Comparing Election News Coverage in Europe: Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of the Approach

  • Susana Salgado
  • Eileen Culloty
  • Agnieszka Stępińska
Part of the Political Campaigning and Communication book series (PCC)


The principal aim of this study is to further research on elections and news media coverage by identifying contemporary characteristics and tendencies across different European countries. This introductory chapter contextualizes the rationale and methodological approach for the study of election campaign coverage in six European countries (Croatia, Greece, Ireland, Poland, Portugal, and Spain). The theoretical framework situates the analysis in terms of the general trends identified in extant literature as well as broader contexts of European-wide politics such as populism, the Euro Crisis, and the migration crisis. It is these European contexts that informed the selection of countries for comparative analysis, which include four of these countries most deeply affected by the Euro Crisis (Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain) and two countries in which populism and the issue of immigration are to the fore (Croatia and Poland).


  1. Aalberg, T., Esser, F., Reinemann, C., Strömbäck, J., & de Vreese, C. (Eds.). (2017). Populist Political Communication in Europe. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Aalberg, T., Strömbäck, J., & de Vreese, C. H. (2012). The framing of politics as strategy and game: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 162–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Balmas, M., & Sheafer, T. (2016). Personalization of politics. In The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication (pp. 1–9). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, W. L. (2007). News: The Politics of Illusion. New York: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, W. L. (2012). The Personalization of politics: Political identity, social media, and changing patterns of participation. The Annales of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 644(1), 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bennett, W. L., Lawrence, R. G., & Livingston, S. (2007). When the Press Fails: Political Power and the News Media from Iraq to Katrina. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowler, S., & Farrell, D. M. (Eds.). (1992). Electoral Strategies and Political Marketing. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Brandenburg, H. (2005). Political bias in the Irish media: A quantitative study of campaign coverage during the 2002 general election. Irish Political Studies, 20(3), 297–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Canovan, M. (1999). Trust the people! Populism and the two faces of democracy. Political Studies, 47(1), 2–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cappella, J. A., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of Cynicism. The Press and the Public Good. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6(4), 284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cohen, J. E. (2008). The Presidency in the Era of 24-Hour News. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Vreese, C., Esser, F., & Hopmann, D. (Eds.). (2017). Comparing Political Journalism. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media distribution in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 571, 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Entman, R. M. (2010). Media framing biases and political power: Explaining slant in news of Campaign 2008. Journalism, 11(4), 389–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Esser, F., Stępińska, A., & Hopmann, D. (2017). Populism and the media: Cross-national findings and perspectives. In T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reinemann, J. Strömbäck, & C. de Vreese (Eds.), Populist Political Communication in Europe (pp. 365–380). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Freedman, P., & Goldstein, K. (1999). Measuring media exposure and the effects of negative campaign ads. American Journal of Political Science, 43(4), 1189–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. (1965). The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding What’s News. A Study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek, and Time. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Glaser, T., & Salmon, C. (1991). Public Opinion and the Communication of Consent. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  22. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gulati, G. J., Just, M. R., & Crigler, A. N. (2004). News coverage of political campaigns. In L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of Political Communication Research (pp. 237–256). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hallin, D., & Mancini, P. (2012). Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Harcup, T., & O’Neill, D. (2001). What is news? Galtung and Ruge revisited. Journalism Studies, 2(2), 261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hazan, R. Y. (1996). Presidential parliamentarism: Direct popular election of the prime minister. Electoral Studies, 15, 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Iyengar, S., Norpoth, H., & Hahn, H. S. (2004). Consumer demand for election news: The horserace sells. Journal of Politics, 66(1), 157–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jagers, J., & Walgrave, S. (2007). Populism as political communication style: An empirical study of political parties’ discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research, 46(3), 319–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kaid, L. L., & Strömbäck, J. (2009). A framework for comparing election news coverage around the world. In The Handbook of Election News Coverage around the World (pp. 21–38). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Karvonen, L. (2010). The personalization of politics: A study of parliamentary democracies. Political Communication, 27(4), 476–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kriesi, H. (2014). The populist challenge. West European Politics, 37(2), 361–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kriesi, H., & Pappas, T. S. (Eds.). (2015). European Populism in the Shadow of the Great Recession. Colchester: ECPR Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lengauer, G., Esser, F., & Berganza, R. (2012). Negativity in political news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maddens, B., & Fiers, S. (2004). The direct PM election and the institutional presidentialisation of parliamentary systems. Electoral Studies, 23, 769–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mair, P. (2002). Populist democracy vs. party democracy. In Y. Mény & Y. Surel (Eds.), Democracies and the Populist Challenge (pp. 81–98). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mazzoleni, G., Horsfield, B., & Stewart, J. (Eds.). (2003). The Media and Neo-populism: A Contemporary Comparative Analysis. Westport: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  38. McAllister, I. (2007). The personalization of politics. In R. J. Dalton & H. D. Klingemann (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Political Behavior. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from Scholar
