Content uploaded by Marius Dragomir
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Marius Dragomir on Sep 21, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
The State of State Media: A Global Analysis of the Editorial Independence of State Media and an Introduction of a New State Media Typology
Abstract
Studying the complexity of today’s state media requires sophisticated research methods and tools as well as new categories able to capture the variety of existing state media and offer an understanding of how the way they are established and operated affects their editorial performance.
This paper has two goals. One is to introduce a new taxonomy for state media that takes stock of the latest developments in the media and communication field. The second is to present the latest trends in state media globally, with a focus on how these operations are funded and managed, and how their editorial autonomy is protected.
The paper draws on data and information on state media in 151 countries collected over the course of the last four years as part of the Media Influence Matrix project of the Center for Media, Data & Society (CMDS). It also uses historical data collected by the paper’s main author, Marius Dragomir, through older research projects including Television Across Europe and Mapping Digital Media.
... Some media outlets that are state-owned or receive government support remain independent from the government. Other outlets are directly controlled by the state and are used by the government to shape political narratives (Djankov et al., 2003;Dragomir & Söderström, 2021;Walker & Orttung, 2014). Although state-affiliated media outlets can exist in democratic countries, this model of state control is in its "most potent" form under authoritarian regimes, where state media outlets are used to spread propaganda in support of the government (Dragomir & Söderström, 2021;Walker & Orttung, 2014). ...
... Other outlets are directly controlled by the state and are used by the government to shape political narratives (Djankov et al., 2003;Dragomir & Söderström, 2021;Walker & Orttung, 2014). Although state-affiliated media outlets can exist in democratic countries, this model of state control is in its "most potent" form under authoritarian regimes, where state media outlets are used to spread propaganda in support of the government (Dragomir & Söderström, 2021;Walker & Orttung, 2014). While television has historically been a prominent form of state-controlled media, social media platforms also provide a mechanism for authoritarian regimes to manipulate information flows and propagate misinformation (Arnold et al., 2021;Bastos & Farkas, 2019;Bradshaw & Howard 2018). ...
State media outlets spread propaganda disguised as news online, prompting social media platforms to attach state-affiliated media tags to their accounts. Do these tags reduce belief in state media misinformation? Previous studies suggest the tags reduce misperceptions but focus on Russia, and current research does not compare these tags with other interventions. Contrary to expectations, a preregistered U.S. experiment found no effect of Twitter-style tags on belief in false state media claims, seemingly because they were rarely noticed. By contrast, fact-check labels decreased belief in false information from state outlets. We recommend platforms design state media tags that are more visible to users.
... They may occasionally be controlled by state-owned companies. Dragomir & Söderström (2021) point out that there are also state media that are run as part of a state institution (example: a department in the Ministry of Communication) without any form of actual ownership (Dragomir & Söderström, 2021). Private media are media that are run and owned by individuals or companies. ...
... They may occasionally be controlled by state-owned companies. Dragomir & Söderström (2021) point out that there are also state media that are run as part of a state institution (example: a department in the Ministry of Communication) without any form of actual ownership (Dragomir & Söderström, 2021). Private media are media that are run and owned by individuals or companies. ...
The election is a social process that establishes representative democracy. To accurately represent public opinion, the election process must be held on a level playing field. The role of the news media in creating a level playing field is critical. It is essential that the news media behave unbiasedly, objectively, and neutrally during the election season. The ownership of the news media is a crucial factor in that unbiased role. There have been numerous empirical studies to identify how election coverage varies with news media ownership patterns. These studies have confirmed that news media owners affect public opinion by transferring the news media agenda onto the public agenda. However, empirical studies that examine the effect of news media ownership patterns on public opinion toward voter intention are rare. The primary goal of this study is to fill this research gap in the Sri Lankan context. This study was conducted using a quantitative survey method. Data was collected through a well-organized questionnaire that tested face validity and content validity. In the data analysis, it was found that news media ownership patterns do not have a direct effect on voter intention. However, the effect of news media ownership patterns on public opinion is strong. This study revealed that public opinion mediates the relationship between ownership patterns and voter intention. The data analysis revealed that it is a fully mediated effect. In light of this, it can be said that public opinion is a mediating variable. These findings once again confirm the agenda-setting theory, Shoemaker and Reese's ownership theory, and the spiral of silence theory. Finally, identifying public opinion as a mediating variable in this study will open a new window for future public opinion studies.
... Similarly, each year has seen the online and offline safety of journalists threatened more openly and viciously than the year before (e.g., CPJ, n.d.). The global study of state media (Dragomir & Söderström, 2021 documents that independent media are vanishing worldwide. COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine, two local-global crises, have fundamentally challenged media systems with 'infodemics' and war-related propaganda. ...
Disinformation poses a significant challenge to epistemic rights globally, but the phenomenon manifests differently and is promoted by different actors in different countries and regions. The capture of legacy journalistic outlets and the creation of journalism-like sites without journalistic principles and ethics by commercial and political actors have resulted in the significant erosion of epistemic rights in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Based on three mapping projects created by the Media and Journalism Research Centre, formerly the Centre for Media, Data and Society, at Central European University, this chapter showcases shifts in economic and political conditions of epistemic rights in CEE by focusing on entities that violate epistemic rights by deliberately promoting disinformation in the region.
... First, there is the need to reflect on the inherent risks because if "not deployed with care, … content prioritisation practices could do more harm than good to European democracy, human rights and pluralism" (CoE, 2021, p. 5). Furthermore, policy design will have to face the global and the European realities of captured and biased PSMs (Dragomir & Soderstrom, 2022). States often orchestrate these specific PSMs as channels of government propaganda, which fuel both dis-and misinformation in specific contexts (Urbán et al., 2023) and ignore the democratic essence of their special mandate for serving the public. ...
