The Agenda-setting Theory: Do We Live in Democracies or Mediocracies?

Who isn’t annoyed by the news that constantly recurs in the global media, repeating itself to the point of exhaustion, with only a few topics receiving focused attention? Does this pose a threat to Democracy? This article discusses the agenda-setting theory, which contends that the media instructs us on what topics to consider rather than what ideas to pursue. In fact, media organisations’ and the media ecosystem’s larger underlying ideologies or prejudices can be reflected in the restricted coverage and recurrence of particular themes. Are we living in a Democracy or in a Mediocracy? Numerous elements have a role in this phenomenon:

1. Editorial Bias:The editorial position of the media outlet, which can be impacted by political, cultural, or economic prejudices, has an impact on decisions regarding which news stories are covered and how they are presented. This may result in an emphasis on specific themes or storylines that suit the values and interests of the medium or its audience.
2. Economic Pressures: Because they have to make money, media corporations tend to give priority to stories that they think would draw in the greatest number of readers, viewers, or listeners. The emphasis on dramatic or conflict-driven news at the cost of other significant but somewhat less instantly attractive topics might result from this economic pressure.
3. Cultural Hegemony: News coverage may be considered within the umbrella of the idea of cultural hegemony, which is the perpetuation of the values of the dominant culture in society. By concentrating on topics that appeal to their main audiences, media from nations with substantial worldwide influence (such as the United States or several European countries) frequently sets the tone for international news and shapes the agenda for news coverage worldwide.
4. Access and Resources: Significant resources are needed to cover worldwide news, such as interpreters and foreign reporters. There may be disparities in coverage around the globe as a result of media outlets focusing on regions where they have more access to resources.
5. Echo Chamber Effect: The abundance of information sources in today’s digital media environment hasn’t always translated into a more diverse range of news coverage. Instead, echo chambers are frequently produced by social media algorithms, where users are given content that confirms their own opinions and interests, reinforcing the coverage’s constrained reach.

Both media outlets and readers must work together to increase the variety of news coverage. Media organisations should make an effort to invest in reporting on a greater range of issues and to expand their coverage internationally. By looking for and interacting with news sources that present a variety of viewpoints and coverage of underreported areas and subjects, consumers may help to encourage this. Initiatives that support media literacy can also assist viewers in assessing news sources critically and stimulate the desire for thorough and diversified news coverage.

Global news coverage’s restricted scope has a negative impact on society and our comprehension of the globe as a whole. Raising our level of criticism of this occurrence brings to light more serious problems and possible losses for humanity:

1. Loss of Diversity: News uniformity restricts people’s access to a wider range of cultures, viewpoints, and narratives. This creates a world viewed through a limited lens and limits our capacity to comprehend and value the diverse fabric of global communities. Diverse perspectives and experiences lose significance and exposure when global news stories take precedence over local and cultural tales.
2. Misrepresentation and Stereotyping: A distorted image of particular places and peoples is created when they are solely associated with poverty, violence, or natural disasters. This leads to misconceptions and prejudices. This can have an impact on immigration laws, international relations, and intercultural relationships by sustaining prejudices and stigmas that are difficult to overcome.
3. Neglect of Important topics: A lot of important but less dramatic topics get unreported.
4. Neglect of Crucial Issues: A lot of important but less dramatic stories don’t get enough attention. Underreported issues include environmental catastrophes, social injustices, health inequities, and cultural accomplishments that are not part of the mainstream media. Neglect can prevent resources from being mobilised, slow down international responses to urgent problems, and reduce awareness of good progress and solutions that are being made globally.
5. Democratic Deficits: The basis of democracy is an informed public. Focusing just on a small number of stories can result in a population that lacks knowledge of many significant topics, which lowers the standard of democratic participation and debate. Citizens’ capacity to hold power institutions responsible and participate in informed decision-making is undermined when they lack a comprehensive understanding of local and global processes.
6. Erosion of Empathy and Solidarity: Experiencing a range of narratives and viewpoints is essential in cultivating empathy and a feeling of worldwide unity. Media coverage might unintentionally reduce our empathy by emphasising a small number of stories, which makes it more challenging to rally support for international crises and cooperate solutions to common issues.

All things considered, the effects of a limited media focus go much beyond a simple deficiency of diversity in news reporting. They touch on broader social concerns that have an impact on our perceptions of one another and the outside world, how we interact with one another locally and globally, and ultimately how we tackle the difficult problems that mankind faces. Including a wider range of stories and viewpoints in media coverage is crucial to creating a more knowledgeable, compassionate, and cooperative global community.

Both media producers and consumers must work to promote a more diversified media environment and combat the narrowness of global news coverage. The following tactics and activities can assist in reaching this objective:

For Consumers:

1. Seek Out Diverse Sources: Actively look for news outlets, journalists, and platforms that offer varied perspectives, especially those focusing on underreported regions or issues. This could include international news services, independent media, and platforms dedicated to niche topics.
2. Support Independent Media: Many independent media organizations strive to cover stories overlooked by mainstream outlets. By subscribing to, donating to, or simply sharing their content, you can support their mission and help diversify the news ecosystem.
3. Use Social Media Wisely: Social media can be a double-edged sword, offering both echo chambers and gateways to diverse perspectives. Follow a broad array of accounts from different cultural and geopolitical backgrounds to ensure a wider range of viewpoints in your feed.
4. Engage with Content Critically: Develop media literacy skills to critically evaluate the news you consume. This includes understanding the source’s perspective, questioning biases, and considering what might be missing from the coverage.
5. Demand Better Coverage: Audiences have power. By engaging with media outlets through social media, feedback forms, or viewership choices, you can demand more comprehensive and diverse coverage.

