Abstract
The fourth chapter is devoted to an empirical examination of the scope conditions on a more general level using quantitative content analysis across time and cases. Using a comparative approach, the chapter explores how and to what extent foreign policy roles adopt media logic. To expand on the question on the scope conditions of mediatization, approximately 20 years of speeches in the UNGA, from the early 1990s to 2011, are studied. The results in this chapter indicate that mediatization resulting in the adoption of media logic in the political rhetoric does not occur consistently. Instead, there is clear evidence supporting the likelihood of mediatization and the adoption of media logic under certain scope conditions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Some earlier studies have indicated that mediatization varies between different political actors and organizations both within and across countries. Perhaps most important is the conclusion that the development is seldom straightforward or linear; mediatization is not a process that only goes in one direction. However, mediatization research seldom theorizes the scope conditions of mediatization.
- 2.
However, we still have reason already here to specify some general directions in which the potential change in content can be expected to go. First, if the form of politics is transformed into a “strategic horse game” shaped by “simplification, polarization, intensification, personalization, visualization and stereotypization,” then we should expect a stronger focus on political issues easy to communicate in a black and white manner or issues with an existential dimension. We should to a lesser extent expect politics, at least the part of politics communicated to the public, to focus on complicated long-term strategic issues. But it should be underlined that such issues can be of very different characters in different political cultures.
- 3.
However, there is reason to question the dialectical relationship between these two logics as seen to their more fundamental forces of motivation. As Thesen argues, both logics can be seen as motivated by a struggle between competing interests. But despite this similarity, the two logics can still be expected to guide actors to behave and express themselves in different ways, according to our framework.
- 4.
The UNGA setting might be less mediatized than other settings, such as national parliaments; however, this is not a major problem since the situation is the same for all actors being investigated.
- 5.
Unfortunately, we have not been able to obtain transcripts of three of the speeches (UK 1992 and 1993 and Finland 1994). A fourth speech is also not included, that of Finland in 1999. This is because Finland represented the EU in lieu of its presidency of the European Council that year, and chose not to give an independent Finnish speech.
- 6.
We have included two more speeches in the Swedish case. This can partly explain the higher number of arguments in the Swedish case. But, since the mean number of arguments per speech is still higher, this cannot alone explain the difference.
- 7.
We should point out that the total number of coded statements do not vary significantly over the period but remain fairly stable. There may be some variation from year to year, but no general significant trend over the entire period. Changes in the level of individualized statements (Fig. 4.1) or statements characterized by political logic can therefore not be explained by variance in the number of statements.
- 8.
Cf. Elisabeth Eide and Risto Kunelius (eds.) Media Meets Climate—The Global Challenge for Journalism (Göteborg: Nordicom, 2012).
- 9.
However, see Maxwell T. Boykoff, ‘Public Enemy No. I? Understanding Media Representations of Outlier Views on Climate Change’, American Behavioral Scientist, 57(6), 2013, 796–817; Maxwell T. Boykoff and Tom Yulsman ‘Political Economy, Media, and Climate Change: Sinews of Modern Life’, Wiley Interdisciplinary Review—Climate Change, 4(5), 2013, 359–371 for a discussion of how the issue of climate change is mediatized in different ways across different countries and cultures.
- 10.
We have coded 20 Swedish speeches (1992–2010), 18 British speeches (1994–2011) and 18 Finnish speeches (1992–2011, except 1994 and 1999).
References
Literature
Brommesson, Douglas, and Ann-Marie Ekengren. 2013. What Happens When a New Government Enters Office? A Comparison of Ideological Change in Swedish and British Foreign Policy 1993–2010. Cooperation and Conflict 48(1): 3–27.
Djerf-Pierre, Monika, et al. 2014. “The mediatization of political accountability: Politics, the news media logic and industrial crises in the 1980s and 2000s.” Journalism Studies 15.3: 321-338.
Nord, Lars, and Jesper Strömbäck. 2005. Hot på agendan: en analys av nyhetsförmedling om risker och kriser. Stockholm: Krisberedskapsmyndigheten.
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1974. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Vol. 5. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Robinson, Piers. 2011. The CNN Effect Reconsidered: Mapping a Research Agenda for the Future. Media War & Conflict 4(1): 3–11.
