Copyrighted material List of Figures. List of Tables. Notes on Contributors

Transcription

1 Contents List of Figures List of Tables Notes on Contributors vii viii x 1 Comparing Political Communication across Time and Space: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges in a Globalized World An Introduction 1 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer Part I Challenges of Comparative Political Communication Research: Design, Methods and Measurement 2 Methodological Challenges in Comparative Communication Research: Advancing Cross-National Research in Times of Globalization 15 Frank Esser 3 The Role of Measurement Invariance in Comparative Communication Research 31 Christian Schemer, Rinaldo Kühne and Jörg Matthes 4 Using Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Comparative Political Communication Research: Applying Fuzzy Set Theoretic Thinking to Small-N Case-Oriented Research 47 John Downey and James Stanyer Part II Communicating with Citizens: Campaigns, Political PR and the Media 5 Negativity in the Public Space: Comparing a Hundred Years of Negative Campaigning on Election Posters in Sweden 67 Bengt Johansson 6 US and International Coverage of the Election of Barack Obama: Trends and Differences 83 Salma Ghanem v

2 vi Contents 7 Is It Enough to Be Strategic? Comparing and Defining Professional Government Communication across Disciplinary Fields and between Countries 98 María José Canel and Karen Sanders 8 Comparing Political Participation in Different Institutional Environments: The Mobilizing Effect of Direct Democracy on Young People 117 Ruth Kunz, Judith Moeller, Frank Esser and Claes de Vreese Part III Journalism and Media Realities: Journalistic Cultures, the Market and Political News 9 Political Trust among Journalists: Comparative Evidence from 21 Countries 137 Thomas Hanitzsch and Rosa Berganza 10 Making Sense of Press Freedom: A Comparison of Journalists Perceptions of Press Freedom in Eastern Europe and East Asia 157 Katrin Voltmer 11 A Hedge between Keeps Friendship Green Concurrence and Conflict between Politicians and Journalists in Nine European Democracies 172 Barbara Pfetsch, Peter Maurer, Eva Mayerhöffer and Tom Moring 12 It Didn t Happen Here: Commercialization and Political News Coverage in Swedish Television Lars W. Nord and Jesper Strömbäck 13 Global Climate Change, Global Public Sphere? Media Attention to Climate Change in 27 Countries 210 Ana Ivanova, Andreas Schmidt and Mike S. Schäfer 14 Conclusion: Comparing across Space and Time Challenges and Achievements in Political Communication Research 228 Barbara Pfetsch Index 241

3 1 Comparing Political Communication across Time and Space: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges in a Globalized World An Introduction María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer As political communication in advanced democracies has reached its third age (Blumler and Kavanagh, 1999), or is even about to enter a fourth age (Strömbäck, 2008), the relationship between citizens and those who govern is undergoing fundamental changes. Developments such as the commercialization of media systems, the changing norms and practices of journalism, the rise of professional communication advisors and political public relations and last, but not least the unpredictable nature of the Internet are fundamentally altering the way in which political matters are communicated in the public sphere. For many observers, media frenzies (Sabato, 1991) and the mediatization of politics (Mazzoleni and Schulz, 1999) are challenging the quality of democracy and are even one of the root causes of the current crisis of democracy (Keane, 2009; Patterson, 1993). However, new forms of communication also open up spaces for a more participatory, inclusive and responsive political process (Bennett and Entman, 2001; Brants and Voltmer, 2011; Cain et al., 2003). Political communication scholars have sought to provide empirical evidence for the scope and consequences of these changes, in particular on the political attitudes, political behavior and knowledge of citizens (DelliCarpini, 2004; Norris, 2000), but also on the workings of political institutions and public policy making (Meyer, 2002; Koch-Baumgarten and Voltmer, 2010). However, the empirical findings as to the extent to which these developments can be attributed to the media remain inconclusive (Van Dalen et al., 2011). The reasons for the often-puzzling contradictions in empirical results are not only due to methodological problems with pinning down the effects of media and communication (Bartels, 1993; Zaller, 1996). 1

4 2 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer Evidently, the relationship between media and politics is highly dependent on contextual factors, such as political institutions, regulatory regimes of the media and political culture. Comparative research offers a conceptual and methodological framework that allows us to address issues of causality and contextualization in political communication processes, for example the effect of market competition on news content, the relationships between the structures of political institutions and campaign strategies, or the impact of public service broadcasting on political knowledge and participation. Political communication scholars have therefore called for more comparative research, across both space and time, and, after a slow beginning, comparative political communication research is now a flourishing field that has acquired methodological sophistication and theoretical reasoning. The present volume contributes to this body of knowledge by presenting new research from a broad range of thematic concerns and methodological approaches. Comparative political communication research: the maturation of a field Comparative research is widely regarded as one of the main intellectual tools in the social sciences for enhancing knowledge and conceptual understanding. As Dogan and Pelassy (1990: 8) state: Comparison is the engine of knowledge. Most evidently, comparative research broadens our horizons and prevents the type of parochial thinking that might prevail when studying a particular country, especially one s own. Moreover, comparative research enables us to avoid unjustified generalizations from single-case observations when in fact individual and collective behavior differs widely depending on the political, social, economic and cultural contexts in which it takes place. Thus, systematically investigating the relationship between the macro and micro level of social processes across two or more countries helps us to understand how particular institutional arrangements shape human behavior (see Kohn, 1989; Newton and Van Deth, 2005). More than three decades ago, Blumler and Gurevitch (1975) set the scene for comparative communication scholarship. However, unlike neighboring disciplines, such as political science or sociology, communication science has been rather slow in developing concepts and strategies for comparative research. This is now beginning to change. Scholars are more aware of the advantages of going comparative and today there are more opportunities and resources available for cross-national research. As the academic programs of the major international communication associations (ICA, IAMCR and ECREA) demonstrate, a vivid culture of comparative scholarship has emerged. Moreover, both national and international funding bodies, most notably the European Union, have increased the resources for international collaborations and comparative research. In this process, Hallin and Mancini s (2004a) seminal book, Comparing Media Systems, has become

5 Introduction 3 a milestone in the conceptual development of studying media and politics from a comparative perspective. Their typology or models of media systems has provided scholars with a theoretical framework for developing hypotheses about the relationship between structural conditions of media and political systems on the one hand, and variations in political communication practices, and their effects, on the other. Today, comparative political communication research can be rega rded as poised for maturity (Gurevitch and Blumler, 2004: 326). One indicator for the maturity of the field is the growing conceptual and methodological rigor of comparative research designs. Studies now clearly explicate the purpose and underlying assumptions of the comparative approach they take. Furthermore, an increasing number of studies systematically address the macro micro link by interpreting the similarities and differences with reference to the distinct structural and cultural conditions of public communication that constitute specific system characteristics. Finally, large-n research is no longer an exception in political communication scholarship, thus broadening the opportunities for multilevel analysis. As Blumler (2012: xii) states in a summary overview, current comparative political communication research is both revisiting existing and producing new concepts, theories, paradigms and models. However, a celebration of the maturity of this field might have been somewhat premature, as there are still numerous caveats to be addressed. As Pfetsch and Esser (2012: 39) maintain, [s]cholars still display some uncertainty about its conceptual and methodological foundations and its level of achievements. According to Hallin and Mancini (2012), for comparative communication research to be more efficient, more data is needed and better use should be made of existing data collections. Comparative communication research still suffers from a lack of standardized measures, which impedes the accumulation of a reliable body of knowledge in the field. Most importantly, while most comparative research designs are still embedded in the conceptual boundaries of the nation state, more sophisticated theories and methodologies are needed to capture new developments in communication, such as the implications of globalization and the Internet for the communication of political messages both within and across national boundaries. This volume addresses the challenges political communication is facing today from a comparative perspective, using principles and methods of comparison both across space (cross-national) and across time (longitudinal), thereby advancing the understanding of global trends and cultural differences. All chapters in the book aim to apply the key criteria that according to Esser and Hanitzsch (2012: 6 7) are essential for comparative research: the purpose of comparison is clearly laid out; the units of analysis as well as the contextual factors that are assumed to affect the object of analysis are identified; the study employs functionally equivalent variables for the comparative analysis; and a common theoretical framework is used.

6 4 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer The chapters of this book look at a wide range of countries and cultures covering advanced Western democracies and beyond. The analyses pursue different comparative approaches, as mentioned by Esser and Hanitzsch (2012: 8 9): two-country comparisons; US and the rest ; Western/Western; Western/non-Western and global. By using a diversity of theoretical and methodological approaches, and by encompassing both cross-national and longitudinal analyses, this volume is able to shed new light on issues that are of key concern in the literature on comparative political communication research (see Blumler and Gurevitch, 1975, 2001; Gurevitch and Blumler, 2004; Pfetsch and Esser, 2004, 2012; Esser and Pfetsch, 2004; Holtz-Bacha, 2004; Hallin and Mancini, 2004b; Wirth and Kolb, 2012; Hanitzsch and Donsbach, 2012). Concepts such as professionalization, personalization, the changing nature of journalism, and convergence versus divergence in the wake of globalization, to name but a few, are addressed from different cultural and political contexts and traced across time. The following section outlines in more detail how the chapters of this book address the challenges of comparative research. Why and how to compare While comparative research has its indisputable merits, it also bears particular risks. Most importantly, with the trend to increase the number of countries included in a study, the analysis inevitably moves to a more abstract level, thereby losing sight of the processes that underlie the patterns observed. Furthermore, over-generalizations that ignore the cultural meaning and historical background of institutions and individual choices can lead to misinterpretations of the findings and mistaken conclusions. Finally, even though institutions and behavior might be referred to by the same terms, their meaning and function often differ fundamentally across different contexts. Finding adequate equivalents is particularly difficult in comparative survey research where respondents interpret the wordings of questions in different ways (Schmitt-Beck, 1998), but is an equally perennial problem in institutional and structural research where it has frequently undermined the validity of comparative research (Sartori, 1994). As Hallin and Mancini (2012: 512) point out, it is therefore of crucial importance to clearly spell out why, for the research interest at hand, the comparative approach is the method of choice, and which tools are most suitable to achieve the objective of the study. Comparison is not an end in itself: nor is a study that compares two countries necessarily inferior to one that includes 20 countries. One of the key issues comparative political communication is con - cerned with is to describe and explain processes of change and transformation. Concepts such as Americanization, Europeanization, globalization, hybridization, democratization and commercialization all imply trends of change, either towards an existing model (the US, Europe) or towards new

