Descripció
This working paper investigates the relationship between the media landscape and populist parties and leaders. It assumes that in the scientific literature three distinct aspects of populism have been mainly addressed by scholars, namely, populism expressed by populist political parties and leaders (studied, for instance, through the analysis of election manifestos), populism among citizens (studied using opinion surveys), and populism within the media (usually investigated through content analysis of media coverage). Accordingly, this research focus on this latter dimension in order to shed light on the relationship between journalism and populism. Based on the literature developed by Mazzoleni (2003), Krämer (2014), and Jagers and Walgrave (2007), the working paper aims at identifying and operationalising the so-called “media populism” in media outlet, as well as the social and political factors that prompt journalists to contrast or favour populism. The empirical analysis, including six EU countries (Czechia, France, Italy, Poland, Spain, and Slovakia), combines an original expert survey (aimed at measuring the level of populism by the media in each national context) and in-depth interviews with journalists about news media perception and reaction to populism in politics. General results suggest that the media landscape is witnessing a process of normalisation of populism in news coverage. This happens mainly by the inclusion of people-centrism and anti-elitism as a simplified way of accomplishing the information and control functions typical of political journalism. The expert survey data also suggest that a process of polarisation between news outlets is occurring. This polarisation takes place particularly with respect to outgroup ostracism: some news outlets support this orientation, while others actively act to counter it. In the second part of the paper, the authors stress, by means of in-depth interviews, that populism is in the eye of the beholder. Populism can be conceived as positive (rarely) or negative (often), and in any case it is perceived as a normative concept. “Populism” is therefore a typical word and concept in political competition, not only for political actors but also for journalists and news outlets. The interviews also suggest that populism is becoming a constitutive element of contemporary political journalism. The relationship between journalism and populism is characterised by forms of parallelism, polarisation or normalisation: all these processes lead to the inclusion of populist frames and claims within mainstream media outlets’ political coverage.
