Mediatization of European Foreign Policy - a cross-time, cross-national comparison
make sense of the way media shape society and politics with recourse to this
meta-concept. From the mediatization follows that politics adapt to a media logic.
This project studies to what degree and in what way the foreign policy of
European states has adopted a media logic and its focus on "simplification,
polarization, intensification, personalization, visualization and stereotypization,
and the framing of politics as a strategic game" (Strömbäck 2008:233). From this
follows a possible increased focus on human security and human rights, instead
of national security and national sovereignty.
We depart from three research questions:
1) To what degree does the impact of
media logic vary with different positions on the conflict-consensus dimension?
2) In what ways, if any, does media logic impact on the form and
3) Content of European states' foreign policies?
In the first phase of investigation we quantitatively study EU´s 27 member states
and the extent of media logic in their general foreign policy statements during the
last 20 years using speeches made in the UN General Assembly. We study if
media logic is more prevalent in consensus-oriented systems than conflict
systems. In the next phase of investigation we study three cases and elaborate on
what type of effects follow from different levels of media logic in different types
of consensus and conflict systems.
Ann-Marie Ekengren, Gothenburg University, Policy Studies
2011-2017
The purpose of the project
The purpose of the project has been to comparatively study to what degree and in what way mediatization and media logic has come to dominate politics. We focus in particular on states foreign policies. In practice, we have studied United Kingdom, Sweden and Finland since they position themselves differently in the European and global community. We have tried to find empirical variation in terms of the content of their foreign policies.
Depending on our conducted studies we have decided to focus on the scope conditions of mediatization. Over the time we have become more and more critical towards literature speaking of a linear development where politics adapt more and more to media. With the help of earlier research on foreign policy changes, we have formulated three possible scope conditions of mediatization; uncertainty, identity and resonance. First, uncertainty as a scope condition means that the decision makers lack an institutional path to relate to. Media logic can offer an alternative logic. Secondly, states' different perceptions of their own identity can be variably receptive of media logic. Thirdly, the resonance on the mass level for media logic can also vary. If there is an opinion support in favor of positions in line with media logic, this could also have an impact on media logic variation.
We focus on states foreign policy roles, their own and others perceptions of who they are and ought to be. This is in line with an increasing interest overall in foreign policy roles.
Important results from the project
One important result comes from our quantitative study. We have coded all speeches by Finland, Sweden and the UK in the UN General Assembly Debate during the years 1992-2010. In other mediatization studies, the tendency is to focus exclusively on media material.
Our results show that it is difficult to find any results indicating increasing media logic in the speeches. The results indicate the opposite. The tendency in the UN speeches is a slight increase in political logic. However, we also find some interesting results in line with our expectations. Media logic tends to increase when climate change and human security are discussed. This result is particular evident in the British speeches. The results indicate that media logic tends to increase during certain scope conditions. But it is not necessarily a linear development.
A second important result is that media logic varies considerably when it comes to foreign policy decision-making and foreign policy roles. One of our cases is the humanitarian intervention in Libya, and the other is the simultaneous case of humanitarian intervention in Côte d'Ivoire. The sense of uncertainty was much more obvious in the Libyan case. In the UK this led to increasing media logic in both how the conflict was portrayed in the media, but also in the decision-making process. Media logic was not so obvious in the Swedish decision-making, and even less so in the Finnish decision-making. We see the same pattern in the Ivorian case, but on a much lower level. The Ivorian case was much more straight-forward. We see some media logic in the British case, some examples in the Swedish case, but none in the Finnish case.
A third research result it that Finland seems to resist media logic the best, at least in foreign policy decision-making. We interpret this as a result of their consensual culture. Decision-makers do not have to relate to media logic as much as in the UK.
New questions
Given the fact that scope conditions have relevance for media logic, the new questions are what scope conditions are important overall, and also in what empirical cases certain scope conditions are more or less important.
International Connections
We have presented the project and its results at numerous occasions: International Studies Association (ISA), British International Studies Assocation (BISA), Europan Community Research and Education Association (ECREA) and Nordic Political Science Association (NOPSA).
Douglas Brommesson has also been a visiting researcher at the National Centre for Research on Europe (NCRE) at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, Nya Zeeland. Here Brommesson held several presentations of the project.
Research information
Ann-Marie Ekengren has presented the project to pupils at Bäckängsgymnasiet in Borås.
Douglas Brommesson has presented research at an open seminar at NUPI in Oslo and also at an open seminar in Helsinki.
The two most important publications
The most important publication in the project is the monograph The Mediatization of Foreign Policy, Political Decision-Making and Humanitarian Intervention. The book is published by Palgrave MacMillan in March 2017. The book presents the theoretical points of departure for the whole project, methodological arguments, a quantitative oriented chapter on media logic in the UN General Assembly Debates and two case studies on decision on humanitarian interventions.
The case studies consist of in-depth analysis of the foreign policy roles of Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom in relation to the humanitarian interventions in Libya and Cote d'Ivoire, both in 2011. In these case studies the media narratives on the humanitarian interventions and how different actors acted, are studied. The case studies also include narratives from the foreign policy decision-making in Finland, Sweden and the UK. Here we have studied questions like to what extent the decision-making was influenced by media images, or what foreign policy roles where brought forward in the debate.
Another important publication from the project is the article "What happens when a new Government enters office?" published in Cooperation and Conflict. In this article the effect of change in government on foreign policy is studied. In order to do so a variable on political culture is defined and problematized. This variable is also used in different other parts of the project.
The publication strategy of the project
The publication strategy has been to publish in high-ranking journals and for a high-ranking international publishing house. Regarding our book Palgrave MacMillan publishes a book series with a thematic profile very close to the theme of the book, hence we decided to publish within this book series.
A summery of the project has been published in Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift (open access), and one article has been published in Cooperation and Conflict. In addition to this, one of the researchers in the project has published one chapter in The Oxford Handbook of Swedish Politics (Oxford University Press, 2015). We have also written one additional manuscript for a chapter that is still to be published.
Through active participation at international and national conferences our papers have been available online via the webpages of the various conferences.
Links to personal web pages
Ann-Marie Ekengren http://pol.gu.se/personal/larare-och-forskare/ekengren-ann-marie
Douglas Brommesson http://www.svet.lu.se/douglas-brommesson
Publications
Bok
Brommesson, Douglas and Ann-Marie Ekengren (2017) The Mediatization of Foreign Policy, Political Decision-Making and Humanitarian Intervention. The Palgrave MacMillan Series in International Political Communication. Palgrave MacMillan.
Chapter
Brommesson, Douglas och Ann-Marie Ekengren (2017). ” Homogenization or Fragmentation? Perceptions of Mediatization among Finnish and Swedish Parliamentarians” i Enroth, Henrik och Magnus Hagevi (red.) Cartelization, Convergence, or Increasing Similarities? Lessons from Parliamentary Parties. ECPR Press.
Brommesson, Douglas (2015) ”The Europeanization of Swedish Foreign Policy and Beyond: On Multiple Roles in Swedish Post-Cold-War Foreign Policy”, i Pierre, Jon (red.) The Oxford Handbook of Swedish Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tidskriftsartikel
Brommesson, Douglas och Ekengren , Ann-Marie (2013) “What happens when a new Government enters office? A comparison of ideological change in British and Swedish foreign policy 1993-2010”. Cooperation and Conflict vol. 48(1).
Brommesson, Douglas & Ekengren, Ann-Marie (2012) ”Mediatisation of European foreign policy”, Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift vol. 114(1): 59-67
Konferenspapper
Brommesson, Douglas och Ann-Marie Ekengren (2016) The Mediatization of Foreign Policy. British and Finnish decision-making on interventions in Côte d’Ivoire and Libya. Papper presenterat på ISA i Atlanta 16-18 mars 2016.
Brommesson, Douglas och Ann-Marie Ekengren (2014) “The Scope Conditions of a mediatized foreign policy. A comparison of media logic and political logic in British, Swedish and Finnish foreign policy statements”. Papper presenterat på ECREA 12-15 november 2014.
Brommesson, Douglas och Ann-Marie Ekengren (2014) “The Scope Conditions of a mediatized foreign policy. A comparison of media logic and political logic in British, Swedish and Finnish foreign policy statements”. Papper presenterat på NOPSA 12-15 augusti 2014.
Brommesson, Douglas och Ann-Marie Ekengren (2012) ”Mediatization of Foreign Policy. A Comparison of British, Swedish and Finnish Foreign Policy Statements”. Paper presenterat vid SWEPSA i Växjö 26-28 september 2012.
Brommesson, Douglas och Ann-Marie Ekengren (2012) ”Mediatization of European Foreign Policy – A Cross-Time, Cross-National Comparison”. Paper presenterat vid BISA i Edinburgh juni 2012.