The Effects of Media and their Logic on Legitimacy Sources within Local Governance Networks: A Three-Case Comparative Study

Abstract Although theoretical and empirical work on the democratic legitimacy of governance networks is growing, little attention has been paid to the impact of mediatisation on democracies. Media have their own logic of news-making led by the media’s rules, aims, production routines and constraints, which affect political decision-making processes. In this article, we specifically study how media and their logic affect three democratic legitimacy sources of political decision-making within governance networks: voice, due deliberation and accountability. We conducted a comparative case study of three local governance networks using a mixed method design, combining extensive qualitative case studies, interviews and a quantitative content analysis of media reports. In all three cases, media logic increased voice possibilities for citizen groups. Furthermore, it broadened the deliberation process, although this did not improve the quality of this process per se, because the media focus on drama and negativity. Finally, media logic often pushed political authorities into a reactive communication style as they had to fight against negative images in the media. Proactive communication about projects, such as public relation (PR) strategies and branding, is difficult in such a media landscape.

[1]  E. Sørensen,et al.  The democratic Anchorage of Governance Networks , 2005 .

[2]  S. Oliver.  Public Relations Democracy: Public Relations, Politics and the Mass Media in Britain , 2002 .

[3]  Henrik Paul Bang,et al.  Governance as social and political communication , 2003 .

[4]  Erik-Hans Klijn,et al.  THE IMPACT OF NETWORK MANAGEMENT ON OUTCOMES IN GOVERNANCE NETWORKS , 2010 .

[5]  F. Fischer.  Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices , 2003 .

[6]  Deana A. Rohlinger.  American Media and Deliberative Democratic Processes* , 2007 .

[7]  G. Mazzoleni,et al.  "Mediatization" of Politics: A Challenge for Democracy? , 1999 .

[8]  M. Hajer.  Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void , 2003 .

[9]  Frank Marcinkowski,et al.  Is Talk Always Silver and Silence Golden? , 2010 .

[10]  R. Entman.  Framing Bias: Media in the Distribution of Power , 2007 .

[11]  Peter John,et al.  Agendas and Instability in American Politics , 2013 .

[12]  D. Graber.  THE MEDIA AND DEMOCRACY: Beyond Myths and Stereotypes , 2003 .

[13]  J. Dryzek.  Foundations and Frontiers of Deliberative Governance , 2011 .

[14]  J. Habermas.  Political Communication in Media Society: Does Democracy Still Enjoy an Epistemic Dimension? The Impact of Normative Theory on Empirical Research , 2006 .

[15]  D. Graber.  Mediated politics and citizenship in the twenty-first century. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[16]  Hanspeter Kriesi,et al.  Models for democracy , 2013 .

[17]  Maarten A. Hajer,et al.  Authoritative Governance: Policy Making in the Age of Mediatization , 2009 .

[18]  P. Neijens,et al.  The Infotainment of Politics , 1998 .

[19]  W. Bennett.  News, the politics of illusion , 1983 .

[20]  Risto Kunelius,et al.  Mediatization in context: Consensus culture, media and decision making in the 21st century, the case of Finland , 2010 .

[21]  T. Tyler,et al.  Media and agenda setting: effects on the public, interest group leaders, policy makers, and policy. , 1983, Public opinion quarterly.

[22]  J. Kleinnijenhuis,et al.  Negative News and the Sleeper Effect of Distrust , 2006 .

[23]  Jörg Matthes,et al.  Mediatization effects on political news, political actors, political decisions, and political audiences , 2013 .

[24]  J. Eshuis,et al.  Branding in Governance and Public Management , 2011 .

[25]  Steven C. Currall,et al.  Research Methods in Management and Organizational Research: Toward Integration of Qualitative and Quantitative Techniques , 2003 .

[26]  Mark E. Warren,et al.  Practices of Freedom: Governance-Driven Democratization , 2014 .

[27]  F. Esser,et al.  Shaping Politics: Mediatization AND Media Interventionism , 2009 .

[28]  M. Schudson.  Why Democracies Need an Unlovable Press , 2008 .

