Dit is een samenvatting van het boek Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics van Hallin & Mancini (2004). Dit boek wordt gelezen in de studie IBCOM tijdens de course Media Systems in Comparative Perspective. De hoofdstukken die zijn samengevat zijn: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
Summary Media Systems in Comparitive Perspective (Hallin and Mancini)
Summary Media Systems in Comparative Perspective
Complete summary, Media Systems in Comparative Perspective, Week 1 - 8 (CM1008 @EUR)
Tout pour ce livre (6)
École, étude et sujet
Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam (EUR)
Communication and Media
Media System in Comparative Perspectives
Tous les documents sur ce sujet (9)
11
revues
Par: fatimaalzaabi • 2 année de cela
Par: mghari190 • 3 année de cela
Par: helenfrench60 • 4 année de cela
It's such a complex book to understand but this really lays out the key concepts involved and explains them so well
Par: yaniwille • 4 année de cela
Par: wendyleung • 4 année de cela
Par: tessakross • 4 année de cela
Par: daniellevanveen1 • 4 année de cela
Afficher plus de commentaires
Vendeur
S'abonner
172_mns
Avis reçus
Aperçu du contenu
Comparing Media Systems, three Models of Media and Politics
Daniel C. Hallin and Paolo Mancini
Chapter 1
Introduction
We place our focus on the relation between media systems and political systems, and therefore
emphasize the analysis of journalism and the news media, and, to a somewhat lesser extent, media
policy and law.
Why is press as it is? turn to comparative analysis
- The role of comparative analysis in social theory can be understood in terms of two basic
functions: its role in concept formation and clarification and its role in causal inference.
Why is comparative analysis valuable in social investigation?
1. Because it sensitizes us to variation and to similarity
- This can contribute powerfully to concept formation and to the refinement of our conceptual
apparatus
- It has the ‘capacity to render the invisible visible’, to draw our attention to aspects of any
media system, including our own, that ’may be taken for granted and difficult to detect when
the focus is on only one national case’.
- Comparative analysis makes it possible to notice things we did not notice and therefore had
not conceptualized, and it also forces us to clarify the scope and applicability of the concepts
we do employ.
- They ‘provide an important check on the generalizations implicit’ in our concepts and forces
us to clarify the limits of their application (Bendix).
- It can protect us from false generalizations, but can also encourage us to move from overly
particular explanations to more general ones where this is appropriate.
- Comparison can be ethnocentric.
- Comparative method properly applied provides a basis for systematic critique of work that
falls into these patterns of overgeneralization and conceptual narrowness.
2. Because it allows us in many cases to test hypotheses about the interrelationships among
social phenomena
- It is to compare cases where they are simultaneously present or absent (Durkheim).
The use of comparative analysis for causal inference belongs to a relatively advanced stage in the
process of analysis.
Purpose of the book: to develop a framework for comparing media systems and a set of hypotheses
about how they are linked structurally and historically to the development of the political system:
produce a cogent theoretical framework
Comparative analysis, particularly of the broad synthetic sort we are attempting here, is extremely
valuable but difficult to do well, especially when the state of the field is relatively primitive.
- Much of the collaboration is indirect
Scope of the study
- Focused on ‘most similar systems’ design: permit careful development of concepts that can
be used for further comparative analysis, as well as hypotheses about their interrelations.
- One of the greatest problems: many variables, few cases to solve: focus on a set of relatively
comparable variables.
- Exploratory research.
- Focus primarily on news media and media regulation (reduce property space of the analysis).
1
,The legacy of four theories of the press
- Thesis of this volume: the press always takes on the form and coloration of the social and
political structures within which it operates.
- It reflects the system of social control whereby the relations of individuals and institutions are
adjusted.
- One cannot understand the news media without understanding the nature of the state, the
systems of political parties, the pattern of relations between economic and political interests,
and the development of civil society, among other elements of social structure.
- Media will always be the ‘dependent variable’, in relation to the ‘system of social control’.
Media system models
- There is a great deal of appeal in the idea that the world’s media systems can be classified
using a small number of simple, discreet models (reason why Four Theories of the Press has
proved so influential).
- Three media system models will be introduced:
o Liberal Model: prevails across Britain, Ireland, North America.
Characteristic: relative dominance of market mechanisms and of commercial
media.
o Democratic Corporatist Model: prevails across northern continental Europe.
Characteristic: historical coexistence of commercial media and media tied to
organized social and political groups, and by relatively active but legally
limited role of the state.
o Polarized Pluralist Model: prevails in Mediterranean countries of southern Europe.
Characteristic: integration of the media into party politics, weaker historical
development of commercial media, and a strong role of the state.
- Primary purpose of the models: not classification of individual systems, but the identification
of characteristic patterns of relationship between system characteristics.
- The media do not constitute any single ‘system,’ with a single purpose of philosophy, but are
composed of many separate, overlapping often inconsistent elements, with appropriate
differences of normative expectation and actual regulation.
- Models will be identifying some of the underlying systemic relationships that help us to
understand these changes.
Do we need normative theories of the media?
- The models are intended as empirical, not normative models. Though, normative questions
are addressed.
