Presentation by Jennifer A. Yoder Friday, 28 March 2014 Moscow State University “POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS, MEDIA CULTURES, AND NATIONAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS.

Presentation by Jennifer A. YoderFriday, 28 March 2014Moscow State University

“POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS, MEDIA CULTURES, AND NATIONAL

ELECTION CAMPAIGNS IN GERMANY AND THE UNITED STATES”

GREETINGS FROM COLBY COLLEGE IN WATERVILLE, MAINE USA

interaction between politics and the media communication relationships between political actors and

journalists

norms of actors in political communications: journalists and consumers of media

structures and rules of political communication market-based systems (minimal regulation of the media) public ownership (significant regulation of broadcast media

Mediatization of politics – importance of visual media

Expansion of new types of media and content possibilities

FAMILIAR THEMES FROM MEDIA STUDIES

Themes from comparative politics

Impact of particular political institutions on political culture on political

communications culture

Why compare the USA and Germany?

Democratic experience, history

Constitutional/legal norms Political institutional

landscape US pluralism,

libertarianism; winner-take-all majoritarian elections; presidentialism

German consensus-oriented democratic system; party-centered, parliamentarism

Structural conditions of the political and media systems matter

Shape media roles, behavior of producers and consumers of media

Political communication systems in Germany and USA represent “party-political” and “media-oriented” types

origins and development of the media systems

key political institutional features of each case

Implications for political communications cultures

election campaigns in recent years

STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

Media Context

First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

Traditional Big Three broadcast companies

Public Broadcasting Corporation since 1967

Media a political institution

UNITED STATES

Political Institutional Context Presidential system Weak party system Campaign finance system

UNITED STATES

Political Communications CultureRole of media as link between candidate and the public

Increasing editorializing Shift away from issue-based media coverage to Horse-race Strategy and tactics of campaign Coverage of a “war” or a story with plots,

performers Emphasis on opinion polls, candidates’ standing

in them

UNITED STATES

Impact on US election campaigns No limitations on political speech

Candidate-centeredProfessionalized campaignsCommercialized – money and media drive

UNITED STATES

Impact on US election campaignsNo provision for free access to media for political parties – voluntary program in 1996 to offer free airtime

News coverage of “events” like Presidential Debate

Paid access in form of “spots”Museum of the Moving Image, The Living Room Candidate

Political Communications Lab, Stanford University

UNITED STATES

2004 Bush campaign spent $367 million, while Kerry campaign spent $328

2008 Obama campaign spent $730 million, McCain campaign spent $333 million

2012 Obama and Romney each over $1 billionCongressional spending in 2012

Average winner in House of Representatives $1.5 million; average loser $496,000

Average winner in Senate $11.4 million; average loser $7.4 million Source: Center for Responsive Politics,

www.opensecrets.org

SPENDING STATISTICS

SPENDING IN THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

Presidential Election Expenditures on Media

Unspecified media buys $594,690,686

Web ads $94,291,103

Media consulting $30,095,195

Media production $17,885,512

Miscellaneous media $15,438,098

Broadcast ads $8,548,406

Print ads $2,398,810

Source: Center for Responsive Politics, www.opensecrets.org

Media coverage of political advertising: the “adwatch”

Competition to be fi rst: the 2000 presidential election debacle

2012 and digital outreach

ROLE OF JOURNALISTS

Media Context Post-totalitarian democracy British public service model Accountability

federalism proporz principle

GERMANY

Strong position of political partiesMulti-party systemCampaign finance system

GERMANY’S POLITICAL INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXT

Implications for German pol it ical communications system

Impact on election campaigns

Brief campaign period

Campaign spending far less, so politicians spend little time fund-raising

GERMANY

Each party creates one 90-second advertisement for broadcast

Number of times aired based on proportionality principle (share votes in last election)

Rarely do other groups create ads – Metalworkers’ Union (IG)

BROADCASTS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk06yfbXQYg

Featuring Chancellor Angela Merkel:

“I have to be sure that we do the right thing. The right thing isn’t always what is demanded most loudly. The right thing is what in the end will help people. Germany is in a good position: a strong economy, more people in employment than ever before – this is not self-evident, this is something we have achieved together. This should not be put at risk with higher taxes and more social security payments.”

CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC UNION/CDU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_VBj__W5-Q

Featuring chancellor candidate Peer Steinbrück

“That is why I want to be federal chancellor. Because Germany has been thrown off course and things must become more just in our country. So I’m asking for your vote.”

SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY (SPD)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRpJF84byXo#t=32

Featuring a (fake) naturalist discussing the common snail (the CDU/FDP government)

“As they linger in their natural resting place we can see that, due to their lack of spines, they do not orient themselves with an inner compass but just point their feelers whichever way the wind is blowing.”

THE GREENS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZvhIyIK8OQ#t=38

THE LEFT PARTY

CHANCELLOR CANDIDATE “DUELS” ON TELEVISION

PLACARDS STILL IMPORTANT

THE LIBERALS (FDP)

THE GREENS

THE LEFT PARTY

NEW PARTIES

FAR RIGHT PARTIES

CONCLUSIONS