Introduction to Comparative Politics

NARRATIVE REPORT
A Narrative Report on
Non-democratic System, Political Culture,
and Political Communication

GROUP 2

Bachelor of Arts in Political Science III-A

ESTRADA, Alliah Mae B.

ALCANCIADO, Johann Oliver B.
CALLEJO, Amanda Rose
DE LA CUADRA, Rashel Jane C.
NERJA, Ryan Mark
SEDANTES, Sydney Razem C.
TUDAYAN, Ryan Jeffrey C.

1st Semester A.Y. 2024-2025

 NON-DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM

Overview of Non-Democratic System

• Non-democratic systems are characterized by a concentration of power, limited political

pluralism, and restricted individual freedoms.
• These systems can take various forms, such as authoritarian regimes, totalitarian states, or
oligarchies, where the ruling entity seeks to maintain control through various mechanisms of
repression and control.
• Non-democratic systems concentrate power, limit political pluralism, and restrict individual
freedoms. These systems, such as authoritarian regimes, totalitarian states, or oligarchies,
maintain control through repression and strict regulation of political life.

Definition of Non-Democratic System

• A non-democratic system is defined as a political structure where power is concentrated in the
hands of a single leader, a small group, or a dominant party that is not accountable to the public
through regular, free, and fair elections.
• Such systems often lack the institutional checks and balances found in democratic regimes,
leading to the suppression of dissent and limited political participation.
• Defines non-democratic systems as political structures where power is centralized in a single
leader, a small group, or a dominant party, with little to no accountability to the public. These
systems lack institutional checks and balances, suppress dissent, and restrict political
participation.

Traditional Authoritarian Rule

o Personal Authority: Power is vested in the ruler, not in an abstract entity like a party.
- In traditional authoritarian systems, power is centered on the ruler personally, rather than
on an institution like a political party.

o Subjects vs. Citizens: The population serves the ruler, who is not constrained by law or elections.
- People are viewed as subjects who serve the ruler, with no legal protections or democratic
participation through elections.

o Patrimonial Rule: Ruler acts as a father figure, expected to care for people, but maintains
inequality.
- The ruler is seen as a paternal figure responsible for the well-being of the people, but this
comes with maintaining inequality and control.

o Lack of Modern State Concepts: No constitutions, separation of powers, or rule of law.

- There is an absence of constitutions, separation of powers, or the rule of law; the law is
often just the ruler’s will.

o Limited Control: Power is not absolute; rulers rely on local leaders due to limited bureaucracy
and communication.
- Despite their power, rulers often rely on local leaders due to the lack of modern bureaucracy
and communication infrastructure, meaning their control is not absolute.
 Communist, Fascist, And Military Rule

Communist States:
o Origin: Emerged from the 1917 Russian Revolution.
- Communist states originated from the 1917 Russian Revolution, marking the beginning of
a new political era.

o Ideology vs. Practice: Marx's vision of equality vs. Lenin's authoritarian party rule.
- While Marx envisioned a classless, equal society, in practice, Lenin established an
authoritarian rule where the communist party held dominant power.

o State Control: Extensive control over society, economy, and political life.
- These regimes exercised extensive control over all aspects of society, the economy, and
political life, with the state playing a central role in shaping every part of daily life.

Fascist States:
o Nation Over Individual: Extreme nationalism and glorification of the state.
- Fascist states emphasize extreme nationalism, prioritizing the state above individual rights.

o Authoritarian Rule: Autocratic leaders, single-party dominance, limited by time and geography.
- These regimes are led by autocratic leaders and dominated by a single party, with their
influence often limited to specific times and regions.

o Ideological Simplicity: Less coherent than communism but driven by national revival.
- While less complex than communism, fascism is driven by a strong focus on national revival
and unity.
Military Rule:
o Non-Ideological: Often lacks theoretical justification, focuses on control.
- Military regimes often lack a clear ideological foundation, focusing primarily on maintaining
control.

o Seizure of Power: Typically through coups, often supported by Cold War superpowers.
- These governments typically come to power through military coups, sometimes with
backing from Cold War superpowers.

o Exclusionary Regimes: Prevents popular participation, suppresses opposition.

