Political Communication Flashcards

Question

3 aspects of power struggle: Who?

Answer 1

Who ?= Which politicians make it into the news? Bonuses and biases in media coverage of politicians. Questions like: Do more powerful politicians get more media attention? Do media decide for themselves who gets attention? Which other factors determine media attention?

Answer 2

Who a politician is: Standing: 17/18 studies find that standing matters. Seniority: 9/14 studies find that seniority matters. Age: 2/5 find that younger politicians get more attention (especially in newspapers) Attractiveness: only two studies, but both find that attractiveness affects media coverage (controlling for institutional factors). What a politician does: Political work: 5/11 studies find that ‘work horse’ politicians get slightly more attention, but very modest effect. Media work: 8/10 studies find that media work positively affects media attention Conclusion: who makes it into the news is the result of a mix of political and media factors Political standing, meaning political function. Cabinet members, party leaders, and committee chairs have a higher political standing and therefore receive more coverage. This is usually the most significant variable for the amount of coverage of an politician. Seniority, politicians with more political experience have more authority and therefore pass the media gates more often Age – younger politicians get more attention (but mostly in newspapers) Political activity (e.g. being active in parliament) provides only for a modest effect in media coverage Media work: Politiciaions who make an effort to get covered indeed receive more media attention. Politicians who set up interesting pseudo-events, have good contacts with journalists and press releases to newsrooms gain additional attention.

Answer 3

What = Do media (co-)determine the political agenda? Political agenda = the topics that are considered sufficiently important to be debated for potential future action in the political arena (Van Noije, 2007:12) A political agenda is a list of subjects or problems to which government officials as well as individuals outside the government are paying serious attention at any given time. It is most often shaped by political and policy elites non-governmental activist groups private sector lobbyists think tanks courts world events The media!

Answer 4

Attention = precondition for decision-making Media-democracy (populism) Media agenda setting determines which topics come to the political genda -> this is a precondition of decision-making When politics pays a lot of attention to the opinion of the media (because in an ideal case media would mirror public opinion), this might result in a media-democracy and therefore in an increase in populism

Answer 5

Country (US dominance: 15/19) Method (interviews, time-series, cross sectional…) Mass media type (newspapers vs. television) Issue type (obtrusive, sensational…) Political agenda type (symbolic vs. substantial) Time period (elections or not) Media type Not all news carries the same political agenda-setting power (e.g., newspapers vs TV) Issue type E.g., obstrusive vs unobtrusive issues, institutional ownership, newness, style of coverage Time period E.g., elections or not Media type Battle among scholars over the power of print versus electronic media. Some see primacy of newspapers, others believe in the power of TV Newspaper: more in depth – more consumed and read by politicians and elites (easier processing of paper material) – also higher inter-media agenda-setting effects, e.g. The New York Times is consumed my many other journalists who value its editorial decisions and are influence by it in their own topic selection TV is considered to have a bigger impact on the public’s priorities – higher audience share and reach of all societal groups For the media to have a strong impact on politics, a high congruence of the different media outlets is important: Only if all media are focusing on the same issue, for longer time and with same frame – only when a strong focussing event draws all attention. Can you think of an example? Issue type The media have more political agenda-setting power when it comes to issues that – without media – would simply be not observable. When the media act as solidarity sources, their impact increases. The institutional ownership of an issue can be relevant. The clearer a political actor’s responsibility regarding an issue, the greater the chance that media coverage on that issue will urge that agency to act, while diffuse and shared responsibilities breed little political action. New issues have stronger bearings on the political agenda than eternal ones, because politicians are less familiar with new issues, have not yet developed a clear stance and are still searching for information. Type of coverage: Unambigious reporting clearly defining the problem and pointing towards a solution might bear more agenda-setting power than ambigious and less dramatic coverage with many ifs and mights and not self-evident solutions. Negative coverage seems to have more agenda-setting power. Sensational (unobtrusive, concrete, dramatic events) – prominent (real world cues, concrete effects) – government issues (unobtrusive, no drama): CRIME and Climate change are most susceptible for media impact Time Period (campaigns) -> the short campaign period of weeks before the Election day is substantially different from routine periods. The behavior of political actors, their reaction on media coverage, and even the dynamics of media coverage itself follow different logics in both periods. During campaigns, the media’s impact on candidates’ and parties’ is limited or even absent. Knowing that during campaigns the political agenda is merely a symbolic agenda, given that media’s impact is much larger when it comes to symbolic agendas, these limited effects are even more startling. Reasons: 1) during campaigns parties and candidates are vigoursly tryigng to influence the public agenda. Their whole behaviour is aimed to dominate the public debate: daily press briefings, staging of (pseudo) events, press releases, make provocative statements. -> media follow rather than lead. 2) During campaign times, media deveote more attention to politics -> plenty of room for candidates and parties to get their messages across 3)Media are less autonomous and their coverage is more balanced in election times. -> especially in election times, certain rules, traditions, and practices regarding fairness and balance limit the media’s sovereign role. More than in routine times, both the politicians and the public are sensitive to unfair coverage or unbalanced share of attention

