In the last few decades personalization has been identified as a defining trend of contemporary political communication. The empirical evidence, however, is mixed and there are very few studies that explore more than a single-case study. This article investigates media personalization in comparative perspective by analysing the press coverage of recent general elections in Germany (2009) and the United Kingdom (2010). Was the reporting in both campaigns (equally) personalized? How and to what extent does the phenomenon vary across the two countries? What does this mean for our understanding of personalization? The analysis shows that there are at least as many differences between the countries as there are similarities; although both campaigns can be considered personalized in some respects, the form it takes is substantially different due to structural variations in the media and political systems, as well as the more transient, but key, impact of the distinctive characteristics of the campaigns and each of the candidates.

The concept of `videomalaise' was first used in America in the 1970s to describe the dual phenomenon of a loss of trust in political institutions and individuals' increasing reliance on television as a means of obtaining political information. Could it be that the particular features of political programming caused political malaise? Using West German survey data, the research presented here tests the validity of the videomalaise thesis. No connection was found between political malaise and the contents of political programming which leads to the conclusion that the videomalaise thesis is unwarranted. Instead, political alienation and low participation are related to the use made of entertainment content in both television and the press.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract