While the majority of previous research suggests there are positive relationships between digital media use and political participation and knowledge, most studies have relied on cross-sectional surveys and have thus not been able to firmly establish the chain of causality. Also, there is little research investigating use of different forms of digital media and their relative effects on political participation and knowledge. This study examines (a) the effects of digital media use on political participation and knowledge and (b) whether different forms of digital media use affect people differently. Drawing on two representative panel surveys, the study demonstrates that there are only weak effects of digital media use on political learning, but that the use of some digital media forms has appreciable effects on political participation.

This study uses four waves of panel data to analyze inadvertent learning-that is, learning in the absence of interest or motivation-from watching public service television channels. Previous research suggests that motivation-based gaps in political knowledge are at least partly a function of the political information opportunities provided by the major television channels in a country, which influence the likelihood of being inadvertently exposed to news and current affairs programs. The present study puts the inadvertent learning hypothesis to a thorough empirical test by analyzing individual-level growth in knowledge over time, based on panel data collected during five months leading up to the Swedish 2010 national election. Using multilevel growth curve modeling and an extensive battery of surveillance knowledge questions, the results show not only (a) that public service channel viewing was related to learning, but also (b) that knowledge growth occurred among public service viewers independently of their political motivation and news attention, and (c) that such learning was even more pronounced among viewers lacking an interest in politics. The findings are discussed in light of ongoing media environmental transformations as well as cross-national comparative media systems research.

Crises tend to be crucial political events with the ability to determine the public’s faith in political actors. If well managed, crises provide windows of opportunities for political actors to show action, strengthening credibility and pushing through new policies. This article explores one such instance of successful crisis exploitation: the Swedish government’s management of the financial crisis in 2008. During the worst turbulence, the government was able to successfully frame the event, without being challenged by contrasting frames, as a crisis managed with great competence and in the best interest of ordinary citizens. We explain this phenomenon through journalistic styles and standards. The article concludes by discussing the findings where we propose that issue framing, in combination with descriptive journalism, contributes to portraying political actors as credible crisis managers rather than tactical politicians, with the result being that they appear more trustworthy and competent. Moreover, due to unbalanced coverage, actors who are framed as competent crisis managers succeed in further strengthening their positions.

PreprintThis is the submitted version of a paper published in Journalism Studies. Citation for the original published paper (version of record):Karlsson, M., Clerwall, C., Nord, L. (2014) You ain´t seen nothing yet.: Transparency' s (lack of ) Effect on Source and Message Credibility. AbstractTransparency has been proposed to both change the way journalism is being produced and increase its credibility. However, little research has been conducted to assess the connection between transparency and credibility. This study utilizes an experimental setting (N=1320) to measure what impact transparency have on source and message credibility from the user perspective. The results reveals an almost absence of any transparency effect on both source and message credibility although some small significant effects could be observed primarily regarding internal hyperlinks, comments and contextual information. Although further research is desperately needed in this area the study suggest that transparency does not affect the credibility of journalism in the eyes of the contemporary audience and thus have limited appeal as a new norm in journalism.

No abstract