7 Introduction 5 forms that emerge from the amalgamation of different strands of development (see Pfetsch and Esser, 2004: 11; Esser and Hanitzsch, 2012: 5 6). For instance, the study of recent trends in election campaigning often refers to the ongoing changes as Americanization, which assumes that countries around the globe adopt the techniques and styles of electioneering that have been developed in the US However, further systematic comparative research, alongside single-country studies, shows more diverse patterns that involve both convergence towards American-style campaigning and divergence resulting from the specific cultural and political circumstances of individual countries and even individual parties (see Plasser, 2000). Authors such as Swanson and Mancini (1996) therefore prefer to talk about the modernization of election campaigns, which leaves parties and candidates to adapt as they choose to the changing electoral environment. What seems to be a battle over labels is in fact a reflection of the growing unease among political communication scholars regarding the dominance of anglo-saxon research in the field that often assumes US-specific developments to be universal. Blumler and Gurevitch (1995) point at the fallacy of this usually implicit assumption: Although many theoretical propositions about the social and political functions of the mass media are couched in universal terms, the evidence adduced in support of them is almost always culture- specific. (Blumler and Gurevitch, 1995: 75) Although employing different research strategies and theoretical app - roaches, several of the studies compiled in this volume investigate processes of change and transformation, such as negativization of campaigns (Johansson), inter nationalization of campaign coverage (Ghanem), professionalization of government communication (Canel and Sanders), democratization (Voltmer), commercialization of the media (Nord and Strömbäck) and transnationalization of national public spheres (Ivanova, Schmidt and Schäfer). Two of these chapters compare political communication across time, and attempt to explain the evolution of campaigns and news coverage in Sweden. In Chapter 5 Johansson focuses on the negativization of campaigns. He analyses how election posters have evolved over a period of one hundred years ( ) by examining whether changes can be explained by an increased mediatization. The chapter challenges general claims of the Americanization of campaigns, arguing that changes in negative campaigning on election posters in Sweden can be better interpreted in terms of political and societal changes rather than increased mediatization. Thus, levels and trends of negative campaigning, Johansson argues, are not as global as might be expected because these trends are dependent on political system differences.

8 6 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer Different developments resulting from U.S. campaigns are also found in Nord and Strömbäck s analysis of the commercialization of Swedish media. The authors compare television news journalism in Sweden between 1998 and 2010, and conclude that there are no clear indicators of commercialization that could be correlated with changes in political journalism reporting styles. In sum, these two chapters show that the comparative logic of inquiry helps us to understand that processes of change in election campaigns and political journalism in Sweden do not follow the pattern that has been described for the US. Methods and research strategies for comparing political communication Edited volumes and handbooks on comparative research have identified methods and research strategies as key issues for discussion (see for instance Kleinsteuber, 2004; Esser and Hanitzsch, 2012). Research designs include, among others: the selection of units of comparison, the establishment of functional equivalences and the selection of research tools. The present book brings together a wide variety of methodological approaches, ranging from large-n studies employing multilevel statistical tools of analysis to stateof-the art qualitative studies. The research tools employed by the authors of this book include quantitative and qualitative content analysis (media content, election campaign material), comparative case studies, document analysis (constitutions, legal texts, government reports, party programs, etc.), opinion surveys, elite interviews and a combination of various methods. Because of the costs involved in collecting cross-national data, the availability of comparable data is a recurrent problem in comparative research (Norris, 2009; Hallin and Mancini, 2012; Sanders and Canel, 2013). Some chapters of this volume present new data; others use data from existing databases, such as Freedom House and the World Value Survey. Schemer, Kühne and Matthes address the problem of measurement equivalence when comparing across contexts, cultures or over time. The authors demonstrate that measurement invariance matters for observational data from different cultures as well as from different points in time. They conclude that findings of the presence or absence of media effects might be methodological artifacts resulting from the failure to test and establish measurement invariance. The selection of countries to be compared is another key issue in the design of comparative research. For instance, a most similar design makes it possible to study the effect of particular institutional arrangements in countries whose economic and political environments are otherwise largely similar. This is the strategy chosen by Kunz, Moeller, Esser and de Vreese, who investigate the determinants of political participation of young people. Their study employs a most similar systems design by comparing the Netherlands and Switzerland, which only differ in one crucial institutional variable: the presence or absence of direct democratic forms of participation.

