Media en Politiek
CM4405
Samenvatting
Esmée Lieuw On
, Week 1: Democratische crisis
Hoofdstuk 1: Introducing Political Communication in Crisis Times
● Political communication = purposeful communication about politics
❖ Includes all forms of communication undertaken by politicians and other
political actors, communication addressed to these actors by non-politicians
such as voters and activists, communication about these actors and their
activities as contained in news reports, editorials or other forms of media
● Traditional left-right political spectrums were no longer the clearest means of
identifying or uniting a party → legacy media of the public sphere was dying & social
media was rapidly reconfiguring the basis on which politics and journalism operated
● For modernization theorists Pippa Norris & Ronald Inglehart, notions of a crisis were
superficial and a short-term reaction to changing times → democracies were really
experiencing temporary cycles of disruption and renewal
● Legacy news media consumption has declined, so we have a new wave of alternative
online publications, blogs, tweets, and social networking spaces → politics media and
participation are being reconfigured with multiple, vibrant alternatives springing up
everywhere
● There are three great disrupters of current-day nation-state democracy:
1. Globalization: involves greater interconnectedness, exchange and interaction
across national borders
2. Neoliberalism: favored market-based solutions to economic and political
problems
3. New information and communication technologies: internet, digitalization,
mobile phones etc. have combined to reconfigure politics, media and
communication (but also led to fake news and echo chambers)
● Digital developments could be driving democracies towards a fourth age of political
communication → no more top-down pyramidical model of elite to mass
communication
● Three contentious conclusions:
1. Modern democracy itself is in the midst of an existential crisis as weighty and
disturbing as any since 1945
2. Several core foundational elements of the scholarly field of political
communication are in desperate need of a rethink
3. However the changes are evaluated, the fourth age of political communication
has well and truly arrived for wealthy, Western capitalist democracies if not
other nations and systems
,Hoofdstuk 2: Evaluating Democratic Politics and Communication
● Understanding what norms, ideals, institutions and practices make for a strong, stable
democracy is important for a few reasons:
❖ We need a framework for evaluating what we have
❖ A set of markers aids us in making judgments about whether and to what
degree our democracy is in crisis
❖ Such discussions help identify the range of alternatives on offer, enabling
debates about what changes might be adopted in future
● Three core concepts come up in virtually every treatise or declaration of rights:
liberty (physical freedom of the individual and the need to be free from coercion of
monarchs and all-powerful states), equality (all individuals on the same standing) and
some sense of binding nationhood
❖ In relation to public communication, these core ideals are interpreted in the
following ways:
Liberty: media has a role to play to support individual liberties and
freedom of speech by keeping governments and their leaders in check
(watch-dog)
Equality: equal access to information and to expression of opinion
Nationhood: general sense of public media, culture and communication
pulling all citizens together
● For others, ideal democracy requires more inclusive participation on every social and
political level and accordingly, good democratic processes should encourage that
● Public spheres operated some important, progressive practices → involvement was
decoupled from social status which meant more inclusiveness and extensive
participation + increasingly commercialized and mass mediated public sphere
inevitably became polluted with promotional and self-serving material
● Habermas offered a new evaluative framework where democracies were two-track
systems, which channeled the multiple spheres of civil society through to legislative
bodies, which then deliberated and produced law
● A commonly debated issue in comparative media systems work is whether states
should have a greater or lesser role when it comes to the funding, ownership and
general regulation of media → market advocates argue that individual liberties are
best protected through media that are free from state control → market-led news
media tend to produce softer news, less investigative reporting and more poorly
informed citizens
Seminar 1
● Politiek als systeem (Den Haag) tegenover burgers (mensen die stemmen, krant lezen
etc.) die wat moeten vinden van de politiek en dat gaat meestal via de journalistiek
● Op grote schaal: kwantitatieve inhoudsanalyses of effectenonderzoeken
, ● Wat is de betekenis die wordt uitgezonden? → allemaal context bepalend (anders in
bijv. Groot-Brittannië)
● Nederlandse politieke cultuur is niet hetzelfde als Amerikaanse politieke cultuur, dus
als je wil weten hoe de Nederlandse politiek eruit ziet, moet je dat met een
Nederlandse blik bekijken
● Nederland is een consensusdemocratie → systeem van evenredige
vertegenwoordiging (50% van de stemmen, dan krijgen ze 50% van de zetels),
wortels in de verzuiling (het systeem is een gevolg hiervan), versnipperd landschap,
samenwerking in coalities (om iets te bereiken, moet je het samen doen)
● Een ander belangrijk kenmerk van Nederlandse politieke cultuur is dat wij zijn heel
internationaal gericht
❖ Klein handelsland
❖ Profiteren van open grenzen
❖ Afhankelijkheid van buitenland
❖ Er is altijd een enthousiasme over internationale instellingen
❖ Weer: samenwerking
❖ Probleem: Deze houding staat onder druk (Hebben we een probleem met
migranten of met de houding van migranten?)