Answer 6

Politics consists of different actors and policy levels, each with their own logics, dynamics, powers, procedures and interests Crucial distinction: Symbolic political agenda ↕ Substantial political agenda

Answer 7

Power Balance = Macro-level assessment of relative strength of a countries’ political system / strength of media system. *E.g., ‘high-power’ source & ‘low power’ media *Recall also mediatization: some countries are not as far along in this process compared to others. Strength of the Political System Strong concentration of power (majoritarian – consensus) Low number of parties in parliament/government Strength of the Media System Autonomy of the media (no political control) Magnitude of audience reached by media

Answer 8

Design: Method and Data Interviews with political journalists in eight countries Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, UK, Germany, Spain → similar countries, but differences in terms of power balance. Interviews = Proxy measure of impact Not really measuring impact, but indicative of it. Tend to overestimate impact of media, but focus here is on comparative differences. Two measures of media impact: Question regarding the extent to which media decides which issues are important. Question regarding different actors’ ability to put a new issue on the political agenda.

Answer 9

1. Sweden (^), Spain (>) 2. Belgium (^), Spain (>)

Answer 10

There is a lot of focus on the impact of media on politics, but remember the ‘tango’ description: Politicians need the media -Communicate information to the public -Communicate information to each other -Make themselves known to the public -Media as proxy for public opinion -Hurt political opponents Journalists need media just the same: -Main source of political news -Only a small circle of top politicians

Answer 11

Bias = the situation where specific news content occurs more, less, or differently than a specific benchmark suggests. (De Swert, 2011)

Answer 12

1. Political system logic -Visibility of actors Share of MPs/voters Legislation (if given) Equality (2-party systems) -Favourability toward and evaluations of actors Neutrality -Issue coverage Congruence between party issue ranking and party visibility on issues 2. Media routine logic -Visibility of actors Opinion polls Incumbency (including supporting parties) Charisma/communication skills Level of attractiveness of campaign activity -Favourability toward and evaluations of actors Variation in opinion polls (up- and downwards) Charisma/communication skills Attractiveness of political campaign activity -Issue coverage Congruence between party issue ranking and party visibility on issues depends on party newsworthiness +Partisan logic

Answer 13

- Oftentimes hard to find evidence of media bias. - E.g., in the US, coverage of presidents has been scrutinized by a slew of scholars. - Some find bias - Some do not - The problem: if media criticize a politician, is that criticism correct? - One solution: try to ‘control’ for actual job performance. - E.g., Niven: controlling for unemployment rate, then seeing whether controlling for that, media still are more (un)favorable towards Bush / Clinton. - “no evidence of any meaningful partisan bias”

Answer 14

System-level (Media – Politics) - Amount of parties - Level of media competition Media organization - Pressure of owners / editors (examples?) - Historical ties with political actors Media routines - “those patterned, routinized, repeated practices and forms that media workers use to do their jobs” (Shoemaker & Reese, 1999) - Can cause bias due to specific news values routinely determining coverage Journalists - Ideological Preferences - Experience (!)