Strömbäck, Jesper. 2010. Mediatization and Perceptions of the Media’s Political Influence. Journalism Studies 12(4): 423–439.
Strömbäck, Jesper, and Frank Esser. 2014. Introduction. Making Sense of the Mediatization of Politics. Journalism Practice 8(3): 247.
Strömbäck, Jesper, and Lars Nord. 2006. Do Politicians Lead the Tango? A Study of the Relationship between Swedish Journalist and their Political Sources in the Context of Election Campaigns. European Journal of Communication 21(2): 147–164.
Strong, James. 2012. More Spinn’d Against than Spinning? Public Opinion, Political Communication, and Britain’s Involvement in the 2003 Invasion of Iraq. Ph.D. thesis, The London School of Economics and Political Science, London.
Thesen, Gunnar. 2014. Political Agenda Setting as Mediatized Politics? Media–Politics Interactions from a Party and Issue Competition Perspective. The International Journal of Press/Politics 19(2): 181–201.
Van Ealst, Peter, Kees Brants, Philip Van Praag, Claes De Vreese, Michiel Nuytemans, and Arjen Van Dalen. 2008. The Fourth Estate as Superpower? Journalism Studies 9(4): 494–511.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Appendix. Code Sheet: The Mediatization of European Foreign Policy
Appendix. Code Sheet: The Mediatization of European Foreign Policy
-
1.
Give each speech a code (country code + year of the speech, e.g. SWE 1995)
-
2.
The date of the speech
-
3.
How many pages does the speech contain?
-
4.
In how many arguments are the following themes discussed (one code for each argument)? Several themes can occur in one argument.
-
1.
Power balance/military balance/levels of armament
-
2.
International security (security between states)
-
3.
Economic redistribution between states/regions/parts of the world
-
4.
Free trade
-
5.
Economic and financial systems
-
6.
Economic sanctions against states
-
7.
Institutional reforms
-
8.
Migration
-
9.
Foreign aid or international development
-
10.
Conflict management: military means (including humanitarian interventions)
-
11.
Conflict management: civilian means
-
12.
Human rights (political and social rights)
-
13.
Democracy
-
14.
Rule of law
-
15.
Human security
-
16.
Climate/environment (including sustainable development)
-
17.
Health issues/health threat
-
18.
Humanitarian catastrophes (natural disaster, starvation, food crisis, etc.)
-
19.
Women’s rights/lack of rights/women as victims (in conflicts/trafficking/economic dependency, etc.)
-
20.
Children’s rights/lack of rights/children as victims
-
21.
NGOs and civil society
-
22.
Education
-
1.
-
5.
Does the speech in its entirety bear the stamp of issues/processes being described in a simplified or complex way?
(As a coder you must weigh different parts of the speech and catch the full picture)
-
1.
Simplified
-
2.
Complex
-
3.
Not possible to determine
-
6.
Does the speech refer to two or more sides of the problem being discussed?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
7.
Are individual actors (political leaders and others) framed in the speech as important actors?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
8.
Are states framed in the speech as important actors?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
9.
Are collective organizations framed in the speech as important actors (UN, EU, AU, NATO, etc.)?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
10.
Are individuals framed in the speech as important objects (receiver of political action/critique/support)?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
11.
Are states framed in the speech as important objects (receiver of political action/critique/support)?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
12.
Are there examples of argumentation in the speech where the rights of individuals are prioritized over the rights of states?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
13.
Are there examples of argumentation in the speech where the security of individuals is prioritized over the security of states?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
14.
Are there dramaturgical examples in the speech identifying winners and/or losers in a strategic meaning and/or in individual issues?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
15.
Does the speech refer to public opinion (opinion polls, demonstrations, etc.)?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
16.
Does the speech refer to individual human examples when discussing issues or problems?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
17.
Are adjectives or illustrative descriptions used that can be assumed to generate feelings of “outrage, identification, empathy caring, sympathy or compassion”?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
-
18.
Does the speech reflect differences in opinion between states, parties, groups, organizations or individuals?
-
1.
Yes
-
2.
No
-
1.
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brommesson, D., Ekengren, AM. (2017). Mediatization in the United Nations General Assembly. In: The Mediatization of Foreign Policy, Political Decision-Making, and Humanitarian Intervention. The Palgrave Macmillan Series in International Political Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54461-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-54461-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-54460-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-54461-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)