Page 197 - Communication and Citizenship Journalism and the Public Sphere

186 COMMUNICATION AND CITIZENSHIP

DISCUSSION: DIMENSIONS OF POLITICS
Some of the observed differences in the two samples may be accounted
for by cultural factors. As already suggested, individuals may
understand political information with reference to powerful others,
which range from religious to parliamentary-political agents. It appears
plausible, for example, that the relatively more secularized nature of
Danish culture would explain why religious aspects were not introduced
by the Danish respondents, in contrast to the US sample. This is despite
the fact that one news story took up undertakers and their business
practices, which might reasonably bring to mind the religious aspects of
death.
Moreover, there emerge some interesting conceptualizations of the
political and economic spheres of society. While some Danish
interviewees draw on the theme of class to make sense of a variety of
news stories, the American respondents conceive of economic relations
not in terms of class power or powerful others, but in more specific,
monetary transaction terms. The role of government is also articulated
in different ways. Whereas some American interviewees do refer to
government when discussing their lack of personal control, government
is only one of several powerful others. On the other hand, Danes tend to
emphasize the responsibilities of government for the social and
economic welfare of individuals. Moreover, the emphasis on individuals
and personalization in the American human impact theme may certainly
reflect the classical liberal tradition noted by so many political
observers of the United States (De Tocqueville 1974, Hartz 1955,
Huntington 1968), but further research is needed to explore this aspect
of American culture. The attention to class and to human impact in the
context of government unemployment policies is more characteristic of
a Danish social democratic tradition. What seems to emerge is thus a
cultural difference in the discursive construction of society, respectively
highlighting market capitalism and the welfare state.
Finally, it appears that an awareness of the position of one’s home
country in the center-periphery structure of the world contributes to
specific ways of discussing political information. It is plausible that
whereas Danish television viewers observe most world events from the
sidelines, Americans conceive of international events as involving the
US as a central agent. This does not imply that Americans, when
debating international issues, necessarily endorse particular positions or
policies, but only that their taking of positions occurs within a culturally
specific perspective. Thus, the Danish and American respondents begin