Page 179 - Comparing Media Systems THREE MODELS OF MEDIA AND POLITICS

P1: GLB/IRK/kaa P2: KAF
0521835356c06.xml Hallin 0 521 83535 6 January 28, 2004 21:0

The North/Central European Model

8
theNetherlands,andespeciallySwitzerland. Germanyisalsoclosetothe
model of liberal corporatism. In the media sphere, a desire to limit state
power in order to avoid the recurrence of totalitarianism has influenced
the development of a relatively liberal system in Germany. Despite these
distinctions,theDemocraticCorporatistcountriesingeneralarecharac-
terized by relatively high levels of social spending as well as other forms of
active state intervention in economic and social life, including an active
industrial policy. The political culture of the Democratic Corporatist
countries tends to emphasize the duty of the state to provide condi-
tions for full participation of all citizens and all groups in social life. The
view expressed by Gustafsson in the quotation that begins this chapter –
Gustafsson took it from an article by a Liberal party politician and cites it
as evidence for the strong consensus in 1970s Sweden on the social role of
the press – reflects this philosophy as applied to the media, which tend to
be seen in the Democratic Corporatist countries not simply as a private
commercial enterprise but as a social institution for which the state has
an important responsibility. This tradition is manifested in media policy
in several ways: in the system of press subsidies, in stronger regulation
of media industries than is found in the Liberal countries, and in strong
institutions of public broadcasting.
All the Democratic Corporatist countries except Switzerland and
Germany have direct state subsidies for the press. Denmark (which here
deviates from Katzenstein’s categorization of social and liberal corpo-
ratist countries) is a marginal case, with a Finance Institute of the Press
9
that provides security for low-interest loans. Denmark, however, also
has a system of subsidies for local noncommercial radio (Peterson and
Siune 1997). All also haveindirect subsidies, usually inthe form of taxex-
emptions and reduced postal and sometimes telecommunications rates.
These subsidy systems had their origins in the 1960s, when growing
press concentration threatened the pluralism that had characterized the
press in Northern Europe throughout the early twentieth century. The
evolution of media markets particularly threatened politically affiliated

8 Katzenstein places Sweden between these two groups. He does not discuss Finland.
Social corporatism, in Katzenstein’s analysis, arises where social democratic parties
are dominant and is characterized by particularly strong welfare states. Liberal corpo-
ratismariseswherebourgeoispartiesaredominantandinvolvesmoremarket-oriented
policies. In both cases, however, policies are strongly shaped by bargains reached across
class and other lines of social division.
9
Some sources, for example Petersen and Siune (1992) and Humphreys (1996: 106),
describe the Danish financing as a direct subsidy system and some (Søllinge 1999) as
a system without direct subsidies.

161