9 Introduction 7 Ghanem (Chapter 6) employs a different strategy from what has been more frequently used in the analysis of election news coverage. Instead of comparing the coverage of different national elections across countries, she focuses on an American election (Obama s victory in 2008) and compares how this event was covered by the media in the United States and other parts of the world. This strategy of cross-country comparison of an event allows us to identify how cultural differences shape the perception and representation of the same event or topic. Ghanem s analysis demonstrates that reporting not only reflects the ideology in which the news is produced but also country-specific journalistic norms and cultural values. Downey and Stanyer introduce the benefits of fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in comparative political communication research, which is illustrated by an analysis of the media coverage of sex scandals involving politicians in eight countries. QCA is a method that enables both an effective classification of findings and attribution of causation across cases. This method allows researchers to calibrate membership of sets on a variety of possible scales. The authors demonstrate that for researchers engaged in comparative work with a small number of cases, this method provides a way of thinking about causation that is nuanced, rigorous, and systematic, and an important alternative to conventional quantitative and qualitative approaches. Theoretical approaches In their introductory chapter for an edited volume on comparative communication research, Esser and Hanitzsch (2012) identify three broad schools of thought in comparative communication research: the actor/behaviorcentered approach that focuses on the strategic choices and communication behavior of individuals and groups; the structuralist or institutionalist approach that focuses on macro-level institutional arrangements and how they constrain or facilitate the communication behaviors of actors; and finally, the culturalist or interpretative approach that focuses on the ideas, interpretations and mental construction of communities or individuals as placed in the context of shared meanings (Esser and Hanitzsch, 2012: 11 12). All three approaches are represented in this volume. In the comparative political communication literature, the structuralist approach is the most commonly used one. As Pfetsch and Esser have noted (2012: 28 29), contrasting geographically defined units aim to understand how institutional contexts shape communication in diverse settings, thereby testing hypotheses about causal linkages between system-level variables and actor-level processes of political communication. This approach is used by Hanitzsch and Berganza in their analysis of trust in public institutions, as expressed by journalists and the general public across 21 countries. The authors look at contextual factors that shape political trust and combine cultural and institutional theories. From a cultural

10 8 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer perspective they hypothesize that political trust is an extension of social (or interpersonal) trust, learned early in life and, later on, projected onto public institutions. From an institutional perspective, political trust can be understood as a consequence, not a cause, of political performance. They find a general pattern of journalists having little trust in political parties and politicians, which points to them having a broadly cynical attitude towards political actors. At the same time, journalists levels of political trust vary considerably across nations. Overall, journalists in Western nations exhibit somewhat higher political trust than their colleagues in the non-western world where, however, journalists exhibit significantly less political trust than the general public. The study provides strong evidence for the importance of both institutional and cultural factors as influences that shape journalists trust in politicians and political institutions. Pfetsch, Maurer, Mayerhöffer and Moring combine a systemic app roach with a culturalist approach, assuming that the milieu of political communication is influenced not only by the different structures of media systems, but also by the political culture, history and tradition of countries. Based on survey data of journalists and politicians from nine European countries, the chapter analyses how these two sets of actors perceive their relationship in their day-to-day interactions, in particular the level, forms and causes of conflict and cooperation. The findings show a surprising level of similarity across countries, even though there are distinct patterns that distinguish the German-speaking, Scandinavian and Mediterranean countries. Nevertheless, the differences within countries are generally larger than those between countries. Canel and Sanders pursue a more fine-grained approach. Their chapter deals with the professionalism of government communication drawing on the insights of different strands of research, such as political communication, public relations and corporate and organizational communication research. They suggest that the systemic approach of political communication that looks at structures and systems, in order to understand the relationship between political and media systems, should incorporate a public relations approach to examining professionalism as an institutional process and as a dynamic community of practice. Taking the insights of both perspectives, the authors compare what they describe as the institutional registers of government communication practice in six democracies. The research reported in this chapter attempts to analyze professional government communication not only as an index of practices or technological developments, but also in terms of how goals and purposes of government communication are institutionally registered by the professional community. The culturalist or interpretative approach, according to which communication preferences and practices of individuals have to be understood in the context of shared meanings within communities (Esser and Hanitzsch, 2012: 12), constitutes the theoretical framework of Voltmer s chapter. Her

