Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Intervening Intermediary: Making Political Sense of Media Influence

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
How Political Actors Use the Media

Abstract

This theoretical chapter puts political actors’ news use into a broader political science context. Despite increasing acknowledgement of the media as a political institution and actor, media influence on politics should be distinguished from other types of influence typically studied by political scientists. Media influence is not about what the media “gets”, but rather about how news intervene in the political processes that determine the distribution of power between other political actors and institutions. We call this the second layer of media’s political influence, and argue that studies of media and politics should to a larger extent use theories about the strategies and motives of political actors as a starting point in order to contribute to the explanation of who gets what, when, and how.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Asp, K. (2007). Fairness, informativeness and scrutiny: The role of news media in democracy. Nordicom Review, 28‚ 31–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cater, D. (1959). The fourth branch of government. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, R. W., & Elder, C. D. (1972). Participation in American politics: The dynamics of agenda building. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, Timothy E. (2005). Governing with the news. The news media as a political institution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dearing, J. W., & Rogers, E. M. (1996). Communication concepts 6: Agenda-setting. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bruycker, I., & Beyers, J. (2015). Balanced or biased? Interest groups and legislative lobbying in the European news media. Political Communication, 32(3), 453–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowding, K. (1996). Power. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, J. N., & Parkin, M. (2005). The impact of media bias: How editorial slant affects voters. Journal of Politics, 67(4), 1030–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1965). A framework for political analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esser, F., & Strömbäck, J. (Eds.). (2014). Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of Western democracies. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green-Pedersen, C., & Stubager, R. (2010). The political conditionality of mass media influence: When do parties follow mass media attention? British Journal of Political Science, 40(03), 663–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16, 411–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarren, O., & Donges, P. (2006). Politische Kommunikation in der Mediengesellschaft. Eine Einführung (2nd ed.). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. (1936). Politics: Who gets what, when, how. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linsky, M. (Ed.). (1986). How the press affects federal policymaking: Six case studies. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, Thomas. (2002). Media democracy: How the media colonize politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, K. (2006). May the weak forces be with you: The power of the mass media in modern politics. European Journal of Political Research, 45(2), 209–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nørgaard, A. S., & Klemmensen, R. (2009). Hvorfor stemmer oppositionen for regeringens lovforslag? Korporatisme og parlamentariske forlig, 1953–1999 []. Politica, 41, 68–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, B. I. (1996). The mass media as political actors. PS: Political Science & Politics, 29(01), 20–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersson, O. (1994). Journalistene som klass, Journalismen som ideologi. Media og samfunnsstyring. Edvardsen and T. Steen. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert‚ A. Dahl. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science‚ 2(3):201–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rommetvedt, H., Thesen, G., Christiansen, P. M., & Nørgaard, A. S. (2013). Coping with corporatism in decline and the revival of parliament: Interest group lobbyism in Denmark and Norway, 1980–2005. Comparative Political Studies, 46(4), 457–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The semi-sovereign people. New York: Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitter, P. C. (2010). Micro-foundations for the science(s) of politics. Scandinavian Political Studies, 33, 316–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schudson, M. (2002). The news media as political institutions. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1), 249–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seeberg, H. B. (2013). The opposition’s influence on policy through issue politicization. Journal of Public Policy, 33(1), 89–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sevenans, J. (2017). One concept, many interpretations. The media’s causal roles in political agenda-setting processes. European Political Science Review, 1–21. doi: 10.1017/S1755773917000078.

  • Shah, D. V., Watts, M. D., Domke, D., & Fan, D. P. (2002). News framing and cueing of issue regimes: Explaining Clinton’s public approval in spite of scandal. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 339–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, B. H. (1999). Uncertain guardians: The news media as a political institution. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strömbäck, J. (2008). Four phases of mediatization: An analysis of the mediatization of politics. International Journal of Press Politics, 13(3), 228–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strömbäck, J., & Esser, F. (2009). Shaping politics: Mediatization and media interventionism.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thesen, G. (2013). When good news is scarce and bad news is good: Government responsibilities and opposition possibilities in political agenda-setting. European Journal of Political Research, 52(3), 364–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thesen, G. (2015). Win some, lose none? Support parties at the polls and in political agenda-setting. Political Studies, 64, 1467–9248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thesen, G., Green-Pedersen, C., & Mortensen, P. (2016). Priming, issue ownership, and party support: The electoral gains of an issue-friendly media agenda. Political Communication. doi:10.1080/10584609.2016.1233920.

  • Van Aelst, P., & Walgrave, S. (2011). Minimal or massive? The political agenda setting power of the mass media according to different methods. International Journal of Press Politics, 16(3), 295–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vliegenthart, R., & Walgrave, S. (2011). When the media matter for politics: Partisan moderators of mass media influence on parliament in Belgium, 1993–2000. Party Politics, 17(3), 321–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walgrave, S., & De Swert, K. (2004). The making of the (issues of the) Vlaams Blok. Political Communication, 21(4), 479–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walgrave, S., & Van Aelst, P. (2006). The contingency of the mass media’s political agenda-setting power. Towards a preliminary theory. Journal of Communication, 56(1), 88–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, M. D., Domke, D., Shah, D. V., & Fan, D. P. (1999). Elite cues and media bias in presidential campaigns explaining public perceptions of a liberal press. Communication Research, 26(2), 144–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfsfeld, G., & Cohen, A. (1993). Framing the Intifada: People and media. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfsfeld, G., & Sheafer, T. (2006). Competing actors and the construction of political news: The contest over waves in Israel. Political Communication, 23, 333–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Stavanger, Stavanger, Norway

    Gunnar Thesen

Authors
  1. Gunnar Thesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium

    Peter Van Aelst

  2. Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium

    Stefaan Walgrave

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Thesen, G. (2017). An Intervening Intermediary: Making Political Sense of Media Influence. In: Van Aelst, P., Walgrave, S. (eds) How Political Actors Use the Media. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60249-3_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation