Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance a Study for the Project „Forum for Europe“

Department of Knowledge and Communication Management International Journalism Center

Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30, A-3500 Krems Telefon: +43 (0)2732 893-2701; Fax +43 (0)2732 893-4700

Homepage: www.donau-uni.ac.at/ijz

Project info: www.donau-uni.ac.at/KnowComm

Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance A Study for the Project „Forum for EUrope“

Birgit WOLF / Silvia ETTL-HUBER

Supervisors: Mag.a Birgit Wolf Dr.in Silvia Ettl-Huber

Co-workers: DIin (FH) Julia Juster Dr.in Caroline Wörgötter Mag.a Christine Lechner

June 2007 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 4 1.1. Research Objectives ...... 5 1.2. Research Questions...... 5 1.3. Structure of the Paper ...... 6

2. Research Methods...... 7 2.1. Theoretical Background...... 7 2.2. Methods Used ...... 8

3. Results of EU-Acceptance, Information and Communication ...... 11 3.1. Standard Eurobarometer in the Period between 2004-2006 ...... 11 3.1.1. Acceptance of the European Union Image...... 11 3.1.2. Knowledge and Sources of Information ...... 14 3.1.2.1. Trust in EU Institutions……………………………………………………….14 3.1.2.2. Knowledge about the EU ...... 16 3.1.2.3. Proximity to the Citizens...... 18 3.1.2.4. Sources of Information...... 19 3.1.2.5. The EU in the Media ...... 20 3.1.3. Concerns and Expectations of the EU citizens...... 21 3.1.3.1 Concerns and Fears of EU citizens...... 22 Digression: Work Force Situation in Austria 2004-2006...... 25 3.1.3.2. Expectations of the Future...... 27 3.1.3.3. Challenges facing the EU ...... 31 3.2. Country-specific and Regional Polls: Lower Austria–Slovakia ...... 34 3.2.1. Development of the Lower Austrian–Slovakian Border Region (Schaller 2006) ………………………………………………………………………………………..34 3.2.2. Mayors from the Lower Austrian–Slovakian Border Region ...... 36 3.3. Conclusion ...... 38

4. EU News Management und EU Communications Structures ...... 40 4.1. The European Public and its Effects on Media Work ...... 40 4.2. Communication Structures in the EU...... 42 4.3. EU-News Management ...... 46 4.4. EU Campaigning ...... 48 4.4.1. Expansion Campaign 2004...... 50

page 2 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

4.4.2. Europe Day 2006...... 51 4.5. Summary...... 52

5. Empirical Study: EU Communication Structures...... 54 5.1. Communication about EU topics – Empirical Design ...... 54 5.2. Cohesion Policies: Analysis of Results ...... 55 5.2.1. Design of Analysis ...... 55 5.2.2. Analysis of Results ...... 56 5.3. Mobile Phoning – Roaming...... 59 5.3.1. Design of the Study ...... 59 5.3.2. Analysis of Results ...... 59 5.4. Conclusion ...... 61

6. Summary of the Results and Conclusion...... 63

7. Bibliography ...... 66

page 3 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

1. Introduction

The Institute for the Danube Region and Central Europe (IDM) as initiator and project executor of the „Forum for EUrope“ has conducted research in Austrian and Slovakia prov- inces as well as cross national collaborations in its project goal to fight EU scepticism. This investigation mainly deals with findings in Austria, particularly in Lower Austria, as well as Slovakia, particularly the region of Western Slovakia/Bratislava1. The International Journalism Centre (IJC) of the Danube University Krems, which was chosen to implement this project partnership, has its core competencies in teaching communication and communication research. Its main focal points are in the areas of journalism and public relations. In the years after the political changes of the 1990’s, the IJC has dedicated itself to, among other things, the post graduate education of students from central and eastern European countries. In 2005, the IJZ published an extensive study about the ownership of media in Central and Eastern Europe. The present study provides another component to this European topic. This investigation, which was conducted in the framework of the project “Forum for EUrope”, focuses on determining the potentials which lie within communication in order to enhance EU acceptance. The base of the problem is the growing European-wide scepticism towards the EU as formulated in the project proposal. The scepticism is documented by several sources including the Eurobarometer survey from 20052. This study is limited to the time period from the spring of 2004 to the spring of 2007.

1 see grant „Forum für EUropa“, INTERREG IIIA Austria – Slovakia 2 Cp. Standard Eurobarometer 64/ Herbst 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/index_en.htm, last access on 03/28/2006

page 4 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

1.1. Research Objectives

The main goals of the present study are to investigate communication structures and to present possible methods of working out communication issues to counteract EU scepticism. The study restricts itself to general conclusions about the EU based on its specific findings in the case of Austria. In addition, the regional cross-national dimensions of the project are described by the Eurobarometer results concerning Slovakia and, there are investigations into the neighbourly collaboration between Lower Austria and Slovakia. The results of the investigation will be published by the cross-national platform, “Forum for EUrope”. They will be established and presented in such a manner that they can be used by “old” and “new” EU member countries for the creation of communication which increases EU acceptance.

1.2. Research Questions

The following research questions can be derived from the above research objectives:

1. What conclusions can be derived from the Eurobarometer surveys about the image of the EU, EU acceptance, level of knowledge about the EU, and sources of information consumed by EU citizens in the period from the spring of 2004 to the fall of 2006?

2. What additional conclusions can be drawn specifically from the participating regions of Lower Austria, Western Slovakia and Bratislava about the communication potentials to increase EU acceptance in reference to the project “Forum for EUrope”?

3. What scientific findings already exist concerning the EU public, EU news management as strategic EU public relations as well as EU campaigning, and, what can be extracted and used to help solve these problems?

4. What possible resolution could the European Commission (DG Communications) strive for and how can this be interpreted in the context of the evaluated findings?

page 5 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

5. How are press relations utilized on these selected issues on an EU level and how are they used and pursued on a national level?

6. How is press work carried out and pursued in relation to these selected issues on the EU level and on a national level?

7. What conclusions can be made from the conducted investigation, what strategic approaches are recommended, and which courses of action can be deduced.

1.3. Structure of the paper

In the following section (Chapter 2) the methodical procedure is described and justified. The third section of the paper is devoted to the examination of the Eurobarometer studies especially focusing on EU-acceptance and the results in the areas of communication and information. Here, the germane data about Austria is extracted from the data of the EU25. This data is then interpreted in relation to the question of communication potentials. As a comparison to this data, the Slovakian findings are also presented and analysed. Additionally, to emphasize the cooperation between Austria and Slovakia even more, the study goes into more detail about the specific country findings. The fourth section of the paper is devoted to the framework of EU-communication and ana- lyzes the current communication sciences literature in relation to the European Commission communication policy intentions. Additionally, the expert round table “Communicating the EU Success and Failure of EU-campaigns” which was arranged as part of the project, “Forum for EUrope”, is drawn upon. The fifth section deals with the research questions about PR work. The empirical investigation of the press relations is conducted on the EU and national levels by means of exploring the two selected topics, “cohesion policy” and “roaming fees”. The final section recapitulates the results, draws conclusions and presents recommended courses of action. These recommendations should be incorporated into the common platform “Forum for EUrope”, jointly with the investigation recommendations of the Slovakian partners, and, when the project is completed, should be available online as well as in written form within the IDM publication series.

page 6 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

2. Research Methods

To pursue the question of what potentials in communication could increase EU-acceptance, we have used similar approaches to those which have previously been used in investigating communication systems and communication management.

2.1. Theoretical Background

Klaus Merten (2004) describes the communication system as a prominent subsystem which operates on the meta-level. He reasons that analysis of political systems should make references to communication as the effects of communication are active in voting decisions. Therefore, this paper begins with the theoretical assumption of the relationship that “communication plays a role in EU-acceptance and, respectively, EU-approval”. Merten’s “molar approach” (Merten 2004:15) should therefore serve as an additional theoretical frame of reference and states that all political action has a communicative dimension and therefore needs strategic planning of the communication process. News Management as a “classical” political PR-strategy concept tries to influence the every day journalistic business and tries to set the news agenda by adapting media logistics and media formats (cp. Hahn/Rosenwerth/Schröder 2006). One attempts to anticipate specific topics (developments and events) using the “agenda setting” strategies in Issue(s) Management (cp. Röttger 2001), and, above all, to launch them into the mass media (Hahn et.al. 2006: 287). The “agenda setting“ thesis (originally McComps and Shaw, cp. Sievert 2006: 63, Burkhart 1998:247f.) is based on the assumption that mass media exert most of their influence by having control over which topics are being absorbed by the recipients, but not which opinions are being formed about these topics. Here “agenda setting” is understood as described by Werner Frueh (1991: 178 zit. after Burkhart 1998:253), “as the complex interrelation between the media organizations and other societal subsystems”. This means that we do not believe that the media alone sets the structure of the topics/agenda. The “agenda setting” thesis is, however, of importance in the sense of strategic news management because strategic PR tries to influence the news agenda. According to Hahn (Hahn et.al. 2006: 289), two forms of news management exist: (1) the media centered news management, which describes the political and media system of the USA and which predominantly uses techniques of personalization, dramatization, and the staging of pseudo events; thus uses image management and image building, and (2) the political news management, which is used in Germany and Great Britain and aims to maximize

page 7 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance the political aspects of statement production and strives to enforce certain political topics and opinions. The techniques used here are negativism, political attacks, framing, spin controlling and de-thematisation. Due to the different compositions of the political and media systems of the EU-member states, different types of news management are being used. Moreover, news management on the institutional level of the EU is only rudimentarily developed: The EU institutions (Com- mission, Council, and Parliament) are gaining importance, however, they have hardly suc- ceeded in shaping the news agenda of the mass media (cp. Hahn et.al. 2006: 289f). The approach of a “strategic communication operation” means that all communication measures are based on strategic concepts. This means, it is firmly established what information in which form and at which time is communicated to the different target or reference groups. In this case, one can say that this is an integrated (organisational-) communication approach (cp. Bruhn 2003, Kirchner 2001) with the goal to create a consistent image and, at the same time, to disperse3 the necessary information to the target and reference groups. Integration creates synergy effects and stronger communication impacts. So, a limited means of communication can be used more effectively and communication potentials can be used better (cp. Bruhn 2003, Kirchner 2001).

2.2. Methods Used

In order to pursue the question of communication potentials, a secondary analysis was carried out. More specifically, a meta-analysis was conducted of selected items derived from the standard Eurobarometer studies. The Eurobarometer studies consist of representative data derived from random samples at various levels. These public opinion surveys were adminis- tered in half year intervals. They depict the participating countries in their entirety and reflect the distribution of the resident population in accordance to the respective countries in reference to metropolitan, mid-sized and small town regions4 (details in the respectively used Eurobarometer studies, see bibliography). Meta-analysis is used as special form of secon-

3 Cp. Burkart (1998: 166): The term ‚disperse public’ was originally introduced by Maletzke (1963: 28f) and it describes a single individual or a small group whose connected characteristic is that they turn towards a common object – the messages of the mass media. Disperse publics are not lasting social entities and as a rule, no inter- human relationships exists between their members, they are multilayered, inhomogenous, as well as unstructured and disorganised. 4 Homepage of the EU Commission, Public Opinion – Methodology – Instrument Description, “The standard Euro- barometer was established in 1973. Each survey consists of approximately 1000 face-to-face interviews per Mem- ber State (except Germany: 2000, Luxembourg: 600, United Kingdom); Online-source, URL http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/description_en.htm, last access: 29.05.2007

page 8 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance dary analysis to evaluate this paper’s research questions, and in this form of analysis, the raw data is not evaluated anew, but, rather, the results of several investigations on the same topic are combined and summarized (cp. Bortz/Döring 1995). Thereby, a new comprehensive depiction can be established from the selected items of the Eurobarometer opinion polls, with the exception of those questions which were not present in all investigated studies (polls). This methodical approach has been chosen to obtain an image, based on comparable data, of the status quo of EU-acceptance as well as the state of EU-information and the citizens’ sources used to obtain EU-information taking into account the experience of the Austrian’s considerable EU-scepticism. On this basis, further research steps were taken in an explorative manner. This means that the research process and the particular research steps are based on the approach of ‚theoretical sampling’, a methodical procedure taken from Grounded Theory, which itself is based on the process of investigative logic, the timely parallelism and the reciprocal functional de- pendence of the processes of the data collection, data analysis and theory construction – and the idea that none of these processes is ever understood as entirely finished (cp. Strübing 2004: 14). Hence‚ `theoretical sampling’ presents itself as a “chain of consecutive selection decisions alongside the research process whereas the selection criteria are being increasingly specified during the course of the project – the purpose of which is to generate investigation perspectives” (cp. Strübing 2004: 30). Theoretical sampling is based on the research’s logical perception of a successive examination of ad-hoc hypothetical deducted consequences of actions (cp. Strübing 2006: 31). The following steps were conducted in this investigation resultant to following this approach:

- a meta- analysis of selected items in the Eurobarometer polls; - a literature analysis of EU-public, EU-news management as well as EU- campaigning; - an evaluation of the main statements of the expert-round table „EU- communicating – Successes and Failures of EU-Campaigns“ at the Danube University Krems in relation to the topic of EU-campaigning; - an empirical investigation of the press relations of EU-institutions and their de- pendants on national levels by means of two selected case studies.

This paper’s goal is to pursue the question of communication potentials on EU, national, and regional levels in relation to the procurement of EU-topics emanating from the findings of the Eurobarometer polls and the scientific literature and through the examination of specific

page 9 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance frameworks and relations of communication. This approach is an explorative and exemplary one. This paper is not a comprehensive analysis of communication structures and activities. Likewise, it cannot deliver representative empirical data but rather confines itself to investigating and interpreting the available data in relation to the research questions, as well as obtain- ing new clues based on the exemplary investigation.

page 10 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

3. Results of EU-Acceptance, Information and Communication

This section of the paper examines the Eurobarometer polls, analyzing the items concerning EU-acceptance and the results regarding the areas of communication and information. Here, the Eurobarometer (short EB) data pertaining to the EU25 and specifically pertaining to Aus- tria is interpreted in regards to the question of communication potentials. As a comparison, the results pertaining to Slovakia are depicted. Additionally, country specific findings are addressed to emphasize the cooperation between Austria and Slovakia.

This paper focuses on the general opinion items (main concerns and expectations of the EU citizens towards their future) as well as indicators for EU-acceptance, trust of the EU- institutions and knowledge about the EU. Results in the context of media and information are examined in relation to communication. This paper draws on primary data sources, the standard Eurobarometer studies, in the time period from 2004 to 2006. Subsequently, this data is compared to further Austrian studies about the attitudes of Austrians towards the EU.

3.1. Standard Eurobarometer in the Period between 2004-2006

This section serves to answer the question, which findings can be read off the Eurobarometer polls during the period of examination from the spring of 2004 to the fall of 2006 regarding EU acceptance and sources of information of the citizens as well as the image of the EU in the media.

3.1.1. Acceptance of the European Union Image The number of Austrians who perceive the EU-membership as a “good thing” has declined 14 percentage points since the year 2005 to 32 %. The average acceptance rate in the EU25 is 50 percent (EB64nat_at, 2005: 28) and, this is also the case for Slovakia (EB64first_de, 2005: 11). With this low acceptance rate, Austria is at the top of the ranking of the EU-sceptical countries. In the fall of 2005 the acceptance was at 36 %. Austria therefore maintained a second place ranking, just after Great Britain, concerning EU-acceptance. About a quarter (23 %) of the Austrian population sees the EU as a “bad thing” (EU25: 16 %). The scepticism here increases with age (EB66nat_at, 2006: 19).

page 11 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

In the fall of 2005, one and a half years after joining the EU, half of the population of Slova- kia regarded EU-membership as “a good thing” (EB64first_de, 2005: 11). In the spring of 2006, the acceptance rate increased to 55 percent (EB65first_de, 2006: 11) and, in the fall of 2006, 61 % of the interviewed viewed their country’s EU-membership as a “good thing”. Only 6 % were of the opinion that EU-membership was “a bad thing” (EB66nat_at, 2006: 19).

Forty-three percent of Austrians perceived advantages through EU-membership, however, almost as many, namely 42 %, perceived no advantages (EB66nat_at, 2006: 20). More than two thirds of the Slovakians, 71 %, were of the opinion that their country profited from joining the EU, whereas the EU average is 54 % (EB66first_de, 2006: 11). This means that Slovaki- ans are 17 percentage points above the EU-average. Polled about whether or not one “rather trusts” the European Union, the following depiction unfolds for the investigated countries (in %):

60 EU[1] EU[1] n.v. 50 EU[1] EU[1] v. 40 AT[2] AT[2] n.v. 30 AT[2] AT[2] v. SK[3] SK[3] n.v. 20 SK[3] SK[3] v. 10

0 spring autumn spring autumn spring autumn 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 (EB61) (EB62) (EB63) (EB64) (EB65) (EB66)

Figure 1: Trust in the European Union 2004-2006, IJZ illustration; source: EB61-EB66. Abbreviations: n.v: do not trust, v: trust.

In the fall of 2005, Austrian women between15 and 24 years had the most trust in the EU (59 %), and men in the age group of 55 to 64 had the most distrust in the EU with 61 % (EB64nat_at, 2005: 23). The following Eurobarometer polls show, however, an above average trust in the EU of Austrian men between 15 and 39 years of age (53 %). A general evaluation of gender specific aspects is not possible because the necessary data is not available in all the studies.

page 12 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

In general, mistrust prevails over trust in relation to opinions about the EU in Austria, whereas this is not the case for the average of the EU countries and specifically for Slovakia. Only once, in the poll taken in the fall of 2004, there is an abundance of trust in favour of the EU. In the beginning of the time period investigated, in the spring of 2004, the difference between “rather trust” and “rather do not trust” was 16 percentage points (EB61nat_at, 2004: 58),but in the fall of 2006, trust and distrust are fairly evenly distributed (43 % to 46 %). Basically, the trust in the European Union continually declines with increasing age (EB66nat_at, 2006: 18). It is remarkable that in the fall poll of 2006, 16 % of the Austrian women responded that they had “no opinion” to this question, but only 7 % of the men made this allegation (EB66nat_at, 2006: 18). The Slovakian’s trust in the EU during the whole time period of the investigation lay significantly above the EU average. The same is true for the factor of distrust towards the EU. The following figure illustrates the results of the question of whether or not the European Un- ion evokes a positive image (in %), during the time period of this investigation:

40 EU[1] 30 AT[2] SK[3] 20

0 spring 2004 autumn spring 2005 autumn spring 2006 autumn (EB61) 2004 (EB63) 2005 (EB65) 2006 (EB62) (EB64) (EB66)

Figure 2: Acceptance of the positive image of the EU 2004-2006, IJZ illustration; source: EB61-EB66.

The positive perceptions of the EU fluctuate EU-wide within the investigated time period from between 43 % and 50 %. The Austrians generally view the European Union image as “not very positive”. The lowest Austrian percent of EU acceptance, 24, was present in the fall of 2005, shortly before the EU-council presidency (first term of the year 2006). At this point, Austria was at the bottom of the league (EB64first_de, 2005: 18). The age group of 15 to 24

page 13 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance year olds had the highest percent of viewing the EU in a positive way; with increasing age this data decreases continually. (EB64nat_at, 2005: 26). The positive image increased during the EU-presidency, in fact, by about eight percentage points to 32 %. Nevertheless, Finland is the only country behind Austria at this point in time (EB65first_de, 2006: 17). Austria attained an EU-wide record in the poll during the EU-presidency in spring of 2006. The number of citizens with a positive image of the EU exceeds only marginally the number of those with a negative image of the EU. For 31 % of the polled Austrians, the EU arouses, at this point, a negative image (EB65nat_at, 2006: 33), and for only 32 % a positive one. Even before joining the EU, in the spring poll of 2004, 42 % of the people polled in Slovakia evaluated the image of the EU as positive. (EB61full_en, 2004: C69). And, as an EU- member, Slovakia ranked in the middle ranks of the EU25 (rank 12 in the fall of 2004 and rank 13 in spring of 2006). In the fall of 2006, the results improved substantially: 55 % of the Slovakian people indicated that they had a positive image of the EU. The EU average was, at this point in time, only 46 %. At this point, Slovakians were number seven (EB66first_de, 2006: 14). Altogether it became clear that Austrians had a rather negative attitude in relation to EU- acceptance and the EU-image and that Austria ranked on the bottom, whereas in Slovakia, the data was above the EU-average. The different initial positions concede the case for an implementation of different communication strategies in terms of utilizing the communication potentials.

3.1.2. Knowledge and Sources of Information

This section focuses on the items Trust in EU Institutions, State of Knowledge, Proximity to the People, Information Sources, and EU in the Media in order to draw conclusions about the needs in communication work from the results of the opinion polls

3.1.2.1. Trust in EU-Institutions

In general, the citizens of the EU have more trust in the European Parliament compared to the European Commission and the Council of the European Union. The same is also true for the two countries investigated here, Austria and Slovakia. However, whereas Austria’s trust

page 14 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance in EU institutions is persistently found in the lower one third, Slovakia’s trust, on the other hand, is found in the upper one third (details in %).

60 EU[1] Parl. EU[1] Kom 50 EU[1] Rat AT[2] Parl. 40 AT[2] Kom AT[2] Rat 30 SK[3] Parl. SK[3] Kom 20 SK[3] Rat

0 spring 2004 autumn 2004 spring 2005 autumn 2005 spring 2006 autumn 2006 (EB61) (EB62) (EB63) (EB64) (EB65) (EB66)

Figure 3: Trust in EU-Institutions 2004-2006, IJZ representation; Source: EB61-EB66. Abbreviations: Parl=European Parliament; Com=European Commission; Coun=Council of the EU.

The Austrian and average European trust in the European Parliament and the European Commission was the highest in the fall of 2004. For Slovakia, trust in both institutions was the clearest in the last opinion poll in the fall of 2006. The Slovakians had a very strong trust in the European Parliament with 71 % agreement and, with this result, were in second place after the Slovenians (EB66first_de, 2006: 16). As the past years have shown, the results of the opinion polls in the fall of 2006 show, without exception, a stronger trust of the EU citizens in the European Parliament (52 %) and in the European Commission (48 %) in which the Austrians show a trust in both institutions at the EU average (European Commission: 45 %, European Parliament: 50 %) (EB66first_de, 2006: 16). The situation concerning the question of trust in the European Court of Justice and the European Central Bank is different. These institutions are trusted by 53 and 52 % of Austri- ans respectively, which is above average compared to the EU-average (EB65nat_at, 2006:39).

page 15 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

3.1.2.2. Knowledge about the EU

When the EU citizens were asked how they depict the EU budget allocations, 31 % were of the opinion that the largest amount of money is budgeted towards administrative, personnel and building costs, and only 17 % gave the correct answer that agriculture receives the most amount of money (EB64full_de, 2005: 87). At this time, about 45 % of the budget is allocated to agriculture; administrative and personnel costs are in sixth place (EB64nat_at, 2005: 41). „Thus, the cliché of the EU as a bureaucratic monster which spends most of its money on itself is still deeply-rooted“(EB65nat_sk, 2006: 4). In principle, the ten „new“ EU member states know more about the EU budget allocations than the 15 „old“ member states. However, only 5 % of the people in Slovakia know that the largest allocation of money is in agriculture, in fact, 34 % think that the largest amount goes to administrative costs (EB64full_de, 2005: 87). The opinion poll in the spring of 2006 demonstrated an above average knowledge: 42 % of the Slovakians who were questioned ne- gated the idea that the largest budgetary allocations are administrative and personnel costs. The EU-average to this question is only 33 % (EB65full_en, 2006: 112).

Among the Austrians, 34 % of the people questioned were of the opinion that administrative, personnel and building costs consumed the largest percentage of the EU budget. But, only 12 % were of the opinion that agriculture is the largest recipient on the expense side, which is, at any rate, 5 percent points less that the EU-average (EB64full_de, 2005: 89). Interest- ingly, an above average 14 % of the Austrians believe that the biggest expense in the budget is regional support and/or sponsoring, which, actually, is the second largest expense (Eb63.4nat_at, 2005: 21). As the results of the spring opinion poll show, merely 31 % of the Austrians know that the administrative costs are not the biggest EU budgetary expense. Those who answer the most questions correctly are the 15 to 24 year old males and those who give the most wrong answers were the 55 to 64 year old men who were questioned (EB65full_en, 2006: 112). This study was unable to collect and present any gender specific reflections in the course of time because there was no general gender data collected.

The following figure reflects the results (in %) of the questions to the EU-citizens during the time between 2004 and 2006 about their own estimations of their knowledge, on a scale of 1-10, of the EU, EU politics, and EU institutions.

page 16 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

40 know almost nothing know a little 30 know quite a lot 20 know a whole lot

0 spring autumn spring autumn spring 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 (EB61) (EB62) (EB63) (EB64) (EB65)

Figure 4: The subjective estimated knowledge of EU citizens 2004-2006, IJZ representation, Source: EB65full_en, 2006: 104.

More than half of the EU citizens asked claimed that they only knew „a little“ information about the EU. Between 17 and 21 % claimed to „know almost nothing“, and the range of people who claimed to know „ quite a lot“ was 20 to 28 %. The number of people who said that they knew “a whole lot” was small and insignificant at 2 %. At any one time, less than half of the people questioned in Austria, Slovakia, and the EU- average stated that they would understand how the EU functions (in %).

50 45 40 35 30 EU[1] 25 AT[2] 20 SK[3] 15 10 5 0 spring autumn spring autumn spring autumn 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 (EB61) (EB62) (EB63) (EB64) (EB65) (EB66)

Figure 5: Self estimation of EU-affairs: „Do you understand how the EU functions?“ 2004-2006, IJZ representation; Source: EB61-EB66.

page 17 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

The percent of Austrians who believe they understand how the EU functions (43 %) is average for the EU member states (42 %). Noteworthy is, nevertheless, that 50 % of Austrian men report that they know how the EU functions, whereas women fall clearly below this value, namely at only 35 % (EB66nat_at, 2006: 59). However, there is no general gender data available for the entire time period. In Slovakia the positive results of the question, “do you know how he EU functions?” fluctu- ated from 28 % one year after entering the EU to 40 % in 2006. Forty percent is practically the EU-average for this question. A third of the EU citizens answered the statement, „the EU has its own hymn“, correctly. However, both the Austrians with 53 % (EB64nat_at, 2005: 21) and the Slovakians with 49 % (EB64nat_sk, 2005: 8) answered this question with, „yes“, which is well over the EU25 average.

3.1.2.3. Proximity to the Citizens

The two statements used to determine whether or not a citizen felt close to the EU were the following self assessment statements: “My opinion counts” and “I feel part of the EU”. For the first statement, “my opinion counts”, only 29 % of the Austrians answered “yes” in the fall 2006 polls (EU average: 34 %). The Slovakians answered this question pessimistically. Be- fore entering the EU, only 13 % of the Slovakians were of the opinion that their vote counted, meanwhile, it has increased to about one third. Twenty two percent of people polled in Austria feel strongly connected to EU business affairs, whereas, the EU average is 19 % (EB66nat_at, 2006: 60). The results of the EU25 are the same as for Slovakia. Merely 10 % agreed that they felt very connected to EU affairs (EB66nat_sk, 2006:8). In general, in Austria, there is a strong backwards trend to the feeling of connection to EU affairs, whereas for Slovakia the feelings are increasing. In the following graph, all the results for the entire time period are presented (data in %):

page 18 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

40 EU[1] AT[2] 30 SK[3]

0 spring autumn spring autumn spring autumn 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 (EB61) (EB62) (EB63) (EB64) (EB65) (EB66)

Figure 6: Self reported EU connection: „My vote counts in the EU “ 2004-2006 IJZ representation; Source: EB61-EB66.

3.1.2.4. Sources of Information The three most important sources of information acquisition about the EU are television programs, print media, and radio programs (data in %).

70 EU[1] TV EU[1] Newspaper 60 EU[1] Radio 50 AT[2] TV AT[2] Newspaper 40 AT[2] Radio SK[3] TV 30 SK[3] Newspaper SK[3] Radio 20

0 spring 2004 autumn 2004 spring 2005 autumn 2005 spring 2006 autumn 2006 (EB61) (EB62) (EB63) (EB64) (EB65) (EB66)

Figure 7: EU information sources 2004-2006, IJZ representation, Source: EB61-EB66.

page 19 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

In Austria, as in the EU-average, more people watch television than listen to the radio or read newspapers. In Austria, ORF 1 is the channel that most people watch (78 % of the people watch it a minimum of five times a week), the regional radio channels are the most frequently listened to (more than 50 % listen a minimum of five times a week) and the newspaper, Kronen Zeitung, is the most frequently read paper in Austria (more than 52 % of the people read it a minimum of three times a week).

A not so insignificant number of Austrians inform themselves about EU matters by means of discussions with friends and co-workers (39 %). Here, Austria is clearly above average as the EU-average is 22 %. As for procuring information from the internet, Austria is below the EU- average. Only 17 % of Austrians use the World Wide Web to access information about the EU, whereas the average is 23 % in the EU25. Here, what is noteworthy, however, is the group of 15 to 24 year old men: a third of them use the internet to procure information about the EU (EB65nat_at, 2006: 25). On the other hand, 14 % of the people in Austria have “no interest”, on principle, in information about the EU or they “never look for such information”. This data is in comparison to the average of 10 % for the EU citizens (EB63full_de, 2005: 82). Slovakians listen to radio programs more often than they read daily newspapers about EU themes. The EU-average and the Austrians read newspapers more often than they listen to radio programs. The Slovakians get an “above the EU-average” amount information from the most important media, television (80 %). Only 10 % of the people asked said that they never inform themselves about the EU (EB65nat_sk, 2005: 11). On average, in the EU, men use all the information sources more than women, with exception to the talks with relatives, friends, and co-workers (EB62full_de, 2004:52). Other gender related data were not possible to obtain given the limits of this study.

3.1.2.5. The EU in the Media

When the EU citizens were asked about the extent of EU coverage in the media, Austrians gave above average good grades. Fifty-five percent of the Austrians were of the opinion that the extent of coverage on television was „just right“, and 61 % of them found that the newspaper coverage was “just right”. A clear deviation from the EU-average is seen with radio: only 42 % of the EU-citizens agree that the extent of the EU coverage is “just right”, whereas 56 % of the Austrians are of this opinion (EB65nat_at, 2006: 26f.). The EU coverage on television is rated as “too positive” by one-third of Austrians. Only about

page 20 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance one-half (49 %) believe that the television news about the EU is “objective”. The coverage on the radio and in the press is rated by 53 % and 54 % respectively as “objective”, and, here, the Austrians are just over the EU-average of 48 and 49 % respectively. A fourth of the Aus- trians assess the radio and newspaper coverage as “too positive” (EB65nat_at, 2006:28). The established below average knowledge of the Slovakians (see chapter 3.1.2.2 Knowl- edge) puts into question the „amount and quality as well as the clarity and comprehensibility” of the information supplied (EB65nat_sk, 2005:11). In Slovakia, an above average amount of people polled thought that the amount of coverage on television (66 %), on the radio (62 %), and in print media (67 %) was „just right“(EB65nat_at, 2006: 26). The results of the question about the objectivity of the media coverage about the EU were considerably above the EU25- average. Sixty-four percent of the Slovakians believe that the radio coverage and the print media coverage are objective and 59 % said the same was true for television. Nevertheless, more people in Slovakia believe that the coverage is “too positive” compared to the EU25 (20 % television, 13 % press, 13 % radio) (EB65nat_sk, 2005:11).

Knowledge about the EU is mediocre and one should ask how much the knowledge about the function and responsibilities of the EU deviates from the knowledge about how national politics function, respectively, if this is the case at all. Communication potentials in the information work can be found in the lack of knowledge about administration costs as the over- whelming picture of the EU is that its excessive expenditures go primarily to cover bureaucratic costs. Furthermore, the Schuman Day should be considered as an appropriate EU- wide holiday to work on the EU-image and to support the image of a united Europe. There is also potential in relation to the proximity to citizens, as only a fifth of the EU-citizens feel connected to the EU and only a third believe that their own vote counts. As television is the main information source for over two-thirds of the citizens in the EU25 as well as for Austrians and for as many as 80 % of the Slovakians, it is clear where the greatest potential lies in strengthening the flow, reception and effectiveness of information and communication about the EU.

3.1.3. Concerns and Expectations of the EU Citizens

The Project European Union claimed to establish and guarantee peace, security and prosper- ity. In order to assess this claim, the Eurobarometer polls asked the EU-citizens questions regarding their concerns, fears, and expectations. The results make it clear which themes

page 21 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance and problem areas should be on the communication agenda in order to address the citizen’s fears and concerns.

3.1.3.1. Concerns and Fears of EU Citizens

Even though the EU citizens appear to be overall content with their lives, they voiced sub- stantial concerns about the work force situation. In the investigation time period from the beginning of 2004 until the end of 2006, the greatest concerns of the EU citizens were unemployment, economic situation, criminality, and inflation.

Forty-nine percent (EB65first_de, 2006: 8) of the citizens in the EU25 chose unemployment as their main concern in 2006, an increase of one percentage point in comparison to the last EB poll (EB64first_de, 2005). The second main concern was criminality with 24 % for the EU, and, just after that, in third place, was the economic situation (23 %). Since 2003, unemployment as the main concern of the EU25 citizens has increased nine percentage points, peak- ing in the spring of 2005 with 55 % (EB63.4first_de, 2005: 8).

The nine member states have a more pronounced concern regarding unemployment (63 %) compared to the EU 15 (48 %) (EB63.4first_de, 2005: 8). So, in the spring of 2006, the main concern of 49 % of the EU 25 citizens was unemployment, but within this statistic is the 69 % from the nine member states. Therefore, as before, unemployment in the nine member states affects a wider population spectrum as in the EU15 (46 %) (EB65first_de, 2006:8).

Comparing the EU average with Austria and the nine member states, one sees that Austria’s values are similar to the nine EU member countries. The concern regarding unemployment in Austria and Slovakia affects a much wider population spectrum compared to the EU- average. One sees that the apprehensions of the Austrian citizens continually grew since the spring of 2004, from 41 % in the spring of 2004 to 61 % in the spring of 2006. However, what is striking, though, is that practically two-thirds of the Slovakians from the beginning on (60 % in the spring of 2004) believed that the most important problem facing their country was unemployment. In relation to the fears of the Austrians corresponding to the fear of European integration, the outsourcing of jobs to member countries with lower production costs was in first place with 71 % (EB64nat_at, 2005: 4). In the spring of 2006, this value sank to 69 % (EB65nat_at, 2006: 4), however, it remained the largest concern of the Austrians.

page 22 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

A comparison of the „most important problems facing our country“(in %) showed the following results:

50 spring 2004 (EB61) autumn 2004 (EB62) 40 spring 2005 (EB63) autumn 2005 (EB64) 30 spring 2006 (EB65) autumn 2006 (EB66) 20

0 EU AT SK EU AT SK EU AT SK EU AT SK

unemployment economic situation crime rising prices/inflation

Figure 8: The most difficult problems facing our country IJZ representation, Source EB 61-66.

In the time period between 2004 and the beginning of 2006, the Slovakian people had two top priorities: the increasing drug trade and the fear that farmers could have more difficulties. The fear that jobs would be outsourced to other EU member countries came in third.

page 23 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Comparison of data concerning „fears which are connected with European integration” (in %):

60 spring 2004 (EB61) 50 autumn 2004 (EB62) spring 2005 (EB63) 40 autumn 2005 (EB64) 30 spring 2006 (EB65) autumn 2006 (EB66) 20

0 EU AT SK EU AT SK EU AT SK EU AT SK

transfer of jobs to other increase in drug our country paying more difficulties for member countries* trafficking more and more to the national farmers EU

EU AT SK

74 76 73 73 73 72 71 72 69 64 61 57 60 49

EB61 EB62 EB63 EB64 EB65

Figure 9: Fears in connection with European Integration IJZ representation, Sources EB 61-66.

page 24 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Digression: Work Force Situation in Austria 2004-2006

Now we compare the example of “unemployment” as the main concern with the actual numbers from the Austrian labour market statistics. For the other main concerns, similar compari- sons can be made, i.e. concerning criminality, by looking at the crime statistics.

Unemployment Quota in % (from the Labour-Force-Concept) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Austria5 3,5 3,6 4,0 4,3 4,9 5,2 4,7

Women 3,8 3,8 3,9 3,9 5,4 5,5 5,2

Men 3,3 3,4 4,1 4,3 4,5 4,9 4,3

15-24 5,1 5,6 6,2 7,0 9,7 10,3 9,1

25-34 3,2 3,4 3,6 4,1 5,0 5,5 5,0

35-44 2,7 2,9 3,2 3,3 4,1 4,0 3,9

45-54 3,6 3,3 3,8 3,9 3,6 3,8 3,6

55-64 5,2 4,9 5,4 5,3 3,8 3,6 3,5

Lower Austria 6 3,0 3,2 3,57 3,5 4,2 4,3 4,0

Women in Lower 3,6 3,3 3,8 3,7 5,1 4,8 4,5 Austria

Men in Lower Aus- 2,6 3,1 3,4 3,4 3,6 3,8 3,5 tria

Table 1: See footnotes for sources.

5 Source: Year 2000: Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Annual Report 2004, Mikrozensus-Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbe- richt 5.8; S. 38; Jahre 2001-2006: Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Jahresergebnisse 2006, Mikrozensus- Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbericht 5.8; S. 40 6 Source: Jahre 2000, 2003, 2004: Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Annual Report 2004, Mikrozensus-Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbericht 5.8; S. 51f; Jahre 2005, 2006: Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Jahresergebnisse 2006, Mikrozensus- Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbericht 5.8; S. 53f. 7 Data for Lower Austria 2002: Mikrozensus Jahresdurchschnitt 2002 (Lechner 2007, eigene Aufzeichnungen des Telephone with Dr. Reinhard Eichwalder, Statistik Austria, 09.05.2007)

page 25 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

In the following pages, the main concern “unemployment” and the actual values depicting unemployment in Austria will be graphically represented one on top of the other (graphs 10, 11 and 12).

Development of the Unemployment Quota in Austria since 2000:

6,0

5,2 5,0 4,9 4,7 4,3 4,2 4,3 4,0 4,0 4,0 3,5 3,6 3,5 3,5 3,2 Austria 3,0 3,0 Lower Austria 2,0

1,0

0,0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Figure 10: Comparison of the Austrian and Lower Austrian Unemployment Quota from 2000-2006,

IJZ representation; Source: see Table 1.

Unemployment as a main concern in Austria (data in % for years 2004 -2006):

70 63 61 57 60 52 50 50 41 40 30 20 10 0 spring 2004 autumn spring 2005 autumn spring 2006 autumn (EB61) 2004 (EB63) 2005 (EB65) 2006 (EB62) (EB64) (EB66)

Figure 11: Unemployment as the main concern of Austrians 2004-2006,

IJZ representation, Sources: EB61-BE66.

page 26 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

5,3 5,2 5,2 5,1 5,0 4,9 4,9 4,8 4,7 4,7 4,6 4,5 4,4 2004 2005 2006

Figure 12: Unemployment quotas in Austria 2004-2006, Source: see Table 1.

If one compares the main concern of Austrians, namely, the concern that they will lose their jobs, with the unemployment statistics, one can clearly see a correspondence which must be further investigated. The average rate of unemployment in 2006 of 4.7 % clearly had an influence on the fall opinion polls of 2006 (EB66). In the spring of 2006, 61 % of the Austrians said that their main concern was unemployment, and, in the fall, this value sank to 50 %. If one considers the average percent of people who have this main concern in the time period from 2004-2006, one can clearly see that there is much more concern than the actual unemployment quota would suggest.

3.1.3.2. Expectations of the Future

Thirty-four percent of the EU25 member states expect a worsening of the labour force situation in the next 12 months and, a worsening of the economic situation is still more than one third (35 %). Practically the same percent of people (34 %) think that their life in will improve (in general), and only 12 % think that it will deteriorate (EB66nat_at, 2006: 13). In terms of the financial situation in individual households, 24 % of the EU citizens believe that their situation will develop positively and 19 % think that it will develop negatively (EB66nat_at, 2006: 14).

In Austria, just about a quarter of the people (23 %, EU25: 34 %) are expecting a better life (in general) in the next year, 12 % fear a worsening of their situation, and 63 % (-4 % compared to the EB65) believe that it will stay the same. Teenagers and men have a tendency to be more optimistic than older people and women (EB66nat_at, 2006: 13). In Austria, the

page 27 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance fears in respect to a worsening of the economic situation are below average. Here, only 18 % of those polled (EU25: 35 %) shared this fear. Also, in terms of the household monetary situation, Austrians have less fear than do the average EU citizens (13 % vs.19 %) (EB66nat_at, 2006: 14). Expectations for the next twelve months with regard to career situations and the situation in the labour force in the EU25 member states (data in %):

The situation of the Your personal career labour force( our coun- EU 25 situation try)

better worse better worse

Spring 2004 21 10 15 48

Fall 2004 22 10 17 47

Spring 2005 22 9 18 42

Fall 2005 22 9 20 40

Spring 2006 22 9 21 38

Fall 2006 23 - - -

Table 2: Sources: 2004: EB61/EB62, 2005: EB63/EB64, 2006: EB65/EB66.

In comparison with the European results, Austrians are more optimistic about their future job situations. In the fall of 2006, 22 % of the Austrian citizens believed that their personal job situation would improve, whereas almost a tenth (9 %) believed that it would worsen.

page 28 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Expectations for the next twelve months with regard to career situations and the situation in the labour force in Austria (data in %):

Your personal The job market Austria job situation situation in Austria

Better worse better worse

Spring 2004 13 10 9 49

Fall 2004 21 7 14 47

Spring 2005 18 6 13 42

Fall 2005 17 8 14 41

Spring 2006 15 10 20 32

Fall 2006 22 9 25 26

Table 3: Sources: 2004: EB61/EB62, 2005: EB63/EB64, 2006: EB65/EB66.

Altogether, the EU citizens and the Austrians have a rather optimistic view of their personal job situations whereas practically one fourth (24 % in Spring 2006) of the Slovakian people fear a worsening of their personal job situations. Thereby, they are 15 percentage points over the EU-average.

Pessimism concerning the work force situation is shared by all three, the Slovakian people, the EU citizens and the Austrians. In the fall of 2006, concerns reached a peak which is clearly demonstrated by the Slovakians with 45 %. Since the spring of 2004, the frame of mind about the work force situation decreased eight percentage points.

page 29 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Expectations for the next twelve months with regard to the career situation and the situation in the labour force in Slovakia (data in %):

Your personal job The situation in the Slovakia situation labour force in Slovakia

better worse better worse

Spring 2004 13 - 18 37

Fall 2004 17 26 17 38

Spring 2005 20 26 16 38

Fall 2005 16 20 14 39

Spring 2006 19 24 13 33

Fall 2006 17 - - 45

Table 4: Sources 2004: EB61/EB62, 2005: EB63/EB64, 2006: EB65/EB66.

If one takes into consideration the investigation results of the overall quality of life in Slovakia, one sees that the results are very similar to those of the EU25: more than half of the people in Slovakia expect no change in the next 12 months, a third hope for an improvement, and 14 % think that their quality of life will get worse. In terms of the economic situation in their country, 28 % (EU25: 20 %, EB66nat_at, 2006:14) of Slovakians believe it will improve, and only 30 % think that it will worsen or go in a negative direction. The Slovakians are more optimistic compared to the EU25 (35 %) (EB66nat_sk, 2006:2). What is striking is the pessimistic perception of the development of the household financial situation. Contrary to the EU- average (19 %), 28 % of Slovakians fear that their individual financial situation will worsen. Slovakia and Germany together make up the tail-enders (EB65full_en, 2006:22). Half of the EU citizens believe that their quality of life in five years will be better than it is today, although the general feeling is somewhat worse than it was in 2005. A fifth of the people polled believed that their situation would remain the same, a little more, namely 22 %, expect, on the other hand, that their situation will worsen (EB65full_en, 2006:23). The Austrians are more pessimistic than the EU-average: only 43 % are of the opinion that the situation will improve in the next five years. On the other side, in Slovakia, one views the future more optimistically: fifty-five percent believe that quality of life will improve (EB65full_en, 2006:24). In terms of the expectations of the personal quality of life in the next

page 30 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance five years, one of every four people believes that it will improve. About the same number of people in the EU25 presume that it will continue in this direction. The situation is similar for the Slovakians: forty-one percent expect an improvement and 35 % believe that their quality of life will not change. A majority of Austrians (57 %) believe that it will continue the way it is and 27 % expect an improvement. As a last word, Austria is in second to last place in front of Germany (EB65full_en, 2006:20).

3.1.2.6. Challenges for the EU

Concerns lead to expectations and new challenges. Therefore, we now present the results concerning the items „expectations and demands of the EU”. The EU25 yielded the following order of priorities (EB65nat_at, 2006: 40): 1. Fight against unemployment (43 %) and Fight against poverty and social marginalisation (43 %) 3. Maintenance of peace and security in Europe (27 %) 4. Fight against organized crime and drug trade (23 %) 5. Concern for the cares of European citizens (19 %).

From the previous chapter about the main concerns of the European citizens, it was established that the fight against unemployment should be on the top of the priority list for the European Union. Just as high a percentage of people, namely 43 %, demand that the EU fight against poverty and social marginalisation. Following this demand is the demand for the maintenance of peace and security in Europe (27 %) and the fight against organized crime and drug trade (23 %) (EB65nat_at, 2006:40). The Austrians view their priority list of demands of the EU in the following way (EB65nat_at, 2006: 40): 1. Fight against unemployment (52 %)

2. Fight against poverty and social marginalisation (40 %) 3. Fight against organized crime and drug trade (30 %)

4. Concern for the cares of the EU citizens (22 %) 5. Maintaining peace and security in Europe (21 %)

page 31 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Especially in comparison to the expansion year of 2004, the Austrians wishes to fight crime and illegal immigration have decreased. The fight against unemployment is, as before, the most important theme to which the EU must respond (52 %, minus 3 % since fall 2005). Following this are the fight against poverty and social marginalisation (40 %, minus 5 PP), the fight against organized crime and drug trade (30 %, plus 2 PP since fall, minus 12 PP since 2004), and, new in fourth place, concern for the cares of the EU citizens (22 %, plus 4 PP)“ (EB65nat_at, 2006: 40). What is interesting to note is the above average wish for a stronger connection to the citizens by 15 to 24 year old men. The demand to fight unemployment is the wish of an above average percentage of women between 55 and 64 years old, namely 59 % (EB65nat_at, 2006: 41). The fight against illegal immigrants, as an Austrian demand to the EU, made it to fifth place in the fall of 2004. Since then, this demand has lost significance (EB62nat_at, 2004: 45) and is now at 16 % according to the spring polls of 2006 (EB65nat_at, 2006: 40). Clear differences can be seen between the „old“, and „new“ EU member countries. For the ten new member countries, the fight against unemployment (61 %) as well as social marginalisation and poverty (53 %) are especially marked needs and are well over the EU-average compared to the EU25 (EB65full_en, 2006: 119).

These priorities were also mirrored in the Slovakian population (wider) (EB65nat_sk, 2006: 8): 1. Fight against poverty and social marginalisation (54 %) 2. Fight against unemployment (52 %) 3. Maintaining peace and security in Europe (29 %) 4. Guarantee the quality of food (23 %) 5. Environmental protection (22 %)

What is especially interesting here is the importance of environmental protection and the quality of food (EB65nat_sk, 2006: 8). These two challenges, chosen by the Slovakian people, are not represented in the top five priorities of the EU-average nor in the top five of the Austrians. One observes a different picture when one compares Austrians and Slovakians during this time period. The Austrians maintained the opinion that the fight against unemployment should be first priority (in the fall of 2006, 48 %) and the Slovakians opinions concur with the EU citizens in general, since the spring of 2005, that the fight against poverty and social marginali-

page 32 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance sation should be in first place (50 %). It is noteworthy that, in the data from Austria and Slo- vakia, there are higher percents for each goal in comparison to the average EU results. Four goals which the EU should prioritize (in %):

spring 2004 (EB61) 40 autumn 2004 (EB62) spring 2005 (EB63) 30 autumn 2005 (EB64) spring 2006 (EB65) 20 autumn 2006 (EB66)

0 EU AT SK EU AT SK EU AT SK EU AT SK

fighting unemplyment fighting poverty and maintaining peace and fighting organised social exclusion security in Europe crime and drug trafficking

Figure 13: Sources 2004: EB61/EB62, 2005: EB63/EB64, 2006: EB65/EB66.

Despite the concerns about increasing unemployment, the EU citizens are relatively optimistic in regards to their personal job situations. At the time of the data collection, one fifth of the people polled expected an improvement in their situation in the next 12 months and 10 percent expected a worsening of their situation.

The EU citizens demonstrated a lasting pessimism concerning the work force in their own countries. A significant percent of the population in the EU25 (between 38 and 44 %) presume that the work force situation will worsen in the next 12 months. In comparison to the standard Eurobarometer polls from the spring of 2004, the other polls in the time period from the fall of 2004 until the spring of 2006 showed a positive inclination. Thus, the amount of positive answers since 2004 rose six percentage points and the negative answers decreased ten points.

page 33 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

3.2. Country-specific and Regional Polls: Lower Austria–Slovakia

The following section is dedicated to describing the project partnership “Forum for EUrope” in greater detail. Regional findings concerning the regions of Lower Austria and Western Slova- kia and Bratislava are depicted and interpreted. These additional results should give exemplary evidence for the communication potentials to increase EU acceptance in the participating regions.

3.2.1. Development of the Lower Austrian–Slovakian Border Region (Schaller 2006)

According to the study „Gelebte Nachbarschaft in der Grenzregion Niederösterreich-Slowakei 2001-2005” (How the neighbourly relationship is experienced in the border region between Lower Austria and Slovakia 2001-2005) (Schaller 2006, 4ff), the acceptance of Slovakia joining the EU increased in Lower Austria during the time period from May 2001 to September 2005 from 32 to 41 percentage points. The residents of the Lower Austrian Slovakian border region experienced the developments of the border region with mixed feelings. The concerns of the Lower Austrians are similar to the overall Austrian concerns in the Euro- barometer polls primarily within negative developments on the labour market. The concerns about the workplace increased in the fall 2005, in comparison to the poll in May 2004, about 11 percentage points. The acceptance of the seven year transition period for the labour market is correspondingly high. Here, 37 percent agree entirely that this period is advantageous, because, otherwise, it would lead to increasing unemployment. Aggravations in the areas of crime as well as an increase in transit encumbrance are two other main concerns of the residents of the border region. Only nine percent of the polled Lower Austrians viewed the EU joining of Slovakia as increasing security, 42 percent actually viewed it to the contrary.

page 34 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

50 poll Feb.04 in % 40 poll May.2004 in % poll Sep.05 in % 30

0 negative negative negative positive positive

workplace crime traffic cultural cooperation tourism

Figure 14: Development of the Lower Austrian Slovakian border region IJZ illustration, Source: Schaller 2006, graph 4a-4e.

In September 2005, one and a half years after the entry of Slovakia to the European Union, Lower Austrians still had very little personal contact to people in Slovakia. Almost half (47 %) of the people said that they had never had a personal contact to a Slovakian. However, at the time of the Slovakian entry (May 2004), this increased to 59 %. In February of 2004, most people met as friends and acquaintances, but, by the fall of 2005, social events and festivities were the main reason for a get together across the national borders. The results of the question about “a visit” to Slovakia were similar. Forty-six percent of the people polled had never visited Slovakia (compared to 52 % in May 2001). Most frequently, Lower Austrians visited neighbouring Slovakia for sightseeing tours and excursions. The polling of the sectored collaboration of the border communities in Lower Austria and Slo- vakia was insightful (Schaller 2006, Graphic 6): 65 % of the polled evaluated the cooperation in the area of environmental protection as” rather not enough”, only 11 % found the cooperation in this area as adequate – with that, environmental protection is the area which re- quires the most action. The Lower Austrians also view economic cooperation as unsatisfac- tory. Here, 45 % of the people polled expect an intensified cooperation between the two countries. The results in the area of cultural cooperation are different – according to the polls, the most effectively functioning area – here, 61 % of those polled view the cooperation as sufficient, although potentials of improvement do exist, and, 27 % of those polled view the cooperation as “rather not enough”. In the middle ranks are the sectors economy, tourism, clubs and associations and sports.

Despite the growing acceptance of the Lower Austrians towards the EU entrance of Slovakia in the border regions and the increase of personal contacts of its residents, the negative

page 35 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance evaluation, in relation to crime and to the situation of the labour market, did not improve at all during the period investigated.

3.2.2. Mayors from the Lower Austrian–Slovakian Border Region

The Austrian Association for European Policy (OGfE) is working on the issue of “improving people’s attitudes towards the EU”. Since 2005, in the framework of the project “Living Neighbourhood”, the neighbouring regions of Slovakia, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovenia are all part of the project. Within the framework, “Living Neighbourhoods in the Bor- der Region”, additional polls were conducted which questioned the mayors in the western Slovakian border region about the same topics (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006). The mayors polled view their country as “part of a united Europe” (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 5) since the EU-entry. These community representatives have very positive images of their relation to the EU-entry and the newly ensured mobility linked to this event: more Austrians visit the border communities, and work, school and study visits in the neighbouring country are on the rise. In particular, leisure activities (soccer tournaments or weekend excursions) are creating connections between the people on both sides of the border (in both border regions), and personal and “friendship” contacts to Austrians play a growing role. However, positive neighbourly relationships in the border region existed even before the EU-entry. In the future, there will be more common projects and events to intensify the neighbourly connections. The mayors are of the opinion that by strengthening contacts, general opinions toward the EU-neighbour Austria are positively influenced. In general, the peopled polled said that they “very often” or “often” have contact to Austrians (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 10) in the form of societal, professional, or amicable relationships, however, none of the polled de- clared family relations. The Slovakians visit Austria to go to professional meetings, to shop, to meet friends, to sightsee, and to make short excursions.

The new employment possibilities keep the young people in the communities. The community representatives evaluate the future situation of the labour market in the border region positively. They view the seven year transition period which puts limits on the Austrian labour market differently. They show rather little understanding for it in contrast to the residents of the Lower Austrian border region. Obstacles within the “Slovakian labour mobility in the border region” are being voiced (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 14). Those who already work in the neighbouring country are motivating the population to learn foreign languages in order to add valuable contributions

page 36 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance to communal life.

The whole region profits from shopping tourism in Austria, but at the same time, is suffering from the differing spending power and the uneven financial situation of the populations. In general, the border region is well suited for tourism. Often, however, “the plan for future regional development” (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 7) is missing in order to realize the new ideas in the sector of tourism. Moreover, there is often a lack in services and human resources. Desires to increase the value of tourism are going in the direction of community and regional cross-border planning and cooperation, and also are going directly towards EU subsidies. Despite regional developmental subsidy programmes, there are not enough subsidies. The mayors also find fault with way in which the differing funds are assigned to the different regions.

The assessment of the mayors in relation to increasing crime differs significantly from those of the polled Lower Austrians. The mayors saw “no change”. Also the reduction of executive power had no influence on the number of crimes committed, merely, the sense of individual security in the population suffered (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 6). The expectations for the future described here are neither positive nor negative; however, preventative measures for combating crime are desired.

The people polled view the transit problems as, predominantly, a Slovakian issue. Here, above all, the national infrastructural deficits and the deprivation of the public transportation are the centre of attention. Henceforth, the representatives want to lobby for a strengthening of regional railways. The polled Slovakians expect an improvement of living standards for the whole country. The hitherto advancements in this area might not be, as believed by the mayors, directly attrib- uted to the EU-entry. The subsidies from the “Eurofonds” are being used to advance the ”general standard of living” (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 6). Newly created jobs and educa- tional possibilities are admittedly seen as the reasons for the boom. On the other hand, many are still struggling “for their daily survival” (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 8). It is an ample challenge to embrace the socially weak – here, solutions need to be found. The Slovakian community representatives and the polled Lower Austrians agree that there is enough cultural collaboration. The only downer is that “the individual financial situation does not allow for participation in events and programs in Austria” (Schrastetter/Strauss 2006: 12). Further- more, unity prevails in the sector assessment of economic cooperation and environmental protection – here, there is “rather too little” collaboration. In the tourism and sport sectors, as well as on the level of social associations, the cooperation is satisfactory.

page 37 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

3.3. Conclusion

In order to answer research question 1, “what conclusions can be derived from the Euro- barometer surveys about the image of the EU, EU acceptance, level of knowledge about the EU, and sources of information consumed by EU citizens in the period from the spring of 2004 to the fall of 2006?”, we looked at the many Eurobarometer study findings concerning EU-agreement, the citizens’ knowledge base and sources of information as well as the presentation of the EU in the media during the time period of this investigation from the spring of 2004 to the fall of 2006.

As the main concern of the EU25 as well as the Austrians, unemployment, is the key indica- tor of the communications potential. Due to the increasing rate of unemployment in Austria from 3.5 % in 2000 to 5.2 % in 2005 (Work force statistics, Annual Report 2005, Micro- census-work force data collection, Quick Report, page 38), and the fear of 71 % of the Aus- trians that jobs will be outsourced to EU-member countries with lower production costs, this main concern is confirmed. Possible communication potentials lie in strategies to improve the labour market as well as a more differentiated news coverage concerning the background of unemployment, and the general economic situation in connection to the EU.

For the Slovakians, the themes of poverty and social marginalisation continue to be the main concerns above unemployment. Here, communication about political measures as well as the respective appertaining EU-policy would be possibilities for differentiated and goal- oriented research.

