Public Opinion, Media And Foreign Policy

As technology has enabled the widespread and rapid dissemination of information, the way governments make decisions on the global stage has fundamentally changed. No longer can foreign policy formation happen behind closed doors without scrutiny from the public. The media acts as a critical link between governments and their citizens, shaping public opinion on international affairs.

At the same time, the media has become an active environment that foreign policy decision-makers must navigate. How issues and events are framed in the news influences policy choices and strategies. Governments invest significant resources into managing their image and messaging in the media through public relations techniques like “spin.” While the media empowers the public, it also provides an opportunity for governments to manipulate public opinion to align with policy goals. The complex interplay between the media, public opinion, and foreign policymaking is integral to understanding international relations in the modern world.

This content will explore the variables that define the media’s role in foreign policy. From political communication regimes to news values, many factors determine how the media covers global affairs and how this coverage in turn impacts policy decisions. Understanding these dynamics is key to evaluating the media’s growing clout in international relations.

Political Communication Regime

The political communication regime refers to the overall system and structure for political communication in a given country or state. It encompasses the laws, norms, patterns, and practices that govern the relationship between political actors, media organizations, and the public.

Some key aspects of a political communication regime include:

• Laws and regulations - These involve rules around freedom of speech, press freedom, censorship, access to information, licensing of media outlets, etc. For example, an authoritarian regime may impose strict censorship and control over media. A democratic regime tends to have strong protections for press freedom.
• Media-state relations - This refers to the level of independence or connection between media organizations and the governing regime. State-controlled media vs private/independent media.
• Media-public relations - The norms around media’s role in informing the public, mobilizing citizens, and representing public opinion or national interests.
• Media bias - The extent to which media coverage skews in favor of or against particular political actors, parties, or viewpoints. Examples include state-run media as propaganda vs objective professional journalism.
• Media effects - Beliefs around media’s power to influence public opinion and voting behavior. Political actors may respond differently depending on whether they see media as all-powerful or inconsequential.

So in summary, a country’s political communication regime shapes the ground rules for how information spreads, discourse occurs, and the public forms political preferences. Different regime types lead to very different media environments and practices.

Government Communication Policy

Communication policies adopted by governments directly impact media environments and operations within a state. Governments enact communication policies that set various rules and regulations for media organizations and practitioners to follow.

These rules and regulations can cover areas like censorship, access to information, licensing requirements, content guidelines, legal liability, and ownership restrictions. More authoritarian states tend to impose tighter controls over media, including banning certain topics, requiring pre-publication review, and using state media for propaganda. More democratic states allow greater press freedoms, but may still impose some content regulations, liability laws, and access restrictions.

A government’s communication policy shapes the landscape in which media outlets operate. Strict policies limit the ability of journalists to investigate and report freely. More open policies enable the media to serve as watchdog over society. But even in democracies, governments look to manage public perception and may withhold information or pressure media over coverage. The prevailing communication policy dictates what boundaries exist for media and just how independent journalism can function within a state.

Political Economy of Media

The political economy of media refers to the ownership structures, funding models, and influence of market forces on mass media. Key factors here include:

• Ownership - Media outlets may be owned by governments, individuals, non-profits or corporations. State/public media generally has different incentives than private media focused on profits. Concentrated private ownership can limit diversity of voices.
• Profit incentives - For-profit media seeks to maximize revenue, which impacts what content gets coverage based on what is most commercially viable. This can lead to sensationalism, infotainment and soft news over public interest coverage.
• Advertising influence - Media reliant on advertising revenue will shape content to avoid offending advertisers and provide programming amenable to commercial breaks.
• Consolidation and conglomeration - Mergers of media companies into huge conglomerates limit competition and diversity of voices as a few giants dominate markets. Their size also increases political lobbying influence.
• Market forces - In commercial media, bottom line economics and the drive for profits, ratings, circulation etc. dictate decision making over public service. Competition for audience attention and share can push extremes over balanced coverage.
• Labor trends - Cost-cutting pressure has led to decline of investigative journalism as resources are not invested into in-depth, expensive reporting. Less journalism jobs/training opportunities impact quality.

The political economy shapes the structure and environment of media systems. It determines what types of content get priority and influences the diversity of voices and viewpoints represented in media ecosystems.