● Democratie
❖ Normatieve idealen = hoe democratie zou moeten werken, ons idee van wat
goed is
❖ Staat in verband met de rechtsstaat (= overheid houd zich aan de wet, ze
mogen niks anders doen dan wat in de wet staat)
❖ Als er wetgeving wordt gemaakt, dan wordt dat gedaan door mensen die wij
daar hebben neergezet en de rechtsstaat voert dat dan precies uit
❖ Representatieve democratie = burgers kiezen vertegenwoordigers en die
vertegenwoordigers nemen besluiten (bijv. CDA)
❖ Directe democratie = burgers nemen zelf beslissingen, referenda, burgerfora
etc., lokaal makkelijker te organiseren dan Europees → in praktijk wordt dit
bijna niet gedaan (bijv. PVV/FvD)
❖ Geïnformeerd burgerschap: burgers moeten op basis van informatie besluiten
nemen, dit stelt eisen aan de journalistiek
Wie besluit wat en waarom? Welke gevolgen hebben die beslissingen?
Weten burgers wel genoeg? Krijgen ze voldoende informatie?
❖ Participatief burgerschap: burgers moeten deelnemen aan politieke
besluitvorming
Wat doen burgers op politiek terrein en waarom? Welke macht hebben
burgers? Hoe gaan bestuurders daarmee om?
❖ Monitorend burgerschap (empirische variant): burgers letten vooral op hun
eigen belangen, raken gealarmeerd als die in gevaar zijn → burgers maken een
selectie van thema’s die zij belangrijk vinden, daar letten ze dan op
Wat vinden burgers belangrijk? Worden burgers gealarmeerd?
● Daadkracht (bijv. migratie, Gaza, klimaat)
CM4405
Samenvatting
Esmée Lieuw On
, Week 1: Democratische crisis
Hoofdstuk 1: Introducing Political Communication in Crisis Times
● Political communication = purposeful communication about politics
❖ Includes all forms of communication undertaken by politicians and other
political actors, communication addressed to these actors by non-politicians
such as voters and activists, communication about these actors and their
activities as contained in news reports, editorials or other forms of media
● Traditional left-right political spectrums were no longer the clearest means of
identifying or uniting a party → legacy media of the public sphere was dying & social
media was rapidly reconfiguring the basis on which politics and journalism operated
● For modernization theorists Pippa Norris & Ronald Inglehart, notions of a crisis were
superficial and a short-term reaction to changing times → democracies were really
experiencing temporary cycles of disruption and renewal
● Legacy news media consumption has declined, so we have a new wave of alternative
online publications, blogs, tweets, and social networking spaces → politics media and
participation are being reconfigured with multiple, vibrant alternatives springing up
everywhere
● There are three great disrupters of current-day nation-state democracy:
1. Globalization: involves greater interconnectedness, exchange and interaction
across national borders
2. Neoliberalism: favored market-based solutions to economic and political
problems
3. New information and communication technologies: internet, digitalization,
mobile phones etc. have combined to reconfigure politics, media and
communication (but also led to fake news and echo chambers)
● Digital developments could be driving democracies towards a fourth age of political
communication → no more top-down pyramidical model of elite to mass
communication
● Three contentious conclusions:
1. Modern democracy itself is in the midst of an existential crisis as weighty and
disturbing as any since 1945
2. Several core foundational elements of the scholarly field of political
communication are in desperate need of a rethink
3. However the changes are evaluated, the fourth age of political communication
has well and truly arrived for wealthy, Western capitalist democracies if not
other nations and systems
,Hoofdstuk 2: Evaluating Democratic Politics and Communication
● Understanding what norms, ideals, institutions and practices make for a strong, stable
democracy is important for a few reasons:
❖ We need a framework for evaluating what we have
❖ A set of markers aids us in making judgments about whether and to what
degree our democracy is in crisis
❖ Such discussions help identify the range of alternatives on offer, enabling
debates about what changes might be adopted in future
● Three core concepts come up in virtually every treatise or declaration of rights:
