1,721,012 research outputs found
Communicating political positions on European issues – a comparison of parties and newspapers in seven countriesi
Get PDFThis article starts from the observation that most voters know relatively little about positions and plans of political parties, especially when European Union politics is concerned. One reason for this could be that the main sources for political information, party communication and mass media coverage, provide voters only little concrete information about positions and plans of political parties. We ask how concretely, respectively vaguely, political parties and mass media communicate political positions prior to the 2014 European Parliament elections. We conducted a quantitative content analysis of all European Union–related press releases from 46 national political parties and of all European Union–related articles of 14 national quality newspapers from 7 European countries 12 weeks before the 2014 European Parliament elections. Our analysis shows that press releases as well as media coverage contain more concrete political positions on European Union issues than vague political statements. Other than expected, newspaper coverage provided the public with less concrete information than political actors did. Nevertheless, countries vary with regard to the extent to which party communication or newspaper coverage contain vague statements. We cannot find empirical support that the communication of concrete political positions depends on a party’s “extremity” of issue position or on the type of issue
Strategies of pro-EU parties in the face of a Euroskeptic challenge
Get PDFWe ask how pro-European parties communicate in the face of a Eurosceptic challenge and how this affects the politicization of European Union integration within a country. We draw on a quantitative content analysis of parties’ press releases issued in the run-up to the 2014 European Parliament elections in seven countries. Our results show that pro-European parties as such put Europe on the agenda, debate issues similar to those voiced by Eurosceptics and defend their pro-European positions: yet, they do so to varying degrees and with major exceptions. It is pro-European catch-all parties with strong internal dissent that silence Europe and choose blurring or adoption strategies. Consequently, the politicization of European integration varies among countries, thereby high topic visibility is accompanied by low levels of party conflict
Mein Service-Favorit
No full textAllein im Jahr 2022 wurden laut der Datenbank Scopus mehr als drei Millionen wissenschaftliche Artikel und Bücher veröffentlicht, also mehr als 8000 wissenschaftliche Publikationen pro Tag – eine schier unüberschaubare Menge. Wie sollen Journalisten und Journalistinnen hieraus die „wichtigsten“ Befunde für ihre Wissenschaftsberichterstattung auswählen? Auf den Wissenschaftsseiten deutscher Tageszeitungen beispielsweise (die in den meisten Fällen nicht einmal täglich erscheinen) ist in der Regel Platz für maximal eine Handvoll Beiträge.
Und wie sollen Journalisten und Journalistinnen einschätzen können, welche der publizierten Befunde wissenschaftlich fundiert und vertrauenswürdig sind? Das Science Media Center Germany (SMC) hat sich zur Aufgabe gemacht, Journalisten und Journalistinnen Orientierung bezüglich dieser und weiterer Fragen zu geben. Es fungiert als unabhängiger Intermediär zwischen Wissenschaft und Journalismus, als „Themenradar“ für Relevantes aus der Wissenschaft und liefert Einschätzungen sowie Stellungnahmen ausgewählter Fachleute zu wissenschaftlichen Themen und Publikationen. Darüber hinaus organisiert das SMC Press Briefings mit Forschenden, stellt Datenreports etwa zur zeitlichen Entwicklung des Coronageschehens oder der Füllstände der Gasspeicher in Deutschland bereit sowie ein Tool zur Recherche wissenschaftlicher Experten und Expertinnen und vieles mehr. Spätestens seit der Coronapandemie ist uns bewusst, wie relevant guter Wissenschaftsjournalismus ist. Das SMC leistet hierzu einen wichtigen Beitrag und ist deshalb mein Favorit
Horse-race coverage (Election Campaign Coverage)
Get PDFThe term horse-race coverage refers to one of the most prominent types of election coverage (e.g., Schmuck et al., 2017) that strongly focuses on winners and losers (who is ahead?). Typically, it is related to opinion polls and/or election outcomes. Quite often also “a language of war or games to describe the campaign” (Aalberg et al., 2012, p. 167) is involved in this kind of news stories, although – in a narrow sense – this aspect does not seem to be an essential part of the concept of horse-race coverage (e.g., Banducci & Hanretty, 2014). Regarding the conceptual definitions, a development in the terminology may be noticed: “The original horse race news became part of the game frame which was later discussed as part of the strategy frame.” (Aalberg et al., 2012, p. 166) In other words, the term ‘game frame’ is sometimes used synonymously with ‘horse-race’ coverage (although some scholars discuss whether these concepts can actually be used synonymously; e.g., Banducci & Hanretty, 2014; de Vreese 2005; Valentino et al., 2001).
