The liberal democracies in the EU area have been weakened over the past 10-15 years. This likely includes the influence of editorial media. Is there a connection?
By Einar Hålien, Editor at Schibsted Media (Norway)
Liberal democracies do not sustain themselves. They must be continuously defended against destructive forces. Editorial media have provided society-relevant information and power criticism to the population for generations, which is considered a prerequisite for democracies to function.
But when the media become weaker and counterforces stronger, the path is open for illiberal and manipulative leaders who gain support in a frustrated population. These connections have been analyzed by us at Schibsted Media over the past year.
Democracy comes in many forms
In academia, there are several classifications of democracy. The most relevant in practice are what can be called “electoral democracy” and “liberal democracy.” Simplified, “electoral democracy” mainly concerns the interests of the majority, while “liberal democracy,” which we in Norway have chosen to adhere to, also ensures the rights of minorities.
In the report, we analyze four large datasets from the EU area, look for connections, and discuss possible causality (cause/effect). We include the UK and Norway where data is available.
- All these four datasets show a negative development over the past 10-15 years
- The democratic level in the EU area has significantly weakened.
- We have more and larger news deserts, areas lacking coverage from editorial media.
- Media diversity has decreased.
Only three out of 29 countries have strengthened media freedom in the last ten years. Additionally, data from the Reuters Institute shows that the proportion of people who refrain from consuming news has increased, and trust in the media has fallen. Underlying this is a significantly weakened media economy over the past 15 years, especially due to competition from social networks, both for advertising revenue and people’s time.
In many countries, it is also a problem that actors like oligarchs and illiberal politicians take control of media to use them to their advantage, naturally destroying the credibility of these media.
It is also undeniable that the editorial media’s innovation power, the ability to renew, seems far too weak concerning the challenges the media face.
Weakened influence
The situation for a large part of the editorial media in the EU area is very challenging and probably weaker than often perceived. Editorial media definitely seem to have lost influence over the past 10-15 years. Many are so weak and outdated, especially regarding digitalization and appeal to young people, that they are likely to disappear.
We can say that the editorial media traditionally had at least three functions as defenders of liberal democracies: They have contributed with reliable and independent information, conducted critical journalism to hold power accountable, and ensured that different voices and viewpoints are heard.
In the last area, there has been an improvement over the past 10-15 years: Social networks have made it easier for more people to be heard. The “Arab Spring” – popular protests against authoritarian regimes and human rights violations in the Middle East and North Africa – is used as the prime example that collective influence through social networks leads to positive mass mobilization. But it has been a long time since this spring.
A problem is that everyone’s free expressions in social networks are surrounded by increasing “pollution,” even though there is no common understanding of how big the problem of harassment, hate, and disinformation is.
The overall picture of the connection between democratic level and editorial capability is only obtained when one sees editorial power in relation to other forces in society.
Competing forces
To help examine the causality in the trends, we have interviewed 20 researchers, people in organizations, and leaders from the media industry. Most of these agree that there is a connection between democratic level and editorial capability, but they have slightly different views on how this connection is.
I have tried to gather the threads based on the data we have had access to and the experts’ assessments.
It seems that the degree of frustration, anger, and concern for the future has increased in many societies in Europe. It is pointed out that an explanation for such a development may be that a significant portion of the population feels overlooked by societal elites. For many, a large part of the media also falls into this elite category. A Belgian editor I interviewed says that his newspaper “grows on a melting ice floe.”
What he means is that the newspaper has short-term success because they grow in the demanding group +/- 30 years. The problem, as he sees it, is that they mostly grow among the highly educated who are in a political center, while the political currents move towards the extremes. In this changed political landscape, his own newspaper is on unfamiliar ground.
One must therefore study what kinds of forces are at work simultaneously to understand what is decisive when parts of the population move away from the ideals of a liberal democracy and decide to support illiberal politicians.
It is reasonable to assume that journalism with low trust and limited reach will have relatively little ability to counteract manipulative leaders who know how to exploit strong emotions in the population. If we add varying degrees of organized disinformation on top of this, it becomes even harder to resist.
It is unlikely that people move towards political extremes because they want to weaken democracy; they may even perceive it the opposite way. Far more likely is that they go there out of sheer frustration, to be heard. The editorial media have not been good at understanding these forces. This is probably part of the reason why trust in the editorial media in Europe has weakened in recent years.
When the overall influence of the editorial media weakens while counterforces strengthen, the editorial media’s support for liberal democracies becomes weaker. I think this is a reasonable summary of the development that has taken place over the past 10-15 years.
At the same time, it is important to emphasize that there is nothing wrong with the editorial or journalistic function. People and societies need what the media can deliver for democracy to function, but right now there are problems with the deliveries.
There is a job to be done
To have hope of restarting the journalistic function in Europe, a big job must be done by both media owners, media leaders, and political authorities. The media themselves must, in my opinion, radically increase the pace of innovation and especially engage in how journalism can better appeal to young people. Work must be done to increase trust and ensure that more people perceive the media’s content as relevant.
There is also a political job to be done. In Norway, we have a well-thought-out media policy, whether one agrees or disagrees with the various elements of this policy. In many other European countries, there is hardly any media policy at all. Other differences in Norway’s favor are that trust in Norwegian media has not fallen in the measurements, and that most Norwegian politicians have a good understanding of what free media should be good for and promote them.
A political effort must be made both nationally and at the EU level to contribute to strengthening the editorial media. In our report, we primarily direct the advice at the EU level. The most important thing is that the laws already enacted are implemented in the member states and complied with.
This applies, for example, to the Media Freedom Act, which was passed before Christmas last year and, among other things, aims to prevent states and strong private interests from controlling the content of editorial media.
We also recommend introducing mechanisms that ensure that digital regulations, which are almost always motivated by the behavior of tech giants, do not have unintended effects on editorial media.
The weakening of liberal democracies and what can be done to regain some of the lost ground is trending on the political agenda in Europe. The recently re-elected leader of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, has launched what she calls a “European democracy shield,” and here in Norway, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs recently announced that they will deliver a report to the Storting on “democracy, human rights, security, and the rule of law in Europe.”
Schibsted Media has an ambition that our report will serve as an input to these initiatives and as a “wake-up call” both in the political environment and in the industry itself.
We also hope that politicians who are very concerned with fighting disinformation will consider whether they can get more out of fighting for the editorial media.
This article was first published in Norwegian in Aftenposten.