liberty (physical freedom of the individual and the need to be free from coercion of
monarchs and all-powerful states), equality (all individuals on the same standing) and
some sense of binding nationhood
❖ In relation to public communication, these core ideals are interpreted in the
following ways:
Liberty: media has a role to play to support individual liberties and
freedom of speech by keeping governments and their leaders in check
(watch-dog)
Equality: equal access to information and to expression of opinion
Nationhood: general sense of public media, culture and communication
pulling all citizens together
● For others, ideal democracy requires more inclusive participation on every social and
political level and accordingly, good democratic processes should encourage that
● Public spheres operated some important, progressive practices → involvement was
decoupled from social status which meant more inclusiveness and extensive
participation + increasingly commercialized and mass mediated public sphere
inevitably became polluted with promotional and self-serving material
● Habermas offered a new evaluative framework where democracies were two-track
systems, which channeled the multiple spheres of civil society through to legislative
bodies, which then deliberated and produced law
● A commonly debated issue in comparative media systems work is whether states
should have a greater or lesser role when it comes to the funding, ownership and
general regulation of media → market advocates argue that individual liberties are
best protected through media that are free from state control → market-led news
media tend to produce softer news, less investigative reporting and more poorly
informed citizens
Seminar 1
● Politiek als systeem (Den Haag) tegenover burgers (mensen die stemmen, krant lezen
etc.) die wat moeten vinden van de politiek en dat gaat meestal via de journalistiek
● Op grote schaal: kwantitatieve inhoudsanalyses of effectenonderzoeken
, ● Wat is de betekenis die wordt uitgezonden? → allemaal context bepalend (anders in
bijv. Groot-Brittannië)
● Nederlandse politieke cultuur is niet hetzelfde als Amerikaanse politieke cultuur, dus
als je wil weten hoe de Nederlandse politiek eruit ziet, moet je dat met een
Nederlandse blik bekijken
● Nederland is een consensusdemocratie → systeem van evenredige
vertegenwoordiging (50% van de stemmen, dan krijgen ze 50% van de zetels),
wortels in de verzuiling (het systeem is een gevolg hiervan), versnipperd landschap,
samenwerking in coalities (om iets te bereiken, moet je het samen doen)
● Een ander belangrijk kenmerk van Nederlandse politieke cultuur is dat wij zijn heel
internationaal gericht
❖ Klein handelsland
❖ Profiteren van open grenzen
❖ Afhankelijkheid van buitenland
❖ Er is altijd een enthousiasme over internationale instellingen
❖ Weer: samenwerking
❖ Probleem: Deze houding staat onder druk (Hebben we een probleem met
migranten of met de houding van migranten?)
● Democratie
❖ Normatieve idealen = hoe democratie zou moeten werken, ons idee van wat
goed is
❖ Staat in verband met de rechtsstaat (= overheid houd zich aan de wet, ze
mogen niks anders doen dan wat in de wet staat)
❖ Als er wetgeving wordt gemaakt, dan wordt dat gedaan door mensen die wij
daar hebben neergezet en de rechtsstaat voert dat dan precies uit
❖ Representatieve democratie = burgers kiezen vertegenwoordigers en die
vertegenwoordigers nemen besluiten (bijv. CDA)
❖ Directe democratie = burgers nemen zelf beslissingen, referenda, burgerfora
etc., lokaal makkelijker te organiseren dan Europees → in praktijk wordt dit
bijna niet gedaan (bijv. PVV/FvD)
❖ Geïnformeerd burgerschap: burgers moeten op basis van informatie besluiten
nemen, dit stelt eisen aan de journalistiek
Wie besluit wat en waarom? Welke gevolgen hebben die beslissingen?
Weten burgers wel genoeg? Krijgen ze voldoende informatie?
❖ Participatief burgerschap: burgers moeten deelnemen aan politieke
besluitvorming
Wat doen burgers op politiek terrein en waarom? Welke macht hebben
burgers? Hoe gaan bestuurders daarmee om?
❖ Monitorend burgerschap (empirische variant): burgers letten vooral op hun
eigen belangen, raken gealarmeerd als die in gevaar zijn → burgers maken een
selectie van thema’s die zij belangrijk vinden, daar letten ze dan op
Wat vinden burgers belangrijk? Worden burgers gealarmeerd?
● Daadkracht (bijv. migratie, Gaza, klimaat)