Public discourse has moved online, enabled by platforms, which in the context of information and media content have become an essential source, access point and key distributor of information. Public Service Media (PSM) — the ‘basic information service provider’ with a special mandate from the state — increasingly relies on platforms under the universality principle to reach out and interact with the broadest range of their audiences. However, control over PSM content dissemination and audience engagement is primarily determined by the private interest-ruled platforms via algorithmic recommendation systems (content curation) and according to their terms and conditions (community standards). This paper addresses the necessity and possibilities of safeguards for PSM content delivery on digital online platforms as an issue of media pluralism. Actual or potential policy interventions for the preferential treatment of public value content, aka due prominence online, were studied through the analytical lens of accountability in its interaction with platforms and PSM performance. Finally, the analyses on the appropriateness of the current accountability regimes for achieving pluralism objectives laid out recommendations for future policy for public-interest-driven platform governance.
... In terms of existing legal measures, there is a large variety across EU Member States in addressing transparency and fair rules concerning the distribution of state advertising. The MPM 2021 Mapping Study and other sources (Dragomir & Söderström, 2021;UNESCO, 2021) show that these include: media specific measures on transparency and fair distribution of state advertising (not in all cases these go together); ban or limits on state advertising; requirements for state institutions to advertise in the media; general procurement, public transparency rules or other relevant rules with special mentioning of state advertising and other non-legally binding instruments (e.g. recommendations). ...
The Study on Media Plurality and Diversity Online investigates the value of safeguarding media pluralism and diversity online, focusing on (i) the prominence and discoverability of general interest content and services, and on (ii) market plurality and the concentration of economic resources. With a focus on Europe, the project is funded by a tender from the European Commission to produce a study on Media Plurality and Diversity Online and involves four partner universities: CMPF (EUI); CiTiP (Centre for Information Technology and Intellectual Property) of KU Leuven; the Institute for Information Law of the University of Amsterdam (IViR/UvA); imec-SMIT-Vrije Universiteit Brussel. The purpose of the assignment was to describe, analyse and evaluate the existing regulatory and business practices in the two areas mentioned above, and finally to elaborate some policy recommendations. Data were collected from the database of the Media Pluralism Monitor (CMPF) and through desk research, online consultations and interviews with stakeholders. The contractor was able to call on a network of national experts across the Member States to support this work.
In recent crises, domestic and international discussions on national security and resilience have been marked by significant concern about information disorders eroding societal trust. With the influence of social media, this phenomenon has spread to various aspects of life and broad audiences, whether it is about well-being and health safety or political propaganda from foreign powers. Policy-makers and other stakeholders have begun to seek means to strengthen national and regional resilience to such information disorders. Recent studies indicate that resilience against disinformation depends on various national societal, political, and media-system-related characteristics—and a robust public servive media (PSM) seems to be one of the concrete structural aspects defining highly resilient societies. This chapter discusses PSM as a part of national resilience-building with an understanding that resilience depends both on content providers (information resilience as a structural characteristic of society) and information users (epistemic resilience as an individual’s communicative, knowledge-related capacities and capabilities to participate in society). PSM have a special role as the former to strengthen the latter.
The article examines how the structural conditions (ownership, management, financing, and accountability) of public service media (PSM) functioning established by public policy decisions align with citizens’ attitudes. The empirical research employs the case of Lithuanian PSM because of relatively favorable conditions created for developing the PSM as a project of democracy and civil society. A document analysis was performed, and a representative survey of the Lithuanian population was conducted in response to the research questions. The analysis concludes that the intentions of public policy and civil society are quite different concerning the operating conditions of PSM. The citizens would like to have more say in the management of the PSM and to see the PSM much more accountable to society.
Populist leaders are often described as “strongmen,” receiving a somewhat two-dimensional Western press coverage that cannot explain their local popularity. Based on visual and textual analysis of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Facebook, we argue that he has a more complex social media persona. Orbán’s Facebook shows him as (1) a fighter against a variety of enemies, (2) a symbolic condensation of the nation, (3) a relatable politician with (4) a gentleness toward children and animals, and (5) a strong competence in elite political contexts. Orbán uses his charismatic authority on Facebook to draw the boundaries of the Hungarian nation, presenting himself as the iconic representation of “Hungarian-ness.” The building blocks of his image are constantly being adapted to the current political situation and to shifts in public opinion. The Orbán image is, thus, a fluid and pragmatic material with only a few core principles and its popularity remains steadfast despite the brand’s contradictions. Understanding the appeal of Orbán’s self-representation may help us better grasp populist regimes’ variation and success worldwide.
All political parties represented in the Maltese Parliament own and run various news media platforms, including television stations. Though small, Malta’s media system became the subject of unprecedented international interest after the political assassination of Daphne Caruana Galizia, its most renowned journalist, in 2017. This study investigates this media system from the perspective of its journalists and editors, applying the four dimensions of the theoretical framework put forward by Hallin and Mancini, namely political parallelism, journalistic professionalism, the role of the state and the media market. Using a mixed methods approach, this study triangulates qualitative and quantitative data to understand the characteristics that journalists attribute to the media system in which they work. The results show that the movement of Malta’s media system from the Mediterranean Model towards the Liberal Model was adversely affected by increased advocacy by all media organizations together with endemic characteristics such as the pronounced role of political parties and the small size of the market.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.