Media and public accountability: typology and exploration

Abstract

The role of the media in public accountability has often been discussed. This is especially the case for public sector organisations, whose accountability relations have changed in the shift from government to governance. In this paper, we develop a typology of the ways mass media are involved in public accountability processes. Media can stimulate actors to reflect on their behaviour, trigger formal accountability by reporting on the behaviour of actors, amplify formal accountability as they report on it or act as an independent and informal accountability forum. To explore the presence of these roles in practice, we focus on public sector organisations in the Netherlands. Our quantitative and qualitative analysis in the Netherlands suggests that the media primarily serve an indirect role in public accountability, either by invoking pre-emptive self-criticism in public organisations in anticipation of potential media scrutiny or by triggering formal accountability demands from MPs key words public accountability • media • public sector organisations SPECIAL ISSUE • Media and governance

Why do “teeth” need “voice”? The case of anti‐corruption agencies in three Australian states

“…ACA interviewees acknowledged that sometimes in the course of their investigation, “a really good investigative journalist would publish a material” that ACAs may not know about; and “this gives them new leads into what to look for” (ACA Staff_1). These findings are consistent with earlier studies that social accountability actors operate by activating the operations of horizontal accountability agencies (e.g., Ankamah, ; Jacobs & Schillemans, , p. 27; McCubbins & Schwartz, ; Smulovitz & Peruzzotti, ). However, findings go beyond activation by also showing that social actors continue to provide ACAs with evidence in the course of their investigations to help them effectively perform their functions.…”

“…Analysis of interviews showed that the news media serves as a communication channel for ACAs’ activities and operations. Although this finding confirms that of Jacobs and Schillemans (), it shows the various ways the media does this and why interviewees perceive it as a support role to ACAs’ activities and operations. It was evident that ACAs normally provide copies of their reports and findings to journalists through their “media release” portals on their websites.…”

Entangling and disentangling governance and the media

“…The second paper, 'Media and public accountability: typology and exploration' by Sandra Jacobs and Thomas Schillemans (Jacobs and Schillemans, 2016) develops a typology of the various roles news media may fulfil in public accountability. The paper is based on content analyses of media reporting and parliamentary questions in the Netherlands.…”

Breaking bad news without breaking trust: The effects of a press release and newspaper coverage on perceived trustworthiness

“…Why do we focus specifically on a mistake by an independent regulatory agency (IRA)? First, we think that errors, as opposed to successes, have more influence on public perceptions because media coverage tends to focus on what went wrong (Liu et al, 2010;Jacobs & Schillemans, 2016) and negative information tends to have a stronger effect on judgments (e.g. Olsen, 2015).…”

“…Secondly, this kind of communication is important because it functions as an informal accountability mechanism. Jacobs and Schillemans (2016) have found that public organizations, in anticipation of potential media scrutiny, exert "preemptive self-criticism," meaning that agencies disclose failure themselves before it is revealed by the media. Thirdly, we focus on an IRA because these agencies face a somewhat less adversarial media environment than some other government institutions (Maggetti, 2012, p. 400;Van Erp, 2013;Glynn & Huge, 2014;Puppis, Maggetti, Gilardi, Biela, & Papadopoulos, 2014) and therefore citizens may be more amenable to information coming from a relatively independent government agency, as opposed to organizations less independent from politics.…”