  39. Moffitt, B., & Tormey, S. (2014). Rethinking populism: Politics, mediatisation and political style. Political Studies, 62(2), 381–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mudde, C. (2004). The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4), 541–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mughan, A. (2000). Media and the Presidentialization of Parliamentary Elections. London: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Neveu, E. (2002). The four generations of political journalism. In R. Kuhn & E. Neveu (Eds.), Political Journalism. New Challenges, New Practices (pp. 22–43). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Norris, P. (2011). Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ohr, D. (2011). Changing patterns in political communication. In K. Aarts, A. Blais, & H. Schmitt (Eds.), Political Leadership and Democratic Elections (pp. 11–34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Passarelli, G. (2015). Parties’ genetic features: The missing link in the presidentialization of politics. In G. Passarelli (Ed.), The Presidentialization of Political Parties. Organizations, Institutions, and Leaders. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Patterson, T. E. (1993). Out of Order. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
  47. Patterson, T. E. (1996). Bad news, bad governance. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546(1), 97–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Picard, R. G. (Ed.). (2015). The Euro Crisis in the Media: Journalistic Coverage of Economic Crisis and European Institutions. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  49. Poguntke, T., & Webb, P. (Eds.). (2005). The Presidentialization of Politics in Democratic Societies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Price, V., Tewksbury, D., & Powers, E. (1997). Switching trains of thought: The impact of news frames on readers’ cognitive responses. Communication Research, 24(5), 481–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Roberts, K. (2015). Populism, political mobilizations, and crises of political representation. In C. de la Torre (Ed.), The Promise and Perils of Populism (pp. 140–158). Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.Google Scholar
  52. Rooduijn, M. (2015). The rise of the populist radical right in Western Europe. European View, 14(1), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Salgado, S. (2010). Os Candidatos Presidenciais: Construção de Imagens e Discursos nos Media [Presidential Candidates: Construction of Images and Discourses in the Media]. Coimbra: MinervaCoimbra.Google Scholar
  54. Salgado, S. (2018). Where’s populism? Online media and the diffusion of populist discourses and styles in Portugal. European Political Science.
  55. Salgado, S. (with contributions of, Balabanic, I., Garcia-Luengo, Ó., Mustapic, M., Papathanassopoulos, S., Stępińska, A.) (2015). Election news in six European countries: What is covered and how? – Study for research project. Retrieved from
  56. Salgado, S., & Nienstedt, H. W. (2016). Euro crisis and plurality: Does the political orientation of newspapers determine the selection and spin of information? European Journal of Communication, 31(4), 462–478. Scholar
  57. Salgado, S., & Strömbäck, J. (2012). Interpretive journalism: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 144–161. Scholar
  58. Salgado, S., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., & Esser, F. (2017). Interpretive journalism. In C. de Vreese, F. Esser, & D. Hopmann (Eds.), Comparing Political Journalism (pp. 50–70). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1), 103–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shoemaker, P. J., Chang, T.-K., & Brendlinger, N. (1987/2012). Deviance as a predictor of newsworthiness: Coverage of international events in the U.S. media. In M. L. McLaughlin (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 10 (pp. 348–365). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Soroka, S. N. (2012). The gatekeeping function: Distributions of information in media and the real world. The Journal of Politics, 74(2), 514–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Soroka, S. N. (2014). Negativity in Democratic Politics. Causes and Consequences. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Stanyer, J., Salgado, S., & Strömbäck, J. (2017). Populist actors as communicators or political actors as populist communicators: A cross-national findings and perspectives. In T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reinemann, J. Strömbäck, & C. de Vreese (Eds.), Populist Political Communication in Europe (pp. 353–364). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Stemler, S. (2001). An overview of content analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7(17), 137–146.Google Scholar
  65. Strömbäck, J., & Aalberg, T. (2008). Election news coverage in democratic corporatist countries: A comparative study of Sweden and Norway. Scandinavian Political Studies, 31(1), 91–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Taggart, P. (2004). Populism and representative politics in contemporary Europe. Journal of Political Ideologies, 9(3), 269–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Van Aelst, P., Sheafer, T., & Stanyer, J. (2012). The personalization of mediated political communication: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Westerstahl, J., & Johansson, F. (1986). News ideologies as moulders of domestic news. European Journal of Communication, 1, 133–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susana Salgado
    • 1
  • Eileen Culloty
    • 2
  • Agnieszka Stępińska
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute of Social Sciences, University of LisbonLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.School of Communications, Dublin City UniversityDublinRepublic of Ireland
  3. 3.Adam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations