Media Consensus and Divergences in Norway During the Second Wave of Coronavirus Infections

Framing of the COVID-19 pandemic:

“…News media play vital societal roles, particularly during a crisis, ranging from primary functions, such as information and knowledge dissemination (Viehmann et al, 2022), to emergent functions such as "social glue" (Miles & Morse, 2007), as well as arenas for public debate (Fedtke et al, 2021), social criticism, and holding those in power accountable (Fonn & Hyde-Clarke, 2021). In this section, we discuss these functions regarding the news media frames to answer the two research questions.…”

“…In the history of public service broadcasting, this function has been a vital part of so-called debate programmes (Örnebring, 2003) and political talk shows (Fedtke et al, 2021). The controlling watchdog function of public service broadcasting is critical during a crisis such as the Covid-19 pandemic because it poses political questions and looks at injustices and questions of responsibility and accountability (Fonn & Hyde-Clarke, 2021). News media are likely to play a definitive role in times of confusion and uncertainty (Fedtke et al, 2021).…”

How negative out-party affect influenced public attitudes about the coronavirus crisis in Norway

“…The results are partly in line with those found for the US case, as prior levels of out-party dislike were associated with more negative (positive) attitudes about how the government had managed the crisis for supporters of opposition (government) parties. Out-party dislike thus had the expected partisan effect, even though moderate levels of out-party antagonism, coupled with a consensual and successful response to the crisis, might make such an effect less likely in Norway than in other countries where the response has been characterized as more polarized (Christensen and Laegreid, 2020;Fonn and Hyde-Clarke, 2021;Gadarian et al, 2021;Kerr et al, 2021;Moss and Sandbakken, 2021).…”

“…The authors conclude that asking people to evaluate the superordinate category of the US response did not reduce the effect of affective polarization compared to those who rated the performance of President Trump. This difference between the countries likely stems from the way in which political elites handled the crisis: while the response in the US was polarizing and closely associated with the president himself, Norwegian politicians managed to successfully portray an image of political consensus that was echoed by the media narrative (Christensen and Laegreid, 2020;Fonn and Hyde-Clarke, 2021;Moss and Sandbakken, 2021). Consequently, even those who strongly disliked government or opposition parties in Norway tended to have similarly positive views of how the country managed the initial phase of the pandemic.…”

“…As such, the article is based on similar studies in the US, specifically the article by Druckman et al (2021a), which examines how affective polarization shaped attitudes about the political response in the US and how this effect was altered when people evaluated the superordinate category of the United States instead of President Trump. However, Norway presents a contrasting case to the US: while the response in the US was polarizing and closely associated with the president himself (Gadarian et al, 2021;Kerr et al, 2021), Norwegian politicians managed to successfully portray an image of political consensus that was echoed in the media narrative (Christensen and Laegreid, 2020;Fonn and Hyde-Clarke, 2021;Moss and Sandbakken, 2021). Hence, studying the effects of negative outparty affect in Norway provides a test for how well results travel across countries and an opportunity to explore differences between countries that could depend on contextual factors.…”