Political Communication

Question 1

Politics in the age of mediation Scheme: McNair 2007

Answer 1

1. Political organisations: Parties, Public organisations, Pressure groups, Terrorist organisations, Governments -> Media = Appeals, Programmes, Advertising, Public Relations
   Media -> Political organisations = Reportage, Editorials, Commentary, Analysis
2. Citizens -> Media = Opinion Polls, Letters, Blogs, Citizen journalism
   Media -> Citizens = Reportage, Editorials, Commentary, Analysis

Question 2

Definition of political communication (McNair 2007: 4)

Answer 2

-> Purposeful communication about politics

This includes:
1. All forms of communication undertaken by politicians and other political actors for the purpose of achieving
specific objectives.
2. Communication addressed to these actors by nonpoliticians such as voters and newspaper columnists.
3. Communication about these actors and their activities, as contained in news reports, editorials, and other forms of
media discussion of politics.

Question 3

Where did most of the post-its go and why?

Answer 3

Politics is mediated (Mazzoleni & Schulz, 1999)
* Media are the dominant source of information about
politics (and society).
* Communication is central to politics – some even say
politics is communication…
* … and politics increasingly relies on (mass) media to
communicate with the public-at-large.

Question 4

Political communication’s major changes

Answer 4

• Mediation is a descriptive statement: it describes the
  situation of the crucial intermediary role media play nowadays.
• Mediation also has a normative component: is this a good or a bad thing? (Mazzoleni & Schulz)
  -The ‘irresponsible media complex’
  -Media bias

Question 5

Two major trens/shifts in society that are relevant
for any discussion on political communication

Answer 5

• Media proliferation: compared to a few decades ago, citizens can now consume content through an ever increasing variety of media.
• Audience fragmentation: this allows citizens to select which content to (not) attend to. In turn, this leads to a fragmentation of the mass audience into smaller ‘sub’ audiences.

Question 6

These trends influence the impact media can have on the public

Answer 6

some scholars believe that these trends lead to smaller media effects (minimal effects), due mainly to (partisan) selective exposure.
- Political news less likely to reach all but the most interested (and hard to persuade) voters;
- Political news is less likely to reach citizens who disagree with it, as they self-select out of incongruent news (partisan selective exposure).

Question 7

But: politics is mediated, so any impact on media (and it’s effects) also matters for politics.

Answer 7

• Politicians may have a harder time reaching the public at large, but an easier time reaching specific subgroups in society.
• However, this oftentimes also means that they’ll need to play by media’s (new) rules…

Question 8

Kaid et al. suggest that we may view political ‘reality’ as
comprising three categories (1991):

Answer 8

• First, we may speak of an objective political reality, comprising political events as they actually occur
• There is then a subjective reality – the ‘reality’ of political events as they are perceived by actors and
  citizens
• Third, and critical to the shaping of the second category of subjective perceptions, is constructed reality, meaning events as covered by the media.
  (in: McNair 2007, 11)

Question 9

McNair: Democracy rests upon three principles

Answer 9

• Constitutionality: the rules need to be clear (of elections / power
  held by representatives / …).
• Participation: a substantial proportion of the people should participate.
• Rational Choice: breaks down into two conditions
• There should be meaningful alternatives (if all parties/candidates have the exact same policies, what choice do citizens really have?)
• Citizens need to be able to make a rational choice.

Conclusion: To be able to make rational choices, the public needs to be informed and educated about political matters.

• An informed & knowledgeable electorate is therefore crucial for the functioning of democracy.
• Public Sphere (Habermas): the place where public and politics engage in debate with one another.
• Collectively shared information allows individual political opinion to become collective public opinion.
• Why is all of this important in a course on PolCom?
• Because the mass media constitute one of the key (if not the key) components of democracy’s public sphere.
• It is through the mass media that most people get informed about politics: politics is mediated!

Question 10

Five functions of the media in an ‘ideal-type’ democratic society

Answer 10

1. Information
2. Education
3. Platform for political discourse
4. Act as a watchdog of government
5. Channel for the advocacy of political viewpoints
   (McNair 2007: 19-20)

Question 11

Public sphere: scheme

Answer 11

State + Public Sphere + People (overlaping circles)

Question 12

What is a good public sphere?

