Skip to main content

Mediatization as Structural Couplings: Adapting to Media Logic(s)

Part of the Transforming Communications – Studies in Cross-Media Research book series (TCSCMR)

Abstract

The integration of media logic in mediatization studies has been fiercely debated. First of all, the applicability of the concept has been contested on the grounds that media logic is advancing a linear conceptualisation of mediatization. In addition, discussions of how social systems adapt to media logic have resulted in rather ambivalent notions of autonomy and functional differentiation. Consequently, mediatization studies have been divided in two opposite views regarding the relevance and applicability of media logic in studying processes of mediatization; one camp generally rejects the notion, while another has accepted the concept cautiously. This paper intends to overcome this division by acknowledging both the pitfalls and potentials of the concept of media logic. For such an endeavor to succeed a major re-interpretation of the concept of media logic is required. The paper suggests that the systems theoretical notion of structural coupling offers such a starting point. It describes how social systems are increasingly becoming structurally tied to the media system while upholding their operational autonomy. Thus mediatization designates a process of structural adaptation to the logic of the media systems, which is always context and systems specific, determined by the self-sustained structures of a given social system. The argument proceeds by discussing both the resemblances and differences between mediatization and media logic as well as looking into some of the critique raised against the use of media logic in mediatization studies. Following this review, the paper proposes an alternative approach to studying media logic based on the systems theoretical notion of structural coupling. The paper then goes on to show how such a model implies a fundamental change in our perspectives on media logic, from a simple conceptualization of media adaptation as a zero-sum game to a more complex notion of structural interaction. It also implies an analytical re-orientation away from questions of power and dominance towards questions of co-evolution. Finally, the paper demonstrates that the notion of mediatization as structural coupling allows for a plurality of media logics, opening up for an understanding of media logic as a more diverse concept, which nevertheless maintains a systematic description of mediatization. In the final section, this mainly theoretical argument will be illustrated by a case study of organizational adaptation to mediatization, which also serves to demonstrate the analytical potential of the isomorphic vocabulary of systems thinking.

Keywords

  • Structural Coupling
  • Media logicMedia Logic
  • System-theoretic Notions
  • Social Systemssocial Systems
  • Political communicationPolitical Communication