- Military rulers usually limit public participation and actively suppress opposition to secure
their hold on power.
 COMPARISON OF NON-DEMOCRATIC AND DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMS

Political Power and Authority

Non-Democratic Systems: Power is centralized, and leaders are often not subject to public
accountability. Power is maintained through coercion and control over political institutions.
Democratic Systems: Power is decentralized with a system of checks and balances. Leaders are
accountable to the electorate through free and fair elections.
Rule of Law
Non-Democratic Systems: The rule of law is weak, and the judiciary is often controlled by the ruling
elite. Laws are used to suppress opposition and maintain control.
Democratic Systems: The rule of law is strong, with an independent judiciary that ensures laws are
applied equally to all individuals, including those in power.

Political Participation

Non-Democratic Systems: Political participation is restricted, and opposition is often suppressed.

Citizens have limited or no real avenues to influence political decisions.
Democratic Systems: There is broad political participation with multiple avenues for citizens to
engage in the political process, including voting and running for office.

Freedom of Expression and Media

Non-Democratic Systems: Freedom of expression is limited, and the media is often controlled or
heavily censored by the state. Independent journalism is suppressed.
Democratic Systems: Freedom of speech and a free press are protected, allowing for diverse opinions
and critical debate. The media acts as a watchdog over the government.
Civil Liberties and Human Rights
Non-Democratic Systems: Civil liberties are often curtailed, and human rights abuses are common.
Dissent is met with repression.
Democratic Systems: Civil liberties are protected, and there is a strong emphasis on upholding human
rights. The government is expected to protect these rights for all citizens.
Economic Policies and Control
Non-Democratic Systems: Economic policies are often designed to benefit the ruling elite, with
limited transparency. Economic freedoms may be restricted, and state intervention can be high.
Democratic Systems: Economic policies are generally more transparent and subject to public debate.
There is a greater emphasis on market freedoms and protecting property rights, though approaches
vary.
 CONSEQUENCES OF NON-DEMOCRATIC GOVERNANCE ON
HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Consequences On Human Rights

Suppression of Free Expression: Non-democratic regimes often restrict freedoms of speech, press, and
assembly. Individuals may face censorship, imprisonment, or violence for expressing dissenting views or
criticizing the government.
o Source: Human Rights Watch. World Report 2023

Arbitrary Arrests and Detention: In non-democratic systems, the rule of law is frequently undermined,
leading to arbitrary arrests and detention without due process. Political opponents and activists are often
targeted.
o Source: Amnesty International.

Torture and Ill-Treatment: Torture and ill-treatment are common in non-democratic regimes as a means to
maintain control and suppress dissent. Victims often include political prisoners and minority groups.
o Source: Freedom House. Freedom in the World 2023

Lack of Judicial Independence: The judiciary in non-democratic regimes is often subject to political
influence, leading to unfair trials and denial of justice. This lack of judicial independence contributes to
widespread human rights abuses.
o Source: International Crisis Group. Authoritarianism and the Erosion of Judicial Independence –
Analyzes the impact of non-democratic governance on judicial systems and human rights.

Persecution of Political Opponents and Minorities: Political dissidents, activists, and minority groups often
face severe persecution, including imprisonment, forced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings.
o Source: Council on Foreign Relations. The Impact of Authoritarianism on Human Rights –
Examines the persecution faced by political opponents and minorities under authoritarian
regimes.

Consequences on International Relations

International Isolation and Sanctions: Non-democratic regimes often face international isolation and
economic sanctions from democratic nations and international organizations. These measures are typically
imposed in response to human rights abuses or undemocratic practices.
o Source: International Crisis Group. Authoritarianism and the Global Order – This report explores
how authoritarian regimes face isolation and sanctions and the impacts on their international
relations.

Strained Diplomatic Relations: Countries governed by authoritarian regimes often experience strained
diplomatic relations with democratic states due to conflicting values and policies. This can complicate
international cooperation on various global issues, including trade, security, and climate change.
o Source: The Brookings Institution. The Impact of Authoritarianism on International Relations –
Analyzes how authoritarianism affects diplomatic relations and international cooperation.

Increased Regional Instability: Authoritarian governments may engage in aggressive or destabilizing foreign
policies to distract from internal issues or consolidate power. This behavior can contribute to regional conflicts
and affect global stability.
 o Source: Council on Foreign Relations. The Impact of Authoritarianism on Global Stability – Examines
how authoritarian regimes influence regional and global stability.

