Abstract
AbstractThe coverage of debates about media policy presents a unique situation in which the media has the responsibility of managing debates on their policy. In Western democracies, it is widely accepted that what legitimates the media is its role in the sustenance of democracy. The normative expectation in a democratic society is that during media policy debates, the media should give access to all parties in the debate irrespective of whether the party advances arguments different from the position of that media organisations in the debate. Was that the case in the coverage of the debate that followed the News of the World phone hacking scandal and the Leveson Inquiry? Using empirical data, this chapter provides the answer to this question. The chapter also reveals alternative views in the media policy debate.
Highlights
My investigation revealed a serious shortcoming in the coverage of media policy debates, a situation where the media gives quality space to arguments it considers to be in its favour while discourses calling for stringent reforms are either left out or given less quality space in media narratives on press reform
The coverage of the debate that followed the NoTW phone hacking scandal demonstrates that during debates about their policy, the media allocate more quality space to arguments perceived to be in their interest than to those considered to be against their interest
Warnings of threat to “press freedom” featured more frequently than any other theme at the top of the narrative structure of news articles on the media policy debate while arguments against self-regulation and against the new press regulatory system formed by the press were among issues that had the fewest occurrences within this sphere of importance
Summary
The term “media policy” as used in this book refers to “all law and regulation dealing with an information production chain that includes information creation, processing, flows and use” (Braman 2004, p. 153). There are policies such as the competition rules instituted by the government to check for unfair competition in media ownership (see earlier in this book) All these policies are put in place to ensure that the press fulfils its function in society which, as explained, includes ensuring an informed citizenry, providing a democratic forum for public debates, introducing relevant topics to the public sphere for deliberations and by so doing sustaining democracy. The normative expectation in a democratic society is that during such debates, the media should give access to all parties in the debate irrespective of whether the party advances arguments different from the position of that media organisations in the debate If this does not take place, any view different from that of the press will not be given access into the media’s public sphere.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