For Producers:

1. Invest in Global Reporting: News organizations should invest in correspondents and bureaus around the world, especially in underreported regions, to capture a broad spectrum of stories.
2. Promote Diversity Within: Media companies can strive for diversity among their staff and leadership. A diverse team is more likely to produce a variety of perspectives and stories.
3. Ethical Reporting Practices: Adopt practices that ensure fair, accurate, and respectful coverage of different cultures and communities, avoiding stereotypes and sensationalism.
4. Collaborate Across Borders: Media outlets can form partnerships with international and local news organizations to share resources, stories, and perspectives, enriching their coverage.
5. Leverage Technology for Discovery: Use algorithms and platforms to highlight diverse news stories and sources, counteracting the echo chamber effect of social media.

Broader Efforts:

1. Education and Media Literacy: Incorporate media literacy into educational curriculums to equip future generations with the skills to navigate the media landscape critically.
2. Foster Independent Journalism: Support policies and initiatives that protect press freedom, fund independent journalism, and encourage reporting on undercovered issues and regions.

Both producers and consumers may help create a more varied and representative global media environment by implementing these actions. By ensuring that everyone has access to the abundance of narratives our planet has to offer, this initiative may contribute to improving our comprehension and appreciation of the intricately linked, complicated world we live in.

The coupling between the Political System and Media

The relationship between political power and media bias is a well-studied topic that demonstrates how the media may affect public opinion and political results. Here are some salient findings from pertinent research:

1. Framing Bias in Media and Power Distribution: Entman (2007) discusses how media bias, through mechanisms such as framing, priming, and agenda-setting, impacts the distribution of political power and democracy. This comprehensive view suggests that bias in media can significantly influence which political issues are highlighted, shaping public discourse and opinion in ways that may benefit certain political classes (Entman, 2007).
2. Biased Media and Voter Welfare: Wolton (2019) explores the effects of biased media on democracy and voter welfare, indicating that while biased media outlets can inform voters, they may also skew perceptions in ways that benefit specific political interests. This complexity underscores the nuanced role media plays in democratic processes (Wolton, 2019).
3. Types of Media Bias and Political Preferences: Eberl et al. (2017) categorize media bias into visibility, tonality, and agenda biases, showing how each influences party preferences. Their findings suggest that media bias can alter the political landscape by reinforcing or challenging partisan identities, which has implications for political campaigns and voter alignment (Eberl, Boomgaarden, & Wagner, 2017).
4. Persistent Media Bias and Political Influence: Baron (2004) presents a theory where media bias persists due to journalists’ preferences and the profit motives of news organizations, suggesting that bias can shape the political agenda and affect regulatory policies. This perspective highlights how media bias can serve the interests of political classes by influencing public opinion and policy decisions (Baron, 2004).
5. Perceptions of Media Bias and Political Polarization: Barnidge et al. (2020) discuss how perceptions of media bias contribute to political polarization, demonstrating that individuals who engage in selective media consumption may perceive “the media” as biased, reinforcing their political beliefs and contributing to a polarized political environment (Barnidge et al., 2020).

Together, these studies highlight the substantial impact of media bias on voter behaviour, political discourse, and power dynamics. They also imply that media bias actively shapes political realities, reflecting the interests of certain political classes at the expense of an informed and democratically engaged public.

Conclusion

If we wish to strive towards a democratic system-that is, an impartial, free, and just way of living in society-then there should be a critical discourse in political communication and theory continuing in our cultures. Parties and democratic movements (not necessarily from the Left, Right, or Centre) should vigorously explore the extent to which media dominance undermines the fundamentals of democratic government. The genuine character of democracy is called into question when the media, swayed by different political and economic interests, significantly shapes public opinion and sets agendas.

Some opponents use terminology like “mediocracy” to characterise the current system of government in cultures where media dominance seems to trump real public conversation and informed decision-making. This phrase, which blends the words “democracy” and “media,” suggests a kind of government that is more heavily influenced by the media than by the ideal of pure democracy-government by the people, for the people.

“Mediocracy” presents an account of a situation in which media organisations, by virtue of their ability to set agendas and shape public opinion, have a disproportionately large impact on the democratic process. This could potentially eclipse informed citizens and direct public engagement as the main forces behind democratic governance.

Furthermore, debates centred on these ideas frequently lead to an examination of “manufactured consent,” a phrase coined by Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman. They contend that the media and influential elites work together to discreetly undermine the fundamental democratic tenet of an educated and free public by influencing public perception and opinion to an extent that serves elite interests.

Although these criticisms are convincing, they also call for a more thorough examination of the need for media literacy, varied media environments, and legal frameworks that guarantee media independence and pluralism. Taking care of these problems is essential to preserving democratic institutions and making sure that the media promotes rather than erodes democracy.

Originally published at http://soulofmatter.wordpress.com on April 5, 2024.