Communication Channels and Technologies

Both traditional and new media formats make up the communication channels and technologies that exist within a country. Traditional media formats include print media such as newspapers, magazines, and books, as well as broadcast media like radio and television. With the rise of the internet and digital technologies, new media formats have emerged and gained prominence.

Some key new media formats include:

• Websites and Blogs - Online platforms for sharing text, images, video, and other multimedia content. Websites can belong to established news organizations, while blogs offer individual perspectives.
• Social Media - Platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok allow users to create profiles, share updates, and interact with each other. Social media facilitates rapid sharing of information.
• Video Streaming - Services like YouTube and TikTok let users upload and share video content to mass audiences. Live streaming has also emerged as an influential format.
• Podcasting - Audio content delivered via RSS feeds or apps that users can download and listen to on-demand. Podcasts cover every genre from news to comedy.
• Messaging Apps - Smartphone apps like WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, and WeChat enable private chats as well as group messaging. These facilitate person-to-person communication.

The rise of digital media has diversified the landscape, allowing more voices to be heard. However, traditional formats like print and broadcast media still retain influence in most countries. The media landscape is a mix of old and new formats.

Media as Foreign Policy Environment

The foreign policy decision-making process takes place within an environment that is partly created by the media. The media play a key role in influencing policymaking through their ability to set the agenda and frame issues for the public and policymakers.

Several ways the media impacts the foreign policy environment:

• The media shape public opinion on foreign policy issues, which in turn influences policymakers who take into account the “public mood.” This is especially true in democratic systems where governments are accountable to voters.
• Media coverage brings certain foreign policy topics to the public’s attention while ignoring others, affecting what issues policymakers focus on and prioritize. This “agenda-setting” role of the media is important in deciding what is up for debate and discussion.
• How the media “frames” foreign policy issues also impacts policymaking. Certain attributes, images, stereotypes and narratives used in coverage influence how issues are understood and interpreted by the public and elites.
• Media coverage provides policymakers with information about how their policies and messaging strategies are being received. This can compel leaders to adapt their decisions and communications tactics.
• Intensive media coverage during international crises creates pressure on policymakers and limits their options. The “CNN effect” and real-time reporting accelerates decision-making.
• Media narratives commenting on a government’s competence and morality can shape reputations and influence legitimacy and public support for leaders and policies.

Overall, accounting for the media environment is crucial in foreign policymaking. Governments must manage the media effectively to shape narratives, public opinion and the policy agenda in their favor.

Media Management in Foreign Policy

Governments engage in various techniques of media management (MM) to influence the media environment in both foreign and domestic policy issues. One of the most common techniques is known as “spin.”

Spin involves coordination between different government and administration bodies dealing with a range of policy topics. The goal is to ensure all spin participants are synchronized and coordinated so that the administration speaks with “one voice.” This unified messaging allows the government to put its desired frame or perspective on issues.

Some examples of spin techniques include:

• Press conferences with officials from multiple agencies or departments to show a unified position.
• “Background” meetings between government spokespeople and selected journalists to explain policy goals and shape coverage.
• Leaking selective information or trial balloons through third parties.
• Timing announcements and policy launches for moments when the message can dominate the news cycle.
• Rapid response or rebuttals to emerging narratives in media coverage that go against government messaging goals.

Spin is essentially a way for governments to proactively try to manage the media environment and public perceptions rather than just reacting to ongoing coverage. When coordinated successfully, spin techniques can help advance a government’s foreign policy interests and agenda through the media.

Conclusion

Public opinion influences governments’ foreign policy decisions (more so in democracies than in authoritarian states), but governments also manipulate public opinion. There were double-sided effects of the media such as the agenda-setting and framing perspectives of the media.

Key takeaways:

• The foreign policy decision-making process takes place within an environment partly created by the media. The techniques of media management (MM) in foreign policy (as well as internal issues) are varied.

• Governments set the rules and regulations according to the general Communication Regime pattern of that state. However, the media can influence policy as an input variable in decision making and also serve as an output or “sounding board” that leaders must relate to.

• The media has effects like agenda-setting and framing that impact public opinion. Public opinion in turn influences governments, but governments also try to manipulate public opinion through media management techniques like “spin.”

• Media performance in influencing foreign policy is dictated by factors like the state’s political communication regime, government communication policy, media’s political-economy structure, communication channels, and functions.

In conclusion, the media and public opinion have a complex, two-way dynamic with governments and their foreign policy decisions. Neither fully controls the other, but both exert influence.