Posted on

A Polarized yet Hollow Debate: The Journalistic Coverage of the Greek Memoranda

By Christos Kostopoulos

The three memoranda signed between various Greek governments and the creditor Troika have been one of the most important European political issues in this decade, generating a lot of journalistic and scholarly interest. This article presents findings from a framing analysis (you can find the complete research here) conducted on three mainstream Greek newspapers (Avgi, Kathimerini, Ta Nea). These frames were compared with the advocate frames promoted through the announcements of the four constant parties in the Greek Parliament throughout this period (PASOK, Nea Dimokratia, SYRIZA, KKE), in order to shed light on the range of democratic debate fostered by the media and the political opinions that were legitimated through their application in the press.

Starting with the first memorandum in 2010 the examination of frames from all three newspapers reveals the range of the debate. The memorandum is discussed mainly in terms of the division between those who are for it and against it, and its good and bad qualities. The framing of the newspapers follows the advocate frames of the two larger parties PASOK and ND, whereas SYRIZA, a marginal party at that point, also manages to be included, because it’s frames fit on the range of legitimate opinions. All the newspapers apply advocate frames by three out of the four major political parties, whereas none of them includes KKE frames. From a market perspective the positions of KKE are not interesting, as lower income workers form it’s main electoral base. Additionally, the examination of the exclusion of the frame from a political and ideological standpoint reveals the limits of the liberal consensus. The analysis of the frames in 2010 reveals that positions that promote a wider criticism of the capitalist mode of production fall outside the acceptable limits of debate. The main frames construct the debate around the issues of efficiency of the measures, their impact, and issues of sovereignty and democracy. The causal attribution dimension revolves around the political game with the parties accusing each other for the crisis, while there is also some blame attributed to the troika. Finally, the solutions discussed concern the future of the memorandum with positions ranging from the necessity of the successful implementation of the program, to its adjustment or complete cancelation. The application of frames is not identical by all newspapers, reflecting a multitude of evaluative positions. Nonetheless, the debate is set around the memorandum without addressing wider reaching topics and alternatives that would question the economic system, which was under a crisis globally. This framing of the debate cuts off the Greek crisis from the global developments and treats it as an issue of management of the system, to be solved by the system itself. Continue reading “A Polarized yet Hollow Debate: The Journalistic Coverage of the Greek Memoranda”

Posted on

Time for the 89ers to Defend Europe

By Henry Radice

On the eleventh day of the eleventh month, the familiar rituals of remembrance feel particularly poignant in a year marking the hundredth anniversary of the outbreak of the First World War, yet itself scarred by a grim array of conflicts which seem appallingly to celebrate, rather than to mourn, the innovations in inhumanity witnessed a century ago.

BerlinWall-BrandenburgGateIn contrast, our rituals of commemoration of 1989 and its symbolic centrepiece, the fall of the Berlin Wall, remain haphazard and unsettled, despite the far more positive legacy at stake (and the moving celebrations in Berlin on Sunday).

Taking stock of this twenty-five year anniversary in a powerful essay in The Guardian, Timothy Garton Ash asks where the 89ers are, contrasting the absence in our culture of such a group with the undoubted resonance of the generations of 1968 or 1939. Garton Ash ponders whether such a generation of 1989 might yet emerge, placing his hopes in those born at or around the end of the Cold War. But, on reflection, I would also like to lay tentative claim to the label, having come of age in an era in which European political consolidation was rapidly taking place through force of will rather than force of arms. For some of us born almost a decade before the fall of the Wall, a political challenge lies ahead, the importance of which directly relates to the events of 1989. Continue reading “Time for the 89ers to Defend Europe”

Posted on

EU: Reframing Can Go Hand in Hand with Reform

By Marley Morris

1860 Mitchell Map of Europe - Geographicus - Europe-m-63Last year my colleague Giulio Carini and I wrote an article about ‘reframing’ the EU. We thought that the current frames supporters of the EU were using in the debate were obstructive and we wanted to suggest some alternatives. We were particularly motivated to do so because we were spending the week hosting George Lakoff, the American professor who has become one of the most well-known advocates of framing, both as a linguistic construct and a political tool.

Since then, openDemocracy has published a series of articles on reframing the European debate, a number of which are somewhat suspicious of our approach. In the absence of Professor Lakoff, I am not ambitious enough to defend the entire concept of framing. But I will make a case for the value of the approach in the current EU debate. Now, in light of the European Parliament election results, where stagnating voter turnout and hotspots of strident Euroscepticism were some of the most striking trends, the fundamentals of the EU debate need addressing more than ever.

There are three broad criticisms levied against framing. One is that it is a spruced up version of spindoctory; political propaganda dressed up in academic obscurities. Another related critique is that it is elitist and disingenuous, reinforcing the political status quo rather than addressing people’s real concerns. And third, it could be seen as vacuous – rather than making a new political contribution, it just repackages old ideas. These are I think the fundamental complaints about the concept of framing and the somewhat low esteem in which some hold it. Continue reading “EU: Reframing Can Go Hand in Hand with Reform”

Posted on

Framing the Indignant Citizens Movement

By Christos Kostopoulos

20110629 Moutza demonstrations Greek parliament Athens GreeceThe current economic crisis that Europe is going through has produced a lot of social strife around the political handling of the crisis. In one of the most affected countries of the Eurozone, Greece, popular resistance to the austerity measures taken culminated in the actions of the social movement that has been referred to as the “Indignant Citizens Movement”.

In a recently conducted piece of research, I examined the role of Greek and British newspapers in the framing of the Indignant Citizens movement and the interaction of these frames with political engagement and agency. The newspapers used for the research were chosen in an effort to include as many different political standpoints from Greece and the United Kingdom as possible. Eleftherotypia, To Vima and Kathimerini were selected from Greece, alongside The Guardian and The Telegraph from the UK. Using Peter Dahlgren’s civic cultures theoretical framework I tried to interpret the frames identified in the study in order to understand how the framing of the Indignant Citizens Movement impacted on civic engagement and agency in Greece, as well as in Europe. Civic culture entails cultural patterns, consists of six dimensions and it is a prerequisite for a viable democracy and a strong critical pubic sphere. Continue reading “Framing the Indignant Citizens Movement”

Posted on

Framing Europe: An Exchange

Frames are a key issue in the analysis of public discourse on the crisis in Europe. As part of their Reluctant Radicals project, our colleagues at Counterpoint have initiated a discussion on framing Europe on openDemocracy. Here we reproduce the original argument made by Giulio Carini and Marley Morris and a response by Policy Network‘s Olaf Cramme.

Reframing Europe in unfriendly times

By Giulio Carini and Marley Morris

Broken window largeTrust in the EU is falling across Europe. With elections for the European Parliament coming up next year, what can EU leaders do to capture the public’s imagination?

They should start by rejecting the view of the mind that takes voters for rational actors who make decisions by weighing up each available option while taking into account all known facts.

All too often, the EU’s solution to public disapproval is to argue that voters are not fully informed; that if only voters truly understood the workings of the EU’s institutions, that if only they were actively involved in the European Parliament elections, then they would understand that the EU is in their best interests. Continue reading “Framing Europe: An Exchange”