Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: Media Policy and Media Policy Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research

Abstract

This introductory chapter discusses both media policy and the field of media policy research. Focusing on the subject of research first, we deal with media policy, media regulation and media governance, and how they relate to each other. We argue that media policies emanate from and are reflective of more abstract paradigmatic views on the relationship between the state, society and media. Moreover, media policy is not only about the output of policy-making but also about the policy-making process (politics) that takes place within specific institutional structures (polity). In turn, media regulation refers to the specific instruments implemented to achieve specified policy goals and media governance reflects a power shift from governments to new actors and fora. Proceeding to the research field, we follow Lasswell by defining media policy research as encompassing both doing research about media policy and informing media policy-making. We briefly discuss the history of this field of study and the ongoing debate about the relationship between administrative and critical research. The chapter ends by looking at the promise and limitations of the recent trend of evidence-based policy-making and its implication for the analysis of media and communication policy.

Media policy analysis sets out to ‘examine the ways in which policies in the field of communication are generated and implemented, as well as their repercussions or implications for the field of communication as a whole’.

(Hansen, Cottle, Negrine, & Newbold, 1998, p. 67)

Despite Bock, Velleman, and De Veaux’s (2015, p. 1) warning not to call the first chapter “Introduction” because ‘nobody reads the introduction’ (which they felt safe admitting in a footnote ‘because nobody reads footnotes either’), we dared to do so because we believe in our readers. And, apparently, we were right: you even read the notes!

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ali, C., & Puppis, M. (2018). When the watchdog neither barks nor bites: Communication as a power resource in media policy and regulation. Communication Theory, online first. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtx003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allan, S. (2010a). News culture (3rd ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allan, S. (Ed.). (2010b). The Routledge companion to news and journalism. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. A. (1975). Public policy-making. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R., Cave, M., & Lodge, M. (2012). Understanding regulation: Theory, strategy, and practice (2nd ed.). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, J. M., Kim, S., Mody, B., & Wildman, S. S. (2005, May 26–30). The role of research in communications policy: Theory and evidence. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Conference of the International Communications Association, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakie, P., & Soussan, J. G. (2001). Understanding policy processes. Leeds: University of Leeds.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, D. E., Vellemann, P. F., & De Veaux, R. D. (2015). Stats: Modelling the world (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braman, S. (2003a). Policy as a research context. In S. Braman (Ed.), Communication researchers and policy making (pp. 35–58). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Braman, S. (2003b). The long view. In S. Braman (Ed.), Communication researchers and policy-making (pp. 10–31). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Braman, S. (2004). Where has media policy gone? Defining the field in the twenty-first century. Communication Law and Policy, 9(2), 153–182. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326926clp0902_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braman, S. (2008). Policy research in an evidence-averse environment. International Journal of Communication, 2, 433–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braunstein, D., Plumb, J., & Warburton, W. (2012). Media and social policy: Towards an evidence-based approach to content regulation. In W. Warburton & D. Braunstein (Eds.), Growing up fast and furious: Reviewing the impacts of violent and sexualized media on children (pp. 197–219). Sydney: Federation Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham, D. (2009). The appliance of science: The role of evidence in the making of regulatory policy on children and food advertising in the UK. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 15(2), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chernyavskaya, A. (2015). Evidence-based policymaking for provision of children’s rights online. LSE Media Policy Project Blog. http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2015/06/24/evidence-based-policymaking-for-provisionof-childrens-rights-online/.

