I have developed in previous chapters an argument that lends support to the idea that politics has been mediatized in Chile. In other words, political actors and institutions have adjusted their practices to news media logics in order to improve their chances of mediated visibility. Systematic study of this process, nonetheless, has so far been neglected, and only acknowledged as a contextual feature of Chilean contemporary politics. I argue that this lack of research is especially acute when it comes to locating political elites as research subjects, therefore developing an actor-centred perspective on the process of mediatization that may account for the features of the relationship between mass media and political actors in this
131
national context. Additionally, I have argued in favour of applying the institutionalist framework for the study of mediatization beyond European and Anglo-American contexts as a strategy for exploring points of strain in the literature; namely, how news media and political logics interact, as well as how the notion of media autonomy can be better understood in the mediatization of politics.
In contrast to the wealth of theoretical work developed around the mediatization debate in recent years, empirical research studies guided by this framework have been produced in limited numbers.42 Studies focusing on the analysis of media content have mostly concentrated on identifying and measuring indicators of mediatization from the longitudinal analysis of texts (Kepplinger 2002; Strömbäck & Dimitrova 2011; Cushion & Thomas 2013). Overall, these studies have shown a tendency towards greater media autonomy in the way political news agendas are presented. In so far as they have become more interpretive, political actors are given less space to define media agendas and journalists take the role of primary definers of political narratives (for the UK context, see Cushion & Thomas, 2013; Negrine & Bull, 2014; on Sweden see Strömbäck & Nord, 2006; for a comparison between the United States and Sweden see Strömbäck & Dimitrova, 2011). In contrast, in the Chilean context, longitudinal analysis of political news in print have shown a low level of media interventionism; politicians appear to maintain a strong influence on news stories and journalists have adopted indirect ways of keeping distance from political sources in texts, for example, through diminishing
42 Some indications of the breadth and speed of this discussion can be found in academic journals’
dedicated special editions, such as those published by Communication Theory (2013, volume 23) and those published by Journalism Studies and Journalism Practice (2014), as well as numerous edited books (see Lundby, 2009; Lundby, 2014; Stromback and Esser, 2014). An important part of this work has been predominantly theory-oriented.
132
use of direct quotations (Mellado & Rafter, 2014). A slightly different picture emerges from the analysis of TV news agendas, which show greater overall distance from political sources (Porath 2007). Taken together, these studies reflect how media representations of politics have changed over time. However, what studies focused on content generally fail to show is how politicians have adapted to this changing environment and have readjusted their bargaining strategies over news making, since inferences in this direction remain speculative. Additionally, they often cannot properly account for contextual factors moderating or accentuating mediatization processes.
Studies focused on actors tend to show a more complex picture of mediatization processes, with scenarios of constraints and opportunities for political actors. They generally observe tensions between news media logics and policy-making (Reunanen et al. 2010; Landerer 2014) or bureaucratic rationales (Korthagen & Klijn 2012; Thorbjornsrud et al. 2014). However, at least some political actors are in a position to take advantage of their adaptation to news media logics (Elmelund-Praestekaer et al. 2011). What these studies highlight is the fact that the mediatization of political actors is not homogenous. First, the ability to use media visibility as a resource appears aligned to other power resources (Kunelius & Reunanen 2011). Secondly, actors can actively embrace news media logics with strategic purposes (Landerer 2014), though not all the outcomes of the process respond to strategic objectives, and some are unwanted (Korthagen & Klijn 2012; Thorbjornsrud et al. 2014).
I decided to take an actor-centred approach for this study based on the lack of research on this area in the Chilean context. Moreover, this perspective allows for
133
a better account of the ground-level power struggles in the relationship between political actors and news organisations, which is an important element to take into consideration in the Chilean case considering the prevalent elite-culture that dominates the local political ethos (Cordero & Funk 2011). So far, the scarce data available about how political elites relate to news organisations and have adapted to news media logics in the country comes from surveys, some of them not even primarily concerned with the subject. It has been established that political elites consider the media as the most powerful institution in the country and question the legitimacy of that power (PNUD 2004; PNUD 2015). Somewhat contradictory to that finding, parliamentarians have said they trust the media but do not consider them a relevant actor for policy-making purposes43. Still, they say that the news media have overpowered politicians in the ability to control public debate, and have sought professional support for media and communication related activities (ICSO/UDP 2004). Overall, the analysis of these studies shows a complex picture that demands further clarification and qualitative insight, especially regarding how news media logics have been integrated into everyday political practice.
From this research problem, I derived a general research question to guide a study of an exploratory nature approached in this thesis:
43 Data for the period 1997-2009 from the panel survey conducted by the Observatorio de Elites
Parlamentarias de América Latina (Observatory of Latin America Parliamentary Elites) shows that Chile is one of two countries in the region (alongside Uruguay) in which parliamentarians declare high levels of trust in the media together with low levels of influence in political decision-making. This has been initially interpreted as a result of a high institutionalisation of political parties (Tagina 2009).
