Do Large-N Media Studies Bury the Lead, or Even Miss the Story?

Abstract

This paper uses immigration as a case study to examine whether a qualitative approach to content analysis can offer a different perspective on policy discourse than that provided by quantitative analysis. In examining the Canadian elections of 2004, 2006 and 2008, it finds evidence that immigration was a much greater issue at both a riding-level and within certain communities than evidenced in a large-N study. It suggests that issues surrounding identity may be ‘permanent’ top-of-mind issues for some voters, and that the reason minor campaign incidents sometimes garner disproportionate attention is because they act as an ‘emotional heuristic’ for top-of-mind issues even when information is high.