Answer 12

Different normative approaches to the public sphere, each based on different prescribed goals for that public sphere.
Ferree et al. (2002) discuss four such approaches:
* Representative Liberal
* Participatory Liberal
* Discursive Theory
* Constructionist
These approaches determine who should speak, what content should be discussed, how communication occurs (style), and the outcomes of discourse.

Question 13

Representative liberal

Answer 13

The ultimate authority in society rests with the citizens, who decide who is accountable to them … but they do not need to participate in public discourse on policy issues.
* Who? Elite dominance (public representatives) and
proportionality (proportional to their importance).
* What? Free marketplace of ideas – restrictions on
content are suspect.
* How? Detachment (arguments driven by cool
reason) and civility.
* Outcome? Closure – once a matter has been decided through discourse, the system moves on.

Question 14

Participatory liberal

Answer 14

This approach seeks to maximize the participation of citizens in the public decisions that affect their lives.
* Who? Popular inclusion and rejection of expertise –
voices of ordinary citizens should be present – and
empowerment.
* What? Diversity, empowerment of citizens.
* How? Rejection of detachment & civility
* Outcome? Rejection of closure, for fear that this is
premature (pseudo-consensus).

Question 15

Discursive

Answer 15

Similar to Participatory Liberal, but key emphasis on
deliberation – popular inclusion is a means to an end in this approach.
* Who? Popular inclusion and rejection of expertise.
* What? Better ideas should prevail over weaker ones.
* How? Mutual respect (willingness for dialogue,
consensus seeking). Civility to some extent, but it may be necessary to take extreme/offensive stands.
* Outcome? Closure: once the best idea for public policy is agreed upon, it should be removed from the public’s agenda.

Question 16

Constructionist

Answer 16

This approach questions existing arrangements and
categories to see if they conceal hidden inequalities.
* Who? Popular inclusion and recognition of differences.
* What? Creativity in bringing new ideas forward,
seeking out grassroots perspectives (!= Participatory Liberal, which expects the grassroots to mobilize themselves).
* How? Deliberativess and civility, insofar as they do not diminish popular inclusion.
* Outcome? Closure is deeply suspect – it can
suppress diversity of expression.

Question 17

What is a good public sphere?: table, Ferree, M. M., Gamson, W. A., Gerhards, J., & Rucht, D

Answer 17

1. Representative liberal:
   -Who participates? Elite dominance, Expertise, Proportionality;
   -In what sort of process? Free market-place of ideas, Transparency;
   -How ideas should be presented? Detachment Civility;
   -Outcome of relation between discourse and desicion-making: closure
2. Participatory liberal:
   -Who participates? Popular inclusion
   -In what sort of process: Epoerment
   -How ideas should be presented: Range of styles
   -Outcome of relation between discourse and decision-making: Avoidance of imposed closure
3. Discursive:
   -Who participates? Popular inclusion
   -In what sort of process: Deliberative
   -How ideas should be presented: Dialogue, Mutual respect, Civility
   -Outcome of relation between discourse and decision-making: Avoidance of premature, non-consensus-based closure
4. Constructionist: -Who participates? Popular inclusion
   -In what sort of process: Empowerment Recognition
   -How ideas should be presented: Narrative creativity
   -Outcome of relation between discourse and decision-making: Avoidance of exclusionary closure; Expansion of the political community

Question 18

What is a good public sphere?: debates / critiques

Answer 18

These different normative approaches to the public sphere underly many of the debates / critiques on what journalists and media do.
For example, there has been much ado about media’s shift towards more ‘popular’ formats to report on politics and public policy.
Depending on your approach, you may favor or dislike each of these trends.

