Suchergebnisse

In February 2020 Croatia was affected by the COVID-19 global pandemic. A challenging task of communicating the pandemic was assumed by the people associated with the Headquarters of Civil Protection of the Republic of Croatia. The goal of this study was to examine how three of them were covered in the media and to test if and how they were using pandemic-related strategies of persuasion to achieve public compliance. The findings indicate that the coverage of the key communicators during the first three months of the pandemic was overwhelmingly positive. Moreover, in the early stages of the pandemic none of the examined news sites was really pushing issues or angles that questioned pandemic-related policies or actions of the Headquarters. Examination of the rhetoric of the key coronavirus communicators has established that they have embraced persuasive strategies that are typical of pandemic communication, most notably the use of fear appeals, military metaphors and insistence on messages of 'togetherness' and conversely, 'pandemic shaming'. The article concludes that professional credibility and favorable media representation of Croatian coronavirus envoys, along with adopted persuasive strategies, have probably encouraged people to trust their decisions and comply with restrictive measures that have suspended their freedoms and changed their life routines almost overnight.

In February 2020 Croatia was affected by the COVID-19 global pandemic. A challenging task of communicating the pandemic was assumed by the people associated with the Headquarters of Civil Protection of the Republic of Croatia. The goal of this study was to examine how three of them were covered in the media and to test if and how they were using pandemic-related strategies of persuasion to achieve public compliance. The findings indicate that the coverage of the key communicators during the first three months of the pandemic was overwhelmingly positive. Moreover, in the early stages of the pandemic none of the examined news sites was really pushing issues or angles that questioned pandemic-related policies or actions of the Headquarters. Examination of the rhetoric of the key coronavirus communicators has established that they have embraced persuasive strategies that are typical of pandemic communication, most notably the use of fear appeals, military metaphors and insistence on messages of 'togetherness' and conversely, 'pandemic shaming'. The article concludes that professional credibility and favorable media representation of Croatian coronavirus envoys, along with adopted persuasive strategies, have probably encouraged people to trust their decisions and comply with restrictive measures that have suspended their freedoms and changed their life routines almost overnight. ; Hrvatsku je globalna pandemija COVID-a 19 pogodila u veljači 2020. Izazovni zadatak komuniciranja tema vezanih za pandemiju dobilo je četvero ljudi povezanih sa Stožerom civilne zaštite Republike Hrvatske. Cilj je ovog rada istražiti kako je troje članova bilo prikazano u medijima te jesu li i kako koristili strategije uvjeravanja uobičajene za stanja pandemija kako bi dobili pristanak javnosti. Nalazi istraživanja ukazuju na to da je izvještavanje o ključnim komunikatorima tijekom prva tri mjeseca pandemije bilo uvjerljivo pozitivno. Štoviše, u ranoj fazi pandemije nijedan od analiziranih portala nije inzistirao na temama ili perspektivama koje propituju politike ili mjere Stožera vezane za pandemiju. Analizom retorike ključnih ljudi koji su komunicirali o koronavirusu utvrđeno je da su oni prihvatili strategije uvjeravanja tipične za komuniciranje u pandemijama, ponajprije uporabu poruka straha, vojnih metafora i poruka koje inzistiraju na "zajedništvu" i "pandemijskom sramoćenju". Autorica zaključuje kako su pozitivna medijska prezentacija komunikatora i strategije uvjeravanja koje su koristili vjerojatno potaknuli ljude da vjeruju njihovom odlukama i pristanu na restriktivne mjere koje su suspendirale njihove slobode i gotovo preko noći promijenile njihove životne navike.

Glavni je cilj rada utvrditi u kojoj je mjeri novu političku opciju u Hrvatskoj, Most, opravdano nazivati populističkom. Na to pitanje autori nastoje odgovoriti korištenjem recentnih teorijskih, metodoloških i empirijskih uvida politološke literature o populizmu. Analizu temelje na inkluzivnom pristupu populizmu i iz njega izvedenoj istraživačkoj matrici na temelju koje je provedena analiza sadržaja. Analiza samo djelomice potvrđuje teze o Mostu kao populističkoj opciji. Autori smatraju kako je tu opciju najprikladnije kategorizirati kao kombinaciju centrističkog populizma i antiestablišmentske reformske stranke. Tvrde da bi istraživanja populizma trebala razlikovati antielitizam od antiestablišmentske pozicije stranaka i političara. Zanimljivost Mosta vide i u njegovu čudnom i paradoksalnom odnosu prema hrvatskoj političkoj eliti: mostovci kritiziraju političku elitu kao nekompetentnu i korumpiranu, a istodobno zagovaraju politički savez s tom istom elitom kako bi se provele reforme i donio prosperitet hrvatskom društvu. ; The main goal of the paper is to establish to which extent it is justified to label a newly established Croatian party The Bridge (Most) a populist party. In order to answer this question, the paper relies on theoretical, methodological and empirical insights from contemporary literature on populism. The study is based on inclusive approach to populism and accordingly developed categories for content analysis. The analysis only partially confirms the assumption that Most is a populist option. The authors suggest that Most is best described as a combination of centrist populism and an anti-establishment reform party. They suggest that populism research would benefit from distinguishing between anti-elitist and anti-establishment position of parties and politicians. Finally, they argue that the 'curiosity' of Most stems primarily from their awkward and paradoxical relationship towards Croatian political elite: Most's politicians criticise political elite for being incompetent and corrupt, while at the same time advocating alliance with this same elite in order to implement reforms and bring prosperity to Croatian society.

For the very first time in EU history, the 2014 EP elections provided citizens with the opportunity to influence the nomination of the Commission President by casting a vote for the main Europarties' 'lead candidates'. By subjecting the position of the Commission President to an open political contest, many experts have formulated the expectation that heightened political competition would strengthen the weak electoral connection between EU citizens and EU legislators, which some consider a root cause for the EU's lack of public support. In particular, this contest was on display in the so-called 'Eurovision Debate', a televised debate between the main contenders for the Commission President broadcasted live across Europe. Drawing on a quasi-experimental study conducted in 24 EU countries, we find that debate exposure led to increased cognitive and political involvement and EU support among young citizens. Unfortunately, the debate has only reached a very small audience. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion