Showing vs. telling on audience costs

Posted By Daniel W. Drezner Wednesday, March 7, 2012 - 2:32 PM Share

With all the "loose talk" involving Iran and Israel the past week, it seems like an excellent time to discuss the role of nationalist domestic audiences in exacerbating conflict.  Now, there is a large literature on this topic in international relations:  how audience costs can be used to make costly signals in crisis bargaining, how audience costs increase as crises escalate, how a world in which all countries have nationalist audiences creates an environment in which crises can spiral out of control, and how, in the information age, it has become increasingly difficult for foreign policy leaders to placate their domestic audiences without creating problems abroad. 

Sure, I could do all of that in a very long-winded and tedious way.  Or I can just embed Jon Stewart's opening bit from last night's Daily Show: 

Thanks, Jon -- you saved me a good hour or two today. 

EXPLORE:INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, IRAN, ISRAEL, ISRAEL LOBBY, TWO-LEVEL GAMES, UNITED STATES
 

PBACON33

9:39 PM ET

March 7, 2012

Define "Audience Costs"

For those who avoided PoliSci like the plague in college...

 

BLUE13326

1:40 PM ET

March 8, 2012

Audience costs in this

Audience costs in this context at least would mean in democracies the public will punish politicians for making threats and retreating; the costs increase as the crisis escalates. This creates the possibility that leaders on one or both sides will become locked into their position and so will be unable to back down due to unfavorable domestic political consequences. There isn't much evidence that audience costs are a major factor in the lead up to wars, however, afaik.

 

ANON_ANON

1:24 AM ET

March 8, 2012

I embraced PoliSci

like a long-lost relative during college, read plenty of James D. Fearon (and indeed, was at the University of Chicago at the same time he taught there) and wrote my BA Paper on his article in the 1994 American Political Science Review article, "Domestic Audience Costs and the Escalation of International Disputes."

Despite or because of that, I think PBacon33 raises a great question.

Moreover, in the spirit of policy relevance, and any good-faith effort Foreign Policy/ForeignPolicy.com is making to be a bridge between the academy and the public, I think a definition stated in terms a fifth grader can understand is warranted.

I think that since he is getting paid and I am not - it's that free market orientation the U of C embedded in me talking, I suppose - Drezner ought to undertake that task. And, ideally, it would not be here in the comments section, but rather on the "main" blog. Perhaps an "IR for Adults, But Written at the Fifth Grade Level" series is called for?

Regards
Anon_Anon

 

COACH

3:10 PM ET

March 9, 2012

John Stewart at his absolute best...

Thank you for sharing for those of us who missed this when it aired.

 

COACH

3:10 PM ET

March 9, 2012

Oye, that's Jon

...

 

UMESHGEETA

5:37 AM ET

March 10, 2012

Let us cut the chase....

Do we think President McCain or President Romney would be any different whether it is an election year or none?

May be Prof.'s GOP bias is playing here and he is giving a cover to GOP politicians so that they can get away with their totally careless and irresponsible rhetoric on the pretext of an election year.

That is all non-sense.

Truth is GOP has behaved irresponsibility in pushing America illegitimately in the Iraq war to cost us many American & Iraqi lives in addition to One Trillion Dollars while leaving the task of killing true perpetrators of 911 to a Democratic President.

After the 'pull down this Iron Curtain' and historical coincidence of USSR going away, these GOP politicians are only drinking 'cool aid' and recklessly pushing America in avoidable wars at the great detriment of our own future. Iran simply seems to be the next chapter in that collective hubris.

This bluff of GOP and essentially disservice to America must be called out in stark terms - win or lose an election.

No amount of hubris can ever justify a single casket of an young American soldier coming back as 'dead in action'. GOP seems to be the party which has completely lost the bearing of those who make the ultimate sacrifices for our country. GOP is the party of addicted which demean and undermine the sacrifices done by foot soldiers and their families when it comes to undertaking wars.

Prof. does not have to have just links in this case - the matter more grave deserving calling 'spade for the spade' since we are talking here American (and other too) lives here.

 

MAXIMB

1:48 PM ET

March 20, 2012

What is wrong with you

What is wrong with you people? you rather have a idiot to take office instead of very experience military man. My husband is in Iraq and he prays McCain is president because he will with drawl properly without loosing any more soldiers or civilians. When Obama won the democratic election the terrorist where dancing in the street they think America will collapse under him. I'm beginning to believe it. The media won't let you know that..

"Is rio orange war always forfait mobile internet inevitable ?"
MaximB

 

Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

Read More