  • Dahlgren, P. (1995). Television and the public sphere. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • d’Haenens, L., Mansell, R., & Sarikakis, K. (Eds.). (2010). Media governance: New policies for changing media landscape [Special Issue]. Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(2).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donders, K., & Raats, T. (2012). Analyzing national practices after European state aid control: Are multi-stakeholder negotiations beneficial for public service broadcasting. Media, Culture and Society, 34(2), 162–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443711430756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donders, K., Van den Bulck, H., & Raats, T. (2018). The politics of pleasing: A critical analysis of multistakeholderism in public service media policies in Flanders. Media, Culture and Society, online first.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farr, J., Hacker, J. S., & Kazee, N. (2006). The policy scientist of democracy: The discipline of Harold D. Lasswell. American Political Science Review, 100(4), 579–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, D. (2008). The politics of media policy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, D. (2010). Media policy silences: The hidden face of communications decision making. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 15(3), 344–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161210368292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garnham, N. (1992). The media and the public sphere. In C. Cahoun (Ed.), Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, T., & Humphreys, P. (2012). Audiovisual regulation under pressure. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gilardi, F. (2005). The institutional foundations of regulatory capitalism: The diffusion of independent regulatory agencies in western Europe. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 598, 84–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginosar, A. (2013). Media governance: A conceptual framework or merely a buzz word? Communication Theory, 23(4), 356–374. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haight, T. R. (1983). The critical researcher’s dilemma. Journal of Communication, 33(3), 226–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hajer, M. (2003). Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void. Policy Sciences, 36, 175–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. A. (1992). The movement from Keynesianism to monetarism: Institutional analysis and British economic policy in the 1970s. In S. Steinmo, K. Thelen, & F. Longstreth (Eds.), Structuring politics: Historical institutionalism in comparative analysis (pp. 90–113). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, A., Cottle, S., Negrine, R., & Newbold, C. (1998). Mass communication research methods. London: MacMillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Harms, L. S. (1977). Toward a shared paradigm for communication: An emerging foundation for the new communication policy and communication planning sciences. In S. A. Rahim & J. Middleton (Eds.), Perspectives in communication policy and planning (pp. 77–99). Honolulu: East-West Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howlett, M. (2009). Policy analytical capacity and evidence-based policy-making: Lessons from Canada. Canadian Public Administration, 52(2), 153–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-7121.2009.00070_1.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchinson, D. (1999). Media policy: An introduction. London: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, C. (1970). An introduction to the study of public policy. Belmont: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordana, J., & Levi-Faur, D. (Eds.). (2004). The politics of regulation: Institutions and regulatory reform in the age of governance. Cheltenham; Northampton: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Just, N., & Puppis, M. (2012). Communication policy research: Looking back, moving forward. In N. Just & M. Puppis (Eds.), Trends in communication policy research: New theories, methods and subjects (pp. 9–29). Bristol; Chicago: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Just, N., & Puppis, M. (2018). Moving beyond self-castigation: Let’s reinvigorate communication policy research now! Journal of Communication, 68(2), 327–336. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaid, L. L., & Holtz-Bacha, C. (Eds.). (2008). Encyclopedia of political communication. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karppinen, K., & Moe, H. (2013). A critique of “media governance”. In M. Löblich & S. Pfaff-Rüdiger (Eds.), Communication and media policy in the era of the Internet: Theories and processes (pp. 69–80). Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, E., & Katz, R. (2016). Revisiting the origin of the administrative versus critical research debate. Journal of Information Policy, 6, 4–12. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.6.2016.0004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kunkel, D., & Farinola, W. J. M. (2001). Underestimating our own weight? The scope and impact of communication research on public policy. In W. B. Gudykunst (Ed.), Communication yearbook, 24 (pp. 411–431). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Künzler, M. (2012). ‘It’s the idea, stupid!’ How ideas challenge broadcasting liberalization. In N. Just & M. Puppis (Eds.), Trends in communication policy research: New theories, methods and subjects (pp. 55–74). Bristol; Chicago: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1951). The policy orientation. In D. Lerner & H. D. Lasswell (Eds.), The policy sciences: Recent developments in scope and method (pp. 3–15). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1956). The decision process. College Park: University of Maryland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasswell, H. D. (1970). The emerging conception of the policy sciences. Policy Sciences, 1(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latzer, M. (1998). European mediamatics policies: Coping with convergence and globalization. Telecommunications Policy, 22(6), 457–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lazarsfeld, P. F. (1941). Remarks on administrative and critical communication research. Studies in Philosophy and Science, 9, 2–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lijphart, A. (1984). Non-majoritarian democracy: A comparison of federal and consociational theories. Publius, 15(2), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.2307/3329961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowi, T. J. (1964). Review: American business, public policy, case-studies, and political theory. World Politics, 16(4), 677–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marston, G., & Watts, R. (2003). Tampering with the evidence: A critical appraisal of evidence-based policy-making. The Drawing Board: An Australian Review of Public Affairs, 3(3), 143–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • McChesney, R. W. (2008). The political economy of the media: Enduring issues, emerging dilemmas. New York: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meier, W. A. (2018). Media governance: More than a buzzword? In L. d’Haenens, H. Sousa, & J. Trappel (Eds.), Comparative media policy, regulation and governance in Europe: Unpacking the policy cycle (pp. 55–71). Bristol; Chicago: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melody, W. H., & Mansell, R. (1983). The debate over critical vs. administrative research: Circularity or challenge. Journal of Communication, 33(3), 103–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, M. (1995). Why communications policy is passing ‘mass communication’ by: Political economy as the missing link. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12(4), 457–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, G., & Golding P. (2005). Culture, communications and political economy. In J. Curran & M. Gurevitch (eds.), Mass media and society, 4th ed. (pp. 60–83). London: Hodder Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, P. M. (1999). The unique nature of communications regulation: Evidence and implications for communications policy analysis. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(4), 565–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, P. M. (2001). Foundations of communications policy: Principles and process in the regulation of electronic media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, P. M. (2007). Media policy: An overview of the field (McGannon Center Working Paper 19). Bronx, NY: Fordham University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, P. M., & Friedland, L. (2016). US communications policy research and the integration of the administrative and critical communication research traditions. Journal of Information Policy, 6, 41–65. https://doi.org/10.5325/jinfopoli.6.2016.0041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, P. M., & Seaton, M. (2007). Necessary knowledge for communications policy: Information asymmetries and commercial data access and usage in the policymaking process. Federal Communication Law Journal, 59(2), 295–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, W. (2002). From muddling through to muddling up: Evidence based policy making and the modernization of British government. Public Policy and Administration, 17(3), 43–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patzelt, W. J. (2003). Einführung in die Politikwissenschaft. Grundriss des Faches und studiumbegleitende Orientierung (5th ed.). Passau: Wissenschaftsverlag Richard Rothe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pool, I. d. S. (1974). The rise of communications policy research. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pool, I. d. S. (1983). Technologies of freedom: On free speech in an electronic age. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, M., Puppis, M., & Verhulst, S. (2013). Media policy and governance. Oxford Bibliographies. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199756841-0119.