Economic and Trade Implications: Non-democratic regimes may face economic repercussions due to
sanctions or reduced foreign investment. Conversely, they may seek economic partnerships with other non-
democratic states, which can impact global trade dynamics.
o Source: Freedom House. Freedom in the World 2023 – Provides insights into how authoritarian
governance affects economic relations and trade policies.

Humanitarian Interventions and International Pressure: Severe human rights abuses under non-
democratic regimes may prompt international interventions or pressure from global institutions. These actions,
while aimed at addressing human rights concerns, can lead to complex geopolitical responses.
o Source: Human Rights Watch. World Report 2023 – Discusses international responses to human rights
violations in authoritarian regimes and the subsequent impact on international relations.

Tank Man

The "Tank Man" refers to an unidentified individual who became a symbol of resistance during the
Tiananmen Square protests in Beijing, China, in 1989. The context surrounding Tank Man involves a
significant moment in Chinese history, marked by a large-scale pro-democracy demonstration and its violent
suppression by the Chinese government.

The Tiananmen Square protests began in April 1989, driven by student-led demonstrations advocating
for political reform, freedom of speech, and greater government accountability. The movement gained broad
support from various segments of society, including intellectuals and workers, as it addressed widespread
concerns about corruption and political stagnation.

Marcos Regime

The Martial Law period was marked by widespread human rights abuses. Thousands of people were
arrested without warrants, subjected to torture, and detained indefinitely. The regime targeted activists,
journalists, and political opponents, leading to a climate of fear and repression.

Leila de Lima

De Lima’s arrest came amid a highly charged political climate. She was a vocal critic of President
Rodrigo Duterte’s controversial anti-drug campaign, which had led to numerous extrajudicial killings. Her
criticism and investigations into the drug war made her a target for the administration. Many observers,
including human rights groups and international critics, argued that the charges against her were part of a
broader effort by Duterte to silence his critics.

Adolf Hitler

Under Adolf Hitler, the judiciary was systematically purged of judges who were not aligned with the
Nazi ideology. The courts were used to enforce the regime’s policies, including the prosecution of political
opponents and the implementation of anti-Semitic laws. The legal system was heavily politicized and lacked
independence.
 The Great Purge

The Great Purge, also known as the Great Terror, was a period of intense political repression and persecution
in the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin from 1936 to 1938. This campaign aimed to consolidate Stalin's power,
eliminate perceived enemies, and enforce political conformity. Here’s an overview of what happened during
the Great Purge:

North Korea

International Sanctions: North Korea faces extensive international sanctions due to its nuclear weapons
program and other geopolitical issues. These sanctions have restricted its ability to trade freely, access
international financial systems, and obtain essential goods and technologies.

Economic Isolation: The country is largely cut off from the global economy, limiting its trade and investment
opportunities. This isolation has stifled economic growth and technological advancement.

Myanmar

Example: Myanmar (Burma): The military junta in Myanmar has faced severe international condemnation for
its treatment of ethnic minorities, particularly the Rohingya. Human rights abuses, including mass killings and
displacement, have led to strained relations with many countries and international organizations.

Impact: Such violations typically result in sanctions, travel bans, and condemnation from the international
community, which can isolate the regime diplomatically and economically.

Syria

Conflict: The Syrian Civil War, which began in 2011, has led to extensive regional instability. The conflict
involves multiple factions, including various rebel groups such as ISIS.

Impact: The war has caused massive displacement of people, humanitarian crises, and has drawn in various
regional and international actors, contributing to instability in neighboring countries like Lebanon and Turkey.

Russia

Reason for Sanctions: Russia faces sanctions due to its annexation of Crimea, involvement in the conflict in
Eastern Ukraine, and alleged interference in foreign elections. Sanctions are imposed by the United States, the
European Union, and other countries.

Impact: Sanctions have affected key sectors of the Russian economy, including finance, energy, and defense.
They have led to capital flight, economic stagnation, and strained relations with Western countries.

Venezuela

Humanitarian Crisis: Venezuela's political and economic collapse has led to widespread shortages of food,
medicine, and basic services, as well as mass migration of Venezuelans seeking refuge in neighboring
countries.

