Media Coverage of Government Policies and Public Satisfaction with Information Provision and Policy Results
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Paper submitted for the International Communication Organization, Dresden, 2006 Media coverage of government policies and public satisfaction with information provision and policy results Jan Kleinnijenhuis and Anita M.J. van Hoof Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Department of Communication Science De Boelelaan 1081 1081 HV Amsterdam e-mail: [email protected] ; [email protected] Acknowlegment The authors would like to thank the Rijksvoorlichtingsdienst, which commissioned the data collection on which this paper rests. The authors are indebted much to dr. Dirk Oegema (dept. of Communication Science Vrije Universiteit) and dr. Jan A. de Ridder (University of Amsterdam, dept. of Communication Science) who participated in the research project on which this paper rests, as well as to Wouter H. van Atteveldt MSc and dr. P.C. Ruigrok whose contributions to the research project were invaluable also, and, last but not least to the coders in the research project. Topics: Public information, media effects Abstract Public information has not gained much attention in the literature on political communication, although its importance is beyond discussion. The research question of this paper asks how the news on government policies influences satisfaction with government policy. Apart from well known hypotheses such as agenda setting and priming, hypotheses are tested that deal with the question whether the government tries to increase policy satisfaction by communicating ambitions (it’s a mess, but we will do something against it) or by communicating successes (everything under control, due to us). The data to test the hypotheses come from a fourfold survey study to tap aspects of satisfaction with the Dutch government’s policy with regard to 55 policy issues in addition to a longitudinal content analysis of 24 newspapers to unravel the media coverage of these issues. The results show dissatisfaction everywhere. Increase of satisfaction by the communication of ambitions rather than by the communication of results appears to be the rule. The diffusion of negative perceptions of real world conditions may be a side effect of the latter. 2 Introduction This study asks how public information contributes to the satisfaction or dissatisfaction of citizens with government policies. Public information efforts, “irrespective of their importance for the public’s welfare, do not make it onto the radar screens of social science researchers”, according to a recent review of Graber (2005: 482, 497). Remarkably enough, satisfaction with government policies is nevertheless believed to be one of the key determinants not only of electoral choices but also of public participation (Mueller, 2003). Governments use the Internet, public libraries and their own records departments to disclose policy information, press releases and parliamentary debates. Interested citizens and citizens with an interest will find their way to obtain the information sought for. Governments use ads to further specific policy aims (e.g. reducing cigarette smoking or firework risks). Most citizens obtain most of their information on government policies from the news, however, which may explain why politicians and public servants spend much time and effort to influence citizen perceptions and citizen satisfaction by framing the issues for journalists (Jacobs & Shapiro, 2000). Citizens use the news in very different ways. Some will only retain the endlessly repeated highlights of the news, whereas others will develop a detailed cognitive map of the political landscape. Satisfaction with government policies may be based on a superficial impression of government policy, but also on detailed knowledge about it. In both cases, civilians retrieve information from issue news. Satisfaction or dissatisfaction from citizens with government policies is also important because it will ultimately influence the overall evaluation of the government. Therefore, the research question in this paper is how the news on government policies influences satisfaction with government policies. Theory From the point of view of the government, public information provision is the key to open the gateways to the general public. In effect, governments subsidize the news industry with all types of facilities (press rooms, press meetings, interviews, press releases, leaking of confidential information) to put their information in the press (Cook, 1998). Satisfaction with the information on government policies is nevertheless one of the least studied variables in political communication. 3 A government can use different strategies in its communication of policy intentions and policy results. Table 1 gives an elementary overview of four possible communication strategies of a government with respect to real world developments, based on two dimensions. First, the communication strategy depends on the way the government defines the real world situation towards which its policy decisions are directed. In their honeymoon weeks a new governments may emphasize evil negative developments to persuade the citizens that the policy of the previous governments should be eradicated. Alternatively, a government may emphasize good developments, for example to get reelected in the next campaign. Second, the communication strategy depends on how the government formulates its goals: as focused on the Evil – in that case the government will act towards eradicate the observed evil or preventing the evil to come – or as focused on its will to promote the Good. The latter dimension of gains versus losses, or promotion versus prevention, has recently attracted much scholarly interest (Higgins, 1998; Shah, Kwak, Schmierbach, & Zubric, 2004). Table 1: a fourfold typology of communication strategies Government direction Towards the Evil Towards the Good (loss frame, prevention focus) (gain frame, promotion focus) Evil Ambition communication Eradicate the observed Evil (1) Strive for the Good (2) Good Success communication Prevent the Evil from coming (3) Claim what is Good (4) Real Real world condition The first communication strategy tells a story about the Evil (e.g. terrorism, unemployment), but that the government will eradicate it. The second communication strategy tells that the situation is evil now, but that the government strives for the Good (e.g. democracy in Iraq). In this case, the government will strive for something unseen before. These two strategies can be seen as a prevention focused and a promotion focused variety of ambition communication . The third communication strategy tells the story that the real world situation is good now but that the government actively prevents the Evil from coming (e.g. early warning systems to trace terrorist attacks). The fourth communication strategy praises government policy because the Good (e.g. freedom) is being preserved. The last two communication strategies are prevention focused and promotion focused variations of success communication . Different communication strategies can be chosen for different issues, but once a communication strategy is chosen, the government cannot switch fast from one strategy to another without taking the risk of becoming unbelievable. 4 The nature of election cycles implies that governments that come to power, have to shift one way or another from the communication of the ambition that the government will eradicate the ruins that can be observed everywhere (and for which a previous government can be held responsible) (1) towards success communication that the government is responsible for the positive developments that are observed everywhere (4). Whereas in the age of newspapers a media silence could be interwoven in the years in between elections, the nature of the modern publicity process implies that this is not an option anymore. Policy statements and reactions to statements from others have to be provided on an instant basis, thereby increasing the risk of mixing incompatible story lines and the risk that the public will distrust the government. Governments that are reelected will more often start with strategy two (strive for the Good: let us finish our job) or from strategy three (prevent the Evil from coming: you still need us), and not use strategy one, since it will define their own policy as a failure. Satisfaction with governmental policy can be derived from this classification of communication strategies. The first question is whether or not people agree with the definition of the real world situation as sketched by the government in the news. If so, they will be satisfied with the agenda of issue importance of the government as presented in the news. The next question is whether citizens recognize a government communication strategy. Are they satisfied with the information provided by the government? The third question is whether or not citizens are satisfied with the policy results. Therefore, satisfaction is not a one- dimensional concept. A threefold distinction should be made between awareness of the importance of the issues addressed by government policies, satisfaction with the information provided by the government in the news, and satisfaction with the outcomes of government policies according to the news. The three subsections below deal with the expected effects of the news that could have an influence upon these aspects of satisfaction. Awareness of the importance of the issues addressed by the government Before people can start evaluating the government policy regarding an issue as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory,