Does Public Broadcasting Make a Difference? Political Knowledge and Electoral Campaigns on Television

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.

Widening or Closing the Knowledge Gap?

“…The Norwegian public broadcasting company, NRK TV, is the most popular source of political information and the most popular generally (cf. Jenssen 2009, Karlsen 2009). The average political knowledge score among the NRK-TV audience is roughly equal to those preferring national newspapers as their primary source of political information.…”

“…The most striking result is that public television seems to attract a more politically knowledgeable audience than the commercial TV2, and that public radio -by an even wider margin -attracts a more sophisticated audience than does the commercial P4-radio. This does not mean that public broadcasting is better at educating its audience, but rather that public broadcasting is the choice of many politically knowledgeable individuals (Jenssen 2009). Previous studies suggest that media systems with strong PB traditions are more informative with regard to "hard news" than are media systems dominated by commercial broadcasting (Aalberg et al 2008, Curran et al forthcoming).…”

(Cognitive) mobilization and political blogs

“…According to the media malaise argument, the modern media-especially TVtend to create political cynicism and apathy, withdrawal from the sphere of public life, social isolation and consequently loss of social capital. Both the content and format of the modern media are seen as causes of the misery (Jenssen 2009). This has to be analyzed with particular caution, given that the degree of cynicism exhibited by politicians in their TV appearances has a negative effect on political trust (Mutz and Reeves 2005).…”

“…Therefore, while some citizens appear to exhibit a ''spiral of cynicism'', other seem to reveal a ''virtuous circle''. Years later, Jenssen (2009) suggested that neither exposure to public nor private channels contributes to increasing the overall level of political knowledge.…”

“…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 mobilization'' and pessimistic ''media malaise'' banners (Jenssen 2009). These two approaches could hardly be more different.…”