  • Puppis, M. (2010a). Media governance: A new concept for the analysis of media policy and regulation. Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(2), 134–149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-9137.2010.01063.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puppis, M. (2010b). Einführung in die Medienpolitik (2nd ed.). Konstanz: UVK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puppis, M. (2016). Media regulation, political. In G. Mazzoleni (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of political communication. Oxford; Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118541555.wbiepc201.

  • Puppis, M., & Maggetti, M. (2012). The accountability and legitimacy of regulatory agencies in the communication sector. In N. Just & M. Puppis (Eds.), Trends in Communication policy research: New theories, methods and subjects (pp. 75–94). Bristol; Chicago: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puppis, M., Simpson, S., & Van den Bulck, H. (2016). Contextualizing European media policy in the twenty-first century. In S. Simpson, M. Puppis, & H. Van den Bulck (Eds.), European media policy for the twenty-first century (pp. 1–19). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinard, J. C., & Ortiz, S. M. (2005). Communication law and policy: The state of research and theory. Journal of Communication, 55(3), 594–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, W. D. (1984). Deconstructing American communications policy literature. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 1(4), 423–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, I. (2002). Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Administration, 80(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saurwein, F., Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2015). Governance of algorithms: Options and limitations. info, 17(6), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1108/info-05-2015-0025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiller, H. I. (1975). The appearance of national-communications policies: A new arena for social struggle. International Communications Gazette, 21(2), 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siebert, F. S., Peterson, T., & Schramm, W. (1956). Four theories of the press: The authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility and Soviet communist concepts of what the press should be and do. Champagne: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgerson, D. (1985). Contextual orientation in policy analysis: The contribution of Harold D. Lasswell. Policy Sciences, 18(3), 241–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Cuilenburg, J., & McQuail, D. (2003). Media policy paradigm shifts: Towards a new communications policy paradigm. European Journal of Communication, 18(2), 181–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Cuilenburg, J., & Slaa, P. (1993). From media policy towards a national communications policy: Broadening the scope. European Journal of Communication, 8(2), 149–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bulck, H. (2013). Tracing media policy decisions: Of stakeholders, networks and advocacy coalitions. In M. Price, S. Verhulst, & L. Morgan (Eds.), Routledge handbook of media law. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bulck, H. (2015). Public service media accountability in recent decades: A Progressive shift from state to market. In K. A. Ibarra, E. Nowak, & R. Kuhn (Eds.), Public service media in Europe: A comparative approach. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bulck, H. (2017). Is convergence the “killer bug” in the media ecosystem? The case of Flemish media policymaking 2010–2015. In S. Sparviero, C. Peil, & G. Balbi (Eds.), Media convergence and deconvergence (pp. 241–260). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bulck, H. (2018). Mediabeleid [Media policy]. Antwerp: University of Antwerp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Bulck, H., & Donders, K. (2014). Of discourses, stakeholders and advocacy coalitions in media policy: Tracing negotiations towards the new management contract of Flemish public broadcaster VRT. European Journal of Communication, 29(1), 83–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gompel, R., Van den Bulck, H., & Biltereyst, D. (2002). Media industries. In O. Boyd-Barrett, C. Newbold, & H. Van den Bulck (Eds.), The media book (pp. 162–211). London: Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windhoff-Héritier, A. (1987). Policy-Analyse. Eine Einführung. Frankfurt a. M. and New York: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

Further Reading

  • Braman S. (Ed.). (2003). Communication researchers and policy making. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freedman, D. (2008). The politics of media policy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing policy analysis: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Just, N., & Puppis, M. (Eds.). (2012). Trends in communication policy research: New theories, methods and subjects. Bristol; Chicago: Intellect.

    Google Scholar 

  • Napoli, P. M., & Gillis, N. (2006). Reassessing the potential contribution of communications research to communications policy: The case of media ownership. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(4), 671–691.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication and Media Research, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Manuel Puppis

  2. Department of Communication, Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA

    Hilde Van den Bulck

Authors
  1. Manuel Puppis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hilde Van den Bulck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Communication, Drexel University, Philadelphia, USA

    Hilde Van den Bulck

  2. Department of Communication and Media Research, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

    Manuel Puppis

  3. Department of Communication Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Karen Donders

  4. Department of Communication Studies, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium

    Leo Van Audenhove

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Puppis, M., Van den Bulck, H. (2019). Introduction: Media Policy and Media Policy Research. In: Van den Bulck, H., Puppis, M., Donders, K., Van Audenhove, L. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Methods for Media Policy Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16065-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation