Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy

Daoust, Jean-François; Nadeau, Richard

doi:10.1017/9781009128032

Cited by 3 publications

References 180 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy

Daoust,

Nadeau

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Satisfaction with democracy is a vastly studied research topic. In this Element, the authors aim to make sense of this context by showing that elections (electoral processes and outcomes) influence citizens' satisfaction with democracy in different ways according to the quality of a democratic regime. To do so, they leverage the datasets from the Comparative Study on Electoral Systems (CSES) and uphold the belief that social scientists must take advantage of the increased availability of rich comparative datasets. The Element concludes that elections do not only have different impacts on citizens' satisfaction with democracy based on the quality of the democratic regime that they live in, but that the nature of the meaning attributed to electoral processes and outcomes varies between emergent and established democracies.

show abstract

Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy

Daoust,

Nadeau

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

How to study democratic backsliding

Druckman

2023

Political Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The twenty‐first century has been one of democratic backsliding. This has stimulated wide‐ranging scholarship on the causes of democratic erosion. Yet an overarching framework that identifies actors, behaviors, and decision processes has not been developed. I offer such a structure that includes elites (e.g., elected officials, the judiciary), societal actors (e.g., social movements, interest groups, media), and citizens. I discuss erosive threats stemming from each actor and the concomitant role of psychological mechanisms. The framework highlights the challenge of arriving at a holistic explanation of erosion within a given country during a finite period. It also accentuates why scholars should regularly consider the implications of their specific findings for democratic stability. I conclude by discussing various lessons and suggestions for how to study democratic backsliding.

show abstract

“It Forces You to Publish Some Shit”: Toward a Taxonomy of De-Democratizing Journalistic Practices

Ferreira

2024

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several studies argue that journalism can facilitate and shape democratic backsliding when news organizations are captured by business and political elites. Under these conditions, journalists will likely fail to hold political actors to account and provide information essential for public deliberation. Gradually, news outlets devolve to provide unfair representations based on private interests instead of news coverage guided by public interest. However, research still lacks a systematic and detailed analysis of practices in news production that could be capable of damaging democracy. Not only is evidence very scarce, but it is also limited to the content analysis of news outputs and editorials. Using forty semistructured interviews and three case studies, this research investigates how journalists from the most influential outlets in Brazil covered key political events within a period of constant decline in the quality of democracy (2016–2021). Then, I build on the results to propose a new typology of de-democratizing journalistic practices: soft steering (recommendations pretending concern with standards, including partisan interpretations of balance), hard steering (direct orders, including internal censorship or entirely pre-defined stories), and anticipatory steering (reporters and editors act on their own based on perceptions and previous instructions). Moreover, this research offers evidence that de-democratizing journalistic practices can be internalized by news practitioners and, over time, replace democratic norms. Finally, it suggests a dynamic relationship between censorship and self-censorship in which control not only inhibits actions but also compels journalists to perform in specific ways.

show abstract

Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy

Cited by 3 publications

References 180 publications

Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy

Elections and Satisfaction with Democracy

How to study democratic backsliding

“It Forces You to Publish Some Shit”: Toward a Taxonomy of De-Democratizing Journalistic Practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About