Page 315 - Comparing Media Systems THREE MODELS OF MEDIA AND POLITICS

P1: GCV
0521835356c09.xml Hallin 0 521 83535 6 January 20, 2004 13:49

Conclusion

for example – and some specific to media industries, such as newspaper
market structures. Nor do these connections arise from one-way causal
relationships. Media systems have their own effects on the political sys-
tem in many cases; and the process we are describing is really one of co-
evolution of media and political institutions within particular historical
contexts.
We conceive the political variables discussed here as simultaneously
characteristics of political structure and of political culture. They are
structural factors in the sense that they involve sets of institutions and
procedures, patterns of resource allocation, and so on. These institu-
tional structures shape the development of the media by creating con-
straints and opportunities to which media organizations and actors re-
spond.Thusinsystemswherepoliticalpartieshavepowerfulcontrolover
decision making – this is most characteristic of the Polarized Pluralist
Model – media owners and even individual journalists have incentives
to form alliances with party actors. In systems where organized social
groups have strong followings and important influence, media organi-
zations are likely to develop ties with them, and journalists are likely
to form their own such organizations. Where the market is particularly
dominant, commercial media are likely to prevail over media tied to po-
litical and social organizations. At the same time, the political variables
we have discussed involve characteristic patterns of political culture –
characteristic political values and beliefs, and ways of thinking about
and representing the political world. These may not be “reflected” di-
rectly in the culture of journalism and the media, but they clearly affect
journalists’ conceptions of their own role in society, their professional
values and representational practices, and so on.
We have argued that it is possible to identify in the eighteen countries
covered in our study three distinct media system “models,” which we
have called the Polarized Pluralist, the Democratic Corporatist, and the
Liberal Models. The similarities among the three groups of countries
we associate with these models are based both on historical connections
amongthesegroupsofcountriesandonhistoricallyrootedsimilaritiesin
theirpoliticalstructuresandcultures.Aswehaveseen,themediasystems
of individual countries fit the ideal types that our models represent only
roughly, and many media systems must be understood as mixed cases.
Nevertheless, we think that the models are useful both for understanding
patternsofrelationshipamongmediaandpoliticalsystemcharacteristics
and as points of reference for comparing the media systems of individual
countries.

297