Gianpietro Mazzoleni

A Return to Civic and Political Engagement Prompted by Personalized Political Leadership

Keywords political leadership, personalization, political engagement, charismatic leadership, symbolic politics Average news consumers prefer to read about other people, not about abstract groups or remote bureaucracies and government agencies. To cater to these preferences, news stories, especially those that appear on television, are routinely framed from the point of view of central actors . News consumers see an individual in action and are given information about his or her feelings and reactions. Personal motives and mistakes are analyzed. Inevitably, stories about groups are transformed into stories about group leaders. (Davis, 1990, p. 169, emphasis added) From the standpoint of news consumers it has long been known that, as newsmakers, persons are preferred over institutions. The news media discovered this truth as soon as they were established and faced the need to attract readers. Accordingly, the media have long depicted reality and politics in “ personalized” terms. The process of mediatization of the political arena (Mazzoleni & Schulz, 1999) has increased dramatically the extent of personalization in all of the political domains, from government to party politics, to political communication, and to the motivations of the electorate. The success of personalization reflects not only the power of mass media to shape political cultures in different national and institutional contexts but also, and especially, the need of both the political institutions and the citizens to refer to a physical symbol of political power. This seems to be a pattern that dates back to ancient history. The Pharaohs, Alexander the Great, the Roman Emperors, the Popes, the Kings, Napoleon, Lenin, Hitler, all have represented the embodiment of their personal achievements and of the institutions they commanded. It is also true that ideologies are the engines of human history and of political action. They are powerful means of simplifying reality and sources of motivations that prompt people to take sides and participate in the struggle for power or simply to be concerned for and contribute to the welfare of their communities.

Sources in the News

In analysing the news medias role in serving the functions associated with democratic citizenship, the number, diversity and range of news sources are central. Research conducted on sources has overwhelmingly focused on individual national systems. However, studying variations in news source patterns across national environments enhances understanding of the medias role. This article is based on a larger project, “Media System, Political Context and Informed Citizenship: A Comparative Study”, involving 11 countries. It seeks, first, to identify differences between countries in the sources quoted in the news; second, to establish whether there are consistent differences across countries between types of media in their sourcing patterns; and, third, to trace any emergent consistent patterns of variation between different types of organization across different countries. A range of findings related to news media source practices is discussed that highlights variations and patterns across different media and countries, thereby questioning common generalizations about the use of sources by newspapers and public service broadcasters. Finally, a case is made for comparative media research that helps enhance the news medias key role as a social institution dedicated to informed citizenship.

Reconsidering ‘virtuous circle’ and ‘media malaise’ theories of the media: An 11-nation study

This study, based on a content analysis of television news and survey in eleven nations, explores the split between those who see the media as politically alienating and others who see the media as encouraging greater political involvement. Here, we suggest that both positions are partly right. On the one hand, television news, and in particular public service television news, can be very effective in imparting information about public affairs and promoting a culture of democracy in which news exposure, public affairs knowledge, sense of democratic competence and political interest feed off each other. On the other hand, the views represented in public affairs news are overwhelmingly those of men and elites, which can discourage identification with public life.

The Italian broadcasting system between politics and the market

Silvio Berlusconis success in the European elections of 1999 reopened the Italian debate over the leader of Forza Italias conflict of interests in the media and politics. This question is one among many that currently concern the relationship between the media, the market and politics in Italy. The Italian broadcasting system has long been subaltern to the political climate and its idiosyncrasies: in the past, the incapacity or lack of desire to regulate the development of the system made the formation of Berlusconis broadcasting trust possible;in the present,an excess of political sensitivity prevents thoroughgoing reform.The development of digital pay-TV,coupled with the resistance of the state broadcaster,Rai,to return to a mission of public service,provide good examples of some of the contradictions that mark the Italian path to the globalization of communication.

Socially mediated populism: the communicative strategies of political leaders on Facebook

Populism has been defined in many different ways, mostly in regard to political ideology and political dynamics, but only in recent years in relation to communication variables. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the identification of a socially mediated type of populist communication profoundly affected by the specific nature of social media. It presents and discusses empirical evidence on Italy’s populist and non-populist leaders that use Facebook regularly, and highlights the extent of the overflow of populist communication patterns and ideological features into mainstream political communication. Populist ideology fragments emerged in Italian leaders’ Facebook posts, thus leading to two main conclusions: first, populism appears to be ‘endemic’ in the Italian online facebooksphere; second, political actors—even non-populist ones—do not disdain the adoption of typical populist rhetorics.

The Media and the Far Right in Western Europe: Playing the Nationalist Card, by Antonis A. Ellinas

might be little more than random error. Too often, the authors attempted to explain what were essentially flat lines. For instance, the authors made a compelling analysis of the impact of the third presidential debate and John McCain’s emphasis on taxation through his repeated referencing of the now infamous Joe the Plumber. But ultimately the change that the chapter explains—the percentage of people who thought Obama would raise their taxes and McCain would not—was about 3 percentage points. In short, I am skeptical of the substantive importance of a change in perceptions that is this small on the outcome of the presidential race. Also, the social scientist in me sometimes wondered whether the relationships that the authors identified were actually causal ones or whether there was so much endogeneity that it might be impossible to demonstrate which factor came first. For instance, the authors assert that Obama’s e-mailed messages led people not only to improve their opinions of Obama but to cast early ballots for him (p. 264). One wonders, however, whether people who were enthusiastic about Obama were more likely to recall and report receiving an e-mail message from his campaign. To be fair, the authors do control for a host of potentially intervening variables in their statistical models, but I still have doubts about whether the authors’ tests successfully demonstrated causality in this instance. Indeed, many of the “causal” relationships identified in the book might be better thought of as mere relationships. The Obama Victory is not the first account of the 2008 presidential election, but it is the first to marry a journalistic treatment of the election with statistical analysis of election survey data. In doing so, it provides a careful, detailed account of why Obama won that focuses on key points during that campaign and the connection of these events to public opinion. Anyone who wants a better understanding of the outcome of the historic 2008 presidential race should read this book.