- Show more
The political face in the media
Technological evolution within globalization, coming from modernity, is having as an immediate consequence that the media prove to be increasingly penetrating and powerful by innovation. With the arrival of the "New Information Society" there was a true and controversial cultural revolution.
The diversity of social media has achieved an important scope: books and newspapers, television and radio, movies and videos, recordings and electronic communications transmitted in real time through radio, cable, satellite and the Internet. The contents of this vast diffusion range from rigorous news to mere entertainment.For many, they are the main informative and training instrument, of guidance and inspiration for individual, family and social behaviors.
The change produced exceeds, more than a simple revolution, the complete transformation through which humanity captures the world around it and that the perception verifies and expresses. Therefore, the mass media show a growing influence as cultural and political opinion trainers, since they greatly determine ideas, habits and customs.
There are currently large amounts of information and news with unimaginable speed. Beyond the greater or lesser attributed power, they have produced a revolution in the spectator because their presence is prolonged in the different spaces of social-social life. Accompanying the socialization processes, they offer very important knowledge references, images of the outside world and interpellation parameters, ethical and social models of success and failure, which interact within the family, the neighborhood or the immediate social environment.
In most of the issues of public relevance, citizens see them as an alternative analysis of analysis, that is, with the construction of a part of the social reality carried out by the media, which allows individuals to inform themselves and appreciatewhat affects your environment. In this process of construction of the news, information and ideas about political alternatives existing in an accessible way for large audiences are disseminated, and affect the nature of democratic deliberation.
Circulating in this way, certain issues destined to influence the public debate, its weight in the establishment of the social agenda is produced according to the relevance they give to the issues addressed and the attributes acquired by the objects or subjects that receive aSustainable media coverage. In the foreground, Ben Bagdikian already defined in his work The monopoly of the media: the power of the media is political power.
Likewise, the news also constitutes a form of knowledge: "In the search for disseminating information that people want, need and should know, media organizations put into circulation and model knowledge," said Gayo Tuchman that, in this sense, the mediaof communication circulate certain issues to intervene in the public sphere and in turn, to influence the political, social, economic and cultural debate.
By disseminating relevant information for the population, the information media are transformed into institutions with social responsibilities. The degree of circulation that the news has in a society, largely determines the degree to which its members participate in political action. Meanwhile the news is based on cultural and social resources to present the facts, they once constitute methodical mechanisms for collective subjects. Previous years, the journalist Paolo Fabbri said that the media had become a landscape and that, following this idea, they managed to become forms of a kind of modern nature. In current democracies, our experience of everyday reality is entrusted to a media, whether traditional (radio, television) or new (internet, blogs, social networks).
If the first years of democracy were marked by this decisive mutation that unites the relationship between politics and media, whose public status of politics was progressively subordinated to the power of the media, the years of neoliberal postcrysis, called the long decadewhich covered from the years 2001 to 2015, they were marked by the competence of the political and media actors to impose their respective vertidation contracts in the public sphere, after a period of conflict from which none came out unscathed: the formula “that they leaveAll ”integrated a coordinate system, among other key phrases such as Slogan, to mark a certain directionality of opinion in the debate spheres.
The left -wing governments of the left, in Latin America they have turned the symbolic premise into a "semantic combat", which feeds and at the same time exceeds the legal and technical framework of communication policies, making current currency in the press secretariats of Latin American governments. The style and ideology of each president gave this concern, unique inflections: Hugo Chávez and Rafael Correa had television programs (daily or weekly broadcasts, the case depends), in which they exposed their government plans, criticized their adversaries andThey made up a daily dialogue with citizens that cameras broadcast to the whole country. Oratory capacity, speech and gesture styles differentiated a common interest in reaching the town without intermediaries.
Meanwhile, Lula da Silva accused the press of being a bad influence and chose to visit the villages and establish a face -to -face communication. Michelle Bachelet’s government team had designed a citizen communication plan, which involved, among other things, many outings to the streets to have direct contact with people. Evo Morales, who came to the presidency after a long union career, recognized himself as a more speaker than screen than. Correa also talked about "to face and not govern in a desk";The similarities with Kirchner that promulgated Argentina and dodging the comfortable armchairs are not casual to the ghost of the mediatization of the political.
Although there are several research on the informative function of the media, there are no empirical work that has been studying the media as relevant actors of the political system, capable of influencing not only on the spectators and the public agenda, but also on the political agenda. For his part, former President Kirchner defines the written press as a political actor who is not only a mediator between civil society and the State, but also builds representations of power and society in whose space intervenes.
In opinion surveys, the media exceed other actors in social life and have the particularity that in the citizen-acting interaction process, they are sought and that reinforces their degree of credibility more. What has achieved, in addition to having a social role for, is that they are taken into account as partners by other less favored actors in terms of support, such as government politicians or entities.
However, the relationship of the media and society has changed in recent years, with the appearance of social networks and the strength they have taken in some scenarios in which a sector of the population has preference for the new media;The traditional ones, as conceived have had to modify their structures and their way of delivering the information to the public.
Even the theory of the Setting Agenda, highlight a new concept of them, no longer as legitimators who have the ability to tell their viewers what decision to make, but that their field of action is limited to put on the table the issues to be discussed, and the reorganization of social functions that had historically been linked to observing the media as actors with a high capacity for effectiveness in terms of proselytism.
In this space it is related in turn, with actors and political forces in a universe of interactions where it is inevitable that conflicts arise. However, corporations of these different media can pursue political objectives through different ways: one of them is the achievement of particular public policies, related to their interests, such as the implementation of foreign property limits in the media or other measures thatfavor the interests of proprietary companies.
They do not know what their influence is or what are the results they can obtain with their work, demonstrate it daily through social and electoral campaigns, and in some cases when they directly link to the promotion of certain candidates or government actions. In addition, the visibility and exposure that entails, forms a determining factor that encourages politicians for the permanent exercise of their public functions;in order to mobilize its figuration in the various formats for campaigns.
As actors of the political system, the media can have different types of actions, either as narrators and/or commentators or as conflict participants. The interests of the newspaper articulated in the writing thus intermingle with the so -called news criteria, defined as the set of elements through which the informative apparatus controls and manages the quantity and type of events, for the selection of the news.
Considering the media as political actors implies understanding that they are not simple intermediaries between facts and audiences, but social actors with particular interests. In their procedure, they communicate their large -scale speech through a process in which they come into contact with other recognized participants. In this way, the press maintains three aspects in relation to the political process: as an observer, as a participant and as a catalyst.
In the task of selection, inclusion or exclusion, thematization and hierarchy of events, it is possible to trace and detect not only the diversity of communicative, financial, selective, speculative or enlightening interests;but also an ideological perception that holds between between.