The media and politics
Important role of media:









Capacity to provide a civic forum in which meaningful and serious
political debate can take place is often viewed as the key democratic role
of the media
Media as agents of political education- may have largely replaced formal
representative institutions such as assemblies, parliaments and local
councils, as arenas for dialogue debate and deliberation that are the very
stuff of democratic politics
Watchdog role of the media- to ensure public accountability takes place,
by scrutinizing the activities of government and exposing abuses of power
Media pros particularly suited to this role because they are ‘outside’
politics and have no interest other than to expose incompetence,
corruption or simply muddled thinking whenever and wherever it can be
found- ideally in any case!
Media can only perform role effectively if properly independent and not
dominated by government.
Issue- interests of major corporation or powerful media moguls (e.g.
Murdoch) cannot but, at some level, influence media output- potential for
a media which is politically conservative- represents interests of existing
dominant groups in society
Also can be used to expose flaws, failings and transgressions of those in
power
What sort of control over media is acceptable or necessary in a
democracy?
Think about this in terms of media ownership, rules that apply to
journalists/editors, market regulation etc
Importance of Transparency:





On one level- only effective means of preventing or at least reducing
conspiracy, corruption, exploitation and oppression.
Those in power less like to abuse their positions and engage in unethical
activities if they know their actions are likely to be publically exposed.
Open government thus promotes good governance
Media freedom underpins democracy- allows citizens to make up their
own minds, having access to information from all source no just official
sources
With too much ‘freedom’ though (Wikileaks) potential for information to
get into public domain that could both threaten national security and
leave intelligence operatives working in foreign countries, together with
those who work with them vulnerable to identification and reprisals
Media as a Propaganda Tool:

Flip side of previous sections




Media has often been controlled by government and used as a
propaganda machine- Gobbels in Nazi Germany most extreme example
Soviet Union relied on it
Italy as well under Berlusconi was prime minster, richest man in country
and control three of country’s six privately owned television channels.
Importance of the media- first place rebel leaders turn to after the coupthe obsessive concern of controlling it by totalitarian regimes
Media Models:
Pluralist Model:





Pluralist model- highlights diversity and multiplicity generally. Portrays
the media as an ideological marketplace in which a wide range of political
views are debated and discussed
Portrays the media in strongly positive terms. In ensuring an ‘informed
citizenry’, the mass media both enhance the quality of democracy and
guarantee that government power is checked- e.g. Watergate
Argued that advent of new media and particularly the internet has
strengthened pluralism and political competition by giving protest
groups, including ‘anti-capitalist’ activists, a relatively cheap and highly
effective means of disseminating information and organizing campaigns
Deficiencies: weak and unorganized groups excluded from access to
mainstream publishing and broadcasting, meaning that the media’s
ideological marketplace tends to be relatively narrow and generally proestablishment in character
Private ownership and formal independence might not be sufficient to
guarantee the media’s oppositional character in light of the increasingly
symbiotic relationship between government and journalists and
broadcasters
Dominant-Ideology Model







Portrays the mass medias a politically conservative force that is aligned to
the interests of economic and social elites, and serves to promote
compliance or political passivity amongst the masses
Ownership ultimately determines the political and other views that the
mass media disseminate and ownership increasingly concentrated in the
hands of a small number of global media conglomerates- News Corp,
Disney etc- in Ireland similar with INM?
Chomsky & Herman Manufacturing Consent- the five filters:
The Business interests of owner companies
A sensitivity to the views and concerns of advertisers and sponsors
The sourcing of news and information from ‘agents of power’ such as
governments and business-backed think-tanks
‘Flak’ or pressure applied to journalists, including threats of legal action


An unquestioning belief in the benefits of market competition and
consumer capitalist
Criticisms of model: underestimates extent to which the press and
broadcasters, particularly public service broadcasters, pay attention to
progressive social, racial and development issues. Moreover, the
assumption that media output shapes political attitudes is determinist
and neglects the role played by people’s own values in filtering, and
possibly resisting, media messages
Elite-values model:




1 version- anti-socialist and politically conservative views of most
mainstream newspapers, magazines and television stations derive from
the fact that their senior professionals are well-paid and generally from
MC backgrounds
Alternative version- media reflects the views of university-educated,
liberal intellectuals, whose values and concerns are different from the
masses
Feminist Version- predominance of males amongst senior journalists and
broadcasters, implying that this both explains the inadequate attention
given to women’s views and issues by the mass media, and accounts for
the confrontational style of interview and political discussion sometimes
adopted by broadcasters and journalist
Criticisms: fails to take full account of pressures that bear upon senior
media professionals; these for example, include the views and interests of
owners and commercial considerations; notably ‘ratings’ figures.
Market model:




Dispenses with idea of media bias, holds that newspapers and television
reflect, rather than shape views of general public
Media give people what the way- cannot afford to alienate existing or
potential viewers or readers
Public service broadcasters insulated to some extent but not completely
Fearful of losing ‘market share’, television companies in particular have
reduced their coverage of serious political debate, and thus abandoned
their responsibility for educating and informing citizens in favour of
‘infotainment’
Importance of New Media

2000 election. Of those whom Pew identified as seeking candidate
information online, 43 percent said the Web had influenced their final
decision. Fifty percent of Internet users under the age of thirty said the
Net had affected their vote, a finding that suggests a generational shift in
political culture.



