Where the Other Side Gets News: Audience Perceptions of Selective Exposure in the 2016 Election

Abstract

Building on research on selective exposure, hostile media perceptions, and presumed media influence, this study explores what citizens believe about their political rivals' news habits and introduces the idea of perceived selective exposure: the extent to which citizens believe their political opponents curate media diets of like-minded political news. Results from a national survey of voters (N = 657) show that during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, voters disagreed about the extent to which prominent news sources favored Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. The more undesirably biased voters considered a source, the more news they assumed their political rivals received from that source. This perceived selectivity was consequential: A belief that others' news habits were weighted toward like-minded media was linked to a belief that others' election news choices had reinforced their attitudes. Partisans think their political rivals are selecting biased news sources that bolster extremity.