Page 181 - 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

to be evidence that this has occurred in the Democratic Corporatist
countries. Actually the media were more deferential to political elites in
the 1950s, before these subsidy systems were put in place, than in the
1970s:thegrowthof “criticalprofessionalism”injournalisminNorthern
Europe came, as we shall see in the following text, in the period when
subsidies were highest. The subsidies are granted according to clearly
established criteria – consistent with the strong role of rational-legal au-
thority in the Democratic Corporatist countries. This, along with the
process of bargaining and compromise characteristic of democratic cor-
poratism, makes political manipulation of the subsidies for purposes of
pressuring newspapers unlikely. Newspaper subsidies have been reduced
in most countries over the past decades, as the welfare state in general
has been cut back. But they remain an important feature of the media
systems of most of the Democratic Corporatist countries.
The Democratic Corporatist countries also tend to combine strong
protection for press freedom with a significant level of regulation – again
reflecting the assumption that media are a social institution and not
simply a private business. Most countries have hate-speech laws ban-
ning media content that denigrates specific social groups. Many – for
example, Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands – also have specific
bans on dissemination of Nazi propaganda, holocaust denial, and the
like. Norwegian law bans advertising that “conflicts with the inherent
parity between the sexes” (Wolland 1993: 128); Sweden bans advertising
directed at children. Regulation of commercial broadcasting generally
involves limits on the total amount of advertising, the frequency of com-
mercial interruptions, and mixing of advertising and program content,
as well as requirements for political pluralism. Paid political advertising
on television is banned or narrowly restricted in Belgium, Denmark,
10
Sweden, and Switzerland. Access of parties to electronic media during
election campaigns is regulated in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Germany,
and Sweden (Farrel and Webb 2000: 107). All countries, following a vari-
ety of different policies, give free television time for party election broad-
casts. According to Danziger (1986) right-of-reply laws exist in Austria,
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Norway, and Switzerland. The
strongpresscouncilsthatexistinmostDemocraticCorporatistcountries
also reflect the tendency in these countries to treat the media as a social
institution and consequently to place limits, at least in principle, on the

10
Farrell and Webb also list Finland; Salonkangas (personal communication) tells us
that paid political advertising is not banned in Finland but is not much used.

163