Field of application/theoretical foundation:
Horse-race coverage is a very popular concept that is analyzed in research on the media coverage of politics, especially in times of elections and election campaigns.
References/combination with other methods of data collection
The analysis of horse-race coverage may be combined or compared with opinion polls and election outcomes. Furthermore, experimental studies that analyze potential effects of the horse-race coverage on recipients (e.g., political cynicism) exist (e.g., Lavrakas et al., 1991; Valentino et al., 2001).
Example
Although often analyzed, the operationalization of horse-race coverage in quantitative content analyses differs. Aalberg et al. (2012) review existing concepts and operationalizations and provide a set of coding instructions, which are cited below.
Coding instructions (direct quotation) by Aalberg et al. (2012, p. 177):
Game frame [respectively horse-race coverage]
1 Does the story deal with opinion polls and politicians’ or parties’ standing in the polls?
This variable has two codes: 0 = no, 1 = yes.
Coders should type 1 if the news story at least once mentions opinion polls and the standing of political parties or individual candidates in these. Coders should also type 1 if the news story includes references to generic ‘polls’ or ‘the opinion’ and the standing of political parties or candidates according to ‘polls’ or ‘the opinion’. Otherwise coders should type 0.
2 Does the story deal with politicians, parties or other actors in relation to potential election outcomes and/or coalitions/government formation?
This variable has two codes: 0 = no, 1 = yes.
Coders should type 1 if the news story reports or speculates about election results or government/coalition formations. Otherwise coders should type 0.
3 Does the story deal with politicians, parties or other actors winning or losing (elections, debates or in general)?
This variable has two codes: 0 = no, 1 = yes.
Coders should type 1 if the news story at least once refers to whether politicians, parties or other actors are winning or losing with respect to elections, debates or in general. Otherwise coders should type 0.
4 Does the story make use of a language of sports or war?
This variable has two codes: 0 = no, 1 = yes.
Coders should type 1 if the news story at least once makes use of a language of sports and war, such as battle, competition, winning, or fight. Only exempted expression is ‘campaign’. Otherwise coders should type 0.
References
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.
Banducci, S., & Hanretty, C. (2014). Comparative determinants of horse-race coverage. European Political Science Review, 6(4), 621-640.
de Vreese C.H. (2005). The Spiral of Cynicism reconsidered. European Journal of Communication, 20(3), 283–301.
Lavrakas, P.J., Holley, J.K., & Miller, P.V. (1991). Public reactions to polling news during the 1988 presidential election campaign. In P.J. Lavrakas, & J.K. Holley (Eds.). Polling and presidential election coverage (pp. 151-183). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Schmuck, D., Heiss, R., Matthes, J., Engesser, S., & Esser, F. (2017). Antecedents of strategic game framing in political news coverage. Journalism, 18(8), 937-955.
