Book reviews / The Social Science Journal 42 (2005) 149–163 159

When it comes to evaluating definitions of privacy, several of the contributors focus on theeffects a given conception has had (or would have) on society. This is, of course, a valuablepursuit, and it is one that is compatible with any of the three views about the concept of privacyjust discussed. But such an approach does not give us a reason for ruling out these definitionsas capturing types of privacy. It may be that the definitions are accurate and that certain typesof privacy are undesirable. So the contributors are by no means wrong to evaluate definitionsof privacy in terms of the practical outcomes they discuss, but the collection does not addressbasic conceptual issues that would do much in the way of clarifying project the contributorsundertake.

My overall assessment is that the collection raises a host of issues that merit further discussionand would be useful for many scholars interested in the area. However, the collection does failto address the basic conceptual issues that would interest philosophers who would approachthe topic in the analytic tradition.

Willam ButchardDepartment of Philosophy, University of Florida

330 Griffin-Floyd Hall, Gainesville, FL 32611-8545, USATel.: + 1 352 384 717

E-mail address:butchard@phil.ufl.edu

doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2004.11.018

For Better or Worse? How Political Consultants are Changing Elections in the UnitedStatesDavid A. Dulio; Albany: State University of New York Press, 2004, 289.

David A. Dulio’s For Better of Worse? How Political Consultants are Changing Electionsin the United Statesis a timely work that studies an underappreciated aspect of the Americanelectoral process. Political consultants have become a staple of the electoral process in theUnited States. We may take this for granted today, but this is a relatively new development.It was not until 1933, during an initiative campaign in California that the American politicalconsulting industry was born. Since then, the industry has seen tremendous growth and with thisgrowth political consulting has become highly specialized. Political consultants now regularlyperform election tasks that at one time would have been conducted by other entities, such aspolitical parties, to the dismay of many.

It is probably the relationship with political parties that is most controversial today. Pre-vious studies of the role of political consultants, such as Larry Sabato’sThe Rise of Polit-ical Consultants, have argued that the consulting industry has contributed to the decline ofpolitical parties in the United States. Dulio, however, argues that consultants did not pushparties to the side of elections. Parties are undoubtedly weaker than they used to be, but thatis not the fault of political consultants. Rather, consultants helped to fill a void that devel-oped with the changing electoral environment. To a significant degree, therefore, it was theweakness of the parties that lead to the increased prominence of political consultants. Inter-

160 Book reviews / The Social Science Journal 42 (2005) 149–163

estingly, Dulio finds that consultants believe that parties preform some electoral functionsbetter than they do, indicating a cooperative relationship exists. Instead of replacing politicalparties in U.S.’s candidate-centered system, consultants have developed a partnership withthem.

Considering their high-profile role, relatively little is know about political consultants. Duliofinds that the consulting industry is similar to other groups of campaign elites, such as candidatesand campaign activists, which are not demographically representative of the general population.Compared to the American population, political consultants tend to be disproportionately male,white, highly educated, and wealthy. The individuals that make up the consulting industry,therefore, are very similar to the candidates for office that they work for as well as the segmentof the population that chooses to become involved in campaigns. Dulio fails to discuss weatheror not this is problematic or not, but he more than adequately details the types of people thattend to become consultants.

Dulio employs a number of different methodological approaches throughout his work, butthe most important findings tend to come from statistical analyses of survey questionnairescompleted by political consultants. The survey questionnaires prove to be an effective way tomeasure the characteristics and attitudes of political consultants. Through his surveys Duliofinds that political consultants tend to believe that the electorate is not choosing from a qualitypool of candidates. This is quite ironic given all the criticism directed toward consultants.Only 3.3 percent of consultants, according to Dulio’s findings, believed that today’s candidateswere of the highest quality. Republicans, however, were found to be more likely to reportthat candidates are of high quality than Democrats. Consultants’ views of voters was not anybetter: only 3 percent of all consultants thought the electorate was “very well informed” onmajor policy issues, whereas more than 18 percent thought the public was “very poorly in-formed.” Yet, more than three-fourths of consultants were found to express trust in the voters’ability to make proper decisions on Election Day. A group that Dulio found that consultantsheld an extremely negative view of is the press. Over one-half of all consultants gave broad-cast journalists a negative rating and nearly one-third rated print journalist negatively. Thus,Dulio argues that the consultant-journalist relationship is not as cozy or mutually beneficial asmany would have us believe. As Dulio points out, consultants’ criticism of the press is evenharsher than that given by the electorate, which is far from a defender of the modern presscorps.

Dulio makes a convincing argument inFor Better or Worse?that the role of political con-sultants in the electoral process is definitely for the better. Critics, according to Dulio, havenot given consultants a fair shake because they have underestimated their contributions andoverestimated their potentially troublesome aspects. Consultants are oftentimes criticized forcontributing to the escalation of costs of elections, but the costs of consultants pales in com-parison to the costs of television advertising. Consultants are criticized for making too muchmoney, but as Dulio correctly articulates, the money consultants make pales in comparisonto the income that these individuals could make it they worked in other venues. Despite theoftentimes intense criticism that political consultants receive, Dulio believes that they play aninstrumental role in the electoral process in the United States. Consultants’ contribution to acampaign comes by combining different services together in the execution of a strategic planto elect a candidate. To Dulio, consultants are in a position to benefit democratic elections

Book reviews / The Social Science Journal 42 (2005) 149–163 161

because their relationships with candidates, voters, and political parties can help each performtheir appointed tasks better. Among the important tasks of consultants is to, based on informa-tion collected through pollsters, help a campaign decide what type of media strategy to pursue.Dulio concludes his work by arguing that in an age of cynicism toward the political system,individuals, such as political consultants who choose to make politics their vocation should bepraised, not vilified.For Better or Worse?makes an important contribution to an understudied field in political

science. Considering how powerful consultants have become, it is quite remarkable that theyhave not been studied in more detail. The intended audience for the book would include notonly undergraduate and graduate students and academics interested in researching politicalconsulting, but those inside the D.C. beltway and state capitols throughout the nation that havean interest in the role political consultants play in contemporary American politics. Overall, thework is a solid analysis of the political consulting industry in the United States and Dulio shouldbe commended for making a compelling argument defending the role political consultants playin the American politics today.

Patrick FisherDepartment of Political Science, Seton Hall University

400 S. Orange Ave., South Orange, NJ 07079, USATel.: + 1 973 275 2866

E-mail address:fisherpb@shu.edu

doi:10.1016/j.soscij.2004.11.019

Marriage and Same Sex Unions: A DebateD. Lynn, Wardle, Mark Strasser, C. William, Duncan, David Orgon Coolidge (Eds.), Westport,CT: Praeger, 2003, p. 396.

MarriageandSameSexUnionsis a compilation of essays beginning with a preface, followedby eleven chapters of essays. It includes an index listing the cases mentioned throughout variousessays, followed by an index, and concluding with brief biographical information about eachof the authors. The eleven chapters of the book are divided into four main parts. Throughoutthe book, each chapter consists of four essays, two of which are main essays, and two of whichare response essays. A topic is chosen for each chapter and two sides are presented. The firstessay in each chapter begins with the opinions and perspectives of an author who is supportiveof marriage and same-sex unions. Following the conclusion of their essay, another author, thistime, one who is solely supportive of male–female marriage provides a response.

The author who previously wrote the response essay writes the main second essay of eachchapter. This time, the author has the opportunity to discuss their opinions and perspectives onthe topic being debated. After their essay is concluded, the first author who wrote on the topicfollows with a response to the second essay. With only one exception, chapter four, in whichdifferent authors make the responses, the book follows this format.