Question 19

McNair’s critique on the functioning of the media

Answer 19

1. The failure of education
   * For Bobbio, one of the great ‘broken promises’ of liberal democracy is the failure of the education system to produce rational voters, a failure which he sees reflected in the growing political apathy characteristic of such democratic exemplars as the US.
   * slightly cynical response to a political process in which it may appear to the individual citizen that his or her vote does not matter.
   * For Jean Baudrillard, the guru of post-modern nihilism, voter apathy is viewed as an intelligible strategy of resistance to bourgeois attempts to incorporate the masses into a ‘game’ which they can never really win.
2. Absence of choice
   A further limitation on democracy is often argued to be the absence of genuine choice, or pluralism.
3. Capitalism and power
   Socialist and Marxist critiques of liberal democracy are more fundamental, arguing that the real loci of power in capitalist societies are hidden behind formal political procedures: in the boardrooms of big business; in the higher reaches of the civil service and security apparatus; in a host of secretive, non-elected institutions.
4. The manufacture of consent
   if the information on which political behaviour is based is, or can be, manufactured artifice rather than objective truth, the integrity of the public sphere is inevitably diminished.
   Politicians, however, also seek to conceal information from citizens, sometimes for reasons of what is called ‘national security’, and sometimes to avoid political embarrassment.
   In 1962 Daniel Boorstin coined the term ‘pseudo-event’ in response to what he saw as the increasing tendency of news and journalistic media to cover ‘unreal’, unauthentic ‘happenings’.
5. The limitations of objectivity
   For a variety of reasons, it is argued, the media’s political reportage is biased and flawed – subjective, as opposed to objective; partisan, rather than impartial.

Question 20

4 macro-level frameworks for comparative political communication research: Pfetsch & Esser (2014)

Answer 20

1. Media systems
2. Political communication systems
3. Political information environments
4. Political communication processes

Question 21

Political communication in comparative perspective

Answer 21

• Political communication processes = ordered systems consisting of structures AND actors
• Macro level: patterns of interaction of media and political actors as social system
• Micro level: interactions of media and political actors as individuals or organizations
• Political communication systems occur on different
  geographic levels

= “the quantitative supply of news and public affairs content provided to national audience by routinely available sources” (Esser, 2012).
- Diversity of communication channels is seen as favorable

Discuss the following statement by Pfetsch & Esser (2014, 92):
-> ”This is ironic in so far as it suggests that a system with more political pluralistic media options provokes the opposite of diversity, namely that most people gravitate toward sources they politically agree with.”

Question 22

Comparative campaign studies: Barbara Pfetsch and Frank Esser

Answer 22

National election campaigns are probably the most popular subject in comparative political communication research. This is because they are clearly relevant to the democratic process, fulfill the important criterion of functional equivalence across
systems, and are easy to manage for researchers due to their clear starting and ending point. (Национальные избирательные кампании, вероятно, являются самой популярной темой в сравнительных исследованиях политической коммуникации. Это связано с тем, что они имеют очевидное отношение к
демократическому процессу, отвечают важному критерию функциональной эквивалентности в разных системах и легко управляемы для исследователей благодаря своей четкой начальной и конечной точке.)

A key challenge for scholars comparing campaign styles has been to find a theoretical explanation for ostensibly similar trends in clearly dissimilar environments. An important advancement was thus to “contextualize” seemingly global trends in national campaigns. (Ключевой задачей для ученых, сравнивающих стили кампаний, было найти теоретическое объяснение якобы схожих тенденций в явно несхожих
условиях. Таким образом, важным достижением стало Барбара Пфетш и Франл Эссер “контекстуализировать” кажущиеся глобальными тенденции в национальных кампаниях.)

(1) Swanson and Mancini’s (1996)
Interestingly, many studies comparing election communication were unable
to demonstrate stark differences in campaign style (Swanson and Mancini 1996), marketing orientation (Lees-Marshment et al. 2010), the use of advertising (Raid
and Holtz-Bacha 2006) or web campaigning (Kluver et al. 2007), and consequently did not succeed at attributing differences to the impact of country-specific contextual conditions. (Интересно, что многие исследования, сравнивающие предвыборную
коммуникацию, не смогли продемонстрировать разительных различий в
стиле кампании (Swanson and Mancini 1996), маркетинговой ориентации
(Lees-Marshment et al. 2010), использовании рекламы (Itaid and Holtz-Bacha 2006) или интернет-кампании (I’ uver et al. 2007), а следовательно, не смогли объяснить различия влиянием специфических условий в конкретной стране.)

