The interview between Tania Napravnik (COMMIT) and Ernest Taqi (Austrian Academy of Sciences) provides information on current changes in the media landscape und public discourse in the European Union and stresses the importance of independent media for democracy.
TN: The research project MeDeMap – Mapping Media for Future Democracy (2023–2026) aims to create an interactive map of the European media landscape in terms of media supply and demand and its future developments. The aim is to explore which media are currently available and used by whom, and what Europeans are expecting from media in terms of their democratic understanding. Ernest, I would be interested to know how media use is changing nowadays?
ET: Firstly through the digitalization of media – more and more people are getting their news via digital channels such as online news sites, social media or streaming platforms. Traditional media such as television or newspapers are losing reach and importance. There are fewer and fewer print media – this is a clear indication that media use has changed significantly and is likely to change even more in the coming years.
Secondly, we have seen changes in media use in recent years as a result of technological development and the spread of social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Twitter. Social media are nowadays key sources of information, especially for young people. In addition, news is spread very quickly on social media platforms, such as AI-generated images or videos, i.e. fake news. This has the potential to strongly and quickly influence public opinion.
The third reason I would give for the changes in media use is the personalization of data. We keep seeing algorithms on social media and news sites that personalize content based on users’ preferences. This means that people often only see information that they like, which can lead to the formation of filter bubbles and echo chambers.
The last reason I would say is that citizen journalism is an important part of the public discourse nowadays. Thanks to smartphones and social media, every citizen can share information and disseminate it very quickly. This democratization of news production leads to a wider variety of perspectives in the media landscape on the one hand and raises questions about the quality and credibility of information in the media landscape on the other hand.
TN: What do these changes mean for public discourse?
ET: The fragmentation of the information landscape is of central importance here. This means that the diversity of information sources can lead to ‘divisions’ in the public sphere, in which different groups and individuals consume different facts or narratives. This can make social cohesion and shared discourse more difficult. It also means that the acceleration of the news cycle, for example the rapid dissemination of the news, leads to an increased pressure on the media to report very quickly. Such urgency can affect the quality of reporting, as there is less time for thorough research. Every media outlet wants to be the first to deliver news to citizens immediately.
Social media are carriers of the fragmentation of the information landscape. On the one hand, they are platforms for public debates and enable citizens to actively participate in political discussions. This can strengthen democratic participation but also comes with the risk of ‘hate speech’ and extremism in various forms and facets. On the other hand, fake news spreads quickly and easily on social media. Disinformation can in turn undermine trust in the public, the media and political institutions.
TN: In some countries, such as Poland and Slovenia, the media are subject to extreme restrictions. In 2023, the Minister of Culture Bartłomiej Sienkiewicz announced the formal dissolution of public television and radio in Poland. In 2021, press freedom and the future of journalism in Slovenia were under serious threat due to Prime Minister Janša’s policies. To what extent is state media censorship critical for democracy?
ET: State media censorship may be extremely detrimental for a democracy for several reasons. Freedom of the press is a foundation of democracy, therefore shouldn’t be restricted in the case of state media censorship. If this is the case, citizens will have no access to independent media and information, which impairs their ability to make informed decisions.
Furthermore, independent media play a crucial role in monitoring governments and other institutions in power for transparency and accountability. They expose wrongdoing and ensure that the government is held accountable for its actions. Without independent media, this would not be the case and the ability to expose abuse of power would be severely limited.
When the state has control over the media, it can manipulate reporting and ‘give free rein’ to its agenda. This leads to a distorted portrayal of events and issues that do not correspond with reality, undermining democratic processes and jeopardizing journalistic independence. Journalists work under high pressure – critical reports by journalists could put their lives in danger. The examples from Poland and Slovenia show how quickly press freedom and thus democracy itself can be jeopardized. In the case of Poland, the dissolution of public broadcasting raised concerns. In Slovenia Prime Minister Janša’s policies have severely restricted press freedom and put journalism under pressure. These developments, especially in European countries, are alarming as they severely undermine democratic discourse and citizens’ rights. It is therefore crucial that we stand up for the protection of media freedom and take action against state censorship measures.
TN. Is there anything else you would like to add to our interview?
ET: I would just like to emphasize once again how important the role of the media is for a functioning democracy. The media is of course not only a source of information, but also a guardian of truth and a platform for public discourse. Through projects like MeDeMap — Mapping Media for Future Democracy, we can better understand how media fulfil these functions and where there is room for improvement. I would also like to point out that the results of our research are of great importance not only for science, but also for politics and society. They offer valuable insights and concrete recommendations on how we can strengthen the media landscape and thus our democracy. Our aim is to develop strategies and improve the quality of media coverage and strengthen the democratic process by promoting an informed and engaged citizens
The whole radio interview is available online in German: https://cba.media/666488 (Produced by Tania Napravnik on the 10th of June 2024).
Tania Napravnik (COMMIT) participates in the MeDeMAP project focusing on public perception of the connection between media and democracy; trust and distrust in media and democratic institutions; possible implications of audience practices in terms of social agency and political participation. She did qualitative research on media audiences in Austria and Germany.
Ernest Taqi (Austrian Academy of Sciences) focuses on analyzing and evaluating media coverage and its influence on the public and political decision-making processes. He is analyzing how the media present political issues in different EU countries and what role they play in shaping public opinion and promoting democracy.