Interpretation of these results though is complicated; not only because they derive from two questions in an instrument not specially tailored to explore politics and media relationships but also because trusting the media could be either connected to a positive assessment of their work, or a signal of political affinity and lack of adversarial journalism (Waisbord 2006). It seems also reasonable for parliamentarians to declare they take into consideration their voters’, political parties’ or group interests’ demands more than the media for decision-making purposes. Rather than having great explanatory power, these insights offer points of departure for the study of the subject.
134
How have Chilean political elites adapted to the mediatization of politics?
An emphasis on adaptation seeks to shed light on political elites’ interactions with the media and the process of mediatization of politics. As such, it suggests the exploration of transformations in the behaviour patterns of a social group in response to a changing media environment, in particular, how Chilean political elites negotiate their communication practices in relation to such change. From this guiding research question, this study is therefore expected to develop some insight into how the process of mediatization has developed over time (e.g. longitudinally) in recent years. However, being a cross-sectional study, where data has been collected at one point in time (see section 4.4) this study’s main emphasis is, instead, how political elites have adapted to the institutional news media logic in recent years by paying attention to three core aspects of the process, which will be outlined below.
In order to operationalize the guiding research question provided above, three related subordinate research questions that point towards more specific areas of enquiry are formulated, keeping the focus on political elites as the main research subject of the study. These areas are (a) goals of media exposure; (b) media- oriented practices and (c) dynamics of autonomy-control.
The exploration of political actors’ goals associated with media exposure finds a justification in the micro-foundations of the institutional logics perspective. In an attempt to theorize the links between institutional logics, practices, individuals and interactions, Thornton et al. (2012) identify social identities and goals as aspects that capture the dimension of individual agency or intentionality of action within institutional contexts. In other words, goals shape current and future
135
action, answering to individual choices that are nonetheless responsive to the environment and, therefore, institutionally shaped. Contrary to March and Olsen (2006), who separate identity-based and interest-based rationales for action, Thornton et al. (2012) contend that: “rather than viewing identities and goals as alternative motivations for social actors, we posit that they both affect cognition and action” (Ibid: 87). In doing so, it is acknowledged that goals are not only driven by self-interest but also adjusted to fit social roles and expectations.
The sub research questions associated with this area are formulated as:
SRQ1: What are Chilean politicians’ goals when interacting with the news media?
SRQ2. To what extent is media visibility considered a valuable resource for political
activity?
The idea of institutional logics structuring media-oriented practices is connected with the aim of exploring the process of mediatization from the perspective of practice. As discussed in Chapter 3, the idea of logics of action (Friedland & Alford 1991; DiMaggio 1997; March & Olsen 2009) is pivotal in the development of neo- institutionalist theory, and mediatization has been defined as a process of adaptation to news media logics of action (Meyer 2002; Esser 2013). The question about logics of action therefore is different from the question about “media effects” on decision-makers (see Kepplinger, 2007). Instead, it points towards understandings of news media logics of action and their accommodation44 within daily routines.
44 This perspective dialogues with theoretical and empirical research about the way political actors
anticipate the needs of the media for news-making and policy-making processes (Kernell 1997; Cook 2005; Davis 2007a; Davis 2007b).
136
The sub research questions associated to this area are formulated as:
SRQ3: How do political elites understand and interact with news media logics of action?
SRQ4: What are the prevalent media-oriented practices among Chilean politicians and how are they accommodated in their daily activities?
Finally, the third subject area is the relationships of autonomy and control between political elites and the news media. Questions about who controls whom in the media and politics relationship have been longstanding in political communication. Since Gans’ (1979: 116) contention about political sources usually “leading the tango” in their relationship with journalists, the question about control has been the driver of several empirical enquiries (among others, see Seymour-Ure 2003; Strömbäck & Nord 2006; Strömbäck & Dimitrova 2011; Pfetsch & Voltmer 2012), yet some studies lend support to the idea that the answer about “who leads” is highly contingent (Van Aelst & Walgrave 2011). I argue that the question about “who leads” is ill-conceived, and possible answers will be responsive not only to contingency but also to the level of analysis at which the question is formulated (macro, meso or micro-level interactions). Having said this, a key assumption about the process of mediatization of politics is that political actors have lost their autonomy (Mazzoleni & Schulz 1999), as long as they have become increasingly dependent on communication resources and shaped by the media (Bennett & Entman 2001; Meyer 2002; Strömbäck 2008). What is more, the mediatization of politics has been conceptualised as a response to the need to retain degrees of control over public attention by political actors (Marcinkowski & Steiner 2014). In order to narrow down the scope of the
137
questions about autonomy and explore the contentious issue of autonomy loss associated with mediatization processes, then, research questions will be formulated in relation to the perceived ability to control media messages among political elites, together with the strategies used to this end.
Additionally, as perceptions about control over media messages are relational, and constitute the outcome of exchanges with journalists and news organisations, the following sub-research questions incorporate journalists and are formulated as:
SRQ5: What are the prevalent practices in the trade-off between Chilean politicians and journalists?
SRQ6: What are politicians’ and journalists’ perceptions about their ability to control media messages?
In order to provide meaningful answers to these research questions, a qualitative methodological framework will be developed, in order to incorporate political elites’ experiences of the mediatization process, as well as perceptions of other groups of reference that frequently interact with them in their media-oriented activities, most prominently political journalists and press officers.