The Role of Journalism in Democratic Conflict Management

Abstract

While media scholars and other observers have long argued that the news typically presents politics in adversarial, dualistic terms that emphasize drama and conflict, the impact of specific journalistic word choices on citizen participation in democracy has received surprisingly little attention. This article applies conflict theory in empirical analysis of newspaper coverage of the New York City budget crisis following 9/11. Metaphor and content analyses illustrate that conflict is often described as a “battle” or “game” that is played by elite decision makers. Stories emphasize political positions of a narrow range of actors rather than underlying interests of constituents. The authors argue that this coverage reinforces public beliefs that even decisions that affect them personally are out of their control and thus discourages public participation in what they call democratic conflict management: the collective processes of managing clashing interests and factions in ways compatible with representative democracy. The article concludes with a discussion of alternative journalistic practices that might encourage participation in the democratic process.