Category: Book chapters

Abstract

Die kulturtheoretische Perspektive gewinnt seit einigen Jahren in den Sozialwissenschaften an Bedeutung (Reckwitz 2008). Auch die Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft hat sich davon anstecken lassen wie die Thematisierung von Journalismuskulturen (Hanitzsch 2007a), Nachrichtenkulturen (Esser 2008) und Medienkulturen (Hepp 2002) zeigt. Dieses Kapitel diskutiert, was es konzeptionell und methodisch bedeutet, wenn man Journalismus als Kultur analysieren will. Die kulturanalytische Perspektive lenkt den Blick auf die Deutungsmuster, auf die sich Journalisten beziehen, um ihrem Handeln Sinn zu verleihen. Es geht also um ein besseres Verständnis davon, warum Journalisten so handeln wie sie handeln – eine Kernfrage der Journalismusforschung.

Brüggemann, Michael (2011): Journalistik als Kulturanalyse. Redaktionskulturen als Schlüssel zur Erforschung journalistischer Praxis. In Thorsten Quandt, Olaf Jandura (Eds.): Methoden der Journalismusforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag, pp. 47–65. Available online at https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-531-93131-9_3.

Abstract

This chapter argues that, in spite of the economic crisis that has affected the media in Germany, the infrastructure of the German media system is still suited to providing for accountability journalism as a core element of the democratic constitution of society. The conditions for journalism are still more favourable than in some other Western countries, due to stable market structures, policy provisions for public service broadcasting and a media culture heavily influenced by the idea of a public sphere as a critical forum for debate about issues of common concern. There are, however, pressures that will likely aggravate in the long run if left unresponded to. This chapter identifies five countermeasures pursued by German media organisations to tackle the challenges of declining revenues from traditional advertising, shifting audience preferences, and the internet. As a complementary strategy, German publishers have drawn up a wish list of media policy responses designed to improve general framework conditions of the press, and they lobby very hard in Berlin and Brussels for their implementation at the national and European level. Assessing the overall scope of the current difficulties the chapter concludes that we are observing a ‘strategic crisis of newspaper publishers’ but no general media crisis, and certainly no crisis of democracy in Germany.

Esser, Frank; Brüggemann, Michael (2010): The Strategic Crisis of German Newspapers. In David A. L. Levy, Rasmus Kleis Nielsen (Eds.): The Changing Business of Journalism and its Implications for Democracy. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, pp. 39–54. Available online at https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/changing-business-journalism-and-its-implications-democracy.

Abstract

The European Union (EU) has a problem with its citizens. For about fifty years the political elites have pursued the agenda of political and economic integration, while the broader public remained uninformed and by and large uninterested in what was happening in Brussels. This mode of governance has clearly shown its limits: when the citizens were asked whether they support the plan to introduce a constitutional treaty in June 2005, fifty-five percent of the French voters said “Non” and sixty-five percent of the Dutch “Nee”. In June 2008, fifty-three percent of the Irish voters rejected the Lisbon Treaty, the follow-up to the constitutional treaty, and in 2009 the European Parliament (EP) suffered a record weak election turnout. This came as no surprise, considering that barely every second EU-citizen knew that he or she can vote for the EP (in fall 2007, 48 percent of the respondents knew that they can vote) (CEC, 2008a: 10).

Brüggemann, Michael (2010): Public Relations between Propaganda and the Public Sphere. The Information Policy of the European Commission. In Chiara Valentini, Giorgia Nesti (Eds.): Public Communication in the European Union. History, Perspectives and Challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, pp. 67–92.

Abstract

Reflecting on the current state of transnational and transcultural comparative media research, we can ascertain a certain paradox. On the one hand, there are many especially theory-driven publications on the high complexity of communicative landscapes in a ‘global media age’. Arjun Appadurai speaks about the complexity of global mediascapes (Appadurai, 1996: 33), understanding them as “fluid, irregular shapes” of mediated communicative flows. Or Ien Ang has discussed the indeterminacy as a result of the “too many, unpredictable determinations” (Ang, 1996: 172 – emphasis in original) of global media culture. Based on arguments like these, a discussion is emerging about de-westernising (Curran & Park, 2000) and internationalising (Thussu, 2009) media and communication studies that is seen as necessary to address the translocal communicative connections of the present global media age. On the other hand, we notice a striking narrowness in the methodological approach of much comparative media and communication research.

Hepp, Andreas; Möller, Johanna; Kleinen-von Königslöw, Katharina; Brüggemann, Michael; Lingenberg, Swantje (2009): Political Discourse Cultures in Europe. Explaining the Multi-Segmentation of the European Public Sphere through a Transnational and Transcultural Perspective. In Nico Carpentier, Pille Pruulmann-Vengerfeldt, Richard Kilborn, Tobias Olssonm, Hannu Nieminen, Ebba Sundin, Kaarle Nordenstreng (Eds.): Communicative Approaches to Politics and Ethics in Europe. The Intellectual Work of The 2009 ECREA European Media and Communication Doctoral Summer School. Tartu: Tartu University Press, pp. 45–58.

Abstract

The notion of the public sphere has come to play an important role in the debate on the European Union’s democratic legitimacy. Particularly since the erosion of the “permissive consensus” and a growing opposition to the EU in the wake of the Maastricht Treaty (see e.g. Niedermayer 1995), the emergence of a communicative infrastructure between the EU and its citizens has become a touchstone for the legitimacy of European governance. Not only has public support for the integration process steadily declined since the beginning of the 1990s, but Eurobarometer surveys also show that Europeans are not sufficiently informed about the EU and often feel alienated from decision-making in Brussels. They tend to see the EU as remote and at the same time too intrusive (European Commission 2001, 3).

Brüggemann, Michael; Sifft, Stefanie; Kleinen-v. Königslöw, Katharina; Peters, Bernhard; Wimmel, Andreas (2008): Segmented Europeanisation. Trends and Patterns in the Transnationalization of Public Spheres in Europe. In Hartmut Wessler (Ed.): Public Deliberation and Public Culture. The Writings of Bernhard Peters. 1993-2005. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 196–212.

Abstract

Bisher beschränkt sich die Debatte um eine „Europäische Medienöffentlichkeit” vor allem auf mögliche Voraussetzungen und Bedingungen, die für ihre Konstitution notwendig seien, während empirisch gestützte Analysen zu ihrem aktuellen Entwicklungsstand weitgehend fehlen oder bestenfalls als Momentaufnahmen eines längerfristigen Prozesses interpretiert werden können.’ So bleibt trotz erster Forschungsbemühungen die zentrale Frage unbeantwortet, inwieweit und mit welcher Qualität sich ein Wandel nationaler Medienöffentlichkeiten in Europa bereits vollzogen hat: Hat medienvermittelte Kommunikation über die Europäische Union die Stufe routinemaßiger außenpolitischer Berichterstattung und Debatte schon längst überflügelt, wie Klaus Eder und Cathleen Kantner (2000, 307) behaupten? Oder ist Jürgen Gerhards (2000, 295) zuzustimmen, der in einer Studie festgestellt hat, dass der Europäisierungsgrad zumindest der deutschen Medienöffentlichkeit dem gestiegenen politischen Einfluss der EU nach wie vor erheblich hinterherhinkt?

Brüggemann, Michael; Sifft, Stefanie; Kleinen-v. Königslöw, Katharina; Peters, Bernhard; Wimmel, Andreas (2006): Segmentierte Europäisierung. Die Transnationalisierung von Öffentlichkeit in Europa. Trends und Muster. In Michael Latzer, Florian Saurwein (Eds.): Medialer Wandel und Europäische Öffentlichkeit. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 214–231. Available online at https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-531-90272-2_10.

Abstract

While many important social processes cut across national borders and have transnational institutions to regulate them, democratic participation still occurs almost exclusively within individual nation states. Public information and debate are essential ingredients of democracy, and their confinement to the individual national public sphere threatens the democratic aspirations and legitimacy of transnational institutions. Therefore, it is often argued that the European Union can only achieve greater legitimacy if there is a Europeanization of national public spheres. Has public discourse in fact Europeanized in the last decades? Here we present results from a study of major national newspapers from five European countries. Europeanization is defined in three dimensions: Europeanization of contents, Europeanization of public identities, and Europeanization of communication flows. Our results show that national public spheres are, in fact, quite resilient and that change is slow or halting. We discuss several possible explanations for this resilience, and go on to question the assumption that the legitimacy of European institutions depends on Europeanization of public discourse.

Peters, Bernhard; Sifft, Stefanie; Wimmel, Andreas; Brüggemann, Michael; Kleinen-von Königslöw, Katharina (2005): National and Transnational Public Spheres. The Case of the EU. In European Review 13 (Supp. No. 1), pp. 139–160. Available online at https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511752193.007.

Abstract

Crossmedia war in – bei Medienmanagern und Kommunikationswissenschaftlern. Beide begeisterten sich für die Überwindung medialer Grenzen. Während letztere mit Hilfe des vermeintlichen Multi-Mediums Internet die Wahrnehmungsmauern zwischen den klassischen Massenmedien Radio, Fernsehen und Print einreißen wollten, ging es den Medienmanagern um die Expansion in neue Märkte. Inzwsichen ist nur noch die Krise in allen Mediensparten zu Hause. Ganze Onlineauftritte stehen zur Disposition oder warden durch radikale Personalkürzungen von innen ausgehöhlt. Crossmedia hat als Schlagwort überlebt, steht jetzt aber unter dem gänzlich unglücklichen Stern namens Sparzwang. Die Vernetzung verschiedener Angebote einer publizistischen Marke soll Synergiern bringen und dadurch Kosten reduzieren. Fragen publizistischer Qualität stehen hinter dem ökonomischen Motiv zurück. Dabei kann eine gute Crossmedia-Strategie sowohl sparen helfen, als auch die Qualität der Angebote verbessern. Das ist die These dieses Beitrags, die ins Normative gewendet eine deutliche Forderung enthält: Für die Zeit nach der aktuellen Krise sollten die Medien ihre Glaubwürdigkeit bewahren, also den Glauben des Publikums an Wahrhaftigkeit und Kompetenz zur Berichterstattung. Dieses Gut gilt es crossmedial zu sichern.

Brüggemann, Michael (2004): Jetzt erst recht. Crossmedia-Strategien können die journalistische Qualität verbessern. In Klaus Beck, Wolfgang Schweiger, Werner Wirth (Eds.): Gute Seiten – Schlechte Seiten. München: Verlag Reinhard Fischer, pp. 222–232.