Publisher Description

Political journalism is often under fire. Conventional wisdom and much scholarly research suggest that journalists are cynics and political pundits. Political news is void of substance and overly focused on strategy and persons. Citizens do not learn from the news, are politically cynical, and are dissatisfied with the media. This book challenges these assumptions, which are often based on single-country studies with limited empirical observations about the relation between news production, content, and journalism's effects. Based on interviews with journalists, a systematic content analysis of political news, and panel survey data in different countries, this book tests how different systems and media-politics relations condition the contents of political news. It shows how different content creates different effects and demonstrates that under the right circumstances citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.

Author Biography

Erik Albæk is Professor of Journalism and Political Science and Research Director at the Centre for Journalism, Department of Political Science and Public Management at the University of Southern Denmark. His work has appeared in numerous journals including Journalism, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Political Communication, the Journal of Communication, the European Journal of Communication, and Party Politics. He is former chairman of the Danish Social Science Research Council and the Nordic Political Science Association. Arjen van Dalen is Assistant Professor at the Centre for Journalism, Department of Political Science and Public Management at the University of Southern Denmark. His work has been published in The Global Journalists in the 21st Century (edited by David Weaver and Lars Willnat, 2012) and journals such as the European Journal of Communication, Political Communication, the International Journal of Press/Politics, Journalism, and Journalism Studies. He has lived, studied, and worked in The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Austria, Germany, Spain, Belgium, and Denmark. Nael Jebril is a postdoctoral fellow at the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Department of Politics and International Relations at the University of Oxford. He holds a PhD in journalism (2011) from the Centre for Journalism, Department of Political Science and Public Management, University of Southern Denmark, and an MA in global journalism (2006) from Örebro University, Sweden. His research has received support from the Danish Social Science Research Council. Claes H. de Vreese is Professor and Chair of Political Communication and Director of the Amsterdam School of Communication Research at the University of Amsterdam. He is the founding Director of the Center for Politics and Communication and Adjunct Professor of Political Science and Journalism at the University of Southern Denmark. His research interests include comparative journalism research, the effects of news, public opinion and European integration, effects of information and campaigning on elections, referendums, and direct democracy.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction; 2. Comparing political journalism; 3. Journalists: the people behind the headlines; 4. Journalists and politicians: a troubled relationship; 5. Do role conceptions matter?; 6. What type of journalism produces public knowledge?; 7. Does infotainment journalism lead to political cynicism? The effects of privatization versus personalization in the news; 8. Good journalism, satisfied citizens? How perceived watchdog reporting affects satisfaction with political coverage; 9. Political journalism: today and tomorrow.

Review

'This book is a best-practice example of comparative research on news and political communication. By combining journalist surveys, content analyses, and panel surveys, it follows the entire political communication process in four countries. It demonstrates that different conditions create different kinds of political journalism, and it identifies those conditions most favorable to democratic news performance. This is an extremely informed, compellingly argued, and insightful assessment of political journalism in Europe. Moreover, it sets a new standard in comparative media research.' Frank Esser, Universität Zürich

Promotional

This book demonstrates that under the right circumstances, citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.

Prizes

Winner of Goldsmith Book Prize, Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy 2016

Review Quote

"This book is a best-practice example of comparative research on news and political communication. By combining journalist surveys, content analyses, and panel surveys, it follows the entire political communication process in four countries. It demonstrates that different conditions create different kinds of political journalism, and it identifies those conditions most favorable to democratic news performance. This is an extremely informed, compellingly argued, and insightful assessment of political journalism in Europe. Moreover, it sets a new standard in comparative media research." Frank Esser, Universitt Zrich

Promotional "Headline"

This book demonstrates that under the right circumstances, citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.

Description for Bookstore

Contrary to conventional wisdom, this book shows how different political journalism content creates varied effects and demonstrates that under the right circumstances citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.

Description for Library

Contrary to conventional wisdom, this book shows how different political journalism content creates varied effects and demonstrates that under the right circumstances citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.

Details