Answer 15

- Journalistsneed politicians to cover politics - Niven: journalists engage in a ‘cost-benefit’ analysis when decidinghow to cover politics. - Costs: lack of time / investment of effort / deterioration of relations (future access) - Benefits: good comments, employment, improving relations - May result in ‘self censoring’: - if journalists perceive that the costs of covering a story one way (e.g. reporting on drawbacks/opposition to government policy, likelihood that future access to government sources may be withdrawn) may outweigh the benefits. - This tendency may increase in a context of ‘media bias’ accusations

Answer 16

- Propaganda. Defined as ‘the deliberate and systematic attempt to shape perceptions, manipulate cognitions, and direct behaviour to achieve a response that furthers the desired intent of the propagandist’ (Jowett and O’Donnell, 1999). Propaganda can also be long term. - Individual response. The process by which individuals change, or resist change, following exposure to messages designed to influence attitude, knowledge or behaviour. - Media campaign. The situation in which a number of media are used in an organized way to achieve a persuasive or informational purpose with a chosen population. - News learning. The short-term cognitive effect of exposure to mass media news, as measured by tests of audience recall, recognition or comprehension. - Framing. As a media effect, refers to the adoption by the audience of the same interpretative frameworks and ‘spin’ used to contextualize news reports and event accounts. An associated process is that of priming (where media foreground the criteria for assessing public events or figures). - Agenda-setting. The process by which the relative attention given to items or issues in news coverage influences the rank order of public awareness of issues and attribution of significance.

Answer 17

-Individual reaction. Unplanned or unpredicted consequences of individual exposure to a media stimulus. This has mainly been noticed in the form of imitation and learning, especially of aggressive or deviant acts (including suicide). The term ‘triggering’ has also been used. Related types of effect include strong emotional responses, sexual arousal, and reactions of fear or anxiety. -Collective reaction. Here some of the same effects are experienced simultaneously by many people in a shared situation or context, leading to joint action, usually of an unregulated and non-institutional kind. Fear, anxiety and anger are the most potent reactions, which can lead to panic or civil disturbance. -Policy effects. The unintended impact of news on government policy and action by the highlighting of some crisis, abuse, danger, and so on. The chief example is the so-called CNN effect on foreign policy.

Answer 18

- Development diffusion. The planned use of communication for purposes of long-term development, campaigns and other means of influence, especially the interpersonal network and authority structure of the community or society. - News diffusion. The spread of awareness of particular (news) events through a given population over time, with particular reference to the extent of penetration (proportion ultimately knowing) and the means by which information is received (personal versus media sources). - Diffusion of innovations. The process of takeup of technological innovations within a given population, often on the basis of advertising or general publicity. It can be an unintended as well as an intended effect. - Distribution of knowledge. The consequences of media news and information for the distribution of knowledge as between social groups. The main reference is to the closing or widening of ‘knowledge gaps’. A related phenomenon is the ‘digital divide’.

Answer 19

-Social control. Refers here to systematic tendencies to promote conformity to an established order or a pattern of behaviour. Depending on one’s social theory, this can be considered either as a deliberate or as an unintended extension of socialization. -Socialization. The informal contribution of media to the learning and adoption of norms, values and expectations of behaviour in particular social roles and situations. -Event outcomes. Referring to the part played by media in conjunction with institutional forces in the course and resolution of major ‘critical’ events (see Lang and Lang, 1981). Examples could include revolution, major domestic political upheavals and matters of war and peace. Less significant events, such as elections, could also figure here (Chaffee, 1975). - Reality defining and construction of meaning. Effects on public cognitions and frames of interpretation. This kind of effect requires the more or less active participation of receivers in the process of constructing their own meaning. -Institutional change. The adaptation by existing institutions to developments in the media, especially those affecting their own communication functions (see the notion of ‘reciprocal effects’). -Displacement. The many possible consequences of allocation of time to media use away from other (mainly free-time) pursuits, including social participation. -Cultural and social change. Shifts in the overall pattern of values, behaviours and symbolic forms characterizing a sector of society (such as youth), a whole society or a set of societies. The possible strengthening or weakening of cultural identity may also be an example of effect. -Social integration. Integration (or its absence) may be observed at different levels, especially group, local community or nation, which also correspond with the distribution areas of media. Effects can also be short term, as in response to a shared public disaster or emergency.

Answer 20

Public diplomacy = "The way in which government and private individuals influence public attitudes which bear on another government's foreign policy decisions" (Signitzer & Combs, 1992, 138). International Public Relations as “planned and organized effort of a company, institution or government to establish mutually beneficial relations with the politics of other nations.” (Wilcox, Ault & Agee 1992: 409-410). Public diplomacy: state and non-state actors’ use of media and other channels of communication to influence public opinion in foreign societies (Gilboa)

Answer 21

1) Direct communication designed to create supportive public opinion in another state. 2) Pressure by the informed public on its government to adopt friendly politics towards the country employing public diplomacy.