Valentino, N.A., Beckmann, M.N., & Buhr, T.A. (2001). A spiral of cynicism for some: The contingent effects of campaign news frames on participation and confidence in government. Political Communication, 18(4), 347–367
Berichterstattung über Bundestagswahlen – Befunde und Prognosen
No full textWie die deutsche Presse über alle Bundestagswahlkämpfe seit 1949 berichtet hat, ist Gegenstand einer Langzeitinhaltsanalyse, die zur diesjährigen Bundestagswahl fortgeführt wird. Eine ihrer Autor:innen nennt zentrale Befunde und wagt erste Prognosen
Negativity (Election Campaign Coverage)
Get PDFThe term negativity in communication science refers to a news factor and to a tendency of media coverage. To put it simply, negativity as a news factor means that negative events (like controversies, conflicts, aggression, damage and so on) or so-called ‘bad news’ is more newsworthy than good ones (e.g., Galtung & Ruge, 1965). However, negativity is quite a complex concept and it is defined differently in research depending on the focus of the study. Lengauer et al. (2011) differentiate between actor-related and frame-related dimensions of negativity. At the ‘actor level’, negativity describes the tonality directed towards individual actors (for example political representatives or their organizations) in media coverage. At the ‘frame-related level’, negativity describes, for example, the overall tonality of the news story (predominantly negative), a pessimistic outlook in the story and/or a story focus on conflict or incapability and misconduct (Lengauer et al., 2011, pp. 183-185).
Field of application/theoretical foundation:
Negativity is widely analyzed in communication studies. The focus of this article lies on negativity in election (campaign) coverage. Furthermore, negativity (as a news factor) is often analyzed in news value studies respectively studies that analyze journalistic news selection criteria, in news bias studies as well as in video/media malaise or framing research (and others).
References/combination with other methods of data collection:
The analysis of negativity in media coverage may be combined or compared with journalist and population surveys (for example in news value studies or in framing research) as well as with so called “extra media data” (Rosengren, 1970, p. 96) (for example in news bias research). Furthermore, experimental studies that analyze the potential effects of a negative tonality of news coverage on recipients are possible.
Example:
The concept of negativity lacks an agreed-upon operationalization. Lengauer et al. (2011) review and systematize existing concepts and provide a set of coding instructions, which are cited below. Regarding the coding unit, Lengauer et al. (2011) suggest that coding should focus on the story level (instead of statement or paragraph level).
Coding instructions (direct quotation) by Lengauer et al. (2011, pp. 195-197):
Level of negative tone towards political actors (persons or institutions)
Does the report convey primarily a positive/affirmative, negative/critical or balanced/neutral impression of a specific political actor or are no clear indications referring to the positive or negative tone towards political actors identifiable?
Indications of a prevalent negative tone toward a specific political actor are depictions of individual failure, fiasco, disaster, crisis, frustration, miscarriage, collapse, flop, rejection, neglect, default, defeat, deterioration, resignation, disdain, received critique, criticism, attacks, scandal, moralizing accusation, allegations of misconduct, charge of wrongdoing, mistrust, accusation of incompetence or negative traits. Indications of a prevalent positive tone toward a political actor are depictions of individual victory, win, triumph, success, achievement, accomplishment, problem solutions, improvement, advance, prosperity, laudation, asset, sustainability, commendation, accordance of competence, compliment, portrayals of merit, esteem, trust or positive traits. If a report does not reflect indications of negative tonality or of positive tonality towards the specific actor, then it has to be coded as ‘neutral’.
The variable has three codes:
-1 = predominantly negative tone towards the actor
0 = balanced/ambivalent/neutral tone towards the actor
+1 = predominantly positive tone towards the actor
Level of negative tonality
What is the overall tone of the story? Does the report convey primarily a positive, negative, balanced or neutral impression of politics, political records, conditions or views?
Indications of negative tonality are the framing of the story as political failure, fiasco, disaster, crisis, frustration, collapse, flop, denial, rejection, neglect, default, deterioration, resignation, skepticism, threats, cynicism, defeatism or disappointment. Indications of positive tonality are depictions of political success, problem solutions, achievement, improvement, advance, prosperity, accomplishment, enthusiasm, hope, benefit, gain, sustainability, gratification or accomplishment. If a report does not reflect indications of negative tonality or of positive tonality, then it has to be coded as ‘neutral’.