11 Introduction 9 analysis is based on the hypothesis that press freedom is a social construct that emerges from collective negotiations over its meaning, institutional form and practice. Comparing Eastern European and East Asian countries, her aim is to find out how universal the understanding of press freedom is, and to what extent it is shaped by culture-specific presumptions and historical experiences. She finds indications for convergence towards a universally shared understanding of press freedom that resonates with the philosophical and ethical premises of Western discourses; but she also finds that the meaning and professional practices of press freedom are domesticated in many ways through (re-)interpretations that are shaped by specific cultural and historical worldviews. Endogenous processes of divergence seem to prevail, she concludes, thus leading to new forms of journalistic practice that often diverge in significant ways from Western notions of press freedom. Comparative research in an age of transnationalization While the majority of political communication comparative research contin - ues to take the nation as the unit of comparison (Pfetsch and Esser, 2004; Kleinsteuber, 2004; Wirth and Kolb, 2012; Esser and Hanitzsch, 2012; Mancini and Hallin, 2012), this approach has increasingly been subjected to criticism. In a globalized world, transnational and transcultural developments play out in national arenas, and new flows of communication intersect in new spaces that do not necessarily correspond with national boundaries. The Internet is a major driving force in this process, but transnational broadcasting is playing an equally important role in transforming national public spheres (Thussu, 2010). As a consequence, the established comparative approach that treated countries as clearly demarcated, tradition-bound, institutionally integrated entities, that could be considered independent of each other and contrasted in comparative analysis, has to be revised. This is the issue addressed by Esser in Chapter 2. He attempts to overcome what he calls the old logic of comparative research and tackles the paradox that, while processes of transnationalization can only adequately be understood by cross-national comparative designs, they also undermine the concept of countries as self-contained systems that can be contrasted and compared. Distinguishing comparative research from global research, this chapter discusses two key concepts: glocalization (i.e. the manifestation of transnational phenomena in different countries); and deterritorialization (i.e. transnational flows of communication intersecting in new deterritorialized spaces that are no longer confined to territorial borders). The chapter calls for expanded research designs and delineates strategies that allow for the study of transnational communication in a globalized world where, nevertheless, nations, national institutions and national media are still

12 10 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer occupying a central place in political communication. These ideas illuminate how comparative communication research could retool its approaches to account for the emergence of a border-transgressing media arena and the erosion of national media systems. The final chapter of this volume is a good exemplar of a study that takes on board Esser s suggestion to marry glocalization and deterritorialization. Ivanova, Schmidt and Schäfer combine spatial (cross-country) with longitudinal (cross-temporal) comparisons to examine the emergence of a transnational public sphere. Focusing on the issue of climate change, they compare national public spheres in order to find out to what extent similarities in media attention to climate change can be identified in different countries. Their findings suggest a transnationalized and continuously transnationalizing media agenda with regard to the attention paid to climate change: in particular among European and North American countries. While there are indications for the emergence of a transnational public sphere that encompasses these two regions, the results are more ambiguous for Asian countries, leading the authors to conclude that there is no evidence for the development of a global public sphere. Structure and origin of the book The main body of this book is divided into three sections. Part 1 is dedicated to addressing current methodological issues in comparative political communication research covering: transnationalization, measurement equivalence and qualitative comparative methods. The chapters in Part 2 focus on how political actors political parties, candidates, parliaments, governments communicate to citizens and how they are represented by the media. Issues of negativism, commercialization and professionalization are also addressed in these chapters. Part 3 turns to journalists and their professional orientations and routines, as well as the norms that govern the relationship of journalists with politicians. Issues such as journalism and public trust, conceptions of press freedom and interpretative journalism are covered in this section. Most of the chapters compiled in this volume have previously been presented at a conference on Comparing political communication across time and space, organized by the Political Communication section of the European Communication Research and Education Association (ECREA), October 20 21, 2011, in Madrid. Of the 44 papers presented at this conference, the top 12 papers were selected for this volume and, where relevant topics were not sufficiently covered, we invited additional papers to complement the content. References Bartels, L.M. (1993) Message received. The political impact of media exposure. American Political Science Review, 87,

13 Introduction 11 Bennett, W.L. and Entman, R.M. (eds) (2001) Mediated Politics. Communication in the Future of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Blumler, J.G. (2012) Foreword. In F. Esser and T. Hanitzsch (eds) The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (New York and London: Routledge), xi xiii. Blumler, J.G. and Gurevitch, M. (1975) Towards a comparative framework for political communication research. In S.H. Chaffee (ed.) Political Communication. Issues and Strategies for Research (Beverly Hills: Sage), Blumler, J.G. and Gurevitch, M. (1995) The Crisis of Public Communication (London: Routledge). Blumler, J.G. and Gurevitch, M. (2001) Americanization reconsidered: UK US campaign communication comparisons. In W.L. Bennett and R. Entman (eds) Mediated Politics: Communication in the Future of Democracy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), Blumler, J. and Kavanagh, D. (1999) The third age of political communication: influences and features. Political Communication, 16(3), Brants, K. and Voltmer, K. (eds) (2011) Political Communication in Postmodern Democracy. Challenging the Primacy of Politics (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan). Cain, B., Dalton, R.J. and Scarrow, S.E. (eds) (2003) Democracy Transformed? Expanding Political Opportunities in Advanced Industrial Democracies (Oxford: Oxford University Press). DelliCarpini, M. (2004) Mediating Democratic Engagement: the impact of communications on citizens involvement in political and civic life. In L.L. Kaid (ed.) Handbook of Political Communication (New Jersey Lawrence Erlbaum), Dogan, M. and Pelassy, D. (1990) How to Compare Nations. Strategies in Comparative Politics, 2nd edition (Chatham: Chatham House). Esser, F. and Hanitzsch, T. (2012) On the why and how of comparative inquiry in communication studies. In F. Esser and T. Hanitzsch (eds) The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (New York and London: Routledge), Esser, F. and Pfetsch, B. (2004) Meeting the challenges of global communication and political integration: the significance of comparative research in a changing world. In F. Esser and B. Pfetsch (eds) Comparing Political Communication (Cambridge University Press), Gurevitch, M. and Blumler, J.G. (2004) State of the art of comparative political communication research. Poised for maturity? In F. Esser and B. Pfetsch (eds) Comparing Political Communication (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), Hallin, D. and Mancini, P. (2004a) Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Hallin, D. and Mancini, P. (2004b) Americanization, globalization, and secularization: understanding the convergence of media systems and political communication. In F. Esser and B. Pfetsch (eds) Comparing Political Communication (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), Hallin, D. and Mancini, P. (2012) Comparing media systems: a response to critics. In F. Esser and T. Hanitzsch (eds) The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (New York and London: Routledge), Hanitzsch, T. and Donsbach, W. (2012) Comparing journalism cultures. In F. Esser and T. Hanitzsch (eds) The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (New York and London: Routledge), Holtz-Bacha, C. (2004) Political campaign communication: conditional convergence of modern media elections. In F. Esser and B. Pfetsch (eds) Comparing Political Communication (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press),