Widely accepted that, through a combination of social and technological
changes, the media have become increasingly powerful political actors
and, in some respects, more deeply enmeshed in the political process
Development of a mass television audience from the 1950s onwards the
more recently the proliferation of channels and media output associated
with the ‘new’ media, has massively increased the media’s penetration of
people’s everyday lives
Politicians adapt to the medium upon which they rely- design campaigns
and approach fit the media
Problems with New Media:






Interesting to contrast comments in the Jenkins and Thorburn article
about the ‘freedom’ and the ‘ungovernability’ of the internet and modern
data concerns about the NSA/ownership of data etc.
Argument- that serious debate and discussion has been replaced by
cynically crated sound bites and photo-opps; politics has been trivialized
and democracy has been damaged
Sandel-the narrative resources that are essential to a functioning civic
republic are being strained by the prevalence of soundbites, factoids and
disconnected images of our media-saturated culture
Do new technologies bring choice and devolved power or do the
represent surveillance and centralized suppression?
Every electronic communication provides data on the desires and actions
of citizens
Does this make politicians more responsive or just shallower- following
the swerves and switches of populist opinion? Certainly more monitored
anyway!
Is New Media making society more democratic?





How much power must shift to the voters to justify the argument that
society is becoming more democratic? How much of our current
understanding of democracy is bound up with the concept of the
"informed citizen
Argument that new media is a progressive force, helping to improve the
quality of political life by transferring power from governments and
political elites to the public at large
Or is it a contributing factor in the movement of politics and government
back into the control of privileged elites in the manner characteristic of
pre-democratic times?
Unless we understand this antidemocratic potential of cyberspace, Lessig
says, we are likely to "sleep through the transition from freedom into
control."
The emergence of home computers, he predicted, might strengthen
democratic culture, enabling citizens and grassroots organizations to
circulate their ideas more widely than ever before.



There is powerful irony in the fact that both the left and the right initially
understood computer networks in opposition to bureaucratic control
because so much of the initial research had been funded by the military
and had occurred at the Rand Corporation
One of the most influential commercials of the personal computing era,
Apple's "1984" campaign, represented the home computer as a tool of
liberation directed against an impersonal Orwellian bureaucracy
The Web's low barriers to entry ensure greater access than ever before to
innovative, even revolutionary ideas. Those silenced by corporate media
have been among the first, as Pool predicted, to transform their
computers into printing presses. This access to the World Wide Web has
empowered revolutionaries, reactionaries, and racists alike. It has also
engendered fear in the gatekeeper intermediaries and their allies. One
person's diversity, no doubt, is another person's anarchy.
Developments in Media Studies


Study of media’s relationship to politics has moved from an exclusive
concern with propaganda and its mass effects, to mapping changes in
political communication, to studying elite effects, to tracing the contours
of media policy and the political economy of communications
Same questions remain: what power do media exercise? On whose
behalf? With what consequences?
Power and the Media:








Relationship between politics and mass media is a power relationshipthink about who has power
Two dimensions- power over the media- what gets shown or reportedand power of the media- what gets changed b the media
Think of roles of governments, political parties, PR firms/’spin doctors’,
interest groups/lobbyists here
Organizations like News Corp with its newspapers, television stations,
film studios and book publishers, are sometimes portrayed as using their
media outlets to advance their own political cause; this is why the
coverage takes the form it does
Idea that ‘politics’ is what appears on TV or in the press, that appearance
is everything in political life: those who control the image control the
reality’
Power of media can be used to unsettle and even unseat the powerful.
Media have tried (and sometimes succeeded) in humbling many
politicians, whether US presidents (Nixon, Clinton), Italian PMs
(Berlusconi) or GB cab ministers (Blunkett, Mandelson, Mellor, Prescott
and Smith).
Politicians suffer because their reputation is a key resource
Uneven distribution of people’s capacity to control, or be controlled by,
the media they consumer. Interpreting media is a skill, a skill that is
dependent upon social and educational background.
For more see:
Heywood, A., Politics, 4th ed (2013), Chapter 8
Street, J. , Mass Media, Politics and Democracy, 2nd Ed (2011).
Jenkins, H. and D. Thorburn (eds), Democracy and New Media (2004)