Exploring popular conceptions of democracy through media discourse: analysing dimensions of democracy from online media data in 93 countries using a distributional semantic model

被引:0
|
作者
Dahlberg, Stefan [1 ,2 ]
Morkenstam, Ulf [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Mid Sweden Univ, Dept Humanities & Social Sci, Ostersund, Sweden
[2] Univ Bergen, Dept Govt, Bergen, Norway
[3] Stockholm Univ, Dept Polit Sci, Stockholm, Sweden
[4] Inst Future Studies, Stockholm, Sweden
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
The meaning of democracy; distributional semantics; word2vec; editorial media; social media; dimensions of democracy; SOCIAL MEDIA; PUBLIC-OPINION; CITIZENS; CONCEPTUALIZATIONS; PARTICIPATION; PERCEPTIONS; AWARENESS; IDEALS; NEWS;
D O I
10.1080/13510347.2024.2342485
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
Survey studies show that popular support for democracy is strong in democratic and non-democratic countries. Naturally, the question is if democracy actually means the same thing in different linguistic, cultural, and political contexts. Mass media is often mentioned as decisive in forming citizens' understandings of democracy, but the media discourse is rarely in focus in comparative studies on popular conceptions of democracy. This article contributes to the debate by analysing data collected from online media in 93 countries. By utilizing tools from natural language processing, we provide new insights based on methods that are both extensive, flexible and cost-efficient. Our analysis shows that the media discourse revolves around democracy as governance, as outcomes and as values, but that these abstract understandings have additional dimensions. Our main contributions are three: (i) we show that the media discourse is related to popular understandings of democracy; (ii) our results indicate that there are common denominators of how the D-word is discussed in media across the globe, but when analysing the dimensions in more detail, common denominators are few and (iii) by relating democracy to everyday politics, media seems to legitimize any regime as democratic rather than being a beacon for liberal democracy.
引用
收藏
页数:32
相关论文
empty
未找到相关数据