{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02362470469119136, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.253164556962025, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Press, Party, and Presidency

Richard L. Rubin argues that since the earliest days of the republic, political transformations have historically accompanied, and at times are caused by, changes in the partisanship, financial security, technology, or the professional norms of the journalism and information industries. Drawing on the enduring wisdom of E. E. Schattschneider, Rubin has written a book to address two questions (p. ix), "How have major changes in mass communications affected the American electoral system, and how have such changes affected, in turn, presidential leadership?" Over time, Rubin finds, political biases have been mobilized in different ways, and conflicts have been confined or expanded partially as a function of the changing configuration of press institutions. The historical approach Rubin takes to get at his two concerns is, I think, appropriate. Although Rubin claims his presentation is conceptual rather than chronological, he is not true to his claim. The book moves swiftly, at times too swiftly, across historical periods in chapters that trace the evolution of the press from its early focus on matters of commerce to a political focus, and from an early financially weak, patronage-based, politically dependent party organ to a financially strong and political, although nonpartisan, one now. Rather than being a function of technology, however, it seems that the role of the press varies with its ties to the political parties or the strength of the executive. Rubin's reading of history suggests that with the emergence of the partisan press, political cleavages were deepened, and mass mobilization was stimulated during the Age of Jackson. He makes causal linkages which, although not necessarily supported by the evidence, nonetheless make sense. However Rubin cannot account for the continuity of political cleavages and mass mobilization even when the press is less under direct party control. Thus the question of causality remains uncertain. One constant remains through all the historical periods: From the Federalist era to the present, the press is powerful as long as political leaders view it as powerful. The book's greatest strength is in Rubin's presentation of the historical evidence of press/ party/president linkages and the evolving political independence of the press. Particularly valuable is the discussion of why the press demonstrated more interest and support for the Progressive than for the Populist movement. The interest in reform rather than redistribution, which would threaten the growing economic strength of newspapers, demonstrates clearly the origins of press independence when faced with the needs to protect its own interests. For the first time, the press challenged dominant politics-as-usual. However Rubin fails to cite this as an important step toward the creation of the contemporary press that challenges dominant politics to foster its own status and economic interests.