In general, the communication potential to increase the proximity of the citizens exists. A fifth (19 %) of the people who were questioned as part of the Eurobarometer polls wish for “a closer connection to the European citizens” (this ranks as number five in the challenges for the EU), in Austria this is 22 %. Appropriate communications concepts which take into consideration the concerns and fears of the citizens and their values of peace, security and pros- perity could be developed as possible strategies. This also mirrors the challenges of fighting unemployment, poverty, and social marginalisation, which are the biggest areas of agreement between Austria, Slovakia and the EU25.

As to research question 2, “what additional conclusions can be drawn specifically from the participating regions of Lower Austria, Western Slovakia and Bratislava about the communication potentials to increase EU acceptance in reference to the project “Forum for EUrope?”, the regional studies which took part in this project give particularly useful hints about communication potentials to increase EU-acceptance.

page 38 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

As the results of the interviews demonstrated (cp. Schaller 2006, Schrastetter/Strauss 2006), overall, the future expectations of the handled border regions in Austria and Slovakia are positive. Only in the area of crime are the Slovakian municipal representatives rather neutral in terms of their views on future development. They are more concerned with building up tourism and further cooperation with the neighbouring countries. From the above figure in Chapter 3.2.1, one can derive that the areas of tourism and neighbourly relationships are areas which have very positive connotations for the people in the context of EU-expansion. Here, there are also possibilities to develop strategies to strengthen, increase and support activities on this level and with a political viewpoint. Also, to accompany this, one could take into account the intensification of a differentiated media and information work. Other points corroborated here are job fears, crime, the burden of the increasing transit, and the work on combining communications strategies without borders.

page 39 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

4. EU News Management und EU Communications Structures

This section is dedicated to the preconditions and framework of EU-communication. Theories of communication are discussed in the light of the topics European public, EU-news management, EU-communication structures and EU-campaigning. Furthermore, the plans of the European Commission concerning communication policies are inspected by examining the Whitebook on a European communication policy. The main results of the experts´ round table “Communicating in the EU– successes and failures of EU campaigns”, which took place at the Danube University Krems within the context of the project “Forum for EUrope”, serve as a further source for this chapter.

4.1. The European Public and its Effects on Media Work

The model of an unified European public sphere is considered an utopia (comp. Gerhards 1993, Gerhards 2001, Tobler 2001). Gerhards states three reasons: (1) there is little readi- ness to receive news in foreign languages and the respectively high costs of translations, (2) it is impossible to satisfy the diverse cultures with unified formats, and (3) the usage of media is very different in the various countries. “Even if the same topic finds resonance in the various media arenas, national perspectives on the topic will dominate.” (Tobler 2001:2)

Gerhards sees opportunities to introduce European topics into the national public arenas. This corresponds with the Whitebook which emphasizes the national sphere as the public one in the political life in Europe. “We could talk about Europizing the national public spheres, if in the course of time national publics were informed about European decisions and about the politicians who make these decisions. Whether public life has “Europeanized” similar to politics in its media reports is an empirically open and disputable question.” (Gerhards 01:9)

In this context one talks about a deficit in the public sphere, as Gerhards (01) understands “deficit” as a normative criterion for evaluation. The normative reference frame for the empirical question of a deficit in the public sphere of the EU has a variable design, which results in diverse diagnoses. Gerhards points out that the reference criterion for the evaluation results from the assumptions of normative public theories, which he splits into a representative- liberal8 model and a deliberative9 model of the public and explores the respective empirical

8 Representative-liberal public model: (mass medial) Elected communication representatives of the citizens who concur together on the agreement of how the citizens want to vote; the public should ensure the transparency of

page 40 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance results. According to Langenbucher and Latzer (2006:1), the beginnings of a European public are visible, although they also emphasise the heterogeneity of research practises in relation to different basic unities, analysis parameters, and research units. In relation to the representative-liberal model of the public, Gerhards (2001:12) states that, first of all, comparative cross country time series analyses were missing and, secondly, during the time period between 1951 and 1995, there was an empirically founded public deficit in Western Germany. There was an incongruity between Europeanizing political decisions, passing on the information and information in the mass media. The media reports were behind trans-national politics. Whether this has changed since 1995 is an empirically open question. Langenbucher and Latzer (2006) talk of institutionalized communication networks and Euro- pean movement cultures (simple and mid-sized publics within the complex mass media public). According to Gerhards, the deliberative model of the EU is not a democratic model in terms of the evaluation criteria (Gerhards 2001:17). This image of a European public is, much rather, a “deliberative way of lobbying and co-reigning” than the creation of a public. The public presence of elites and counter elites can and do not represent a functional equivalent of a mass media public, and are highly selective “in regard to those representations of interests that are capable of mobilizing people or of being listened to” (Gerhards 2001:16). Hahn, Rosenwerth and Schröder (2006) find in their summary of the current state of research, that there are different national journalistic and politic cultures, which lead to an in- homogeneity in the EU media coverage of the various member states. Furthermore, EU correspondents can only convince their national editorial departments of the informative value of EU topics with difficulty. Similar statements also came from EU correspondent Thomas Schmidt of the Austrian Press Agency (APA): “The next day, only little was left of the press information in the daily press” (cp. Wolf 2006a)10. Gregor Kreuzhuber, who was the press spokesperson under commissioner Verheugen, talked about the problem that he could not handle the press work in the various press agencies of the EU countries from Brussels, whereas it would be no problem to go to the member states to speak to the people directly (cp. Wolf 2006b)11. The growing flood of information from EU institutions, lobbying groups,

the different positions and decision processes (cp. Gerhards 2001: 6) 9 Deliberative public model: as a prerequisite to getting closer, incorporates also the proximity to citizens, group- ing of the civil society and is based on the argumentation of joint dialogues. 10 WOLF: Discussion with Thomas Schmidt before the Midday Briefing in the EU Commission, Brussels on 05.04.2006, protocol written by Wolf 11 WOLF: Discussion with Gregor Kreuzhuber after the Midday Briefing in the EU Commission, Brussels on 05.04.2006, protocol written by Wolf

page 41 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance and online sources leads to a lack of overview, and, the lack of personal resources of the correspondents, and, in addition, spokespersons in Brussels (cp. Wolf 2006a,b) make it harder to deal with the amount of communication and press tasks. Concerning the EU- coverage, it is still true that “the respective country and its internal functional systems pre- dominate in the selection of content.” (Sievert, 1998: 277)

4.2. Communication Structures in the EU

So far, EU communication policies which would be binding for all institutions have not been established. Each EU institution possesses its own communication department although they often collaborate about bigger topics. The European Commission is the most active EU institution concerning communication in the public. The Directorate General Communication is directly submitted to the President of the Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, and the commissioner Margot Wallström who is also the Vice President of the European Commission. The tasks of the Directorate General Communi- cation, the “official organ of the commission” (O`Shea 2003), are to inform the citizens and the media about the commission’s activities and to communicate the contents, reasons and goals of the political measures. In addition, the Commission informs about news and opinions about the EU in its member states. The Directorate General Communication fulfils these tasks by staying in contact with the other Directorates General and services of the Commission who do public relations for their respective fields of work by coordinating the representatives of the Commission in the member states and the media contacts. The present Commissioner for Institutional Relations and Communication, Margot Wallström, plans the measures and strategies of communication together with the Directorate General of Communication. The position of Commissioner for Institutional Relations and Communication was established in august 2004. The president of the Commission, Barroso, wanted to improve the communication strategy by which the EU and the idea of “Europe” are conveyed to the citizens. (cp. Wallström, o.J.) Wallström’s comments on the website of the DG Comm. suggest that her position is an answer to the increasingly EU critical views of the citizens of Europe.

„We politicians are accountable to 450 million Europeans who expect us to work together, to be effective, to communicate with them and to give them a voice. We can never be allowed

page 42 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance to forget that. That is what gives me my political motivation” (Wallström, o.J., homepage). Although the Directorate General of Communication is responsible for a big part of the public relations of the Commission, all the directorates have their own departments of communication which carry out PR-measures and inform the citizens about their field of work. In the Di- rectorate General for Expansion, communication strategies for enlargement of the EU are developed. In planning the external communication, the various director generals work together with the responsible Commissioners and his/her press spokesperson as they have to take into consideration the political goals of the Commissioners. The director generals responsible for the external relations inform the general public in non-EU-countries about the activities of the European Commission, thus the citizens of countries applying for EU membership are also informed. The Commission’s office for official publications is responsible for the publication and sale of all EU institutions’ brochures and documents for public use and also for the marketing thereof. In the online catalogue of the EU bookshop, citizens and enterprises can look up publications and order or download them (cp. representation of EU Commission in Austria, online).

The European Parliament has its own communication department and press service provid- ing the latest information for newspapers, audiovisual media and the internet. The president of the parliament and each political party represented in parliament each have their own homepage. There is also a press archive for the parliament publicizing the latest news about certain topics concerning parliament.

In the EU Council, the Information Working Group designs the communication and information policies as well as all the measures of communication concerning the political tasks of the Council. The work-group Information prepares the political programmes for most of the Council’s decisions concerning external communication.

Also, in the Secretary General of the Council which comprises the administrative directorate generals for all working fields of the Council (agriculture, common market, etc.), there is a Directorate General for Press, Communication and Protocol with a department for communication. The department for communication supports the Information Work Group in developing measures of communication. The press service section of the Directorate General Press, Communication, and Protocol is responsible for the communication with the media and also online. In order to develop a general policy of communication and thus promote good contact with the EU citizens, the Commission, under the guidance of the commissioner in charge of Insti-

page 43 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance tutional Relations and Communication Strategy, Margot Wallström, has created a Whitebook on European Communication Policy (KOM 2006). In its main part it deals with proposals to strengthen, improve and decentralize the dialogue between citizens and policy-makers concerning EU-matters. The Whitebook states that “the ‘public sphere’ within which political life takes place in Europe is largely a national sphere“ (Kom 2006,4). With the Whitebook, the EU wants to introduce a new approach: communication as policy in its own right, building on integration of and dialogue with the EU-citizens, away from communication as mere information about EU-achievements. In part one of the Whitebook, the factors that hamper communication are illustrated as follows (KOM 20906,5): Citizens have no idea about the decisions and the decision-making processes on an EU level and in EU institutions; there is a sense of alienation towards Brussels and a general disenchantment about politics; there is no European public sphere; there are no EU-policy discussions and no obvious forum within which citizens can discuss issues together; and no European political culture – with pan- European political groups and foundations – has, as yet, been developed.

For the design of a European communication policy the Commission sees it necessary to observe the following points:

The EU needs:

• room in the “public sphere” on national and regional levels

• intensification of the discussion beyond the borders of the member states

• consultation and information of citizens by the governments on national, regional and local levels

• the creation of forums to give these debates life; introducing the European dimension in the national discussion

• national authorities, civil society and EU institutions to develop Europe’s place in the public sphere.

In the second part of the Whitebook, the Commission determines five areas for future measures, which will be open for six months after publication on the Feb. 1st, 2006 for con-

page 44 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance sultation by statements by EU institutions, by meetings with stakeholders, and by launching a special web-based citizens’ forum. The proposed measures focus on common principles for communication, on strengthening the role of the citizens, cooperating with the media and new technologies, as well as convey- ing a clear picture of public opinion in Europe and the joint tackling of this task. “The EU should develop its own communication policy at the service of its citizens. It should be based on genuine dialogue between the people and the policymakers and lively political discussions among citizens themselves. People from all walks of life should have the right to fair and full information about the European Union, and be confident that the views and concerns they express are heard by the EU institutions. “(EUK-DE 2006:8) As the EU found a democratic deficit on the European level, the European Commission saw it fit, as a goal, to support initiatives which lead to a stronger involvement of citizens, enterprises and NGO’s in European policymaking (Winkler et al, 2006:378). With the aid of new information and communication technologies, people should be able to participate in the EU-events and a wider public should, thus, be reached. Your Voice in Europe12, an online platform which resulted from this intent, offers a virtual room for discussion and an opportunity to voice one’s opinion in ongoing consultations via especially prepared opinion polls. EU- citizens as well as enterprises and consumers are invited to participate interactively in EU- policy making. Moreover, the online forum helps the EU representatives in their decision- making processes as they are able to take into consideration the wishes and needs of their citizens. Deliberative concepts of democracy, i.e. participation via communication based on arguments, have to see a connection between interest in being advised and interest in public wel- fare (Winkler et al., 2006:381) and, they have to give any person who wants to discuss pub- licly relevant topics the opportunity to participate (Erikson/Fossum, 2000:21 cit. Winkler et al., 2006, 381).

In their study, Winkler et al. have researched the “democratic quality” of the installed consultation and discussion platform Your Voice in Europe from the time of its installation in Janu- ary 2001 till beginning of March 2004. The amount of interactivity and the number of rational critical arguments were the central questions of the research. As the results show, the desire to achieve a wide ranged broad public has not been fulfilled. Only elite groups who already

12 URL: http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice, last access on 05.16.2007

page 45 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance have expert knowledge in EU topics discuss these topics online with other citizens. The participants form a rather homogenous group concerning their values and opinions. Postings with a clear agreement or objection were rather rare. As this constitutes a closed circle of discussion participants “openness and access” to the forum is strongly restricted. Due to the expert participants, the contributions to the discussion were expressed on a high level, although a high number of postings offer lines of argumentation which are easy to follow, and thus the platform distinguishes itself clearly from comparable institutions. The consultations last, on average, three months and are designed not only for the public, but also explicitly for enterprises and other interest groups. Views and values are asked to be explicitly created as a “policy draft” in advance or to evaluate already existing policies. Winkler et al. conclude that “the knowledge of the existence of a consultation process” is dependent on “the participation of resources on specific topics or network interests”. A “professional promo- tion” is missing which “includes all groups of interest”. Therefore, like the “posters” in the discussion forums, the participants in the consultations already comprise expert knowledge. There is no legally binding provision for the Commission to use the results of the consultation questionnaire. In addition, it is not clear which topics were chosen for the consultation and how the results are used. Thus, the design and evaluation of the questionnaires are criti- cized. The simplified presentation of complex problems and the transparent interpretation of the “free-text-fields” are not satisfying for a successful online consultation. At the time Winkler et al.’s study was finished, only 16 % of the population used the internet to gather information about EU topics (EB61full_en, 2004:B32). In Austria only 14 % used the internet (EB61nat_at, 2004:9). A Eurobarometer poll about the e-communication in private households in the year 2006 finds that 54 % of Austrians had “simply disinterest” regarding the use of internet. In the EU this number is 45 % (EB274full_en, 2007: 98). Nevertheless, 40 % of the Austrians have access to the internet in their household which resembles the EU- average (EB274full-en, 2007:72).