The variable has three codes:
-1 = predominantly negative tonality
0 = balanced/ambivalent/neutral
+1 = predominantly positive tonality
Level of pessimistic outlook
Does the story convey primarily optimistic, pessimistic or balanced outlooks on politics or are no indications referring to political outlooks identifiable?
An optimistic depiction is given when the framing of the report generates the intersubjective impression that positive developments in politics are realistic, possible, or at hand (depictions of optimism, positive outlooks and scenarios, hopeful views, prosperous developments, potential gains, potential solutions or promising expectations). In contrast, pessimistic depictions are given when the framing of the report generates the impression that negative developments in politics are realistic, possible, likely or at hand (depictions of pessimism, negative outlooks and scenarios, hopeless views, critical developments, negative expectations or potential threats). If a report does not reflect indications of pessimistic or of optimistic outlooks, then it has to be coded as ‘not applicable’.
The variable has three codes:
-1 = predominantly pessimistic outlook
0 = balanced/ambivalent/not applicable
+1 = predominantly optimistic outlook
Level of conflict-centeredness
Does the report convey primarily conflictual, consensus-centered or balanced impressions of politics, political records, conditions and views or are no indications referring to political conflict and consensus identifiable?
The conflict dimension refers to at least two-sided depictions of (attempts, initiation, completion of) dispute, disagreement, discordance, confrontation, clashing positions and views or controversy. The consensus dimension refers to at least two-sided depictions of (attempts, initiation, completion of) consensus, accordance, consonance, conformities, dispute settlements, agreement, willingness of cooperation, willingness to compromise, approval or reconciliation. If a report does not reflect indications of conflict-centered or of consensus-centered depictions, then it has to be coded as ‘not applicable’.
The variable has three codes:
-1 = predominantly conflict centered
0 = balanced/ambivalent/not applicable
+1 = predominantly consensus centered
Level of incapability and misconduct
Does the report convey primarily indications of incapability, capability or balanced impressions of politics or are no elements referring to political incapability and capability identifiable?
The misconduct dimension refers to unidirectional and unilateral depictions of critique, criticism, attacks, allegations of misconduct, moralizing accusations, charge of wrongdoing, accusation of incapability or incompetence, affronts and insults. The competence dimension comprises unilateral depictions of commendation, accordance of capability or competence, compliment, acclaim, portrayals of merit or effectiveness. If a report does not reflect indications of incapability or of capability, then it has to be coded as ‘not applicable’.
The variable has three codes:
-1 = predominantly incapability centered
0 = balanced/ambivalent/not applicable
+1 = predominantly capability centered
References
Galtung, J., & Ruge, M.H. (1965). The structure of foreign news. The presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64-91.
Lengauer, G., Esser, F., & Berganza, R. (2011). Negativity in political news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13(2), 179-202.
Rosengren, K. E. (1970). International News: Intra and Extra Media Data. Acta Sociologica, 13(2), 96-109
WAHLEN | Ist das Wahl-Plakat ein Auslaufmodell?
No full textStudiointerview | Sie sind derzeit allgegenwärtig: Die Wahlplakate für die Bundestagswahl am 26.09.2021. 80% der Befragten geben an, vor den Wahlen mit Wahlplakaten in Berührung gekommen zu sein. Jeder kennt die Plakate, befestigt an Straßenlaternen oder Zäunen, aber nicht jeder befasst sie so sehr mit ihnen wie Kommunikationswissenschaftlerin Dr. Melanie Leidecker-Sandmann.
Die promovierte Kommunikationswissenschaftlerin ist seit 2018 als wissenschaftliche Mitarbeiterin am Teilinstitut Wissenschaftskommunikation des Karlsruher Instituts für Technologie (KIT) tätig. Wie es der Name schon sagt, ist es ein Teil ihrer Aufgabe, wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse an die Öffentlichkeit zu kommunizieren – und genau das macht sie in unserem Interview mit Ulrich Konrad.
