Suchergebnisse

"This chapter reviews the literature on the visibility of politicians, parties and political candidates in the news media and the way they are presented in political coverage. Starting with the question who is covered (visibility), the following sections provide an overview of different aspects of how actors are covered, focusing on authenticity, negativity, and personalization. Furthermore, studies analyzing the composition of the news media's issue agenda are discussed. While the review shows a predominance of high-ranked political actors, a shrinking of sound-bites, and a substantial overlap between the issue agenda of the media and politicians or parties, no overarching trend toward more negativity, personalization, and process news can be found in the literature. Several reasons for these findings as well as the impact of contextual factors and differences between media outlets are discussed." (publisher's description)

Political disagreement in interpersonal communication increases attitudinal ambivalence and can depress voter turnout. These effects seem to be driven by a wish to avoid social controversy rather than informational gains from encountering other opinions. This article shows that political disagreement in interpersonal communication increases the difficulty of deciding for which party to vote. Moreover, this effect is a result of social disapproval of one's party preference, while political expertise in interpersonal communication has no effect. For voter turnout, no direct effect of social disapproval of one's party preference is found. However, disapproval has an indirect influence on turnout via difficulty of vote choice. In sum, both political attitudes and political behaviour are affected by social pressures. Students of political attitudes and behaviour should try to include interpersonal discussion in their models in greater detail than is common practice today. Adapted from the source document.

Am 15. September 2011 nahmen rekordverdächtige 88 Prozent der wahlberechtigten Dä-nen an den Wahlen zum dänischen Parlament, dem Folketing, teil. Dieser Artikel präsen-tiert eine kurze Zusammenfassung des Wahlkampfes. Unabhängig davon, welche Seite den Wahlkampf gewinnen würde, ein Ergebnis stand bereits vorab fest: Eine außerge-wöhnliche Phase dänischer Politik ging zu Ende. Nach zehn Jahren mit einer rechtslibe-ral-konservativen Minderheitsregierung, gestützt von der Dänischen Volkspartei, bewegte die dänische Politik sich zurück zu ihrem gängigen modus operandi: Zentrumsparteien bestimmen, wer Regierungschef wird. Mit lediglich einigen tausend Stimmen Vorsprung gewann der rote Block, gestützt von den Sozialliberalen, die Wahlen, und die neue Regie-rungschefin Dänemarks wurde die Sozialdemokratin Helle Thorning-Schmidt. In diesem Artikel werden die politische Situation vor der Wahl, der Verlauf des Wahlkampfes und das Wahlergebnis aus einer historischen Perspektive beschrieben. Außerdem geht es kurz um die Herausforderungen, der die neue Regierung gegenübersteht. ; On September 15, 2011 a record-high turn-out of 88 percent of the approx. 4 million Danes eligible to vote for the Danish parliament, the Folketing, was reached. This paper gives a short descriptive summary of the 2011 Danish election campaign. Irrespective of which side would win the position as primeminister, one thing was given: an exceptional era in Danish politics was coming to an end. After ten years of a Right Liberal-Conservative minority government supported by the Danish People's Party, Danish poli-tics would return to its classic modus operandi of centrist parties determining the prime-minister. By a margin of a few thousand votes, the red block won the elections and the new prime minister of Denmark is the Social Democrat Helle Thorning-Schmidt. This article describes the political context prior to the election campaign, the course of the election campaign, furthermore it presents the election results in a historical perspective and shortly discusses the challenges the new government is facing.

AbstractPolitical disagreement in interpersonal communication increases attitudinal ambivalence and can depress voter turnout. These effects seem to be driven by a wish to avoid social controversy rather than informational gains from encountering other opinions. This article shows that political disagreement in interpersonal communication increases the difficulty of deciding for which party to vote. Moreover, this effect is a result of social disapproval of one's party preference, while political expertise in interpersonal communication has no effect. For voter turnout, no direct effect of social disapproval of one's party preference is found. However, disapproval has an indirect influence on turnout via difficulty of vote choice. In sum, both political attitudes and political behaviour are affected by social pressures. Students of political attitudes and behaviour should try to include interpersonal discussion in their models in greater detail than is common practice today.

In the efforts to explain election outcomes, the interest in the effects of political communication, information & media coverage on political opinions has increased. This includes the effects of political opinion polls in the media. Especially, after 1980, numerous studies about the effects of opinion polls on voters' party preference have been published. However, it seems as if many studies approach the issue with ad hoc constructed models not or only partly guided by the existing literature. Research is little cumulative. One of the reasons for this is probably that no recent comprehensive & systematic overview has been published. This article fills this gap: It presents & systematizes approaches in studies analyzing the effects of opinion polls on voters' party preferences. By discussing theoretical & empirical gains & weaknesses, important questions for future research are highlighted. Tables, References. Adapted from the source document.

This chapter is a review of the main features of elections and the related political communication and campaigning in the Nordic countries. The focus is on national election campaigns in Norway, Sweden, mainland Finland, and mainland Denmark, with occasional references to Iceland and to other types of election campaigns. The first part of the chapter begins with a discussion of the rules and regulations governing elections across the Nordics. This discussion is followed by a review of the rules and regulations governing election campaign communication. The second part of this chapter presents the research programmes of voters and voting behaviour in the Nordic countries, as well as research programmes on election campaign communication. The goal of this second part is not to provide a detailed overview of past findings, but to reveal crucial similarities and differences with respect to elections and political communication across the Nordic countries.

This chapter is a review of the main features of elections and the related political communication and campaigning in the Nordic countries. The focus is on national election campaigns in Norway, Sweden, mainland Finland, and mainland Denmark, with occasional references to Iceland and to other types of election campaigns. The first part of the chapter begins with a discussion of the rules and regulations governing elections across the Nordics. This discussion is followed by a review of the rules and regulations governing election campaign communication. The second part of this chapter presents the research programmes of voters and voting behaviour in the Nordic countries, as well as research programmes on election campaign communication. The goal of this second part is not to provide a detailed overview of past findings, but to reveal crucial similarities and differences with respect to elections and political communication across the Nordic countries.

Abstract
The antecedents of immigration attitudes have been extensively examined in academic research, in particular, with respect to media use and personal contact with immigrants. Research on the role of interpersonal discussions about the issue of immigration has been scarce, however. Results from a two-wave panel survey show that individuals holding unfavorable attitudes towards immigration engaged more often in interpersonal communication about immigration, which colored the overall effect of engaging in such discussions. The implications of these results are discussed in the concluding section.

In the 2015 elections to the Folketing (Danish Parliament), the anti-immigrant Danish People's Party (DF) received roughly 21% of the vote, rendering it the second-largest parliamentary party after the Social Democrats and the largest party in the non-socialist political bloc, the so-called blue bloc.

This article traces mediatization in the coverage of election campaigns in Danish and German television news over the past 20 years (1990–2009). The analysis is based on news content analyses focusing on the major candidates in the two countries. Considering that Denmark and Germany are similar but nevertheless different countries, the data show remarkable similarities in the coverage of elections and how it changes over time. Observing the amount of horse-race coverage, personalization, visualization and negativity, most findings fitted the mediatization hypothesis at a first glance. At a second glance, multivariate analyses controlling for important other variables confirmed the notion of mediatization for only three of the five content indicators studied. In addition, the mediatization process apparently stalled in the 1990s.

Prior studies have reported a right-leaning bias in the media's reporting of how the public thinks of political issues, raising the question: Why, and to what extent, is this the case? One reason in particular has been discussed in this regard: Journalists judge public opinion to be more right leaning than it actually is (Beckers et al. 2021; Lewis et al. 2004). This paper therefore studies to what extent journalists misjudge audience opinion. The analyses are based on large-scale representative surveys of journalists (1993/2005) and the voting-age population (1994/2005) in Germany. Results show that German journalists (mis-)judge audience opinion to be more right-leaning than the audience sees itself. The results also show that journalists judge audience opinion to be to the right of their own stances, and that journalists in federal states with a right-leaning government and in West Germany judge audience opinion to be even further to the right. Audience feedback does not push journalists' judgements of their audience towards the right, however. These results are discussed vis-à-vis research showing that there is a consistent bias in the depiction of opinions expressed by ordinary citizens, and research documenting that political elites overestimate public support for right-wing policies.