Mediated Deliberation

Abstract

This article investigates the role of the news media in constructing mediated deliberation, focusing on how instrumental politics intertwines with critical argument exchanges in public debates. In the context of Brazil's recent democratization process, the author analyzes mediated deliberation in the national referendum for banning firearm and ammunition sales in 2005. The following indicators are explored: (1) participant accessibility and characterization, (2) use of arguments, (3) reciprocity and responsiveness, and (4) reflexivity and reversibility of opinions. The article argues that normative deliberation principles add to controversy frame studies by helping understand how contending interlocutors increase the quality and the complexity of reasons in dispute in situations where no consensus or general agreement is expected.

Deliberative Qualities of Generic News Frames: Assessing the Democratic Value of Strategic Game and Contestation Framing in Election Campaign Coverage

“…In recent years these deliberative features of news discourse have been operationalized for empirical study in varying fashion (e.g., Bennett et al, 2004;Ettema, 2007;Ferree, Gamson, Gerhards, & Rucht, 2002;Graham & Witschge, 2003;Maia, 2009;Rohlinger, 2007;Wessler, 2008). Selecting criteria against which to judge the quality of media content is an often neglected exercise that implicates theoretical decisions that need to be made carefully.…”

“…Deliberative democratic theory has sometimes been interpreted by empirical researchers to demand that a substantive consensus over contested issues must be established among participants for public discourse to be successful (e.g., Ferree et al, 2002;Gerhards, 1997). A second, similarly demanding yardstick that has been employed in mediated deliberation research is the idea that discourse participants should publicly admit to reversing their opinions in light of arguments opposing their original position (Maia, 2009). While substantive consensus and reversibility of opinions certainly constitute deliberative ideals, a specific theory of deliberation under conditions of competition and mass mediation would not expect that they be actually fulfilled.…”

“…It is particularly concerned with the degree to which groups from the political periphery (citizens, intellectuals, etc.) occur in the news (Maia, 2009). Various theorists emphasize the importance of an inclusive public sphere for the realization of both moral values (like political autonomy and equality of citizens) and cognitive gains in the deliberative process (e.g., Bohman, 1996;Cooke, 2000;Gutmann & Thompson, 2004).…”

“…News framing processes are an integral element of a larger process of mediated deliberation (Maia, 2009(Maia, , 2012. Some scholars have pointed to the relevance of media frames for the deliberative quality of public communication and have studied frames pertaining to individual issues (e.g., Maia, 2009;Pan & Kosicki, 2001;Simon & Xenos, 2000). But a normatively inspired news framing analysis has not been conducted across a range of issues or for generic news frames.…”

The Impact of Sound-Bite Journalism on Public Argument

“…Television news is therefore a highly probable and relevant public space for the production of public justifications, which play a normatively and empirically important role for democratic discourse. This idea has appeared in several studies of justification in the news (e.g., Ferree, Gamson, Gerhards, & Rucht, 2002;Gerhards, Neidhardt, & Rucht, 1998;Maia, 2009;Renwick & Lamb, 2013;Rudd & Fish, 1989). However, this study is the first major undertaking to link political justification in the news to sound-bite journalism.…”