Answer 22

force, diplomacy, and communication. -> Power in that scenario is the ability to influence the behavior of others to get the outcomes one wants (Nye, 1990).

Answer 23

1. Hard power, Military -Behaviors: Coercion (принуждение), deterrence (сдерживание) -Ressources: Force, threats -Government politics: Coercive diplomacy, war, alliance 2. Hard power, Economy -Behaviors: Inducement (побуждение), coercion -Ressources: Sanctions, payments -Government politics: Aid, bribes 3. Soft power -Behaviors: Attraction: agenda-setting, co-optation -Ressources: Values, cultures, policies, institutions -Government politics: Public diplomacy, bilateral and multilateral diplomacy

Answer 24

Power of attraction: the ability to shape the preferences of others. A country may obtain the outcomes it wants because other countries want to follow it. A different ‘currency’: shared values and the justness to contribute to those values. "Public diplomacy is presented as an official policy translating soft power resources into action" (Gilboa, 2008, 61)

Answer 25

Communications ICT shrinks time and space, globalized news networks Politics Rise of global non-state actors, e.g. societies moving towards democracy which implies increased participation But also: NGOs, bloggers, terror networks, … International Relations The means of IR have changed, with reputation and image now being more important than territory and other tangible means → these shifts challenge traditional state-driven policy and discourse

Answer 26

Cold War model States cultivate a favorable public image in a foreign society, to put pressure on the foreign government. Usually done through international broadcasting, which provides balanced information → emerged initially after the WWII, initial years of the Cold War Gov’s realized the high risk of nuclear power, find ways to influence people's opinion not to use them → PD Portray positive image of their country, also to put pressure on other countries Model was used in US as well as in Soviet Union → not limited to US, also applied by others Non-State Transnational Model Non-state actors (NGOs, corporations, …) cultivate global support for their cause, so not aimed solely at states More actors, not only national actors → more NGOs established, they were also acting within sphere of PD, included here Domestic PR Model States enlist the help of foreign domestic actors (e.g. PR firm), to influence public opinion, as to put pressure on the foreign government (concealing true effort and domestic actors have contextual knowledge) Using PR models to influence Public Opinion

Answer 27

Listening - gathering information and forging strategies accordingly to have someone in the country who makes the coercion in the country, knowing about the people's needs, understanding culture, etc Advocacy - supporting a cause and attaching it to one’s “branding” e.g. supporting press freedom in Brazil, build up an NGO to promote this, hire Brazilians to help me with the cause Exchange - securing the support of “local interpreters of one’s preferred messages”, as to have an impact on that opinion regional/local person who understand the region well who translates your vision into the context ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ Cultural diplomacy is the exchange of ideas, information, art, and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding (Cummnings 2003) ‘International Broadcasting’

Answer 28

“The linchpin of public diplomacy” (Advisory Committee on CD, 2005); A “powerful weapon” (Schneider, 2006); to foster mutual understanding (Cummings, 2003); propaganda purposes (Barghoorn, 1960); and win foreigners’ voluntary allegiance (Schneider, 2006). "cultural diplomacy is the exchange of ideas, information, art, and other aspects of culture among nations and their peoples in order to foster mutual understanding" (Cummings, 2003).

Answer 29

Zöllner: ”Process of translating narrative elements that pertain to the nation’s reality and image in order to make the country understood and understandable for global audiences”

Answer 30

1. Auswaertiges Amt (Federal Foreign Office) 2. Goethe Institut Culture, Language, music 3. Institut for Foreign Cultural Relations (ifa) In relation to political development Fund scholar work more political dimensions, discuss certain arts, societal development means for the country 4. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) Organization that gives the most money to educational development ? Support countries in global south and improve education systems Federal Funding and EU Try to Help with class arrangement of other universities E.g. Curriculum development in foreign countries - DAAD also support this 5. Alexander von Humboldt Only to doctoral students If you win the scholarship you get a lot of money Strengthen Germany’s position in research and attract researchers to come to Germany Yearly Price 6. Central Agency for Schools Abroad (Zfa) Supporting schools worldwide 1200 Overcome cultural barriers and give image of germany 7. German Corporation for International Cooperation (GIZ) One of the biggest development agencies of the world Focuses on education, health, climate change, etc Gov to gov level (more focus on development sector, climate, system of gov), Public level (contribute to funding for education, conservation of culture, arts) 8. Deutsche Welle and DW Akademie