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 5.1

References

  • Altheide, D. L. (2004). Media logic and political communication. Political Communication, 21(3), 293–296.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Altheide, D. L., & Snow, R. B. (1979). Media logic. Sage library of social research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asp, K. & Esaiasson, P. (1996). The modernization of Swedish campaigns: Individualization, professionalization, and medialization. In P. Mancini & D. L. Swanson (Eds.), Politics, media and modern democracy. An iIternational study of innovations in electoral campaigning and their consequences, (pp. 73–90). Westport: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Cambridge studies in contentious politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1998). On television and journalism. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capra, F., & Luisi, P. L. (2014). The systems view of life: A unifying vision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2000a). Materials for an exploratory theory of network society. British Journal of Sociology, 51(1), 5–24.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2000b). The rise of the network society (2nd ed. Vol 1. 3 vols). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couldry, N. (2012). Media, society, world: Social theory and digital media practice. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2013). Conceptualizing mediatization: Contexts, traditions, Arguments. Communication Theory, 23(3), 191–202.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Deacon, D., & Stanyer, J. (2014). Mediatization: Key concept or conceptual bandwagon? Media, Culture and Society, 36(7), 1032–1044.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dijck, J. V. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donges, P. & Jarren, O. (2014). Mediatization of political organizations: Changing parties and interest groups? In F. Esser & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Mediatization of Politics. Understanding the Transformation of Western Democracies, (pp. 181–199). Houndmills: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskjær, M. F. (2016). Medialisering af Frivillige Organisationer. In S. Hjarvard (Ed.), Medialisering. Mediernes Rolle i Social og Kulturel Forandring, (pp. 241–270). København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eskjær, M. F., Hjarvard, S. & Mortensen, M. (Eds.). (2015). The Dynamics of Mediatized Conflicts (vol. 3). Global Crises and the Media. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahlenbrach, K., Sivertsen, E. & Werenskjold, R. (Eds.) (2014). Media and Revolt: Strategies and Performances from the 1960s to the Presentt. Protest, Culture and Society, 11. New York: Berghahn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gitlin, T. (1980). The whole world is watching. Mass media in the making and unmaking of the new left. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New Brunswick: Aldine Transaction.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems. Three models of media and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hepp, A. (2012). Mediatization and the ‘molding Force’ of the media. Communications, 37, 1–28.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hjarvard, S. (2008). The Mediatization of Society. A Theory of the Media as Agents of Social and Cultural Change. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 105–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjarvard, S. (2010). The views of the news: The role of political newspapers in a changing media landscape. Northern Lights, 8, 25–48.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hjarvard, S. (2013). The mediatizaiton of culture and society. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjarvard, S. (2014). Mediatization and cultural and social change: An institutional perspective. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization of communication (pp. 199–226). Berlin: De Groyter Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hjarvard, S., & Löwheim, M. (2012). Mediatization and religion. Nordic perspectives. Göteborg: Nordicom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihlen, Ø. & Pallas, J. (2014). Mediatization of Corporations. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization of Communication, (pp. 423–441). Berlin and Boston: De Groyter Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, K. B. (2013). Definitive and sensitizing conceptualizations of mediatization: Definitive and sensitizing conceptualizations. Communication Theory, 23(3), 203–222.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kepplinger, H. M. (2002). Mediatization of politics: Theory and data. Journal of Communication, 52, 972–986.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kneer, G. & Nassehi, A. (1997). Niklas Luhmann. Introduktion Til Teorien Om Sociale Systemer. Trans. Nils Mortensen. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krotz, F. (2007). The meta-process of ‘mediatization’ as a conceptual frame. Global Media and Communication, 3(3), 256–260.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, S. & Lunt, P. (2014). Mediatization: An emerging paradigm for media and communication research? In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization of Communication, (pp. 703–723). Berlin and Boston: De Groyter Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1996). Die Realität der Massenmedien. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (2000). Sociale Systemer. Grundrids Til En Almen Teori. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (2002). Einführung in die Systemtheorie. Heidelberg: Carl-Auer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundby, K. (2009a). Media logic: Looking for social interaction. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization. Concept, change, consequences, (pp. 101–119). New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundby, K. (2009b). Mediatization. Concept, change, consequences. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lundby, K. (2014). Mediatization of communication. In K. Ludnby (Ed.), Meditization of Communication, (pp. 3–35). Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maturana, H. R. & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living 42. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Dordrecht and Boston: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoleni, G., & Schulz, W. (1999). Mediatization’ of politics: A challenge for democracy? Political Communication, 16, 247–261.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Pallas, J., & Fredriksson, M. (2013). Corporate media work and micro-dynamics of mediatization. European Journal of Communication, 28(4), 420–435.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schillemans, T. (2012). Mediatization of public services. How organiations adapt to news media. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverstone, R. (2007). Media and Morality. On the Rise of the Mediapolis. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strömbäck, J. (2008). Four phases of mediatization: An analysis of the mediatization of politics. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 228–246.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Strömbäck, J., & Dimitrova, D. V. (2011). Mediatization and media interventionism: A comparative analysis of Sweden and the United States. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(1), 30–49.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Thorbjornsrud, K., Figenshou, T., & Ihlen, Ø. (2014). Mediatization in public bureaucracies: A typology. Communications—The European Journal of Communication Research, 39(1), 3–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilly, C. (2007). Contentious Politics. Boulder, Colo: Paradigm Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vestergaard, A. (2014). Mediatized humanitarianism: Trust and legitimacy in the age of suspicion. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(4), 509–525.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Waisbord, S. (2011). Can NGOs change the news? International Journal of Communication, 5, 142–165.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mikkel Fugl Eskjær .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Eskjær, M.F. (2018). Mediatization as Structural Couplings: Adapting to Media Logic(s). In: Thimm, C., Anastasiadis, M., Einspänner-Pflock, J. (eds) Media Logic(s) Revisited. Transforming Communications – Studies in Cross-Media Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65756-1_5

Download citation