What Happened to the Public Sphere? The Networked Public Sphere and Public Opinion Formation

Author(s):  
Jonas Kaiser ◽  
Birte Fähnrich ◽  
Markus Rhomberg ◽  
Peter Filzmaier
Author(s):  
Julie Firmstone

Editorial journalism and newspapers’ editorial opinions represent an area of research that can make an important contribution to our understanding of the relationship between the press and politics. Editorials are a distinctive format and are the only place in a newspaper where the opinions of a paper as an organization are explicitly represented. Newspapers and the journalists who write editorials play a powerful role in constructing political debate in the public sphere. They use their editorial voice to attempt to influence politics either indirectly, through reaching public opinion, or directly, by targeting politicians. Editorial journalism is at its most persuasive during elections, when newspapers traditionally declare support for candidates and political parties. Despite the potential of editorial opinions to influence democratic debate, and controversy over the way newspapers and their proprietors use editorials to intervene in politics, editorial journalism is under-researched. Our understanding of the significance of this distinctive form of journalism can be better understood by exploring four key themes. First, asking “What is editorial journalism?” establishes the context of editorial journalism as a unique practice with opinion-leading intentions. Several characteristics of editorial journalism distinguish it from other formats and genres. Editorials (also known as leading articles) require a distinctive style and form of expression, occupy a special place in the physical geography of a newspaper, represent the collective institutional voice of a newspaper rather than that of an individual, have no bylines in the majority of countries, and are written with differing aims and motivations to news reports. The historical development of journalism explains the status of editorials as a distinctive form of journalism. Professional ideals and practices evolved to demand objectivity in news reporting and the separation of fact from opinion. Historically, editorial and advocacy journalism share an ethos for journalism that endeavors to effect social or political change, yet editorial journalism is distinctive from other advocacy journalism practices in significant ways. Editorials are also an integral part of the campaign journalism practiced by some newspapers. Second, research and approaches in the field of political communication have attributed a particularly powerful role to editorial journalism. Rooted in the effects tradition, researchers have attributed an important role to editorials in informing and shaping debate in the public sphere in four ways: (1) as an influence on readers, voters, and/or public opinion; (2) as an influence on the internal news agendas and coverage of newspapers; (3) as an influence on the agendas and coverage in other news media; and (4) as an influence on political or policy agendas. Theorizing newspapers as active and independent political actors in the political process further underpins the need to research editorial journalism. Third, editorial journalism has been overlooked by sociological studies of journalism practices. Research provides a limited understanding of the routines and practices of editorial journalists and the organization of editorial opinion at newspapers. Although rare, studies focusing on editorial journalism show that editorial opinion does not simply reflect the influence of proprietors, as has often been assumed. Rather, editorial opinions are shaped by a complex range of factors. Finally, existing research trajectories and current developments point to new challenges and opportunities for editorial journalism. These challenges relate to how professional norms respond to age-old questions about objectivity, bias, and partisanship in the digital age.


2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 216-257
Author(s):  
Fahad Hashmi

Considering the role played by Rashtria Sahara, an Urdu daily newspaper that took recourse to the democratic practice of questioning and challenging the hegemonic formation of the maligned image of Islam and the faith community vis-à-vis terrorism in the discursive arena, that is, the public sphere, this article tries to understand the role of the Urdu language media in shaping the public opinion and mobilising people from within the community. To this end, first, the article seeks to comprehend the present configuration of the Indian public sphere keeping in view its colonial origin. Moreover, the ‘othering’ of Muslims in postcolonial India that has colonial roots, too, has been understood through the idea of ‘interior frontiers’. Second, the role and practices of the Indian state towards Muslims have been taken into account. And, the final section analyses strategies that were put to use by the newspaper to contest the hegemonic formation, which paved the way for social movement to emerge.


2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. 1034-1051 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Zerback ◽  
Nayla Fawzi

In modern media environments, social media have fundamentally altered the way how individual opinions find their way into the public sphere. We link spiral of silence theory to exemplification research and investigate the effects of online opinions on peoples’ perceptions of public opinion and willingness to speak out. In an experiment, we can show that a relatively low number of online exemplars considerably influence perceived public support for the eviction of violent immigrants. Moreover, supporters of eviction were less willing to speak out on the issue online and offline when confronted with exemplars contradicting their opinion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document