4.3. EU-News Management

News management as a “classic” political PR strategy concept tries to influence everyday journalism and to determine news agendas by adapting to media logistics and media formats. However, news management at the EU institutional level is only fragmentary. According to Hahn (Hahn et al. 2001: 289f) the technocratic and economic character of the EU, with its administrative processes (e.g. the European Commission preparing and supervising the de-

page 46 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance cision-making process and implementing EU law), hampers profound journalistic coverage. These dry bureaucratic contents leave little room for media-conform, personalizing, and dramatizing as are the techniques of political news management with its media-centred forms. In its political form, it is more likely to serve negativism, political attacks and de- thematization. It will be difficult, however, to increase EU acceptance via negativism. This is to say that, on the institutional level, only fragmentary implemented news management does not correspond to the media’s news values, formats and logistics. In addition, up to 90% of the background information about the decision-making processes of the Council is passed on to the correspondents as “off the records” (cp. Hahn et.al. 2006: 290). Kreuzhuber (cit. Wolf 2006) also confirms an open, informal culture of dialogue between spokespersons and journalists in Brussels. This underlines the gap between the institutional decision-making forums in Brussels and/or Strasbourg and the member countries as, again, it creates an elitist public presence and the question remains of how to bridge the gap to the national editorial departments. Furthermore, there is the problem that media people on the national and regional level often lack the journalistic EU competence and also fail to take the consequences of EU policy processes on their own countries into consideration (cp. Hahn et.al. 2006: 290).

According to Joseph T. Klapper(1960, cit. Burkhart 1998: 213), persuasive mass communication as a rule enhances views, opinions and behaviour dispositions that the recipients already had. A change in their opinions or attitudes rarely happens, although persuasive mass communication is helpful when it comes to forming opinions and attitudes concerning topics in which the recipients have not formulated an opinion beforehand (Brukhart 1998: 215). What is still true today about Klapper’s theories on efficacy research is that he is against a mono-causal interpretation of the effects of mass communication and, much rather, sees dimensions of influences in the mass media which always enfold their effects on an overall holistic situational level (Burkhart 1998: 216).

There are clues that positive or negative courses of politics and the media have an effect on EU-acceptance or EU-scepticism. Günther Ogris (1994) carried out a PANEL survey before Austria joined the EU. He concluded, in terms of the causes and interactions in the opinion forming processes, that people had opinions about joining the EU first, possibly resulting from either idols or from the rejection of political opponents. Finally, in the positive discussions, the expectation of a positive result in the poll had mobilizing effects on four-fifths of the Austrian population; the “band-wagon-effect” was represented more strongly than the pity- effect (Ogris 1994: 146).

page 47 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

This effect of positive reinforcement is also pointed out by the Fessel-GfK survey (2006) “Atti- tudes towards Europe accompanying the Austrian presidency”. The comparative data of 2005 and 2006 of this representative study about the attitudes towards Europe in the context of the Austrian EU Council’s Presidency show that the interest in EU topics has increased. The attitude towards being an EU-member has improved considerably – this is also due to the positive coverage in and about Austria in the context of the EU Council Presidency. In general, all of the EU-topics form a very marginal part of national coverage; tendencies towards more EU-coverage on the national level prove stronger on certain occasions - such as introducing the EURO or the expansion of 2004. Common ground in the EU media coverage is found by Hahn/Rosenwerth/Schröder (2006) when it comes to ignoring unattractive but still important EU topics. This results in little presentation, observation and necessary control of political processes by the media and journalists. Exceptions are found with topics that stay current such as the Santer-Commission as well as the EU-wide BSE scandal. In summary, regarding EU-public relations and EU-journalism, problems of EU- communication are found as a result of the way the EU system is structured and organized, the fact that a unified European media system is missing, as well as deficits concerning EU journalism, and the information and communication strategies of the EU institutions.

4.4. EU Campaigning

The influence of campaigns on public opinion is growing and media, public relations, politics and the economy deal more and more with it. The reasons for this development due to the growing professionalism of campaign work, a growing number of campaigns and an improvement in the quality of campaign communication – such as moral messages contained in campaigns. The aims of campaigns are to arouse attention, to trust the credibility of the organisation, to reach consent for their own goals and to provoke follow-up actions. These follow-up actions include, for example, the change of behaviour of the recipients or the public discussion of the topics dealt with in the campaign. Examples for campaigns which should have resulted in a change of attitude and behaviour are the anti-smoking campaign or campaigns promoting the use of safety belts in vehicles. The principle of political campaigns is a symbolic mediation of politics designed for the re-

page 48 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance spective target group. The instruments of political campaigns are the “staging” and the reduction of political complexity meeting the needs of the recipients. This way a broad range of public is reached. From the EURO campaign of 2001, Peter Wandaller (today Minister of Finance and in 2001 co-responsible for the campaign of 200113) formulates a number of criteria for successful campaigns and sums them up in the following ten points:

• Creating a political will

• Installing a staff that steers this political will

• Installing a steering committee which coordinates activities

• Determining the focus of the campaign

• Finding partners for the project

• Including the Austrian campaign in the central Brussels campaign

• Defining the Euro-product as the project of a century

• Letting the opponents be heard

• Carrying out a marketing control analysis every quarter of the year and constantly adapting the instruments

• Creating publicity pressure by creating a publicity budget

Introducing the Euro was based on a common political will of the EU and its member states. A strategic communication concept on the level of the member states was created and was successful in bridging the communication gap between the EU and the national level. Over- coming such a communication gap is a special challenge in EU campaigning. Campaigns follow a “communicative double strategy” (Röttger 2002: 16). One part of this strategy is media orientation, i.e. the design of condense and the time structure of campaign events follow the rules of media production and the workday routines of the journalists. More- over, the recipients themselves should feel addressed directly by the campaigns, a strategy which is called direct public orientation. The dialogue oriented campaign is viewed as an ethically responsible form of campaign as the target group has the chance to participate and reflect the contents conveyed, and discussions are intended to be held with the citizens. Especially in conflict situations and with con-

13 Discussion contributions by Peter Wandaller, cit. Wolf (2007).

page 49 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance troversial projects dialogue oriented campaigns are often necessary to create trust and acceptance. The main part of EU campaigns is dialogue oriented, possibly because the EU is a very controversial project at the moment (cp. Röttger 2002: 16 – 32). In the following pages, some EU campaigns will be described as examples.

4.4.1. Expansion Campaign 2004

The EU communication campaigns for the round of enlargements in 2004 were planned by the directorate general enlargement of the Commission, the strategy of communication was published in May 2000. The defined main goals were to inform the citizens of the expansion and to achieve public support of the enlargement process via communication and information. To this end, the Commission developed a number of measures for the continuous spread of the latest information, numbers and facts about the enlargement, as well as for communication with the citizens. The concept to be followed was adapted to the target groups and respective countries and counted on emotions and lively messages on the topic enlargement that would touch people personally and have an influence on forming their opinions. Other important elements of the communication strategy were the dialogue with the citizens and the impulses for the public discussion about the enlargement process, which is to say, it was the main part the EU Commission’s responsibility to develop information and communication about the enlargement. All other tasks were taken delegated to other institutions, mainly the Council and the Parliament. People in leading opinion forming positions of the member and candidate countries – such as politicians, media, single groups of citizens and teachers – received information on a regular basis with the instruction to pass this on in a way that people could understand and relate to in order to initiate and continue a discussion about the enlargement. Electronic media re- placed the traditional brochures and other publications: the EU website was enlarged, designed in a more user-friendly and interactive way, especially regarding the pages concerning the enlargement. A group of experts from the Commission were constantly available for questions from the public concerning the enlargement. The President of the Commission and other commissionaires, spokespersons, and representatives would mention the enlargement in their speeches and public announcements on a regular basis. In addition, the EU institutions were seeking dialogue with the citizens.

page 50 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

A quick and easy media access to the EU institutions was installed to reach a large part of the population via mass media. The Commission’s leading representatives and spokespersons were ready to inform the journalists on a regular basis. The communication measures for the enlargement in the east were decentralized of the many diverse EU institutions and national players. The political players of the communication campaign for the enlargement into the east are the Commission, the Council, Parliament and other EU institutions, national and regional governments and institutions and the delegates of the Commission in the candidate countries. In the field of economic enterprises, unions, and professional associations and out of the civil society, non-governmental institutions, universities and teachers took part in the campaign. In Austria, the representative of the EU Commission created dialogue forums with a circle of opinion forming leaders, says Marc Fähndrich (head of public relations)14, with a focus on the media which was created for all EU candidate countries, as well as organized tours for journalists to the candidate countries. This helps to bring the journalists closer to the economy, culture and identity of the candidate countries. A circle of high ranking journalists were invited who then reported a greater amount than usual and wrote more positive articles. Fähndrich sees a potential for improvement of EU campaigns or communication strategies “in focussing on common grounds, instead of only introducing other countries. The common his- tory, challenges and social threats should be pointed out as, in a Europe that’s getting smaller and smaller (in comparison to India or China), we always have been partners and we will have to stick together in the future” (Fähndrich, Marc, cit. Wolf 2007).

4.4.2. Europe Day 2006

The Europe Day should not be viewed directly as an EU campaign, but as a potential part of a general EU campaign. Since 1985, European integration is celebrated in Europe on May 9, by holding a “Europe Day” or “Schumann Day”. On this day, the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community laid the foundations for the EU. The idea of a Europe Day was formed by the Austrian Council Presidency which wanted to convey the EU motto “Unified in diversity” with a European “Guglhupf” (Austrian cake variety). In all the EU 25 member states, different versions of “Guglhupf” were served in one coffee-

14 Discussions contributions by Marc Fähndrich in: WOLF (2007): Closed Expert Round Table “EU communication –Successes and Failures of EU-campaigns“, Interreg IIIA-Project Austrian-Slovakia „Forum for EUrope“; Da- nube University Krems am 27.2.2007.

page 51 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance house in each capital – with different fillings for each member country. There were also read- ings and discussions in the coffee houses. Politicians, media representatives, intellectuals and interested citizens discussed EU topics. The Europe Day 2006 was an EU communication measure to create a more positive EU at- mosphere in the public. Whether it had an effect on the regional and local level has been left unanswered here. The EU – Latin America summit which took place in Vienna on May 6th, 2006, showed policy marketing fit for the media. Sixty heads of state and governments of the EU, Latin America and the Caribbean discussed, amongst other topics, stronger collaboration, drug dealing, and migration. For the politicians’ spouses, a representative program was created. The summit made it onto the title page of all important Austrian press. Measured by the media presence, it was a successful measure in the sense of political news management – on the national level.

4.5. Summary

Answering research question number 3, “which scientific results already exist concerning the EU public, the EU news management and the EU campaigning and what conclusions can be drawn for the problems discussed here?”, it can be concluded for the topic of EU public that the beginnings of a European public can be detected, but, as there are diverse research methods and missing long term studies, it is impossible to make empirically supported statements about all of Europe. Empirical proof is found, much rather, for the existence of a “presence public” of elites and counter elites in the sense of lobbying and co-governing. The reasons are demonstrated by various factors on the national and European level. The On the EU level, the main reasons can be summarized into three categories: (1) resources and preferences of journalists, (2) attention of the public, (3) resources and preferences of the political players (cp. Gerhards 2001: 18ff). Concerning content, the media coverage focuses on the national country and their functional systems.

Looking at the communication structures of the EU, one mainly finds results concerning research question number 4, “which possible solutions does the EU Commission (DG Com- munication) strive for and how can they be interpreted in the context of the evaluated findings?” In relation to the communication structures it is to be attested that so far no unified EU communication policy exists according to which all institutions would have to work. Neverthe- less, there is an awareness of the problems in regard to this topic as is evidenced by the installation of a responsible commissioner, the creation of the Whitebook on European Com-

page 52 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance munication policy as well as initiatives such as the online platform Your Voice in Europe. Solutions on behalf of the European Commission/DG Communication can be interpreted as follows: the areas of information/communication/media are under the responsibility of two separate directorate generals of the EU Commission: DG Commission (Commissioner Margot Wallström) and DG Information Society and Media (Commissioner Viviane Redding). The communication activities of the single EU institutions, and especially in the direction of the member states, are not coordinated, but go from the EU level directly to the journalists. This contradicts the communication strategy according to which the “communication gap” between the EU and its communicators in the member states should be bridged.

News management as classical political PR concept of strategy tries to bridge the gap by adapting media logistics and media formats to influence the daily business practices of journalism and to determine news agendas. EU-news management – as the research up to the present shows – is only fragmentary on EU institutional level.

Campaigning, i.e. PR work by campaigns, is a measure often used in the EU context to strengthen EU-acceptance (see Europe Day or information campaigns for the Council Presi- dency) and to get a higher acceptance of the latest EU-policies (see campaign introducing the Euro). The success criteria for such campaigns are the same as the common criteria for campaigns. The special challenge for EU-campaigning is, as mentioned in the common communication structures, overcoming the “communication gap” between central EU institutions and the EU member states.

page 53 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

5. Empirical Study: EU Communication Structures

5.1. Communication about EU Topics – Empirical Design

“Who communicates for the EU?” This question, which was posed provocatively at the round table discussions with experts on the topic “EU Communication – Successes and Failures of EU campaigns”, by Silvia Ettl-Huber15, head of the International Center of Journalism at the Danube University Krems, is at the core of the present prototype study. The study concerns itself with two European topics which are significant to Austrians with a focus on the players of EU-communication – also called EU-communicators – as well as EU-communication structures. In relation to the EU communicators, Ettl-Huber16 investigates deeper into the question of the motivations of the communicators. She states that, for the most part, it would be hard for national politicians, who have to be voted into office, to communicate about EU topics. The method of “blaming Brussels”, i.e. making EU institutions responsible for unpopular decisions, and the resulting generally bad acceptance of the EU, makes it hard for national politicians to achieve positive voting results with EU topics. In a discussion between Wolf and Ettl-Huber17, a certain contradiction was found concerning this matter in the White Book where the participation of national communicators is viewed as a key element for success. Ettl-Huber18 sees the motivation of the communicators in EU communication as a key element for successful communication. Negative campaigns, as they were propagated, for example, at the time when Austria joined the EU in 1995 and before, (keyword: blood choco- late) had far reaching effects in the media and amongst the citizens. Thus, in achieving a more positive coverage and a resulting higher EU-acceptance, Ettl-Huber locates a problem in the fact that the motivation of anti-EU communicators seems to be much higher than that of the representatives of the EU. In the following pages, the EU and national press releases will be examined with special attention to who communicates about EU topics and, above all, which topics are presented. For this reason, the topics “cohesion policies” and “roaming fees within the EU” (subsequently called “roaming fees”) were chosen.

15 Ettl-Huber, Silvia, Contributions to discussions, citation from Wolf (2007) 16 Ettl-Huber, Silvia, Contributions to discussions, citation from Wolf (2007) 17 Wolf, Birgit/Ettl-Huber, Silvia, Contributions to discussions, citation from Wolf (2007) 18 Ettl-Huber, Silvia, Contributions to discussions, citation from Wolf (2007)

page 54 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

The reason for choosing the topic of “cohesion policies” is that Austria belongs to the first group of countries which have signed a contract for cohesion policies from 2007 – 2013 with the EU Commission. The Commission has approved eight Austrian Structural Fund Programs for regional support. The emphasis of the programs is on increasing the competitiveness and employment in the Austrian federal states. Since, according to Eurobarometer studies (see chapter 2), the fear of losing one’s job ranks the highest among the Austrians’ main concerns, it can be assumed that the political decision-makers will pay special attention to this topic. There is a communication potential to put structural funding in the context of EU-acceptance and proximity to citizens. The second topic “roaming charges” was chosen because the discussion of roaming charge provisions in the spring of 2007 concerns a large percentage of the Austrian citizens as Aus- tria ranks highest in the EU ranking of the possession and use of mobile phones. The Coun- cil for Commerce, Telecommunication and Energy reached an agreement concerning the regulation of roaming charges in Luxembourg on June 8, 2007. This agreement is the basis for reducing the fees of using mobile phones in the EU foreign countries as well as creating a higher transparency in roaming fees. Again, this provides the potential for positive coverage and connection of citizens. The press coverage of the following institutions was examined concerning the two topics: the European Parliament, the European Commission, responsible commissionaires, the Council of the EU Presidency, the Austrian Parliament – EU, the Austrian government, responsible Austrian Ministers, and the government of Lower Austria.

5.2. Cohesion policies: Analysis of Results

5.2.1. Design of Analysis

All press releases were examined which had the term “cohesion policy” in their title within the period January 1, 2007 to May 18 2007. The last access on the various web pages was completed between May 16th and May 18th, 2007, unless otherwise stated.

page 55 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

5.2.2. Analysis of Results

EU Parliament, Regions and Commerce (1)

EU Commission (34)

Press releases with direct reference to Austria (9)

Press releases with no direct reference to Austria (25)

Danuta Hübner, EU Commissioner for Regional Policies (8)

Press releases with direct reference to Austria (1)

Press releases with no direct reference to Austria (7)

Vladimir Spidla, EU Commissioner for Employment, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities (8)

Press releases with direct reference to Austria (1)

Press releases with no direct references to Austria (7)

Representation of the EU Commission in Austria (0)

Council of the European Union (0)

Council of the Presidency (Chair of the Council) (0)

Committee of the Regions (0)

Austrian Parliament (0)

Austrian Federal Government (2)

Heidrun Silhavy, State Secretary for Regional Politics in the Federal Chancellery (2)

Erwin Buchinger, Minister for Social Affairs and Consumer Protection (0)

Martin Bartenstein, Minister for Economics and Employment (0)

Werner Faymann, Minister for Commerce, Innovation and Technology and Christa Kranzl, State Secretary (0)

The government of Lower Austria (0)

In a period of four and a half months (January to May 2007), from a total of 52 press releases on the EU level, there were eight press releases with direct reference to Austria in the data- base of Midday Express (the Commission’s midday briefing). In addition, there were two more releases from the EU commissioners Vladimir Spidla and one from Danuta Hübner. Therefore, out of 52 press releases concerning the topic of “cohesion policies”, there were 11 releases with information about Austrian cohesion policies (multiple entries possible). Looking at the Austrian political institutions during the same time period, only two press releases were

page 56 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance found, both were from an Austrian politician who presented this news to Austrians. This politician was Mrs. Heidrun Slihavy, the State Secretary for Regional Politics in the Federal Chancellery. On the state level of Lower Austria, there are no press releases (see table 5).

Details of evaluating the number of press releases from the various institutions:

• The press releases from the European Commission are exclusively taken from the Midday Express („News from the Communication Directorate General's midday briefing“)19. A total of 34 press releases were found, nine of which made direct reference to Austria.

• The press room of Commissioner Danuta Hübner (regional politics)20 is linked to the Midday Express News of the Commission. However, from April 25, 2007 onwards, there are no more entries. In addition, all of the Commissioner’s speeches21 can be downloaded (concerning these speeches, see also the analysis of the European Commission – marked “speech” in the comments). The last speech was found on May 15, 2007, which means this page is updated regularly.

• The press room of Commissioner Vladimir Spidla (Employment, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities) is always linked to the news of the EU Commission, the department of Employment, Social Affairs, and Equal Opportunities22, which are again iden- tical to the releases of the Midday Express (sometimes there is a link to the Midday Express News at the end of the report). In addition, all the Commissioner’s speeches23 can be downloaded. Concerning the topic “cohesion policies”, however, there is only one release in the given period of time with the heading “Promoting social development for all” The EU experience of fostering employment and social cohesion as a contribution to the Copenhagen +10 review24.

• The council on Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs did not pub- lish any press releases concerning cohesion policies25.

• Germany had the EU Council Presidency26 in the first half of 2007. There is no news

19 URL: http: //europa.eu/rapid/showInformation.do?pageName=middayExpress&guiLanguage=en,last access on 05.21.2007 20 URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/hubner/speeches/press_de.htm 21 URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/hubner/speeches/speeches_de.htm 22 URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/spidla/news_de.cfm 23 URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/spidla/speeches_de.cfm 24 URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/employment_social/speeches/2005/speech_spidla_130105_en.pdf 25 URL: http: //www.consilium.europa.eu/ cms3_applications/applications/newsRoom/loadBook.asp?BID=79&LANG=4&cmsid=351 26 URL: http: //www.eu2007.de/de/News/Press_Releases/index.html

page 57 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

regarding cohesion policies under the press releases of the homepage of the EU Council Presidency.

• In the press corner on the web site of the Committee of the Regions27, there is no news concerning cohesion politics.

• News from the press agency of the Austrian division of the EU Commission28 concerning cohesion policies are totally missing. The link “current issues” also shows entries up until May 2, 2007. There is no more recent news to be found. A further link leads to the archives of the European newsletters29. The last newsletter, dating No- vember 10th, 2006, concludes that the archive has not been updated. The link “press room of the EU”30 leads to the official press room of the EU where links to the press rooms of the various EU institutions can be found. The Midday Express can be downloaded and the press releases from the past seven days as well as the rapid da- tabase are online. Press releases of the Commission, the Council, the European Economic and Social Affairs Department, the European Court of Justice, the Board of Statistics, and the European Investment bank can be viewed there.

• In the year 200731, the press releases from the Austrian Parliament’s correspondence department “European Union” contain no news concerning “cohesion policies”.

• Under the link “current affairs”32 on the homepage of the Austrian Ministry for Social Affairs and Consumer Protection, Erwin Buchinger, there are no releases to be found about cohesion policies. Also, under current news33 and in the “Archive 2007”34 of the Austrian minister for Employment, Martin Bartenstein, there is no news about “cohesion policies”. In the same regard, there are no entries concerning cohesion policies on the homepages of the Austrian minister Werner Faymann35 and the state secretary Christa Kranzl36 from the Ministry of Commerce, Innovation and Technology.

• There are no entries on cohesion politics on either the homepage of the state government of Lower Austria, where the most current press releases are listed, or in the press archives of the state government of Lower Austria.

27 URL: http://www.cor.europa.eu/de/press/press_releases.htm 28 URL: http://europa.eu.int/austria/presse.htm 29 URL: http://europa.eu/newsletter/previous_de.htm 30 URL: http://europa.eu/press_room/index_de.htm 31 URL: http://www.parlament.gv.at/portal/page?_pageid=908,132294&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL 32 URL: http://www.bmsk.gv.at/cms/site/aktuell.html?channel=CH0002 33 URL: http://www.bmwa.gv.at/BMWA/Presse/Aktuelle+Meldungen/default.htm 34 URL: http://www.bmwa.gv.at/BMWA/Presse/Archiv2007/default.htm 35 URL: http://www.bmvit.gv.at/presse/aktuell/nvm/index.html 36 URL: http://www.bmvit.gv.at/presse/aktuell/mai/index.html

page 58 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

5.3. Mobile Phoning – Roaming

5.3.1. Design of the Study

Within the period of March 9th to May 20th, 2007, all press releases were examined which related to the reduction of roaming fees. The last access on the respective web pages was on May 22, 2007, unless stated otherwise. If possible, press releases in German were taken for the investigation.

5.3.2. Analysis of Results

In a period of two and a half months, in the spring of 2007, and from 17 press releases on behalf of the EU institutions, there is only one press release on the communication agenda of the Austrian Federal government or rather there is only one responsible minister plus one press release on the parliament’s agenda. Again, a communication gap between the central EU institutions and the member state Austria can be detected here; this time, in a relation of 17:2. In both case studies there is no activity of communication on behalf of the federal state of Lower Austria which is included in this study because it is a project partner (see table 6).

EU Parliament, regions and transport (1)

EU Commission (8)

Press releases with direct reference to Austria (9)

Press releases with no direct reference to Austria (25)

Viviane Redding, EU Commissioner for public information and media (6)

Neelie Kroes, EU Commissioner for Competition (0)

Meglena Kuneva Kroes, EU Commissioner for –used protection- (0)

Austrian Representative of the EU Commission (0)

Council of the European Union (0)

Presidency of Council (2)

Committee of the Regions (0)

Austrian Parliament (1)

page 59 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Austrian Federal Government (1)

Werner Faymann, Minister for Commerce, Innovation and Technology (1)

Erwin Buchinger, Minister for Social affairs and Consumer protection (0)

Federal Government of Lower Austria (0)

Table 6: Press releases of the examined relevant EU and Austrian institutions concerning the topic roaming (number of press releases given after the institution in parentheses)

Details of evaluating the number of press releases in the various institutions:

• The press room of Commissioner Viviane Reding37 (public information and media) is linked to either the Midday-Express-News of the commission or to the “Europe’s In- formation Society” of the commission38. In addition, all of the commissioner’s speeches39 can be downloaded. However, there is no speech concerning the topic of roaming in the researched period of time.

• The press room of Commissioner Neelie Kroes40 (Competitiveness) has no entries concerning the roaming debate.

• The press room of Commissioner Meglena Kuneva Kroes41 (Consumer Affairs) has no press releases concerning the topic roaming.

• There are no press releases concerning the discussion of roaming charges in the three examined council configurations of the EU Council: o Transport, Telecommunications and Energy42 o Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs43 o Competition44

• In the first half of 2007, i.e. in the examination period, Germany had the EU Council Presidency. There are two press releases on the roaming discussion to be found on

37 URL: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/comnews.cfm?type=pr 38 URL: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/menu.cfm 39 URL: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/comnews.cfm?type=sp 40 URL: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/kroes/index_de.html 41 URL: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/kuneva/media_corner_en.htm 42 URL: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ cms3_applications/applications/newsRoom/loadBook.asp?BID=87&LANG=4&cmsid=354 43 URL: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ cms3_applications/applications/newsRoom/loadBook.asp?BID=79&LANG=4&cmsid=351 44 URL: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/ cm3_applications/applications/newsRoom/loadBook.asp?BID=79&LANG=4&cmsid=351

page 60 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

the respective website45.

• In the press corner of the web site of the Committee of the Regions46 there is no news concerning the roaming charges.

• Press releases of the Austrian Representative of the EU Commission47 show no entries concerning the roaming debate.

• The link “current news”48 on the homepage of the Austrian minister for Social Affairs and Consumer protection, Erwin Buchinger, contains no press release concerning roaming charges.

• There are no entries on the much discussed cut in roaming charges on both the homepage of the state government49 of Lower Austria, where the most current press releases are listed, and in the press archive50 of the state government of Lower Aus- tria.

5.4. Conclusion

Research question 5, “How do press releases on the chosen topics work on the EU level?” was answered by the above detailed two case studies. On the EU level there is press work to be found on the two topics “cohesion policies” and “roaming charges” with a number of press releases within a longer period of time. With the “cohesion policies” topic there is an uneven relation between the quantity of press releases on EU level and those on the Austrian national level with the ratio being 11:2. This is also considering that only press releases with a given relation to Austria were examined. With the “roaming charges” topic, out of 17 press releases (in two and a half months) on behalf of the EU institutions, only one press release was found on the communication agenda of the federal government and of the parliament respectively. Again, a communication gap with a ratio of 17:2 (EU level – national level) can be observed.

The topic of “roaming charges” was one that was covered on a large scale in the Austrian media. It seems adequate and desirable to collect the information and deliver it to the national level, but this is not done in practice. This gives rise to further studies of the above

45 URL: http://www.eu2007.de/de/News/Press_Releases/index.htm 46 URL: http://www.cor.europa.eu/de/press/press_releases.htm 47 URL: http://europa.eu.int/austria/presse.htm 48 URL: http://www.bmsk.gv.at/cms/site/aktuell.html?channel=CH0002 49 URL: http://www.noel.gv.at 50 URL: http://www.noel.gv.at/presse/inhaltssuche.htm, Search word: Roaming

page 61 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance mentioned difficulties of press coverage between the EU level and the communicators on the national level.

page 62 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

6. Summary of the Results and Conclusion

Research question number six asks, in sum, which conclusions can be drawn from the present study and which strategic theories and recommendations for actions can be deduced. The following conclusion focuses on this question.