14 12 María José Canel and Katrin Voltmer Keane, J. (2009) The Life and Death of Democracy (London: Simon and Schuster). Kleinsteuber, H.J. (2004) Comparing mass communication systems: Media formats, media contents, and media processes. In F. Esser and B. Pfetsch (eds) Comparing Political Communication (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), Koch-Baumgarten, S. and Voltmer, K. (eds) (2010) Public Policy and Mass Media: The Interplay of Mass Communication and Political Decision Making (London: Routledge). Kohn, M.L. (1989) Cross-National Research in Sociology (Newbury Park: Sage). Mazzoleni, G. and Schulz, W. (1999) Mediatization of politics: a challenge for democracy? Political Communication, 16(3), Meyer, T. (with Hinchman, L.) (2002) Media Democracy. How the Media Colonize Politics (Cambridge: Polity). Newton, K. and Van Deth, J.W. (2005) Foundations of Comparative Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Norris, P. (2000) A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Norris, P. (2009) Comparative political communications: common frameworks or Babelian confusion? Government and Opposition, 44(3), Patterson, T.E. (1993) Out of Order (New York: Knopf). Pfetsch, B. and Esser, F. (2004) Comparing political communication. Reorientations in a changing world. In F. Esser and B. Pfetsch (eds) Comparing Political Communication (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), Pfetsch, B. and Esser, F. (2012) Comparing political communication. In F. Esser and T. Hanitzsch (eds) The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (New York and London: Routledge), Plasser, F. (2000) American campaign techniques worldwide. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 5(4), Sanders, K. and Canel, M.J. (2013) (eds) Government Communication: Cases and Challenges (London: Bloomsbury). Sabato, L. (1991) Feeding Frenzy. How Attack Journalism Has Transformed American Politics (New York: Free Press). Sartori, G. (1994) Compare why and how. Miscomparing and the comparative method. In M. Dogan and A. Kazancigil (eds) Comparing Nations. Concepts, Strategies, Substance (Oxford: Blackwell), Schmitt-Beck, R. (1998) Of readers, viewers, and cat-dogs. In J.W. Van Deth (ed.) Comparative Politics. The Problem of Equivalence (London: Routledge), Strömbäck, J. (2008) Four phases of mediatization: an analysis of the mediatization of politics. International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), Swanson, D.L. and P. Mancini, P. (Eds.), (1996) Politics, Media and Modern Democracy. An International Study of Innovations in Electoral Campaigning and Their Consequences. (Westport: Praeger). Thussu, D. (ed.) (2010) International Communication. A Reader (London: Routledge). Van Dalen, A., Albaek, E. and De Vreese, C.H. (2011) Suspicious minds: Explaining political cynicism among political journalists in Europe. European Journal of Communication, 26(2), Wirth, W. and Kolb, S. (2012) Securing equivalence: problems and solutions. In F. Esser and T. Hanitzsch (eds) The Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (New York and London: Routledge), Zaller, J.R. (1996) The myth of massive media impact revived: new support for a discredited idea. In D.C. Mutz, P.M. Sniderman and R.A. Brody (eds) Political Persuasion and Attitude Change (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press),

