Kari Karppinen

Rethinking Media Pluralism

Access to a broad range of different political views and cultural expressions is often regarded as a self-evident value in both theoretical and political debates on media and democracy. Pluralism is commonly accepted as a guiding principle of media policy in addressing media concentration, the role of public service media, or more recently such questions as how to respond to search engines, social networking sites, and citizen media. However, opinions on the meaning and nature of media pluralism as a concept vary widely, and definitions of it can easily be adjusted to suit different political purposes. Rethinking Media Pluralism contends that the notions of media pluralism and diversity have been reduced to empty catchphrases or conflated with consumer choice and market competition. In this narrow logic, key questions about social and political values, democracy, and citizenship are left unexamined. In this provocative new book, Kari Karppinen argues that media pluralism needs to be rescued from its depoliticized uses and reimagined more broadly as a normative value that refers to the distribution of communicative power in the public sphere. Instead of something that could simply be measured through the number of media outlets available, media pluralism should be understood in terms of its ability to challenge inequalities and create a more democratic public sphere.

Policy streams and public service media funding reforms in Germany and Finland

On 1 January 2013, Germany and Finland made the switch from the traditional broadcasting licence fee tied to television-set ownership to a compulsory excise duty collected from all citizens, households and places of business. This article compares the changes in these countries’ public service media funding arrangements on the basis of John Kingdon’s ‘multiple streams’ framework of public policy-making which, to date, has been rather neglected in studies of media policy-making processes. Drawing on the analysis of policy documents and interviews with policymakers and other stakeholders involved in the respective processes, we investigate how the actual reforms materialized, which other possibilities were neglected and why this has been the case.

Framing the Newspaper Crisis: How debates on the state of the press are shaped in Finland, France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom and United States

This article argues that discourses of a newspaper “crisis” should not be regarded simply as descriptions of the actual state of the press but also as a means by which strategic actors frame the situation. The emerging frames can have substantial consequences for media policy making. The study identifies four key frames used to portray the newspaper “crisis” and discusses their relevance for public debates in Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States. Similarities and differences are examined through 59 in-depth interviews with policymakers and industry executives as well as a qualitative analysis of policy documents and relevant media coverage. The study demonstrates that debates on the newspaper “crisis” are only partly influenced by (1) economic realities and (2) media policy traditions in the six countries but also reflect (3) the strategic motives of powerful actors and (4) the diffusion of frames across borders, particularly those coming from the United States. A transnationally uniform paradigm emerges according to which the state is expected to play the role of a benevolent but mostly passive bystander, while media companies are expected to tackle the problem mainly by developing innovative content and business strategies. This liberal market paradigm displays one blind spot however: it does not seriously consider a scenario where the market is failing to provide sustainable journalistic quality.

Guiding Principles for Internet Policy: A Comparison of Media Coverage in Four Western Countries

The governance of the Internet on the global level has attracted much attention. In the process the importance of the national context has gotten downplayed. We argue that understanding of the national context is a necessary complement to research on global governance for an understanding of the dynamics of Internet development. We spotlight the importance of the national context by showing that seemingly global principles have varying import and meaning in four countries—the United States, Germany, Finland, and Sweden. We do so via a qualitative content analysis of leading newspapers.

Finland: Maintaining the Fragile Consensus

Financed almost entirely by a special public broadcasting tax, and with no advertising or sponsoring allowed, Yle is one of the ‘purest’ public service organizations in Europe and might be seen as enjoying an enviably secure position in comparison to many other European PSM organizations. In recent years, however, the tradition of media policy consensus has increasingly showed signs of unravelling. The level and justification of Yle’s funding as well as its transparency, efficiency and accountability have been subject to heated political debate, with attacks against its legitimacy spearheaded by the struggling commercial media industry. This chapter reviews the main issues and arguments in the Finnish debates. It concludes that, at least for the time being, the fragile consensus over the importance of PSM is maintained, and it is unlikely that the current government would push through radical changes.