In summary, it may be stated that Austria is a country predestined for research concerning the relationship between communication and EU acceptance because polls show that Austri- ans have a relatively low EU-acceptance rate. The number of Austrians who viewed the EU membership as a “good thing” in the year 2005 was 32 %. Among the EU25 member states (before the enlargement in 2007), the average EU-acceptance rate was 50 %. With Austria’s low rate, it is on the top of the ranking of the EU-sceptical countries. Although there are slight fluctuations from poll to poll, Austria is always on top when it comes to EU-scepticism. Almost a quarter (23 %) of the Austrian population considers the EU to be a “bad thing”, in comparison to 16 % on average in the EU25. At the same time, the standard Eurobarometer polls document unemployment, poverty and social marginalisation as the main concerns of EU citizens. This is true, especially for Austria, where 71 % of the respondents evidently fear the outsourcing of work to countries with lower labour costs. From these findings, the first communication potential can be formulated. Fur- ther findings were taken from the results of the empirical study and, then, they were related back to theoretical research results:

I. The Topic of Unemployment

Unemployment as a main concern of the EU25 as well as of the Austrians can be seen as a key factor for communication potential. This is confirmed by the growing unemployment quotas in Austria from 3.5 % in 2000 to 5.2 % in 2005 (Labour market statistics, Annual Report of 2005, Micro-census of the Labour Force, Quick Report 5.8; page 38) and the fear of 71 % of Austrians of job outsourcing to EU member states with lower production costs. Possible solutions lie in strategies to improve the labour market as well as a more differentiated news coverage concerning the background of unemployment, the economic situation and how this relates to the EU. In addition, the topics of tourism and environmental protection and the relationship between the two neighbouring countries Austria and Slovakia can be seen as having

page 63 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance positively connotations in the respective two countries. The exemplary analysis of press coverage about the topic “cohesion policies” found that this topic was hardly taken up by the national communicators, even though it concerns the worries and fears of Austrians in the polls. A communication potential of themes and contents can be anticipated where worries and fears are confronted by appropriate communication activities.

II. Using the Techniques of Communication Work

Scientific research and experts’ comments concerning EU-communication lead to the general assumption that the techniques of communication hold true for EU-communication. This is equally true for press coverage and working on EU-campaigns. Exemplary techniques, such as personalizing and contextualizing of information in press coverage or straightforward concepts for campaigns, can be formulated. These techniques, which are well known in science and communication practices, are often neglected in EU-communication. We are not able to specify the reasons here due to the constraints of this paper. One basic approach for further research in this field would be to examine the job qualifications of the people responsible for EU-communication.

III. Developing Communication Structures

Communication structures are part of effective communication. The special challenge of EU- communication lies in bridging the gap between communication activities of the EU institutions and the passing on of information via the political players to the national arenas. There are a number of difficulties in fulfilling the high standards of communication policies, as the areas of information/communication/media are under the responsibility of two separate general directorates (DGs) of the EU Commission. In addition, it would make sense, in this context and for organisational communication purposes, to follow a communication strategy from top to bottom. However, designing the information and communication structures strategi- cally through central measures on the EU level cannot completely control the reception of these measures by the national representatives. In order to bridge the communication gap between the European and national levels, the synergy effects of a two-way communication from the national to the EU level and vice versa are needed to communicate a consistent

page 64 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance image of the EU and its tasks and values.

IV. Taking into Consideration the Motivations of the EU Communicators

In designing an EU communication structure, it is essential to scrutinize the motivations of the EU-communicators. The method of “blaming Brussels”, i.e. of attributing EU institutions with unpopular decisions, has a double effect on EU-acceptance. For one, the attributions trigger a sinking acceptance immediately, and, as a consequence, the national politicians, who are dependent on their national voters’ esteem, see themselves confronted with the fact that EU- topics will not boost their popularity. So, the effects of “blaming Brussels” cannot be regarded high enough in terms of how its effects EU-acceptance. Counter strategies have to be developed. At the same time, concepts of communication should take into account the actual situation of the national politicians in order to plan realistic measures.

V. Implementing Strategic News Management

News management as a “classic” political PR-strategy concept in adapting to the logistics and formats of the media tries to influence daily journalistic work and to determine the news agendas. Established networks of communication structures, which take into account the motivations of the EU-communicators, are the prerequisites for implementing a strategic EU- news management. While the use of techniques for effective communication help create a better media resonance, news management creates a balance between “internal” EU decision processes and the media processes as well as the reality of EU-citizens.

VI. Communication Mainstreaming

Strategic news management already leads the way to a “communication mainstreaming” which we (the authors) propose. Similar to the process of gender mainstreaming; the communication of EU-topics would be considered in each phase of the work and decision making processes. The consideration of communicability of activities of the EU and its institutions would then be a central part of all decisions and processes. This high significance of communication seems appropriate considering the fact that EU-acceptance is a prerequisite to making political decisions.

page 65 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

7. Bibliography

AIM Research Consortium (ed.): Understanding the Logic of EU Reporting in Mass Media. Analysis of EU media coverage and interviews in editorial offices in Europe. The Case of Germany, Abstract, URL: http://www.aim-project.net/uploads/media/Germany_01.pdf, last access on 05.24.2007.

Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Jahresergebnisse 2004, Mikrozensus-Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbericht 5.8.

Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Jahresergebnisse 2005, Mikrozensus-Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbericht 5.8.

Arbeitsmarktstatistik, Jahresergebnisse 2006, Mikrozensus-Arbeitskräfteerhebung, Schnellbericht 5.8.

Bortz, J./Döring N. (1995): Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation. Springer Verlag: Berlin/Heidelberg.

BRUHN, Manfred (2003): Integrierte Unternehmens- und Markenkommunikation. Strategische Pla- nung und operative Umsetzung. Stuttgart.

BURKART, Roland (1998): Kommunikationswissenschaft. Böhlau: Wien.

EB274full_en – Special Eurobarometer 274/Wave 66.3: E-Communications. Household Survey. Field- work: November-December 2006, Publication: April 2007, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/info_centre/studies_ext_consult/ecomm_househ old_study/eb07_finalreport_v4.pdf, last access on 05.16.2007.

EB61full_en – Eurobarometer 61, Full Report, spring 2004, Opinion Research Group EEIG, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb61/eb61_en.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB61nat_at – Eurobarometer 61, Austrian National Report, spring 2004, European Opinion Research Group EEIG, URL:http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb61/nat_austria.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB62full_de – Eurobarometer 62, Final Report, autumn 2004, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb62/eb62.de.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB62nat_at - Eurobarometer 62, Austrian National Report, autumn 2004, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb62/eb62_austria_nat.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

Eb62nat_sk - Eurobarometer 62, Executive Summary Slovakia, autumn 2004, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb62/eb62_sk_exec.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB63.4first_en - Eurobarometer 63, First Results, spring 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63.4_en_first.pdf, last access on 10.02.2006.

EB63nat_atEb63.4nat_at - Eurobarometer 63, Austrian National Report, spring 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63_nat_at.pdf, last access on 10.02.2006.

EB63.4nat_sk – Eurobarometer 63, Executive Summary Slovakia, spring 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63_exec_sk.pdf, last access on

page 66 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

03.23.2007.

EB63full_de – Eurobarometer 63, Final Report, spring 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb63/eb63_de.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB64first_de - Eurobarometer 64, First Results, autumn 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb64/eb64_first_de.pdf, last access on 03.28.2006.

EB64full_en – Eurobarometer 64, Final Report, autumn 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb64/eb64 _de.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB64nat_at - Eurobarometer 64, Austrian National Report, autumn 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb64/eb64_at_nat.pdf last access on 03.2.2006.

EB64nat_sk – Eurobarometer 64, Executive Summary Slovakia, autumn 2005, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb64/eb64_sk_exec.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB65first_de - Eurobarometer 65, First Results, spring 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb65/eb65first_de.pdf, last access on 09.26.2006.

EB65first_en - Eurobarometer 65, First Results, spring 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb65/eb65first_en.pdf, last access on 09.26.2006.

EB65full_en – Eurobarometer 65, Full Report, spring 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb65/eb65_de.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB65naat_nat - Standard Eurobarometer 65, Austrian National Report, spring 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb65/eb65_at_nat.pdf, last access on 09.26.2006.

EB65nat_sk – Eurobarometer 65, Executive Summary Slovakia, spring 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http: //ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb65/eb65_sk_exec.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

EB66first_de – Standard Eurobarometer 66, First results, autumn 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb66/eb66_highlights_de.pdf, last access on 01.15.2001.

EB66nat_at - Eurobarometer 66, Austrian National Report, autumn 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb66/eb66_at_nat.pdf last access on 03.28.2006.

EB66nat_sk – Eurobarometer 66, Executive Summary Slovakia, autumn 2006, TNS Opinion & Social, URL: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb66/eb66_sk_exec.pdf, last access on 03.23.2007.

ERIKSEN, Erik O./FOSSUM, John E. (2000) (Hg.): Democracy in the European Union. Integration through deliberation? London/New York: Routledge, cit. from: WINKLER, Roman/KOZELUH, Ul- rike/BRANDSTETTER, Günther (2006): Deliberations in a European context: Online Debates und Onli- ne consultations on the EU Platform Your Voice in Europe. In: Langenbucher, Wolfgang R./Latzer,

page 67 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

Michael (Hrsg.): Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wandel – Eine transdisziplinäre Perspektive. VS Verlag: Wiesbaden. S. 378-400.

EUK DE – European Commission – Representation in Germany (Hg.) (2006): EU-News, Themenheft Nr.15, Europa im Dialog. 2.3.2006, URL: http: //80.237.230.148/pdf/eunachrichten/EU- 15_INTERNET.pdf, letzter Zugriff: 09.10.2006, Dow Jones News GmbH: Eschborn.

HAHN, Oliver/ROSENWERTH, Karen K./SCHRÖDER, Roland (2006): News Management zwischen Europa-PR und EU-Journalismus: Theoretische Überlegungen zu einem transnationalen Kommunika- tionskonzept. In: Langenbucher, Wolfgang R./Latzer, Michael (Hrsg.): Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wandel – Eine transdisziplinäre Perspektive. VS Verlag: Wiesbaden. S. 286-295.

KIRCHNER, Karin (2001): Integrierte Unternehmenskommunikation. Theoretische und empirische Bestandsaufnahme und eine Analyse amerikanischer Großunternehmen. Wiesbaden : Westdt. Verlag.

KOM (2006) - Kommission der Europäischen Gemeinschaften: Weißbuch über eine Europäische Kommunikationspolitik. Brüssel, den 1.2.2006 (Version 35 endgültig, DE)., URL: http://ec.europa.eu/communication_white_paper/doc/white_paper_de.pdfBrüssel. last access on 09.27.2006.

KROEBER-RIEL, Werner (1987): Informationsüberlastung durch Massenmedien und Werbung in Deutschland. In: Die Betriebswirtschaft, 47. Jg., 1987, S. 257-264.

KROEBER-RIEL, Werner(1988): Kommunikation im Zeitalter der Informationsüberlastung. In: Marke- ting ZFP, 10. Jg., Nr. 3, 1988, S. 182-189.

LECHNER, Christine (2007): Telephone Interview with Reinhard Eichwalder (Statistik Austria) on 05.10.2007.

MACHILL, Marcel/BEILER, Markus/FISCHER, Corinna (2006): Europa-Themen in Europas Medien – die Debatte um die Europäische Öffentlichkeit: eine Metaanalyse medieninhaltsanalytischer Studien. In: Langenbucher, Wolfgang R./Latzer, Michael (Hrsg.): Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wan- del – Eine transdisziplinäre Perspektive. VS Verlag: Wiesbaden. S. 132-155.

MERTEN, Klaus (2004): Politik in der Mediengesellschaft. Zur Interpenetration von Politik- und Kom- munikationssystem. HLV Kommunikationsmanagement, Ausg. November.

Mikrozensus Jahresdurchschnitt 2002 (tel. Auskunft Dr. Reinhard Eichwalder, Statistik Austria, 09.05.2007).

MOSER, Karin (2007): „Politiker wissen nicht, warum am 9. Mai der Europatag gefeiert wird“. In: Der Standard. Austrian independent newspaper. May 10th, 2007, 6. Tulln: STANDARD Verlagsgesell- schaft m.b.H.

O’SHEA, Dervla (2003): Information der Medien. In: Amt für amtliche Veröffentlichungen der Europäi- schen Gemeinschaften: Im Dienste der Bürger Europas - So arbeitet die Europäische Kommission, S.19.

OGRIS, Günther(1994): Der Diskussionsprozess vor der EU-Abstimmung. In PELINKA, Anton (Hg.):

page 68 of 69 IJC – International Journalism Center Danube University Krems

Study: Potentials in Communication to Increase EU-Acceptance

EU-Referendum. Zur Praxis direkter Demokratie in Österreich, Wien: Signum Verlag, 121-148.

PRANTNER, Christoph/BAUMANN, Birgit/MORAVEC, Michael/PÜTTER, Martin/SCHUSTER, Ro- bert/BRÄNDLE, Stefan (2006): „Café d´Europe“: 27 [sic] Mitgliedsstaaten, 27 [sic] Kaffeehäuser, 27 [sic] -mal Nachdenken über Europa. In: Der Standard. Austrian independent newspaper. May 10th 2006, 2. Tulln: STANDARD Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.

RÖTTGER, Ulrike (2002): PR-Kampagnen. Über die Inszenierung von Öffentlichkeit. 2. überarb. und erg. Aufl. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.

SCHALLER, Stefan (2006): Gelebte Nachbarschaft in der Grenzregion Niederösterreich – Slowakei 2001-2005. Telephone Survey of the Sozialwissenschaftlichen Studiengesellschaft (SWS) im Auftrag der Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Europapolitik. Vienna.

SCHRASTETTER, Jan/STRAUSS, Maria (2006): Living Neighborhoods in the border region Brati- slavský kraj / Trnavský kraj – Lower Austris 2006, Interviews with Mayors. Upper Austria.

SIEVERT, Holger (2006): Europäischer Journalismus. Westdeutscher Verlag: Opladen.

STRÜBING, Jörg (2004): Grounded Theory. Zur sozialwissenshcaftlichen und epistemologischen Fundierung des Verfahrens der empirisch begründeten Theoriebildung. VS Verlag: Wiesbaden.

THEIS-BERGLMAIR, Anna Maria (2003): Organisationskommunikation, Theoretische Grundlagen und empirische Forschungen, Westdeutscher Verlag: Opladen.

WALLSTRÖM, Margot (o.J.): Homepage of the European Commission http://ec.europa.eu/commission_barroso/wallstrom last access on 06.30.2007.

WINKLER, Roman/KOZELUH, Ulrike/BRANDSTETTER, Günther (2006): Deliberation in a european context: online debates and online consultations on the EU Platform Your Voice in Europe. In: Lan- genbucher, Wolfgang R./Latzer, Michael (Hrsg.): Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wandel – Eine transdisziplinäre Perspektive. Wiesbaden. S. 378-400.

WOLF, Birgit (2006a): Discussion with Thomas Schmidt before the Midday Briefing in the EU Commis- sion, Brussels on 05.04.2006.

WOLF, Birgit (2006b): Discussion with Gregor Kreuzhuber after the Midday Briefing in the EU Com- mission, Brussels on 05.04.2006.

WOLF, Birgit (2007): Closed Expert-Round Table “EU communication - successes and failures of EU- campaigns“, Interreg IIIA-Project Austria- Slovakia „Forum for EUropa“; Danube-University Krems on 02.27.2007.

page 69 of 69