15 Index accountability, 77 actor/behavior-centered approach, 7 adolescents, see young people advertising effects model, agenda setting, 174 Al Jazeera, 16, 21 American flag, 89, 90, 92, 94 Americanization, 5, 102, 103, 104 anti-globalization movement, 26 anti-immigrant sentiment, Asian values, 159, 162 Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), 219 asymmetry, 50 1 Attac, 26 audience effects, audience-orientation, 195 Australia, 148 Austria, 175, 177, 186 BBC World Service, 16, 21 Beck, U., 212 Berganza, R., 232, 236 Biden, J., 88, 92, 94 Blair, T., 108 Blumenthal, S., 100 Boolean algebra, 53 Brazil, political trust in, 145, 148 Buddhism, 162 Bulgaria perceptions of press freedom in, political trust in, 145, 148 Bush administration, 89, 93 cable television, 194 Cameron, D., 108, 109 campaign strategies, 2 Canel, M. J., 84, 99, 232, 234, 235 causal asymmetry, 50 1 causation, censorship, 159 chief executive spokesperson, 108 Chile, political trust in, 145, 147, 148 China, political trust in, 145 citizens, political behavior of, 1, citizenship norms, 118 civil service, climate change, media attention to, 10, , 230 Cold War, 162 collectivism, 162 commercialization, political news and, commercial television, communication technology, 229, 230 community of practice, 8, 98, 102, comparative political communication research, 1 2, on commercialization of political news, field of, 2 4 fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis in, on government communication, key issues in, 4 6 measurement invariance in, methodological challenges in, methods and strategies, 6 7 on Obama election campaign, on perceptions of press freedom, on political participation, on political trust among journalists, on politician-press relationship, reasons for, 4 5 theoretical approaches, 7 9 transnationalization and, 9 10, on transnational public sphere, comparative research, 2, across space and time, country selection in, 6 7 data in, 6 241

16 242 Index comparative research continued design innovations, designs, 3 vs. global research, methodological innovations, 233 reasons for, 4 transnationalization and, 9 10 Comstock, S. C., 24 Conference of the Parties (COPs), 217 configural invariance, 32, 38 9 conflict of interests, level of, between journalists and politicians, origins of, between journalists and politicians, political communication culture and, 174 conservatism, 57 convergence, 4 corruption, 139, 143, 145 7, 151 Corruption Perceptions Index, 143, 152 cosmopolitanism, 22 3, 26 Cossack election, 73 Couldry, H., 24, 26 crisp sets, 51 2 cross-national data, 6 cultural boundaries, 229 cultural heritage, 85 culturalist approach, 8 9 cultural theories, of political trust, 139 cynicism, 67, 137, 139, 151, 236, 239 De Bussy, N. M., 103 democracy crisis of, 1 direct, , 231 divergence of, normative standards for, political trust and, 137 8, 146 7, 150 professional communication and, quality of, 139 representative, 117, spread of, 157 democratization, 5, 22, 230 demographic shifts, 229 Denmark, 175, 177, 181, 184 deregulation, 192 deterritorialized spaces, 9 10, 17, 20 1, de Vreese, C. H., 85, 231, 238 diffusion mechanisms, direct democracy, , 231 media and, political participation and, , discourse convergence, 211, 214 divergence, 4, 9 Durham, F. D., 85 6 duty-based citizenship norms, 118 East Asia, perceptions of press freedom in, Eastern Europe, culture of, perceptions of press freedom in, Easton, David, 137, 138 economic growth, 142, 146, 150, 152 Egypt, political trust in, 145 election campaigns, 31, 104, Americanization of, 5 international coverage of, 5 negative campaigning in, negatization of, 5 news coverage of, 7 of Obama, political advertising, television news coverage of, U.S., 6, 7 US, 20, 68, 69 electioneering, 104 election posters, emerging democracies, Enlightenment, 162 equafinality, 50 essentialism, 159 Esser, F., 4, 6, 7, 10, 104, 212, 214, 230, 231, 238 European Communication Research and Education Association (ECREA), 10 European Social Survey (ESS), 142 European Union, 2, Facebook, 16 Finland, 175, 177, 181, 183, 186 frames, 85 6

17 Index 243 France government communication in, 110 political communication culture in, 177, 184, 186 freedom personal, 157, 161, 162 press. see press freedom Freedom House, 6 freedom of the press, see press freedom fuzzy set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsqca), application of, causation and, defined, 48 9 introduction to, 47 8 method of, 51 4 Gandhi, 162 Gandy, O., 102 Geer, J. G., 68 Germany government communication in, 109 media system in, 175 political communication culture in, 177, 181 political coverage in, 85 political trust in, 145, 148 Ghanem, S., 231 global communication systems, 26 globalization, 3, 4, 9 10, 16, 20 1, 26, 229, 239 global public sphere, , 230 global research, glocalization, 10, 17, 20, government, trust in, government communication, , 232 in Anglo and European countries, categorization of, 107 for civic purposes, 100, cross-country comparison of, institutionally defined, multidisciplinary perspectives on, neutrality in, openness in, professionalization of, 5 reputation management and, values guiding, government spokesperson, 108 Greece, political trust in, 145 Gross domestic product (GDP), 146, 152 Grosskopf, A., 138, 139 Hall, P. A., 86 Hallin, D., 26 Hanitzsch, T., 7, 22, 173, 214, 232, 236 Hart, G., 89 Hepp, A., 24, 26, 102 hybridization, 103 ideology, 75, 85 6 Index of Democracy, 142, 152 individuality, 157, 162 Indonesia, political trust in, 145 information flows, 229, 230, 237 information quality, of negative ads, 69, 76 7 institutionalist approach, 7 8 institutional performance, 146 institutional registers, 8 institutional theories, of political trust, 139 institutional trust, 138, 139, 152 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 218 international newspapers, coverage of Obama campaign in, international relations, 18 Internet, 3, 26, 118, 122 3, 192 interpretative approach, 8 9 Israel, 22, 145 Italy, political coverage in, 84 5 Ivanova, A., 230 Johansson, B., 232 journalism, 85 6 changes in, 1, 4 commercialization of, culture of, 158, 172, 173, 232, market-driven, television news, in Sweden, watchdog, 140 1, 143, 147, 152, journalistic ideology, 147 journalists agenda setting by, 174 autonomy of, 174 concurrence and conflict between politicians and,

