship with age. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 17, 222–232.(
2001). It’s all entertainment—sure. But what exactly is entertainment? Communication research, media psychology, and the explanation of entertainment experiences. Poetics, 29, 247–261.(
2004). Enjoyment: At the heart of media entertainment. Communication Theory, 14, 388–408.(