36 Public Managers, Media Influence, and Governance

Public Managers, Media Influence, and Governance: Three Research Traditions Empirically Explored

Abstract

The logics of media and public administration often clash, creating a complex environment for public managers. These managers must navigate the intricacies of governance while understanding and responding to the media's dynamics. This article provides an analytical review of the literature concerning the relationship between public managers and the media, identifying three primary research traditions: public relations, agenda-setting, and mediatization. These are used to develop Q-sort statements to map how public managers perceive their relationships with the media. The research identifies three distinct groups of leaders: adaptors, communicators, and fatalists, each with a unique approach to media engagement.

Introduktion: Hvordan Offentlige Ledere Opfatter Medieindflydelse (Introduction: How Public Managers Perceive Media Influence)

The increasing complexity of society and administrative processes, coupled with the rise of networked governance, necessitates collaboration among various actors. Public managers face significant media exposure, with their actions and personal characteristics coming under intense scrutiny. This media attention operates under its own logic, influencing how reality is constructed in news narratives. The media serves as a critical source of information about politics, shaping public understanding. Consequently, politicians and public leaders must effectively communicate their ideas through media channels to maintain relevance and influence.

Medieopmærksomhed og Konsekvenserne for Offentlige Ledere (Media Attention and Consequences for Public Managers)

The logic of media refers to the inherent principles guiding news construction, encompassing both content and format. A television news segment, for example, must be concise, possess news value, and capture audience attention. As a crucial institution, the media significantly impacts the dissemination of political information and shapes decision-making processes. Politicians and leaders must skillfully manage media attention, ensuring their messages are effectively conveyed. Understanding media dynamics allows for strategic communication, mitigating potential risks and leveraging opportunities for enhanced public engagement.

Denne Artikel: Undersøgelse af Hvordan Ledere Opfatter Medieindflydelse (This Article: Investigating How Leaders Perceive Media Influence)

This article delves into existing literature on how public managers respond to media attention, primarily drawing from disciplines outside of public administration. It distinguishes among three main research traditions concerning media influence: public relations, agenda-setting, and mediatization. These traditions form the foundation for examining how public managers experience media attention. The study focuses on leaders within the Dutch central government who oversee public services, providing a compelling context due to their involvement in intricate administrative processes significantly influenced by the media. Their supervisory roles—aimed at enhancing quality within education, healthcare, and safety—make their interactions with media particularly salient.

Q-methodology is employed to systematically map intersubjectivity, wherein leaders select and prioritize statements related to the subject, drawing inspiration from the three research traditions. The article further elaborates on the methodology, presents the resultant findings, and draws substantive conclusions.

Offentlige Ledere, Medieindflydelse og Governance: Tre Teoretiske Perspektiver (Public Managers, Media Influence, and Governance: Three Theoretical Perspectives)

Existing literature offers varied perspectives on the intricate relationship between media and administrative processes. Three distinct research traditions emerge:

Tre Perspektiver på Medieindflydelse (Three Perspectives on Media Influence)

1. Public Relations: Focuses on communicating specific ideas, brands, or messages through the media. The emphasis is on enabling public entities to reach audiences and "sell" their messages effectively. This perspective examines the strategies and tactics organizations use to manage their public image and maintain positive relationships with stakeholders.

2. Agenda-Setting: Centers on the interplay between media and the political agenda, analyzing how media coverage influences the priority and prominence of issues. Media attention can elevate issues on the political agenda, opening decision-making processes to previously excluded groups. This perspective explores how media shapes public discourse and influences policy outcomes.

3. Mediatization: Highlights how media, governed by its unique logic, seeks news-worthy items framed as conflicts that can be easily personalized. This perspective focuses on the characteristics of the media system and how media logic permeates other domains, potentially reshaping political and administrative practices. It stresses that media is not neutral but driven by its own internal dynamics.

All three perspectives recognize the significant role of media. The distinctions lie in their theoretical approaches to this relationship.

Public Relations Perspektivet: Få Budskabet Igennem (The Public Relations Perspective: Getting the Message Across)

This perspective encompasses literature related to public relations, political marketing, and branding. It starts from an organizational standpoint, detailing how organizations build communicative relationships with relevant publics. Reaching audiences has become more challenging due to media fragmentation and individualization of citizens. Brands create relationships through compelling ideas and leadership styles, simplifying choices, creating security, embodying aspirations, and striving for authenticity. Beyond the strength of the message, emphasis is placed on communication processes and relationships with the audience; hence, constant nurturing is essential.

Success in this realm necessitates comprehensive audience analysis, strategic image positioning via branding initiatives, and effective information subsidies. This tradition inspires statements on how public leaders can effectively communicate their messages through media channels.

Agenda Perspektivet: Hvordan Ændrer Medieopmærksomhed den Politiske Agenda? (The Agenda-Setting Perspective: How Does Media Attention Change the Political Agenda?)

This perspective focuses on interactions among parties involved in administrative processes overall with significant media attention. Agenda perspectives underscore the complexities inherent within such processes where shaping agendas involves continuous competition amongst parties. The media plays a noteworthy role both regarding issue formulation plus determining which issues receive heightened visibility. While some research suggests only limited impact stemming from media attention upon broader political agendas others contend conversely asserting its major role in terms swaying policy decisions . Shifting priorities within media complicate both agenda setting plus ultimate decision-making . Formulating topics so that they stand greater probability becoming picked up becomes viewed almost strategic maneuver potentially leading toward new policies overall significantly transforming current governance structures.

Medialisering Perspektivet: Den Gennemtrængende Medielogik (The Mediatization Perspective: The Pervasive Media Logic)

The media landscape has dramatically changed due to competition and commercialization, facing pressure to increase ad revenues while reducing budgets. This situation fosters a media logic characterized by biases in news coverage. Bennett (2009) identifies four types of information bias:

1. Personalization: Emphasizing personal aspects while downplaying social contexts.

2. Dramatization: Exaggerating news stories, highlighting crises and conflicts.

3. Fragmentierung (Fragmentation): Focusing on isolated stories and events, divorced from broader contexts.

4. Authority-Disorder Bias: Preoccupation with order and with the authorities able to uphold this.

The media logic significantly influences which issues are covered and how they are framed.