International Pressure: There has been significant international pressure on the Venezuelan government due to
human rights abuses and the erosion of democratic institutions. The international community has imposed
sanctions, recognized opposition leader Juan Guaidó as interim president, and provided humanitarian aid to
affected populations.
 POLITICAL CULTURE

• Culture is defined by UNESCO (2002) as ‘the set of distinctive spiritual intellectual and
emotional features of society or a social group. It encompasses, in addition to art and literature,
lifestyles, ways of living together, value systems, traditions and beliefs.’
• It describes the overall pattern in society of beliefs, attitudes and values towards the political
system, or ‘the sum of the fundamental values, sentiments and knowledge that give form and
substance to political processes’ (Pye, 1995: 965).
• Political culture is the sum of individual values and norms regarding politics and the
political system, or the culture of a group which gives shared meaning to political action.
• In comparative politics, political culture is most often studied from a behavioral perspective,
using surveys of the attitudes of individuals.

• The events of 9/11 also show the importance of studying political culture.
- The 9/11 attacks were a series of coordinated terrorist events that took place on
September 11, 2001, in the United States. The 9/11 attacks resulted in the deaths of
nearly 3,000 people and led to significant changes in U.S. and global security policies,
including the initiation of the War on Terror.

THE CIVIC CULTURE

• Civic culture refers to the moderate political culture in which most people accept the obligation
to participate in politics while still acknowledging the authority of the state and its right to take
decisions.

• Almond and Verba’s “The Civic Culture” (1963)

- The classic study of political culture and democracy is Almond and Verba’s The Civic
Culture (1963). Based on surveys conducted during 1959–60 in the USA, Britain,
West Germany, Italy and Mexico. Their investigation was the first systematic study of
political culture, and – in seeking to identify the culture within which a liberal
democracy is most likely to develop and consolidate.
- Almond and Verba found the source of stable democracy in what they called a civic
culture.
- This is a particular form of allegiant political culture in which most citizens accept the
authority of the state and believe in civic participation, and it includes an expectation of
fair treatment by government authorities, the ability to talk freely about politics,
tolerance towards opposition, and civic cooperation and trust.

Three Pure Types of Political Culture

o Parochial
- In a parochial political culture, first of all, citizens are only indistinctly aware of the
existence of central government, as with remote tribes whose existence is seemingly
unaffected by national decisions made by the central government. Parochial cultures
have been rare in established democracies but elements can be found in isolated rural
communities or in the growing number of inner-city areas where government is remote
from people’s lives.
o Subject
- In a subject political culture, second, citizens see themselves not as participants in the
political process but as subjects of the government, as with people living under a
dictatorship. Although we may not associate subject cultures with democracies, subject
attitudes may be growing among young people, many of whom remain distant from
politics even though they recognize government’s impact on their lives.

o Participant
- The third and most familiar type is the participant political culture. Here, citizens believe
both that they can contribute to the system and that they are affected by it.

Civic culture resolves the tension within democracy between popular control and effective
governance, it allows for citizen influence while retaining flexibility for the governing elite.

POLITICAL TRUST
• Political trust refers to the belief that the system and institutions of government generate
competent decisions which reflect the concern of leaders for those they govern (Hardin, 2006).
- Political trust indicates diffuse support for the regime, facilitating sound governance,
while distrust can lead to a lack of compliance with government in such areas as tax
collection.
• Times move on. In the decades following Almond and Verba’s study, many established
democracies hit turbulent waters.
- Vietnam and student activism in the 1960s, the oil crisis of the 1970s, the anti-nuclear
and ecology movements of the 1980s, privatization and cutbacks to the welfare state in
the 1990s, terrorism in the 2000s.
• Western political cultures responded to these events, demonstrating the danger of drawing
general conclusions about a country’s political culture from a single survey. Much of the recent
research has examined the evolution of one particular theme examined by Almond and Verba:
political trust.
- More recent research in the area has therefore focused on whether established
democracies have suffered a decline in political and social trust. And the answer, in
general, is that they have, although the fall focuses on the public’s confidence in the
performance of democratic institutions rather than on the principle of democracy itself.

SOCIAL CAPITAL
• Social capital refers to a culture of trust and cooperation which makes collective action possible
and effective.
- Social capital refers to the social networks of which people are members (consciously
or unconsciously) and the inclinations that they have as members of these networks to
contribute and also to draw from others.
- The collective value of social networks, derived from communication, help and support
among the members of these networks.

