Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Contents -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- Part I: Representing Politics -- 1 Political Bias -- Why does bias matter? -- Defining bias -- Types of bias -- The Bad News studies -- Manufacturing Consent -- Critiques of bias research -- Constructing reality? -- Conclusion -- 2 Telling Tales: The Reporting of Politics -- Frames versus biases -- Producing news -- Genres and political coverage -- Telling political stories -- We the people -- Explaining political stories -- Conclusion -- 3 It's Just for Fun: Politics and Entertainment -- Political satire: politics as deluded and corrupt -- Politics as conspiracy -- Entertainment as propaganda -- The politics of identity: from soap opera to sport -- Conclusion -- 4 Media Effects -- Seeing is believing? -- Under the influence? -- Press and voting behaviour -- Television and voting behaviour -- Influence beyond the ballot box -- Elite effects -- Media consumption in context -- Conclusion -- Part II: The Political Economy of Mass Media -- 5 State Control and State Propaganda -- Systems of control -- Censorship -- Secrecy -- Propaganda -- Regulation -- Comparing media systems -- Conclusion -- 6 Conglomerate Control: Media Moguls and Media Power -- Media empires -- Ownership and control -- The power of Rupert Murdoch -- Readers and viewers -- Advertisers -- Reconsidering media power -- Conclusion -- 7 Watchdogs or Lapdogs? The Politics of Journalism -- The power of the spin doctor? -- The rise of churnalism -- Investigative journalism and the 'dumbing down' of news -- Models of journalism -- Conclusion -- 8 Dream Worlds: Globalization and the Webs of Power -- Global players -- A history of the future -- Globalization or internationalization? -- Conglomerates, governments and identities -- Conclusion -- Part III: Mass Media and Democracy.

Influence of politics on media, corruption of media and stereotypes related to the social minorities are, according to the authors, the most significant problems of the 21st-century Slovak media. This book explains why the existence of public media is important and why alternative media fail to inform truthfully, impartially and objectively.

The article attempts to show how the role of the mass media is changing in the field of politics today: it is no longer the institution that informs society or provides us with values and norms of behaviour and understanding, but itself becomes a political and ideological agent that exists in parallel with the political parties, competes with them and attempts to replace them in the political field. In modern society, the ideological expansion is only possible as media expansion. For this reason political parties or their ideologies compete today not only among themselves, but are also forced to compete with the mass media as a political power with an ideology of its own. Although it is hard to define (which is characteristic of the political structure of postmodern times), it influence on the society, its preferences in politics, and its choices of values is intensive and effective. As the mass media perceives its power and its new political and ideological opportunities, in the near future we will be forced to put up with it not only as the structure organising the flow of information, but also as an independent political agent with its own political interest, organization structure and interests directed at the processes of political decision- making, and not at the elucidation of those processes via the channels of information. In this way the mass media is changing and turning from a structure that represents the views and positions of the public into a structure that represents public interest in relation to power. It is becoming the key instrument in the organisation of political life and rendering meaning to it. At the same time the activity of the mass media arrests and paralyses the activity of the individual. People could themselves find out what the mass media provides, but at a considerably higher cost in time, energy and money. Thus the mass media deprives us of the will to learn and act independently. [.]

The article attempts to show how the role of the mass media is changing in the field of politics today: it is no longer the institution that informs society or provides us with values and norms of behaviour and understanding, but itself becomes a political and ideological agent that exists in parallel with the political parties, competes with them and attempts to replace them in the political field. In modern society, the ideological expansion is only possible as media expansion. For this reason political parties or their ideologies compete today not only among themselves, but are also forced to compete with the mass media as a political power with an ideology of its own. Although it is hard to define (which is characteristic of the political structure of postmodern times), it influence on the society, its preferences in politics, and its choices of values is intensive and effective. As the mass media perceives its power and its new political and ideological opportunities, in the near future we will be forced to put up with it not only as the structure organising the flow of information, but also as an independent political agent with its own political interest, organization structure and interests directed at the processes of political decision- making, and not at the elucidation of those processes via the channels of information. In this way the mass media is changing and turning from a structure that represents the views and positions of the public into a structure that represents public interest in relation to power. It is becoming the key instrument in the organisation of political life and rendering meaning to it. At the same time the activity of the mass media arrests and paralyses the activity of the individual. People could themselves find out what the mass media provides, but at a considerably higher cost in time, energy and money. Thus the mass media deprives us of the will to learn and act independently. [.]

The article attempts to show how the role of the mass media is changing in the field of politics today: it is no longer the institution that informs society or provides us with values and norms of behaviour and understanding, but itself becomes a political and ideological agent that exists in parallel with the political parties, competes with them and attempts to replace them in the political field. In modern society, the ideological expansion is only possible as media expansion. For this reason political parties or their ideologies compete today not only among themselves, but are also forced to compete with the mass media as a political power with an ideology of its own. Although it is hard to define (which is characteristic of the political structure of postmodern times), it influence on the society, its preferences in politics, and its choices of values is intensive and effective. As the mass media perceives its power and its new political and ideological opportunities, in the near future we will be forced to put up with it not only as the structure organising the flow of information, but also as an independent political agent with its own political interest, organization structure and interests directed at the processes of political decision- making, and not at the elucidation of those processes via the channels of information. In this way the mass media is changing and turning from a structure that represents the views and positions of the public into a structure that represents public interest in relation to power. It is becoming the key instrument in the organisation of political life and rendering meaning to it. At the same time the activity of the mass media arrests and paralyses the activity of the individual. People could themselves find out what the mass media provides, but at a considerably higher cost in time, energy and money. Thus the mass media deprives us of the will to learn and act independently. [.]

In the context of recent political realities, the issue of "political culture" is becoming a major issue, both in practical terms, ie the way "how it translates into life" and conceptually. The notion as such was introduced into the scientific circuit by the contemporary American political scientist Herman Finer (1956) and developed by Gabriel A. Almond and Sidney Verba (1963). The mission of training the political culture has been undertaken by several institutions and organizations in the public segment, the media sector having the role of monitoring and knowledge of the processes that occur in various areas of socio-political and economic life, training the new democratic values of liquidation of the handicap that the "new democracies" have in correlation with the developed countries. In this study, the author aims to identify the extent to which the press, especially in the Republic of Moldova, fulfills its role as a trainer of political culture.

Using a comparative approach, this book examines how political communication and the mass media have played an important role in the consolidation of democratic institutions.

"Focusing on the case of Russia during Putin's first two presidential terms, this book examines media manipulation strategies in electoral authoritarian regimes. Which instruments and approaches do incumbent elites employ to skew media coverage in favour of their preferred candidate in a presidential election? What effects do these strategies have on news content? Based on two case studies of the presidential election campaigns in Russia in 2000 and in 2008, this investigation identifies the critical internal mechanisms according to which these regimes work. Looking at the same country, while it transformed from a competitive into a hegemonic authoritarian regime, allows one to make a diachronic comparison of these two regime types based on the Most-Similar Systems Design. The book explicates the subtle differences between competitive and hegemonic regimes, different types of media manipulation strategies, the diverging extent of media instrumentalisation, various interactions among state actors, large business owners, the media, and journalists, the respective effects that all these factors and interactions have on media content, and the peculiar types of bias prevalent in each type of regime. This deep exploration of post-Soviet politics is based on extensive review of documents, interviews with media professionals, and quantitative as well as qualitative content analyses of news media during two Russian presidential election campaigns"--Provided by publisher