Suchergebnisse

This book explores the media coverage of three prominent Finnish labor market cases in the newspaper Helsingin Sanomat. It analyzes how this arena supported or undermined the power positions of each side and the reaching of the contract. The cases in study are the first proper general agreement in 1968 (Liinamaa 1) and the endeavors for so-called "social contract" by the Government of Esko Aho (1991) and Juha Sipilä (2015). The study identifies changes and continuities in the political discourses, in the ways of making validity claims in political argumentation, and in media/journalistic interventionism. These content analytical viewpoints illustrate the theoretical ideas about mediatization of politics presented in the book. By analyzing corporatist and pluralist aspects of decision making, the book opens a view in the relationships among labor market organizations, the Government, and the media in the three decades studied. - Teoksessa kuvataan, millainen julkisen politikoinnin areena Helsingin Sanomissa rakentui kolmessa merkittävässä työmarkkinatapauksessa ja miten tämä areena tuki tai horjutti sopimusten syntyä ja osapuolten asemaa. Tarkasteltavina ovat vuonna 1968 solmittu Suomen ensimmäinen varsinainen tulopoliittinen sopimus (Liinamaa 1) sekä Esko Ahon ja Juha Sipilän hallitusten yritykset niin sanotuiksi "yhteiskuntasopimuksiksi" vuosina 1991 ja 2015. Tutkimuksen kohteena olevista jutuista tunnistetaan muutoksia ja pysyvyyksiä, jotka liittyvät niin tulopolitiikan puhetapoihin, julkisen argumentoinnin tapoihin kuin median/journalismin toimintaan. Nämä sisällönanalyysin näkökulmat havainnollistavat kirjassa esitettäviä politiikan medioitumista koskevia teoreettisia ideoita. Päätöksenteon korporatistisia ja pluralistisia piirteitä analysoimalla kirja avaa näkymän siihen, miten hallituksen, työmarkkinajärjestöjen ja median suhde on eri vuosikymmeninä julkisuudessa asettunut.

This book [Mediatized power and the return of the political] describes Finnish decision-makers' relationship with the media. It is based on surveys in 2009 and 2019. In 2009 there were 419 and in 2019 484 respondents, all of them having an influential position in some of the eight societal sectors covered in the study. The results show a moderate change from a consensus-oriented and networking decision-making culture towards a more ideologic and power-based way of negotiating. However, it seems that this has not affected how open or transparent the negotiation-processes are or how prone the decision-makers are to leak confidential information. The decision-makers' relationship with media publicity has become more professional and strategic. The results point to an increased role of social media in communications management while the role of the news media seems to be diminishing. Even though the decision-makers view publicity as an even more risky and strategic arena of political struggle than they did before, they also seem now acknowledge more clearly the rational aspects of journalism. The self-reported role of media publicity as a source of personal authority has somewhat diminished while there seems to be no change in how prone the decision-makers think they are for the impacts of media publicity.