Bei dem ihrer Meinung nach unterschätzten Wahlwerbemedium des Wahlplakats kommt es auf einige Dinge an. Es müssen Botschaften und Strategien vermittelt werden, gepaart mit passenden Farben, Sprüchen sowie Symbolen und das mit einem so flüchtigen Medium, das den Wähler beim Vorbeilaufen oder Vorbeifahren nur wenige Sekunden beschäftigt.
Ist viel Text besser als wenig Text? Ersetzen Posts auf sozialen Medien bald Wahlplakate? Sind einfach formulierte Forderungen nach Dr. Leidecker-Sandmanns Forschung wirksam? Und am wichtigsten: Wie sehr beeinflussen uns Wahlplakate bei unserer Wahl wirklich
Personalization (Election Campaign Coverage)
Get PDFThe term personalization refers to a news factor and to a tendency of media coverage. Personalization as a news factor means that topics and events, where individuals act respectively are affected by actions or events are more likely to become news than topics and events that cannot be portrayed as actions of individuals. A personalized reporting style puts destinies of individuals (and celebrities) in the foreground and/or connects topics and events on personal stories of individuals. As a tendency of media coverage, personalization means an increasing orientation towards (prominent) people (e.g., Blöbaum, 2013; Galtung & Ruge, 1965; Handstein, 2016).
Field of application/theoretical foundation:
Personalization is widely analyzed in communication science. Probably most often personalization (as a news factor) is analyzed in news value studies respectively studies that analyze journalistic news selection criteria. Furthermore, personalization as a concept is a considerable issue in political communication research. Here, personalization means that, on the one hand, individual politicians (for example election campaign candidates) are becoming increasingly important in the context of political communication (e.g., Rahat & Sheafer, 2007; Van Aelst et al., 2012), whereas less emphasis is being placed on parties, political institutions and/or political issues and content. This form of personalization is also referred to as ‘individualization’. On the other hand, personalization also means that, in order to describe and evaluate individual politicians, apolitical characteristics, i.e., their personal characteristics and their personal life, are becoming increasingly relevant in political communication and election coverage. This aspect is also known as ‘privatization’ (e.g., Adam & Maier, 2010; Kriesi, 2012; Van Aelst et al., 2012). In principle, personalization can be analyzed in almost all subject areas, for example also in science communication, sports coverage and many more.
References/combination with other methods of data collection:
The analysis of personalization in media coverage may be combined or compared with (quantitative and/or qualitative) journalist surveys on news selection and processing. Furthermore, input-output-analyses (for example by comparing press releases and media coverage) are possible as well as experimental studies that analyze the potential effects of a personalized style of news coverage on recipients.
Example:
The concept of personalization lacks an agreed-upon operationalization. Van Aelst et al. (2012) review relevant studies in the field of political communication research and make some recommendations for how the concept might be operationalized for content analyses of, for example, election (campaign) coverage. These recommendations are cited below.
Coding instructions (direct quotation) by Van Aelst et al. (2012, pp. 219-220):
Individualization
General visibility (shift from parties to individual politicians)
The relative attention for politicians compared to the total amount of attention for political actors (politicians vs parties; government ministers vs the government).
Attention scores: count the total number of references to individual politicians (or candidates, ministers) and parties (government) within the unit of analysis (e.g. article, paragraph, and sentence):
1 How many times is a political party (or government, institution) mentioned within the unit of analysis?
2 How many times is a politician mentioned within the unit of analysis?
Additional similar categories can be inserted if the researcher is interested in several specific politicians, parties, institutions or types of politicians, parties or institutions. Note that the total number of references to a certain actor can easily be reduced to binary codes (presence or absence).
Concentrated visibility (shift from parties to leaders)
The relative attention on leaders compared to the total amount of attention on political actors (leaders vs parties; PM/President vs government).
Attention scores: count the total number of references to party leaders (or candidates for highest position, PM/President) and parties (government) within the unit of analysis. The coding category of leaders is similar to that of other politicians, but it refers to leaders.
Privatization
The characteristics of politicians
We have argued for the inclusion of the following set of characteristics in personalization studies: competence, leadership, credibility, morality, rhetorical skills, and candidates’ appearance. Each characteristic has two coding categories: one allows coding the unit of analysis as presenting the characteristic as political (the characteristic is presented in a political context or not); and a second category allows coding it as presenting the characteristic as personal (the characteristic is presented in a personal context or not). The political context refers to all statements and actions made in the political arena (e.g. in parliament, on campaign, during EU-summit) or explicitly related to the public role of the politician. The personal context refers to all statements and actions made outside the political arena (e.g. on vacation, at a family gathering) or experiences before going into politics.
1 Is the characteristic of ‘competence’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a political context? For example: the leader does not understand the office he or she is responsible for. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
2 Is the characteristic of ‘competence’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a personal context? For example: the leader is a poor mother or father. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
3 Is the characteristic of ‘leadership’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a political context? For example: the leader failed to rally his or her party behind him or her. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
4 Is the characteristic of ‘leadership’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a personal context? For example: was the leader seen as a natural person in command in his/her youth by classmates. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
5 Is the characteristic of ‘credibility’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a political context? For example: a broken promise by the candidate in the previous elections, say on lower taxes. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
6 Is the characteristic of ‘credibility’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a personal context? For example: the leader is criticized by a family member for not keeping his or her promises to spend more time with his/her family. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
7 Is the characteristic of ‘morality’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a political context? For example: an investigation against the leader for accepting bribes or undermining the career of a rival. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
8 Is the characteristic of ‘morality’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a personal context? For example: the leader was caught cheating on his or her spouse. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
9 Is the characteristic of ‘rhetorical skills’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a political context? For example: a reference to a great speech by the leader in parliament. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
10 Is the characteristic of ‘rhetorical skills’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a personal context? For example: a reference to a great speech by the leader in a private ceremony or to one made before he or she entered politics. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
11 Is the characteristic of ‘appearance’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a political context? For example: a reference to the ‘presidential appearance’ of the candidate. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
12 Is the characteristic of ‘appearance’ mentioned within the unit of analysis in a personal context? For example: a reference to the past of the leader as a winner of a beauty pageant. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
Categories can be repeated for specific parties, institutions and politicians.
Personal life of politicians
Does the unit of analysis contain references to one of these indicators:
1 Family life. This includes family relationships and all aspects of domestic life. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
2 Past life or upbringing. This includes all biographical information. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
3 Leisure time. This includes all information on hobbies, vacations, and recreational activities. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
4 Love life. This includes all information on sexual relationships, marriage and divorce. (1 = no; 2 = yes)
This list can of course vary according to indicators selected. It is possible to code these indicators at the level of a specific politician (e.g. for the two main candidates).
References
Adam, S. & Maier, M. (2010). Personalization of politics: A critical review and agenda for research. Communication Yearbook, 34(1), 213-257. DOI: 10.1080/23808985.2010.11679101
Blöbaum, B. (2013). Personalisierung. In G. Bentele, H.-B. Brosius, & O. Jarren (Eds.), Lexikon Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft (2., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage) (p. 367). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Galtung, J., & Ruge, M.H. (1965). The structure of foreign news. The presentation of the Congo, Cuba and Cyprus crises in four Norwegian newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64-91.
Handstein, H. (2016). Personalisierung. Journalistikon. Das Wörterbuch der Journalistik. Retrieved March 27, 2020, from http://journalistikon.de/personalisierung/
Kriesi, H. (2012). Personalization of national election campaigns. Party Politics, 18(6), 825-844.
Rahat, G., & Sheafer, T. (2007). The personalization(s) of politics: Israel, 1949-2003. Political Communication, 24, 65-80.
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
- …