- Considered important: diversity, openness and responsiveness, independence, and accuracy
and completeness of information.
- Under what circumstances did things happen.
Limitations of data
- Limitations impose severe restrictions on our ability to draw any firm conclusions about the
relations between media and society systems.
2
,Part 1 Concepts and Models
Chapter 2 Comparing Media Systems
Four major dimensions are proposed according to which media systems in Western Europe and North
America can usefully be compared:
1. The development of media markets, with particular emphasis on the strong or weak
development of a mass circulation press.
2. Political parallelism: the degree and nature of the links between the media and political
parties, or the extent to which the media system reflects the major political divisions in
society.
3. The development of journalistic professionalism.
4. The degree and nature of state intervention in the media system.
The structure of media markets: the development of a mass press
- One of the most obvious differences among media systems has to do with the development
of the mass circulation press.
- Newspapers Southern Europe: small elite, mainly urban, well-educated, politically active:
o Sophisticated and politicized in their content
o Involved in a horizontal process of debate and negotiation among elite factions.
- Newspapers Northern Europe and North America:
o Mass public not necessarily engaged in political world.
o Involved in a vertical process of communication mediating between political elites
and the ordinary citizen.
- The growth of a mass circulation press is by no means synonymous with commercialization.
Why differences?
- Gender differences
- Literacy rates
- Differences in relative roles of print and electronic media
- Distinction between media systems characterized by a clear separation between a
sensationalist mass press and ‘quality’ papers addressed to an elite readership and those that
lack such stratification of the newspaper market
- Newspapers vary in the balance of local, regional, national newspapers
- Size of media markets
- Language factors
Political parallelism
Functions of journalism:
- Provides info for economic actors about prices/events.
- Provides entertainment in the form of human interest stories and the print equivalent of
gossip.
- Provides political advocacy.
Important differences have persisted among media systems in the strength of connections between
the media and political actors and the balance between the advocacy and neutral/informational
tradition of political journalism.
One of the most obvious differences among media systems: some countries have distinct political
orientations, other do not.
- Distinction is expressed by the concept of party-press parallelism (broader concept of
political parallelism).
Components of political parallelism:
3
, 1. Media content: the extent to which the different media reflect distinct political orientations in
their news.
2. Organizational connections between media and political parties or other kinds of
organizations.
3. Tendency for media personnel to be active in political life (less common today).
4. Tendency in some systems for the career paths of journalists and other media personnel to be
shaped by their political affiliations (more common today).
5. Partisanship of media audiences: supporters of different parties/tendencies buying different
newspapers or watching different TV channels.
6. Manifested in journalistic role orientations and practices: some retain more of the ‘publicist’
role that once prevailed in political journalism (= influencing public opinion), others see
themselves as providers of neutral info or entertainment (= low level of political parallelism).
a. Differences are connected with differences in emphasis on commentary or analysis
versus news gathering.
b. Also, because they are manifested in the organization of journalistic labor, with
journalists in some systems moving fairly freely between the roles of reporter and
commentator, while in others those roles tend to be segregated.
In systems where political parallelism is strong, the culture and discursive style of journalism is closely
related to that of politics.
Closely related to the concept of political parallelism is the distinction between two manners in which
media systems handle diversity of political loyalties and orientations:
1. External pluralism: pluralism achieved at the level of the media system as a whole, through
the existence of a range of media outlets or organizations reflecting the points of view of
different groups or tendencies in society. High level of political parallelism.
2. Internal pluralism: pluralism achieved within each individual media outlet or organization.
Refer to cases where media organizations both avoid institutional ties to political groups and
attempt to maintain neutrality and ‘balance’ in their content. Sometimes used to refer to
media organizations that formally represent a variety of political forces within the structure
and content of a single organization. Low level of political parallelism.
Political parallelism in broadcast governance and regulation
Four basic models for the governance of public broadcasting:
1. Government model (high end of political parallelism)
- Public broadcasting is controlled directly by the government or by the political majority.
- E.g.: French broadcasting under DeGaulle.
2. Professional model (low end of political parallelism)
- A strong tradition developed that broadcasting should be largely insulated from political
control and run by broadcasting professionals.
- E.g.: British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC).
3. Parliamentary/proportional representation model (middle of political parallelism)
- Control over public broadcasting is divided among the political parties by proportional
representation.
- E.g.: Radiotelevisione Italiana (RAI).
- Really distinct from the government model in systems where coalition government and
power sharing are typical.
4. ‘civic’ or ‘corporatist’ model (middle of political parallelism)
- Similar to the parliamentary model in the sense that control of public service broadcasting is
distributed among various social and political groups, but differs in that representation is
extended beyond political parties to other kinds of ‘socially relevant groups’.
- E.g.: Dutch ‘pillarized’ system.
Kelly (1983) proposes a three-way distinction (underline an important difference of philosophy):
4
Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:
Qualité garantie par les avis des clients
Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.
L’achat facile et rapide
Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.
Focus sur l’essentiel
Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.
Foire aux questions
Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?
Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.
Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?
Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.
Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?
Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur 172_mns. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.
Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?
Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour €4,49. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.
