Page 182 - 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 Three Models

logic of commercial competition. These institutions are not generally
11
connected to the state, however. In this sense they reflect another side
of the political culture of democratic corporatism: the strength of civil
society and a tendency to devolve to institutions of civil society functions
that otherwise might be exercised by the state. Strong press councils in
the Democratic Corporatist countries in some ways makes state inter-
ventionlessimportantthanitmightotherwisebe:libellaws,forexample,
may be less important than in the Liberal or Polarized Pluralist systems.
We will discuss press councils more fully in the following text, in relation
to the professionalization of journalism.
Broadcasting in the Democratic Corporatist countries constitutes a
particularly strong example of the logic of the welfare state as applied to
the media. In the case of the print media, the state intervenes to modify
marketmechanisms,butthesystemispredominantlyaliberalone,based
on private ownership and the market. In the case of broadcasting, on the
other hand, the role of the state was absolutely dominant until the 1980s
or 1990s, and is still very important. Broadcasting has been treated as
part of the res publica, as an institution whose influence on society is too
great to be left under the control of private interests and that must be
run under the authority of the state as a representative of the general in-
terest. The Democratic Corporatist countries generally introduced com-
mercial broadcasting relatively late. Their public broadcasting systems
have been well-funded and relatively “pure” in the sense that advertising
revenue has constituted a small part of their funding. They placed rel-
atively strong emphasis on public service as opposed to entertainment
functions, reflecting what Bastiansen and Syvertsen (1996: 141) call, in
the Norwegian case, a “social democratic enlightenment ethos.” They
also have been organized in a way that reflects a strong concern to as-
sure that they serve a wide range of social interests. Looking back at
Table 2.4, which shows the strength and “purity” of public broadcasting
systems according to a number of measures, it is clear that the Demo-
cratic Corporatist countries are distinguished by their strong commit-
ment to that institution. Denmark and Austria head the list in terms
of audience share. Denmark and Switzerland (with an expensive system
because it must broadcast in so many languages) is the highest, along
with Britain, in per capita funding. Norway is the only country without

11
In Denmark the Press Council is established by law and in some countries the equiva-
lent of the press council for broadcasting is linked to the state, for example the Radio
Council in Sweden.

164