(2) The thesis that the Internet has led to a push toward a postmodern era is at the heart of recent studies about e-campaigning. (Тезис о том, что Интернет привел к наступлению эпохи постмодерна, лежит в основе последних исследований, посвященных электронным кампаниям.)

Both studies conclude that the Internet has not leveled the playing field for smaller parties or minor
candidates (no “equalizing” effect) and that the Internet is still only a supplement (“add-on”) in the repertoire of mainstream parties. (Оба исследования пришли к выводу, что Интернет не выровнял условия игры для небольших партий или второстепенных кандидатов (нет “уравнивающего” эффекта) и что Интернет по-прежнему является лишь дополнением (“add-on”) в репертуаре основных партий.)
Large resources still matter and the use of the Internet rather reinforces existing hierarchies and campaign trends. (Крупные ресурсы по-прежнему имеют значение, и использование Интернета скорее укрепляет существующие иерархии и тенденции кампании).

The most revolutionary potential of the Internet seems to lie
in the area of fundraising and mobilizing loyalists (Lilleker and Jackson 2012) (Наиболее революционный потенциал Интернета, по-видимому, лежит в
области сбора средств и мобилизации лоялистов)

structural filters and cultural
restraints limit so-called Americanization trends, and that campaigns around the
world are not necessarily converging but still follow different national logics. (На основании сравнительных исследований мы пришли к выводу, что структурные фильтры и культурные ограничения ограничивают так
называемые тенденции американизации, а кампании по всему миру не обязательно сближаются, но все еще следуют различным национальным логикам.)

Question 23

Comparative studies of politician-journalist relationships: Barbara Pfetsch and Frank Esser

Answer 23

One strong strand of research
refers to the inquiry into journalism culture defined by journalists’ normative beliefs and professional values. This research stimulates a reflection about the
meaning and consequences of journalist’s predispositions for how they perceive and report politics under the influence of different political and cultural contexts.
Another trajectory is devoted to the comparative analysis of how journalists and politicians interact and how their respective attitudes shape different political communication cultures (Одно из сильных направлений исследований связано с изучением журналистской культуры, определяемой нормативными убеждениями и
профессиональными ценностями журналистов. Эти исследования
стимулируют размышления о значении и последствиях
предрасположенности журналистов для того, как они воспринимают и освещают политику под влиянием различных политических и культурных
контекстов. Другое направление посвящено сравнительному анализу того, как взаимодействуют журналисты и политики и как их соответствующие установки формируют различные культуры политической коммуникации.)

For one, a lively theoretical debate about the nature of global journalism raised awareness for the implicit national containment of journalism culture (Reese 2008) and the fact that the available
concepts needed to be striped of the cultural undercurrents of Western notions (Hanitzsch et al. 2011). In addition, Hanitzsch (2007) developed a theoretically
integrated and normatively less biased framework for the study of journalism culture that combines professional, ethical and epistemological dimensions (Например, оживленные теоретические дебаты о природе глобальной журналистики привели к осознанию неявного национального сдерживания журналистской культуры (Reese 2008) и того факта, что имеющиеся концепции необходимо очистить от культурных подтекстов западных представлений.Кроме того, Ханицш (2007) разработал теоретически интегрированную и нормативно менее предвзятую структуру для изучения журналистской культуры, которая объединяет профессиональные, этические
и эпистемологические измерения).

Question 24

Media and politics: studying the tango. 3 aspects of power struggle

Answer 24

How ? (= research on media logic, sound bites, infotainment) → shift towards media logic (mediatization)
Who ? (= research on media bonuses and media bias)
What ? (= research on agenda-setting and framing)

Question 25

3 aspects of power struggle: Who?

Answer 25

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?

Question 26

Debby Vos: Meta study of research on media attention for politicians. What matters is…

Answer 26

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.

Question 27

Media and politics: studying the tango: What

Answer 27

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)

Apolitical agendais a list of subjects or problems to which government officials as well as individuals outside thegovernmentare paying serious attention at any given time. It is most often shaped by
political and policy elites
non-governmental activist groups
private sectorlobbyists
think tanks
courts
world events
The media!