Answer 31

International government-/statesponsored broadcasters: E.g. Voice of America, CCTV, RT, BBC World Service, Radio France International, Deutsche Welle Privately owned global news networks: E.g. CNN, Sky News, MSNBC, Fox News, Al Arabiya

Answer 32

CNN effect: alleged influence of the media and its real-time communication policies to 'force' decision-makers to take action towards a certain global issue (e.g., to intervene in humanitarian disasters or to alter decision-making processes in defense and foreign affairs). However, scholarly results are mixed and confusing. The main results are: "1) Global television news coverage has accelerated the foreign-policy making process; and 2) it can affect the conduct of policy – as opposed to its establishment – by showing graphic images that tend to undermine elite and public support for specific policy goals"

Answer 33

* Funded in 1953 as a radio service to inform audiences abroad about the new, post-Nazi Germany * Today, offers radio, TV and online services in around 30 languages * Claims to reach a global audience of about 122 million weekly * Two locations in Germany (Berlin/Bonn) and several foreign offices and regional correspondents * Autonomous public corporation funded by the German federal government (=taxes), around 400 million EUR budget 2022, some projects funded by German Foreign Office * Involved in a variety of media development projects to "reinforce free and independent media, particularly in developing and transition countries" (DW, 2012), e.g., DW Akademie, offering advanced media training * Clearly identified as part of Germany's public diplomacy efforts by the federal government * Objective, as defined by the DW Act, is to "convey a comprehensive image of Germany's political, cultural and economic affairs and to outline and explain German view on important issues." * Objective has been expanded though new legislation (2004) to include "German and other views on essential topics" and to "promote understanding and exchange of cultures and nations" thereby "firmly establishing Deutsche Welle's position as a significant instrument of public diplomacy.

Answer 34

Populism is not a clearly defined term. Spier (2014) defines populism as a style of politics, which can be defined according to four elements: 1) “The people” 2) Identity 3) Leadership figures 4) Organisation Populism can be understood as a discursive manifestation of a thin-centered ideology that is not only focused on the underlying “set of basic assumptions about the world” but in particular on “the language that unwittingly expresses them” (Hawkins) Populism “fails to qualify as a political ideology (...) since it lacks both core theoretical texts and a coherent set of practical policy prescriptions” (Norris)

Answer 35

Major cleavages in party competition Legitimate aithority and desicion-making processes: Why should decide policy issues? The establishment vs. the people Left-right economic values: What should be done and the role of state vs. markets in managing the economy, welfare, and redistribution Socio-economic cleaveges: Linked to socioeconomic class, income, wealth, poverty, local community and human development Conservative-liberal soicial values: What should be done and the role of the state in managing social order, foreign relarions and moral issues Cultural cleavages: Linked to generation, education, race/ethnicity, religiosity, urban-rural, nation/region/locations

Answer 36

* economic insecurity * cultural backlash. ”The communicative tools used for spreading populist ideas are just as central as the populist ideas themselves” (de Vreese et al., 2018, 425).

Answer 37

-Positive Force for Change Might increase representation and give a voice to a group of citizens that do not feel heard by the current elite Might broaden the attention for issues that are not in the mainstream news Might mobilize groups of people that have felt on the fringe of the political system Might improve the responsiveness of the political system Might be a refreshing wake-up call to power holders -Threat to Democracy Might curb minority rights Can use electoral mandate to erode independent institutions (e.g. free media, courts) Might lead to political tribalism (impeding civil discourse and disencouraging political compromise) In countries with strong institutions (a strong, autonomous and publicly respected press → populism is less likely to become an existential threat In countries with a polarized majority voting system, weak institutions of checks and balances, and a weak press (subject to instrumentalization attempts and other attacks of their independence) → more likely to be a threat

Answer 38

De Vreese et al. Political actors → References to the people, anti-elitism and out-groups, Communication aimed at the media (indirect) or supporters (direct) via speeches, advertising, manifestos, or social media Media → populism by the media (as “activist” organizations) and through the media (as platform for populist actors) Citizens → Selection of populist media contents, expression of populist attitudes, targets of populist messages

Answer 39

Sheafer et al. → communicative skills are of increasing importance for political actors due to the mediatization of politics and the increased centrality of the media logic Politicians adaptation to the media logic led to: -Increase in the importance of communicating via the media. -An adaptation of the content of political communication, because politicians have to respond to media initiated “news” -Change of content since media values are increasingly replacing political values. This led to: Personalization of Politics Politicians in need of charismatic communication and rhetorical skills Political personalization = process, in which the political weight of the individual actor increases over time, while the centrality of the political group (e.g., political party) declines. (Sheafer, Shenhav & Balmas, 2014, 214).

