Between Postmodern Democracy and the Trajectories of the Past: Mass Media and Political Communication in New Democracies Katrin Voltmer Institute of Communications Studies University of Leeds, UK

Global victory of democracy? Limited democratisation: Many new democracies are ‘defective’ / ‘partial’ democracies. Deficiencies of political communication: Insufficient guarantees of press freedom Political instrumentalisation of the media Poor journalistic quality ‘Media wars’

Aims of this paper Develop a conceptual comparative framework To explain why some countries are more successful than others in establishing systems and practices that are conducive to democratic political communication; To understand the particular pattern of interaction between governments and the media; To evaluate the emerging pattern of political communication in new democracies.

1) Comparative media systems Hallin & Mancini (2004): Models / ideal types of media systems: allow to group different countries Set of key dimensions: to identify individual models Analysis of the relationship between media and political actors  Application to new democracies

2) Political science transition research Path dependency of democratic transition: The characteristics of the old regime determine the structure and performance of the new democracy. The role of the media and their relationship with the government in the old regime determine the structure and quality of political communication in the new democracy.

Pathways to democracy Communist oligarchies (Eastern Europe) Military dictatorships (Latin America) One-Party dictatorships (Asia, Africa) (Hollifield/Jillson 2000)

Dimensions of political communication in new democracies Pluralism: statitsm – civil society; centralized – alternative media, media-party parallelism Politicisation: commitment to central unified goal – non- political arenas of public discourse Resourses: access to and support of population  power; mass audience and income revenues  profits Professionalism: journalistic role definitions, news quality; political marketing Political communication culture: interaction pattern journalists/politicians; mediatisation of politics

Communist oligarchies (Eastern Europe) Pluralism: Communist rule allowed for no alternative power centres or oppositional views. Limited pluralism developed only late and in few countries. All media under total central state control. After regime change ‘flattened landscapes’. Politicisation: Goal to create ‘new personality’. Media highly instrumentalized as propaganda instrument, re-education. After regime change media keep sense of political mission.

… communist oligarchies Resources: New political parties lack grassroot organisations. High electoral volatility. Media only resource for mobilizing popular support  attempt to keep TV under political control. Emergence of ‘broadcast parties’. Media suddenly exposed to market competition, insufficient market revenues  remain dependent on state subsidies. Professionalism: Some adoption of political marketing. Dominant journalistic role: watchdog, advocat rather information provider. Political communication culture: confrontational with few mechanisms for crisis management

Military dictatorships (Latin America) Pluralism: Limited pluralism tolerated under old regime (esp. centre- right). Capitalist structures preserved. Media privately owned except few government mouthpieces. Politicisation: No ideology. Censorship, rather than propaganda. Demobilisation and acquiescence. De-politicisation of media; persists after regime change.

… military dictatorships Resources: Weak state institutions, military remains ‘veto player’, presidentialism. Many parties can revitalize their grassroot organisations, media only one resource amongst others. No change of resources for media. Further commercialisation. Professionalism: Parties embrace ‘Americanisation’, suits traditional campaign style. Journalism predominantly entertainment oriented, newsvalue driven. Political communication culture: Symbiosis of political culture and media logic, e.g. presidentialism + personalisation. Spectacle of scandals.

One-party dictatorships (Asia) Pluralism: Tradition of strong state, bureaucracy. Divided societies (ethnic, religious). In some countries strong civil society. Late introduction of TV under protection of state. Politicisation: Strong nationalism (post-colonial, nation building). Media instruments of national unity and development  conflicts after regime change. Limited access of non-state actors to media  importance of Internet.

… one-party dictatorships Resources: Clientelism and local ties are important mobilisation resources for political candidates, complemented by media. Where consumer markets are still weak media remain dependent on state support. Professionalism: Some adoption of modern campaigning combined with traditional forms. Commitment to national goals in tension with modern journalistic role definitions. Political communication culture: Asian values: deference, consensus, social harmony  cooperative relationship.

Conclusion New democracies = postmodern media democracies or Hybrid forms of political communication combining indigenous forms of communicating to voters with media-driven politics.