18 244 Index journalists continued in East Asia, in Eastern Europe, framing by, 85 6 globalized, 20 1 perceptions of press freedom of, political trust among, political trust of, 8 role perceptions of, sources for, 174 as watchdogs, 140, 143, 147, 152, 166 7, 184 Kaid, L. L., 84 Kiousis, S., 99 knowledge model, 103 Kühne, R., 233 Kunz, R., 238 large-n comparisons, 48, 212 L Etang, J., 103 libertarianism, press freedom and, 160 1, 166 Mancini, P., 26 market competition, 2 market-driven journalism, Matthes, J., 233 McCain, J., 88, 89, 90, 91 McMichael, P., 24 measurement equivalence, 6 measurement invariance in comparative communication research, configural, 32, 38 9 effect of, 42 3 empirical example, establishing, in practice, 34 6 metric, 32 6, recommendations for addressing, 43 4 scalar, 33 4, 35, 40 2 types of, 32 4 media climate change coverage in, commercialization of, 1, 5, competitiveness, 195 deregulation, 192 in direct democracies, freedom, 9, 139, 142 3, 147, interactivity of, 123 negativity in, 137, 140, 167 politics and, 1 2, tabloid, 56 7, 59, 60 technology, 194, transnational, transparency, 105 media cultures, 17 media effects, 1, 3, 6, 31 42, 129, 192 5, 205, media frenzies, 1 media markets, 22 3 media systems across Europe, 175 6, comparison of, 2 3 market pressures on, path dependency, 20, 22 in Sweden, transnationalization and, mediatization, 5 message flows, 237 metric invariance, 32 6, Mexico, political trust in, 145 migration, 229 Mill, J. S., 162 modernization, 5, 102, 103, 104 Moeller, J., 231 most similar systems design (MSSD), Muhammad cartoons, 159 Muslims, Obama election and, national public spheres, 211 nation-state, 16, 19, 21 2, 26, 27, , 230, 231 negative campaigning, 5, characteristics of, 68 9 content of, 74 7 effects of, 67 8 explanations for, 68 9, 77 9 information quality and, 69, 76 7 trends in, 68 9, 72 6 negativity, in the media, 137, 140, 167 Netherlands as representative democracy, youth political participation in, neutrality, in government communication,

19 Index 245 Neverla, I., 212 New Right, 57, 60 news on climate change, commercialization of political, in direct democracies, on elections, 7 frames and ideology and, 85 6 on Internet, 192 market competition and, 2 negativity in, 137, 140, 167 newspapers climate change coverage in, coverage of Obama campaign in, endorsements by, 87, 90, 93 4 non-partisanship, Nord, L., 237 North Korea, Norway, 195 Obama, B., 109 Obama election campaign, 83 95, 231 openness, in government communication, organizational charts, Pakistan, political trust in, 145 Palin, Sarah, 88 Park, J., path dependency, 20, 22, 230, 231 patriotism, 89, 94 Patterson, T. E., 193 personal attacks, 69, 76 personality model, 103 personalization, 4 Pfetsch, B., 7, 8, 16, 22, 104, 177, 232 Phillis Report, pluralism, 27 Poland government communication in, 109 perceptions of press freedom in, 165 political advertising, 36 42, political behavior, 1, political campaigns, see election campaigns political cartoons, 70 political communication, 47 see also comparative political communication research changing macro-contexts of, 229 culture of, , 232, developments in, 1 2 effects of, 3, 31, 68, 104, 228, 229, 234 election posters, Internet and, negativity in, professionalization in, structures of, political culture, 2, 8, 84 political efficacy, , 124 5, 128 political institutions, 1, 2, confidence in, 137 supranational, 211 trust in, 138, 139, 143 7, political knowledge, 2 political news, see also news political participation, 2, 238 contingent nature of, defined, 120 direct democracy and, , Internet and, online, by young people, 6, political parties, 8, 10, 49, 50, 69 71, 76, 78, 80, 100 1, 103 4, political performance, political power, 174 political public relations, 1, 99 political scandals, 54 61, 89 political science, 16 political trust, 7 8, corruption and, 146 7, 151, 152 cross-country comparison of, decline in, defined, 138 democracy and, 137 8, 146 7, 150 economic performance and, 142, 146, 152 of general public, 147 9, journalists and, levels of, measures of, performance and, 152 press freedom and, 142 3, 147, 150, 152 research on, 138 9