[29]  E. Klijn,et al.  Managing Uncertainties in Networks a Network Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making , 2004 .

[30]  Stephen D. Reese,et al.  Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content , 1995 .

[31]  Jurian Edelenbos,et al.  Symposium on water governance. Prologue: water governance as a government’s actions between the reality of fragmentation and the need for integration , 2011 .

[32]  E. Klijn.  Democratic legitimacy criteria in interactive governance and their empirical application , 2011 .

[33]  A. Shehata,et al.  STRUCTURAL BIASES IN BRITISH AND SWEDISH ELECTION NEWS COVERAGE , 2007 .

[34]  Iris Korthagen.  Who Gets on the News? The relation between media biases and different actors in news reporting on complex policy processes , 2015 .

[35]  K. Brants,et al.  SIGNS OF MEDIA LOGIC HALF A CENTURY , 2006 .

[36]  Erik-Hans Klijn,et al.  Connective management and governance network performance: the mediating role of throughput legitimacy. Findings from survey research on complex water projects in the Netherlands , 2015 .

[37]  Charles D. Elder,et al.  Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Agenda-Building , 1975 .

[38]  Geert Teisman,et al.  Models For Research into Decision-MakingProcesses: On Phases, Streams and Decision-Making Rounds , 2000 .

[39]  J. Edelenbos,et al.  Connective Capacities of Network Managers , 2013 .

[40]  U. Beck,et al.  The Theory of Reflexive Modernization , 2003 .

[41]  Aeron Davis,et al.  The Mediation of Power: A Critical Introduction , 2007 .

[42]  Nayda Terkildsen,et al.  Interest Groups, the Media, and Policy Debate Formation: An Analysis of Message Structure, Rhetoric, and Source Cues , 1998 .

[43]  J. Parkinson.  Rickety Bridges: Using the Media in Deliberative Democracy , 2005, British Journal of Political Science.

[44]  Michael Crozier.  Listening, learning, steering: new governance, communication and interactive policy formation , 2008 .

[45]  C. Tuohy.  Bureaucracy and Democracy , 1990 .

[46]  Bernard Manin,et al.  On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation , 1987 .

[47]  E. Sørensen.  Democratic Theory and Network Governance , 2002 .

[48]  Joshua Cohen,et al.  DELIBERATION AND DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY , 2005, Philosophy, Politics, Democracy.

[49]  Thomas Meyer,et al.  Media Democracy: How the Media Colonize Politics , 2002 .

[50]  V. Bekkers,et al.  Legitimacy and democracy: A conceptual framework for assessing governance practices , 2013 .

[51]  Frank Fischer,et al.  Reframing Public Policy , 2003 .

[52]  Erik-Hans Klijn,et al.  Managing Uncertainties in Networks: Public Private Controversies , 2004 .

[53]  Steffen G. Schneider,et al.  Why the democratic nation‐state is still legitimate: A study of media discourses , 2009 .

[54]  H. Wagenaar,et al.  Governance, Complexity, and Democratic Participation , 2007 .

[55]  Joe Bob Hester.  Setting the Agenda: The Mass Media and Public Opinion , 2005 .

[56]  Media in Political Power , 2012 .

[57]  Y. Papadopoulos.  Cooperative forms of governance: Problems of democratic accountability in complex environments , 2003 .

[58]  J. Dryzek.  Deliberative Democracy And Beyond , 2000 .

[59]  John S. Dryzek,et al.  Networks and Democratic Ideals: equality, freedom, and communication , 2007 .

[60]  Kees Brants,et al.  Signs of Media Logic Half a Century of Political Communication in the Netherlands , 2006 .

[61]  Michael Higgins,et al.  The Media and Political Process , 2006 .

[62]  Frans van Waarden,et al.  ‘Governance’ as a bridge between disciplines: Cross-disciplinary inspiration regarding shifts in governance and problems of governability, accountability and legitimacy , 2004 .

[63]  P. Valkenburg,et al.  Framing European politics: a content analysis of press and television news , 2000 .