Based on extensive fieldwork, the present article illustrates how the logic of the news media is expanding from influential communication departments to the practices, routines and priorities of traditional career bureaucrats. To theorize the mediatization of a traditional bureaucratic rationale, the article proposes a typology for how rule-based public organizations adapt to and adopt the news media’s implicit ‘logic of appropriateness.’ We emphasize the importance of (1) the news rhythm and (2) news formats, but also (3) how and why being in the media is valued by civil servants, and (4) how this leads to a reallocation of resources and responsibilities within the organization. We find that career bureaucrats both anticipate and adopt a news logic in their daily work. The normative implications of these transformations are discussed in the final section of the article.

No abstract

Based on a quantitative, comparative analysis of U.S., French, and Norwegian news media, this article examines the use of human interest stories in the coverage of irregular immigration. In an innovative design, it systematically analyzes how human interest framing is related to the frequency and complexity of dominant arguments and perspectives (issue-specific frames). In contrast to the extant literature, arguing that news on immigration reduces immigrants to dangerous and anonymous threats, the article finds that about half the news stories studied have a human face or example. Moreover, these human interest articles tend to frame the issue from the immigrants' perspective, describing their personal stories and struggle. This result nuances the commonly held assumption that human interest frames signal declining news quality, as the number and range of arguments presented are not significantly reduced when human narratives are employed. The prevalence of human interest frames is highest in Norway, where we also identify a reduction in frame complexity in human interest stories, indicating the need to rethink the democratic corporatist model in media system theory.

The media coverage of irregular immigration has the power to influence public opinion, fuel the formation of popular movements, and mold the political climate related to immigration. Based on comparative and multimethod data sets, this special issue of American Behavioral Scientist contributes to a renewed understanding of the role and impact of the mass media on the current climate, opinions, and policies related to irregular immigration in three different Western countries. Analysis of source strategies and ethnographic methods is combined with large-scale quantitative content analysis of news and surveys measuring the reception of this news coverage by audiences in the United States, France, and Norway. The research design pursued in this special issue of American Behavioral Scientist identifies (a) the dominant voices, narratives, and arguments in the mainstream media coverage of irregular immigration; (b) how stakeholders work strategically to promote their messages in the media; and (c) what attitudes the public holds about the coverage of irregular immigration in the media, and how these media evaluations relate to their attitudes toward immigration. Together, the articles in this issue offer new and surprising insights into how a controversial and important issue is strategically framed, covered in the news, and understood among the audience.

This article analyzes the influence of the media on the central Norwegian immigration administration. Through behind-the-scenes ethnographic methods, it explores how key bureaucratic values such as impartiality, neutrality and loyalty are challenged and modified by the impact of the news media. A key question is to what extent this process of mediatization overlaps with a more general trend of politicization of the civil service. The article first documents that media pressure generates comprehensive strategies aimed at servicing the press, but also different types of information control and internal steering. Second, it describes how media management has become an important concern within public administration, which identifies strongly with the bureaucratic system and its values, and protects and defends it in the media. The article introduces the term 'administrative loyalty' to describe these practices and standards that go beyond the imperative to loyally serve the media-related needs of political superiors.

The personalization of politics has received much attention in both the political science and political communication literature, but the focus has almost entirely been on party leaders and prime ministers. This study investigates the personalization of ministerial communication in Norway, a type of decentralized personalization. It combines a survey of communication workers; in-depth interviews with politicians, communication workers, political reporters, and top-level civil servants; and ethnographic observation inside a ministry. The article goes beyond media-centered perspectives, and identifies several potential drivers and barriers to personalization processes. Based our mixed methods approach we find that ministerial communication in Norway is is strongly centered on the minister in both reactive media management and the proactive promotion of the minister and new policies. This decentralized personalization is driven by both demands from the media and the strategic adaptation by political and administrative actors within ministries. Based on the rich empirically-grounded insights, the article discusses how the interplay between the logic of the contemporary, commercial news media, political ambitions, internal administrative ambitions, and changes in executive government shapes the personalization of ministerial communication, and illuminates how these multiple drivers of personalization are mutually reinforcing.

This article analyses the role of central editors in constructing a national debate in the Norwegian media after the 2011 Oslo terror attacks. A broad literature has documented that after crisis, mainstream media move away from their everyday critical function to a ritual type of journalism that fosters adherence to shared values and support for national authorities. Based on in-depth interviews with debate editors, this article analyses how this type of national crisis discourse is substantiated and guarded through editorial decisions and policies. Second, it gives insights into how changes in the perceived climate of opinion and increasingly vocal critical voices gradually affect editorial practices and challenge consensus. Theoretically, the article combines perspectives from a critical approach (the media as channels for political authorities during crisis) and a cultural approach (the media as constitutive for resilience and recovery) to contribute to the understanding of crisis journalism in a multi-platform, multi-directional media landscape.

Some irregular immigrants get to stay, most are asked to leave. Many in the latter category appeal and seek media coverage to further their case. While the vast majority of these stories are not reported, some cases do receive coverage, and some even cause policy change and a reversal of the return decision. In this article, we discuss under what circumstances media coverage has such an effect. We analyse three cases where a residence permit was granted after sustained media coverage. In exploring these cases, we found the notion of strong frames to be valuable, particularly in how they link to widely held cultural values. The reversals, however, were also brought about as a result of resourceful frame supporters and journalistic engagement. Taken together, the article contributes to the more general discussion of the dynamics of frame production, effects and power.