media accountability in northern europe and the anglo-american world by heikki heikkilä, david...

Media Accountability in Northern Europe and the Anglo-American World

By Heikki Heikkilä, David Domingo & Jari Väliverronen

Session 11

Photo: imago/ecomedia/robert fishman

July 2013 Session 11 – Media Systems 2

Media Systems in Northern Europe and the Anglo-American World

Hallin & Mancini (2004)

A division of media systems based on their distinct historical featuresDemocratic

Corporatist ModelNorthern Europe

FinlandSwedenNorway

DenmarkGermany

The NetherlandsBelgium

SwitzerlandUK

Austria

Liberal Model Anglo-American World

United KingdomIreland

USACanada


Democratic Corporatist Model: Specific Features

Mass circulation of newspapers

Duopoly in broadcasting

Unionization, emphasis on

self-regulation

Faded political

parallelism

Public service ethos

Press subsidies(gradually removed)

Media marketRelationship

to politics

Ideas of professionalism

Role of the state in the media

Adapted from Hallin & Mancini (2004)


Liberal Model: Specific Features in the United Kingdom

Quality vs. popular press

Duopoly in broadcasting

Unionization, self-regulation

Commercial and unpolitical press

Critical distance

Wary of regulation and interventions

Media market


Relationship to politics

Role of the state in the media



Liberal Model: Specific Features in the United States

Regional actors dominate

Commercial broadcasting

Objectivity, individual integrity

Commercial and unpolitical press

Political polarization

(recently)

Strictly non-interventionist

Media market


Relationship to politics

Role of the state

in the media



Public Trust in the Press and Government:

One way of measuring citizens‘ attitudes towards media accountability

Country Trust in press

Trust in government

Austria 59 % 54 %

Belgium 59 % 36 %

Finland 57 % 48 %

The Netherlands 55 % 49 %

Germany 48 % 40 %

Denmark 45 % 57 %

United States 45 % 49 %

United States 45 % 49 %

Ireland 38 % 15 %

EU average 42 % 29 %

Ireland 38 % 15 %

Estonia 43 % 47 %

Sweden 42 % 59 %

Great Britain 18 % 19 %

Sources: Eurobarometer 72 (2010) [trust in government], Eurobarometer 74 (2011) [trust in press];

figures for the USA: Gallup (2009)

Democratic Corporatist Model:

High public trust in the press (+ other institutions)

Liberal model:

More suspicion about all institutions

General Trends


Layers of Media Accountability: An Analytical Model (Bardoel and d’Haenens 2004)

Accountability to the state (1)

Accountability to the market (2)

Professional accountability (3)

Public accountability

(4)

Developed by Heikkilä, Domingo, Pies, Głowacki, Kuś and Baisnée (2012, 6)

Who are the media generally speaking accountable to?


The Varying Roles of the State

www.persinnovatie.nl/www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/

Leveson Inquiry (UK): Independent inquiry and policy

initiative commissioned by the state

EXCEPTIONAL

Press Stimulation Fund (The Netherlands):

Independent governing body to fund

R&D in media organizations

COMPATIBLE WITH THE FACILITATIVE ROLE OF THE

STATE IN NORTHERN EUROPE


Journalists’ Attitudes towards the State

• Journalists are generally supportive of the facilitative role of the state• UK results influenced by the Leveson Inquiry

“Governmental pressure damages quality in journalism”

Country Agree/fully agree (%)

Finland 8

Switzerland 14

Austria 15

The Netherlands 16

Germany 21

United Kingdom 26

Source: MediaAcT survey conducted in 2011–2012 Included twelve countries in Europe and two Arab countries (N=1,762)


Dynamics of the Media Market and Its Implications

Media output

Media competition

Over market

position

Over professional excellence1

2a 2b

3a 3b+ Market push towards reforms and innovations

+ Transparency as a potential niche strategy (USA)

Incentives for ImplementingMedia Accountability

– Short-term profits principle guides decisions

– Rationalization of resources undermine R&D

Source: Heikkilä et al. (2012: 37)

Restraints for Implementing Media Accountability


”Economic pressure damages quality in journalism”

Country Agree/ fully agree(%)

United Kingdom 78

Austria 78

Finland 77

Switzerland 71

Germany 70

The Netherlands 68

Journalists’ Attitudes towards the Market

Business imperatives are viewed very similarly across countries and models

Source: MediaAcT survey conducted in 2011–2012 (N=1,762)


Professional Accountability (Self-Regulation)

www.presserat.info

Approximately 300 codes of ethics

drafted around the world

Approximately 60 press councils exist around the world

Press councils of Democratic Corporatist countries

are often regarded as benchmarks

– Presserat in Germany– RvD in the Netherlands

– JSN in Finlandwww.spj.org/ethicscode.asp


Journalists’ Attitudes towards Self-Regulation

– Survey results highlight the role of national traditions (see also next slide)

A Strong Impact on Journalists’ Behaviour (%)


Country Ethical Code Press Council

Finland 90 79

United Kingdom 67 31

Switzerland 65 36

The Netherlands 45 26

Germany 36 30

Austria 39 20


Journalists’ Attitudes towards Self-Regulation

– In-house guidelines as alternative for the formally approved ethical code

– The strong role of legal departments in UK relates to the Leveson Inquiry

Country In-house rules Legal dept.

The Netherlands 63 28United Kingdom 56 73Switzerland 51 39Germany 41 43Finland 40 18Austria 39 42

A Strong Impact on Journalists’ Behaviour (%)

July 2013 Session 11 – Professional Accountability 14


July 2013 14Session 11 – Media Systems


Tendency: Self-Regulation in Self-Doubt

Council for Mass Media (JSN) in FinlandStruggling to maintain adequate funding

Aims to increase (again) the audience representation in the council

Press Complaints Commision in the UKCriticized of inaction and lack of authority by journalists,

politicians and grassroot organizations, such as Hacked Off


Many Means for Public Accountability

Offline Online

Media criticism in the news media Media and journalist blogsSatire and comedy about the media Citizen and audience blogs

Journalism trade journals User comments

Letters to the editor Criticism in social media

In-house ombudsman In-house ombudsman online

Correction boxes Correction buttons

Country Criticism in news media has high impact (%)

Social media criticism has

high impact (%)Finland 64 24



Austria 20 23

Switzerland 20 20

Germany 16 17

Many Means for Public Accountability

Traditional (offline) accountability practices are usually preferred by journalistsThe impact of social media is growing


July 2013 17July 2013 17Session 11 – Media Systems


Journalists’ Attitudes towards Audience Feedback

Relation to audience feedback is problematic in most countries: audiences are seen as recipients while journalists consider themselves as producers

Country Audience criticism is fair

(%)

User commentshave a high impact (%)

Finland 35 49

Germany 18 30


Austria 16 23

Switzerland 14 29




Convergence or Divergence of Cultures?

Media accountability practices have developed in

tandem with media systems

S t a

t e

Self-R

egula

tion

Public Tru

st

Changes depend on transitions in economy,

politics, technologies and lifestyles

Globalization

”Marketization”

”Internetization”

Media systems are internally diverging rather than coalescing togetherThe models of Hallin & Mancini are to a great extent outdated (but still useful

references)


Media Markets Matter

NED

Smallmarket

Bigmarket

High level of competition

Low level of competition

USA

GERFIN

LESS VOLATILITY

MORE VOLATILITY

EST

AUT

SUI

UK

Size of the market and competition (See Slide 10) play a crucial part in the formation of media accountability practices

See Mazzoleni/ Splendore 2013: 167-182

media accountability in northern europe and the anglo-american world by heikki heikkilä, david...

Documents

media marketrelationship

media systems4liberal

media systems5liberal

media systems6public

media systems2media

division of media systems

media organizations

public accountability