Answer 40

Mediatization of Politics Power struggle between media and politics - who has more power? Media influence politics or does politics influence the media? Last 15 years - arguments lean towards Mediatization of Politics Increasingly independent from politics While politicians have become more dependent on the media The media having a more in-depth influence of politics Media Logic The way the media function - evaluate things → effects how politicians present themselves E.g. Merkel showing up with a pink suit - this would tick some of the boxes of the news values and therefore give her more coverage Content of what politicians communicate - e.g. Germany Monatsfrage - who would you vote for if there were elections next week? Media establish more actively what is on the agenda

Answer 41

Political actors now using more dramatic language - Personalisation of politics → increased need of charismatic communication and rhetorical skills The scholars have identified political standing, physical attractiveness and charismatic communication skills → as most important factors helping politicians with their publicity The content of communication is not most important - it's the way a politician communicates, the way he looks maybe too

Answer 42

There is by now a fairly long-standing and well-established set of arguments suggesting, as Fallows (1998) memorably put it, that audiences “believe that the news media have become too arrogant, cynical, scandal-minded and destructive” (p. 3) in their coverage of politics. This, in turn, is alleged to generate a “spiral of cynicism” among citizens (Capella and Jamieson 1992). Such arguments are often associated with a “media malaise” thesis, which suggests that the media are responsible for public disengagement or malaise because of their negative and cynical coverage of politics. The evidence for this thesis is, however, debatable, as scholars who have studied the phenomenon have been frequently found more robust support for the alternative hypothesis that the consumption of political news may actually be mobilizing, rather than alienating audiences. Along those lines, there is evidence for “causal and reciprocal relationships between political interest and attention to political news, and between political interest and exposure to some, but not all, news media”. To Blumler and Coleman (2010), there are a series of underlying causes for this crisis, including the increasingly adversarial nature of political reporting, the emphasis on politics as a game, the competitive nature of journalism and politics, the burgeoning of political news and information sources, and the emergence of a “post-deferential” culture in which politicians are forced to compete for attention with popular culture (see also the chapters by Stanyer, by Aalberg and by Hopmann). Sociologically, political news production is a broad church, encompassing many kinds of professional practice, as well as complex internal and external relations. The category of the “political journalist” could be understood to entail anything from parliamentary correspondents to celebrity news anchors, local council reporters, political bloggers, and news agency stringers. These professional roles cover over a variety of specific work practices, positions in the newsroom hierarchy, and specialized skills. Political reporters are in constant contact with powerful political actors. They documented that political journalism has tended to be a largely oral culture, relying far more on face-to-face conversations than on evidence from documents and public opinion polls, leaving both journalists and politicians vulnerable to drawing conclusions that may resonate within their insider universe, but have little relevance to the prevailing public mood. One of the key distinctive features of the relationship between political journalists and their political sources is the convention of allowing sources to speak “off the record,” attributed only as “sources close the White House” or “a Number 10 source,” to mention just a few examples of the nomenclature used to conceal the identity of sources. In their study, based on ethnographic work and interviews with politicians and journalists engaged in the process of establishing the rules of conduct in the newly devolved Scottish Parliament, Philip Schlesinger and his colleagues found that there was great reluctance to move away from off-the-record briefings in favor of greater transparency. Journalists complained that doing so would compromise their relationships with sources and hence their access to information.

Answer 43

-Spin doctors make it increasingly difficult for political journalists to retain a critical stance. -Powerful media moguls are shaping political coverage and seek influence in the policy-making process -Increasingly competitive, financially challenging and diversified media environment -Growth in the PR-industry ”The growth and burgeoning sophistication of the PR industry, combined with the decline in the financial and human resources of media organizations, has meant that the vested (and usually corporate) interests represented by lobbyists are coming to be seen as the invisible center of the political communication process” (Wahl-Jorgensen, 2014, 313).