Question 28

Media agenda setting has important implications

Answer 28

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

Question 29

Why mixed evidence?
Diverging research designs

Answer 29

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

Question 30

Political agenda: there is nothing as ‘the political agenda’

Answer 30

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

Question 31

Van Dalen & Van Aelst use the
power balance

Answer 31

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

Question 32

Van Dalen & Van Aelst: Power balance: Design: Method and Data

Answer 32

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.

Question 33

Percentage of journalists agreeing to statement “the media decide which issues are important. Politics has little
impact on this matter.

How often do the following actors manage to place a new
problem at the top of the political agenda? Scale from 1-5
(Van Dalen & Van Aelst 2013: 14)

Answer 33

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

Question 34

In what ways do you think politicians ‘use’ the mass
media / journalists to their advantage?

Answer 34

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

Question 35

Media bias

Answer 35

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

Question 36

Media bias table

Answer 36

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

Question 37

Media bias features

Answer 37

• 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”

Question 38

Causes of Media bias

Answer 38

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 (!)

Question 39

Self-censoring to avoid blame?

Answer 39

• 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

Question 40

McQualis: Planned and short-term effects

Answer 40

• 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.

Question 41

McQualis: Unplanned and short term

Answer 41

-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.

Question 42

Planned and long term

Answer 42

• 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’.

Question 43

Unplanned and long term

Answer 43

-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.

Question 44

Public diplomacy

Answer 44

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)

Question 45

Public diplomacy relies on a two-step influence process:

Answer 45

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.

Question 46

‘Grand strategy’ in foreign policies today requires three fundamental components:

Answer 46

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).

Question 47

Gilboa system: table

Answer 47

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

Question 48

Soft power

Answer 48

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)

Question 49

Why is soft power the case? (according to Gilboa)

Answer 49

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

Question 50

Public diplomacy consists of a diverse set of strategies

Answer 50

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

Question 51

5 Components of PD (Cull 2008)

Answer 51

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’

Question 52

Cultural Diplomacy

Answer 52

“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).

Question 53

Germany’s Public Diplomacy

Answer 53

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”

Question 54

Main actors of German Public Diplomacy

Answer 54

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

Question 55

Actors in international broadcasting

Answer 55

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

Question 56

International broadcasting as part of public diplomacy

Answer 56

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”

Question 57

Example of Deutsche Welle

Answer 57

• 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.

Question 58

Definition of populism

Answer 58

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)

Question 59

Major cleavages in party competition

Answer 59

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

Question 60

explain the increased support for populism De Vreese et al.

Answer 60

• 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).

Question 61

Populism: Positive force for change or Threat to democracy

Answer 61

-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

Question 62

How is populism communicated?

Answer 62

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

Question 63

Political actors as communicators

Answer 63

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).

Question 64

Mediatization of Politics and Media Logic

Answer 64

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

Question 65

The importance of charisma and rhetoric

Answer 65

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

Question 66

Discuss arguments in favor of “media malaise” versus the hypothesis that the consumption of political news engages the audience in politics?
Who is a political journalist?
What is on- VS off-the-record information? Do you know terms for unknown sources close to politicians?

Answer 66

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.

Question 67

Sources of pressure on political journalists

Answer 67

-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).

Question 68

How social media may be reconfiguring democratic participation and politics

Answer 68

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

Question 69

Political and Social Movements

Answer 69

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

Question 70

Journalism

Answer 70

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

Question 71

5. Surveillance and control

Answer 71

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.”

Question 72

Discuss the pros and cons of the potential of technology to become a major tool for democracy and the arguments
Streets mentions for or against each perspective.

Answer 72

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

Question 73

Street (2021: 176) view on social media influence

Answer 73

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

Question 74

Monitory democracy

Discussion: come up with examples of how monitory democracy works. To what extent do those enable the ordinary citizens to monitor the ones with power?

Answer 74

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

Question 75

Monitory democracy

Answer 75

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’.

Question 76

Technology and democracy summary

Answer 76

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”