How do public managers perceive (and deal with) media attention for

supervisory organizations? 

Professor Mark van Twist

14th EPSO Conference Utrecht

(October 12th 2012)

Outline

• Theoretical perspectives on the relation between media and governance processes

• Practical positions on the relation between media and governance processes

• Data gathered from the EPSO members on the relation between media and supervisory organizations

• Four paradoxes relevant to understanding the relation between media and supervisory organizations

Public relations Perspective

Agenda setting Perspective

Mediatization Perspective

Focal point Selling messages and using the media

Agenda setting and impact of the media

Developments in the media landscape

Focus Organization Issue Context

Research questions

How are messages communicated effectively through media to an audience?

What factors influence the issues on political and administrative agendas?

How is news created and to what extent is media logic taking over other domains (politics, administration etc)?

Interesting phenomena to look at

Ways to communicate ideas, closeness of relations of journalist with politicians and how journalists are 'used' or vice versa.

Dynamics of agenda forming, windows to put issues on agendas and media influence to create 'windows‘.

Signs of adaptation of political and administrative life to media logic. Reporting in media on governance processes

Three perspectives on the influence of media

Mediatization perspective

• Informational biases in the media (Bennett, 2009):– Personalization– Dramatization– Fragmentation– Athority disorder bias

• Media logic ‘invading’ and ‘colonizing’ other domains

Three positions in practice on influence of media

Persevering fatalists

(undergoing

the media logic)

Resilient adaptors

(bending

the media logic)

Active communicators

(using

the media logic)Public Relations

Perspective

X XX

Agenda setting

Perspective

X X

Mediatization

Perspectief

XX X

View of media Prescription for policy View of governancePerservering fatalists

Media as independent negative force, highly biased, that should make more room for balanced news

Not much can be done. Very difficult to cope with media logic, limited influence on media

Media disturb governance and steering, make things complex, are a disturbing and often annoying factor for public managers

Resilient modifiers

Media as 'natural phenomenon‘, that definitely show signs of 'media logic' but can be influenced

You cannot really influence media. Be pragmatic and think about what you want to communicate

Media are an inherent element of governance and should be taken as it comes and managed as good as possible

Active communi-cators

Media are just as dependent on the dynamics of the governance process as they shape it.

Create strong images and communicate them, go along with the complex decision-making process.

In highly complex and dynamic governance processes the media can be an instrument in the hands of public managers.

Discussion: four paradoxes

• First paradox: good supervision is invisible in the media, exactly because the supervision is successful.

• Second paradox: when supervision becomes visible, it is usually framed as ‘failing’ in the blame game.

• Third paradox: not only critical reports make supervision vulnerable, supportive reports do so even more.

• Fourth paradox: the essence of supervision is making sure everything is allright by exposing what is wrong.

Contact

Netherlands School of Public Administration

J. (Jorren) Scherpenisse

Lange Voorthout 17

2514 EB The Hague

Telephone: +31 70 30 24 933

e-mail: steen@nsob.nl

www.nsob.nl/en

Erasmus University Rotterdam

Departement of Public Administration

Prof. Dr. M. (Mark) van Twist

Postbus 1738

3000 DR Rotterdam

Telephone: +31 70 30 24 932

e-mail: m.vantwist@fsw.eur.nl

or twist@nsob.nl