 previous article in this issue | next article in this issue  |
|
Document Details : Title: Television and Civic Attitudes Subtitle: The Effect of Television Time, Programmes and Stations Author(s): HOOGHE, Marc Journal: Ethical Perspectives Volume: 9 Issue: 4 Date: 2002 Pages: 230-248 DOI: 10.2143/EP.9.4.503861 Abstract : When the television set first made its appearance in American households during the 1950s, some expected that the new medium would provide a major boost to civic engagement and political awareness. After all, for the first time in history all citizens would get the opportunity to witness important public events and to follow the debates in parliament. Half a century later, the tide has clearly turned for television. Several authors now argue that the spread of television is one of the major causes for the decline of public life and social cohesion. Putnam considers television to be a key culprit for the gradual erosion of social capital within American society. In other research, it is stated that watching television cultivates feelings of insecurity and leads to the spread of distrust, while television is also accused of strengthening a more cynical outlook toward politics and society, in what has been labeled a “video malaise” diagnosis. Proponents of the video malaise argument, however, differ with regard to the causal mechanism they invoke to explain the negative effects of television. In his study on the decline of civic engagement in the United States, Robert Putnam relies on a time replacement effect by suggesting that the spread of television, by itself, could be responsible for as much as a quarter of the observed decline: the time spent on television is no longer available for other, more civic activities and for political participation. Other authors invoke attitudinal effects: maybe television does not affect behaviour, but it could lead to the development of specific value patterns among its audience. Opinions differ on the question whether a more negative and cynical style of covering political news is to be blamed for this effect or rather the increasing amount of entertainment programmes on commercial television . Other authors have argued against this pessimistic assessment of the influence of television. Several arguments are put forward to counter the video malaise claim. First of all, empirical evidence about the alleged negative effects of watching television is not unequivocal: most studies do not reveal significant or strong effects. Although bivariate analysis often shows a clear relation between television viewing behaviour and civic attitudes, after introducing control variables, these effects are usually quite moderate, suggesting the occurrence of self-selection effects, rather than socialization effects. Other studies show that television can also have positive effects: watching the television news is positively associated with political interest and with a more positive outlook toward the political system. Recent experiments demonstrate quite convincingly that exposure to political information on television can boost political knowledge and engagement levels. The basic argument here is that we should not only look at how many hours people spend in front of their television set, but that we should also pay attention to the kind of programmes they are watching: while amusement programmes may have negative effects, we expect a more positive outcome from news and current affairs programmes. Still other authors have argued that not only the content of the programmes is important, but also the channel people prefer. While public broadcasting could or should stimulate civic attitudes, commercial stations will show a tendency to broadcast a totally different kind of programmes, resulting in less civic-minded value patterns among its audience. Swedish and Belgian studies, at least, show marked differences in the value patterns of people preferring public broadcasting versus those who prefer commercial stations. These different arguments have resulted in an animated debate between authors like Robert Putnam, stressing the negative effects of prolonged television viewing, and others like Pippa Norris or Kenneth Newton, claiming that watching the television news is positively associated with political interest and political participation. Bringing empirical evidence into this debate is notoriously difficult. The first, and major problem is that it is almost impossible to rely on longitudinal research in order to detect television effects. Communication research therefore routinely relies on laboratory experiments, raising the question whether the results of this kind of experiment can be generalized into real world circumstances. A second problem is that thus far, we do not have access to survey data in which all three possible factors (time, content, station) were questioned simultaneously. In fact, only in a few Western societies is the audience reached by public broadcasting large enough to be represented in a satisfactory manner in a general population survey. In this article we will rely on a 1998 Flemish population survey, which included questions about the time people spend in front of their television set, and the kind of programmes they prefer, but also the station they tune in to regularly. This survey also included various questions on participation in voluntary associations, which allows us to test Putnam’s claim that the medium exerts a negative influence on social capital by reducing civic participation, thus diminishing the time people are exposed to the experience of these ‘learning schools of democracy’. Furthermore, Belgian society offers an ideal setting to test the thesis on the importance of commercial vs. public broadcasting: the television market in the country is divided almost evenly between the public broadcasting service and various commercial stations. The survey therefore offers all the necessary material for trying to disentangle the causal mechanisms between watching television and civic attitudes and behaviour. The survey was based on official population records, resulting in 1341 face-to-face interviews, and it proved to be representative for the Dutch-speaking population of Belgium. With the results of this survey, we try to test the alleged causal mechanisms between television and civic attitudes, focusing first on Putnam’s claim that prolonged television watching reduces civic participation. Secondly, we address the claim that television has a direct impact on civic attitudes. Then we go on to analyze the impact of the programmes our respondents preferred, and the relation with the kind of station they prefer. |
|