Answer 44

5 ways in which the media change the political landscape: 1. Government 2. Elections 3. Political and social movements 4. Journalism 5. Surveillance and control Obama Election campaign 2008 -Obama online voters lead the way for political activism -Social media has had an effect on elections

Answer 45

National and global examples #metoo Ice bucket challenge Arab Spring 2011 Save the elephants movements Friday for future The internet to have “produced a non-hierarchical, many-to-many, form of communication structure” → Communication used to be top-down Now: Citizens can communicate towards electorates now - more democratic communication system

Answer 46

a) Blogosphere b) User-generated content: Increasingly traditional media take over coverage from ordinary citizens - e.g. conflict zones, when they do not have correspondents there

Answer 47

Evgeny Morozov (2009: 36): ”Despite what digital enthusiasts tell you, the emergence of new digital spaces for dissent also led to new ways of tracking it.”

Answer 48

Pros: - Fosters civic engagement - tool to help people form an opinion -Easy access to information - Increase of option to get news from and to make your own judgment - Watchdog - shifting to social media users - policies change just because people are loud on social media Cons - Fake News and Disinformation - Spread of Problematic ideas - Quality of content // threat to journalism - Opinion valued based on how many people follow you - you get a platform even though you might not be qualified -Whoever controls the technology can manipulate content, pull strings - Ownership structures -People don't really discuss its more about having your own opinion and presenting it - Not everyone has the literacy to understand where information comes from - Monitoring democracy - people monitor but do not really participate - it becomes about what it looks like - politics becomes about aesthetics and not content

Answer 49

Comes down to what kind of democracy one favors: representative vs deliberative democracy Advocates of electronic democracy still share a belief in the ability of digital media to create the conditions for political participation Answer to question comes down to the question of what democracy one wants: Representative - elect a representative, and then they are the representative Deliberative - not only about voting but also the exchange of arguments → later on there can be representation too - the deliberation as central point in decision making Deliberative public spheres, how people change their views and then make up their mind Exchange is the basis, different viewpoints but sit down and discuss Through social media it becomes easier for politicians to have exchange Beginning of internet - positive view was that the internet might enable higher spaces of deliberation in politics because it's easier for politicians to get into contact with voters and exchange → later it was found out that it's not really the case

Answer 50

Monitor democracy - people in power always monitored by media - that's why they adapt their behavior towards being monitored and having an outlook monitoring democracies tie closely to the growth of multimedia societies Examples of “Monitory Democracies” (Keane 2009) → threatens to expose the quiet discriminations and injustices that happen behind closed doors and in the world of everyday life. Not all democratic issues have technical solutions (Street 2021) -Discovering the will of the people is not a simple matter -Not all information in itself enhances democracy -Digital democracy (at least the one that treats the democratic process as a mere device for registering preferences and politics as a version of the market in which we exercise our choices as consumers) is a debased, impoverished version. -Digital vote - that still causes problems and inequalities - some people might not be able to, issues of access -Technology can not help with all problems, but technology is also not the cause for all democratic problems

Answer 51

It is a form of democracy defined by the rapid growth of many new kinds of extraparliamentary, power-scrutinising mechanisms: ‘guide dog’, ‘watchdog’ and ‘barking dog’ institutions. Monitory democracy includes practices such as election monitoring, workplace codetermination and participatory budgeting. It also includes bodies such as future generations commissions, bridge doctors, truth and reconciliation forums and coralreef monitoring networks. These monitory or public accountability mechanisms are newcomers in the history of democracy. They spring up in many different contexts and are not simply ‘Western’ inventions. As a result, the whole architecture of representative government is changing. The grip of elections, political parties and parliaments in shaping citizens’ lives and representing their interests is weakening. If electoral democracy rested on the principle of ‘one person, one vote, one representative’, the guiding ethic of monitory democracy is ‘one person, many interests, many voices, multiple votes, multiple representatives’.

Answer 52

1. Technology supports democracy -Technology is neutral -Technology provides the tools to facilitate deliberation 2. Technology does not lead to an enhanced version of democracy (is politically driven) -Technology itself is led by political interest, it is a device that deskills and depoliticizes citizens, corporate commercial and political interests of technology are using the new possibilities in their interest → it sustains the status quo “Any attempt to think about digital democracy must therefore consider how media technologies do (and should) structure access to, and use of, political knowledge” “... the media can pursue democratic value only in ways that are compatible with the socio-poliitcal and economic environment in which they operate. Political communication arrangements follow the contours of and derive their resources from the society of which they are part”