Approximately Informed, Occasionally Monitorial? Reconsidering Normative Citizen Ideals

Abstract

This article identifies gaps between normative ideals and realistic accounts of news use in democracy today. Starting from the widespread but unrealistic ideal of the informed citizen, and its more realistic development through notions of the monitorial citizen, we analyze comprehensive qualitative data on news users' experiences. We describe these news users as approximately informed, occasionally monitorial. This description emphasizes the limited, shifting, and partial figurations of societal information that citizens are able to obtain through their use of journalistic and social media, and thereby challenges normative ideals. How do monitorial ideals function when the citizens are only occasionally on guard? By zooming in on three key gaps between even a less demanding ideal and actual practices in news use, we underline the need to further reconceptualize our expectations of citizens' news use.

Temporal ambivalences in smartphone use: Conflicting flows, conflicting responsibilities

“…However, the “day in the life”-approach (see also Groot Kormelink and Costera Meijer, 2019) is particularly relevant to investigate temporal aspects of media use, as it builds from the idea of an ordinary day as a recognizable timeframe to situate different experiences within. Further, initial analyses of the material, and subsequent analysis of news use and citizen ideals (Ytre-Arne and Moe, 2018), placed smartphones at the very center of informants’ media experiences and uncovered ambivalent emotions. These findings merited dedicated in-depth analysis as is provided in this article through an integrated theoretical and analytical approach, in which we explain smartphone use through the notion of temporal ambivalences.…”

The ecology of incidental exposure to news in digital media environments

“…However, this new technology may have simply shifted the nature of information cost. News is costly not just because we spend time finding it, but also because audiences must choose to consume or attend to it instead of some other type of information (Couldry et al, 2010; Prior, 2007; Ytre-Arne and Moe, 2018). In high-choice media environments, the opportunity cost of choosing news over, say, entertainment, may be more consequential than the actual cost of acquiring that news.…”

“…Such incidental exposure can help low-interest individuals learn about or engage in politics (Baum, 2002; Kobayashi et al, 2017; Neuman et al, 1992; Valeriani and Vaccari, 2016). Incidental exposure to news may also allow audiences who are less motivated to routinely seek information a chance to monitor and attend to their political and social worlds through their everyday activities (Couldry et al, 2010; Ytre-Arne and Moe, 2018).…”

Protecting Democracy from Disinformation: Normative Threats and Policy Responses

“…Another common approach is to focus on citizens’ roles as both media consumers and democratic participants, such as “informed” or “monitorial” citizens (Schudson 1998). Such analysis is useful for formulating regulative ideals for institutions and citizens, and evaluating their achievement in practice (see, for instance, Ytre-Arne and Moe 2018). However, it neglects key democratic activities beyond those of average citizens, such as the work of electoral management bodies or national security agencies.…”