No abstract

Television debates have become the centre stage for political debate in advanced societies. Although presidential debates in the United States have achieved much attention, the same cannot be said of the more typical panel debates in multiparty systems. This article investigates whether winning or losing panel debates matters in that it influences important attitudes among the electorate. Based on a quasi‐experimental design prior to the 2001 Norwegian parliamentary election, this study finds that the outcome of the television debates does matter. Winning a debate can actually make a difference, and significant changes in issue ownership and issue hegemony are demonstrated. These findings are important for understanding some of the factors underlying the increase in last minute voter volatility.

No abstract

The political role of the modern media and the impact on public opinion has come under intense scrutiny. The arguments in the scientific dispute have been structured under the optimistic 'cognitive mobilisation' and pessimistic 'media malaise' banners. For obvious reasons the role of television has been most intensely discussed. TV has the widest reach and is believed to have to the strongest impact. So far, much of the exchange of arguments has been based on data from the United States. In many European countries, public broadcasting is far more prominent than in the United States, and one can argue that the ideals underlying public broadcasting have put their mark on the TV industry in many European countries. Norway is such a case. The interesting question is, of course, whether this matters. Does public broadcasting foster a 'virtuous circle' of increased political competence, whereas commercial TV creates 'media malaise'? Data from the Norwegian 1997-2001 election survey panel is used in this study to overcome the main methodological problem in the many studies based on cross-sectional data: the question of causality. Too often researchers have based their inferences about the link between media exposure and political knowledge on cross-sectional correlations. The empirical results do little to support the optimistic view of TV as the great political educator. On the contrary, neither exposure to the state-owned public broadcasting NRK nor the commercial TV2 help to increase the general level of political knowledge. However, NRK seems to be the preferred channel among the politically well-informed.

In the 1994 EU referendum a majority of Norwegian voters rejected membership in the European Union. The outcome contrasts with victories for membership in the corresponding referendums in Austria, Finland and Sweden. The article reports a preliminary investigation of factors relating to the support for “no”. Analysis of aggregate data (representing 435 municipalities) and survey data demonstrates the importance of traditional cleavages as well as new cleavages for the vote. The no‐vote was strongest in northern Norway, among supporters of the traditional “counter‐cultures” and among those employed in the primary sector. Women were more likely to vote no as were public sector employees. The major parties took relatively clear stands on the issue, and we find that party identification shows a strong correlation with the vote in the referendum. With a turnout of 89 percent, the 1994 referendum represents an all‐time high for elections in Norway. Compared with the previous referendum on the EC in 1972, we find that the increase in mobilization was particularly strong in the no‐dominated periphery, but the shift in mobilization patterns was not decisive for the outcome of the referendum.