• The more contacts people possess, the greater the knowledge, advice, and funding on which
they can draw, and the more engaged people become (Lin and Erickson, 2008).
 - Social capital can be seen at work when neighbors keep an eye on each other’s homes,
or when parents contribute towards the functioning of the school attended by their
children, or when a petition circulates among like-minded people calling on the
government to act or refrain from acting in a particular way.

• As Putnam (2002) says, it is the ability of a community to ‘develop the “I” into the “we”’. A
political culture with a fund of social capital enables a community to build political institutions
with a capacity to solve collective problems.
- Bonding social capital is sustained by networks of people drawn from similar back-
grounds while bridging social capital brings together dissimilar types.

Just as trust in others builds social capital, so trust in government creates political capital. Where
the bond between citizens and government is strong, the government will be granted the flexibility
needed to respond effectively to shared problems.

POSTMATERIALISM

• Postmaterialism is a commitment to radical quality of life issues (such as the environment)

which can emerge, especially among the educated young, from a foundation of personal
security and material affluence.

• From the late 1940s to the early 1970s, the Western world witnessed a period of unprecedented
economic growth. ‘You’ve never had it so good’ became a cliché that summarized the experience
of the postwar generation. This era – long before 9/11 and the wars resulting from it – was
also a period of relative international peace.

• From the 1960s, a new generation of post-materialists emerged: young, well-educated people with
concerns centered on lifestyle issues such as ecology, nuclear disarmament and feminism. Where
prewar generations had valued order, security and fixed rules in such areas as religion and
sexual morality, post-materialists take political and religious authority for granted. They give
priority to self-expression and flexible rules.

• Post-materialists are elite-challenging advocates of the new politics rather than elite-sustaining
foot soldiers in the old party battles. They are more attracted to single- issue groups than to
the broader packages offered by political parties.

• More broadly, the distinctive challenges of the twenty-first century include issues such as
terrorism, energy supply, climate change, youth unemployment, and social security. These
problems invite a renewed focus on the value of security, rather than self-expression. Such
issues force themselves onto the political agenda with an energy that can, in the short run,
overwhelm cultural change emerging gradually through the march of the generations.
• As material needs were increasingly met, younger generations began to prioritize non-material
values such as self-expression, environmental protection, and social equality.
 Seeking to transform political culture

The most interesting approach to political culture in non-democratic regimes is to seek to reshape
the country's values. Totalitarian regimes, aimed to reshape the political values of their citizens. This was
done through indoctrination, such as revising textbooks to align with the regime's ideology. The goal was
to create a population that adhered strictly to the regime's beliefs.

But it was communist regimes that made the most systematic attempt to transform political culture.
They believed the state must reshape how people think and behave, aiming to create a new communist
personality through education and persuasion, fostering a classless, atheist society free of capitalist
influence.

Take the Soviet Union and China as examples. In the Soviet Union and China, post-revolutionary
rulers initiated mass political campaigns to involve the public in politics. However, instead of genuine
political transformation, participation became ritualistic, based on passive obedience rather than active
commitment to communism. Fear led citizens to outwardly conform while secretly prioritizing survival. As
a result, communist efforts to reshape political culture often failed, leading to a distrustful social
environment. This legacy of mistrust continues to hinder the development of participatory political cultures
in post-communist countries.

Elite Political Culture

The influence of elite political culture is critical, especially in countries with underdeveloped mass
political culture. The values and beliefs of the elite significantly impact political decisions and stability.
Elite political culture is more sophisticated and progressive than broader national political culture. For
instance, political leaders in democratic societies often support liberal ideas like free speech, even when
public opinion is less tolerant.

Stouffer's 1954 survey of American attitudes on free speech revealed that most community leaders
defended free speech for groups like atheists and communists, despite widespread public intolerance. By
the 1980s, public support for free speech had grown, but during the 1950s, it was the political elite that
resisted populist anti-communist efforts like Senator Joe McCarthy’s witch hunts.

Higher education plays a key role in shaping the more liberal values of political elites, fostering
humanitarianism and optimism about solving social problems. However, this often creates tension between
the educated elite and the less educated population, highlighting a significant divide in many political
cultures.

In assessing the impact of elite political culture on stability, three dimensions are crucial:
➢ The confidence of political elites in their right to govern is a key aspect of elite political culture. Historical
examples, such as the collapse of communist regimes in Eastern Europe, show that when elites lose
confidence in their legitimacy, it can lead to regime change. Initially, Soviet and Eastern European
communist rulers believed their planned economies were successful, but by the late 1980s, economic
decline and loss of intellectual support weakened the system, leading to the eventual fall of communist rule.
In contrast, China's continued economic growth has sustained the elite’s belief in their legitimacy.

A modern example of elite political culture sustaining non-democratic governance is technocracy,

particularly in Latin America. Technocrats, or experts trained in fields like economics or engineering,
influenced economic policymaking in countries like Chile. Unlike communist rulers, these "techno-boys"
 were confident in their economic policies, governing based on technical knowledge rather than political
ideology, thus maintaining political stability by prioritizing national interests.

➢ Elite political culture is shaped by the elite’s approach to national interest. In some countries, such as France
and Pakistan, bureaucratic elites see themselves as protectors of the nation, sometimes overstepping
politicians. Latin America's technocrats, for example, believed their focus on long-term economic interests
should take precedence over the desires of specific social groups.

In contrast, in many developing and post-communist countries, elites often exploit state resources for
personal or group gain. This leads to corruption and weakens state institutions, undermining public service
as a duty to the nation.

➢ The stability of a political system also depends on whether elites adhere to the rules of political competition.
In some countries, elite competition is absolute, leading to division and instability. In others, elites agree
on the rules and accommodate each other, as seen in the Netherlands, allowing for political stability despite
vigorous debate and competition.

Elite compromise can be a crucial strategy for managing divided societies, especially in post-conflict
situations. By agreeing on resource distribution and accommodating different subcultures, elites can foster
political stability even in deeply divided societies, as seen in post-war Sri Lanka.

Political Socializatio

Political socialization is the process by which political culture is passed from one generation to the
next, preparing individuals for political roles. It is universal and largely uncontrollable by rulers, reinforcing
the status quo and resisting planned changes. Unlike formal political education, political socialization is
informal and indirect, shaped by institutions like family, peer groups, and workplaces, as well as
experiences with authority and communication.

This process continues throughout life, with political outlooks evolving due to personal experiences
and events. Two models highlight the influences on political views: the primacy model, emphasizing
childhood experiences, and the recency model, which focuses on the impact of recent events, such as 9/11.
While recent events can strongly shape perspectives, childhood views often continue to influence how
individuals interpret routine events.

Islam and West

The discussion explores the value of political culture in understanding the relationship between
Islam and the West, particularly since 9/11. Huntington (1996) famously proposed that the division between
Islam and the West is cultural or "civilizational," predicting that future conflicts would arise from cultural
differences rather than ideological ones. He argued that civilizations, such as Islam and the West, have deep-
rooted differences in values, which lead to friction as global interactions increase. Huntington suggested
that these civilizations are locked in conflict, driven by cultural divisions rather than religious ones.

Huntington emphasized the secular, materialistic nature of the West as a point of criticism from the
Islamic world, which, in turn, is shaped by religious education that does not prepare its population for the
modern world. He framed the conflict as inevitable, with Islam critiquing Western power and the West
viewing its culture as universal.
 Critics argue that Huntington's view oversimplifies and essentializes Islam, ignoring the historical
variability of relations between the Islamic and Western worlds, which have included long periods of
peaceful coexistence. Political culture, while useful in understanding general trends, fails to account for
the specific historical and political events—such as colonialism, the creation of Israel, and U.S.
intervention—that shape Arab political emotions and the modern dynamics between Islam and the West.
Ultimately, culture provides a broad context but cannot fully explain the complexities of political conflicts.
 POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

Political communication is an interdisciplinary field that focuses on the ways in which

information, messages, and narratives are created, disseminated, and interpreted within the context
of politics. It encompasses the interactions between various entities such as citizens, political actors
(e.g., elected officials), political institutions (e.g., governments and parties), and the media. The
primary goal of political communication is to inform, persuade, and mobilize individuals regarding
political issues, policies, and events.
Habermas: As for many others, democracy is a form of political communication.
➢ According to Jurgen Habermas, democracy is indeed a form of political communication. Why?
It is because in democracy, encourages active participation from citizens, allowing them to
express their opinion and influence political outcomes through voting and other forms of civic
engagement. He emphasizes the importance the importance of the public sphere, where citizens
engage in rational-critical debate about public matters.

➢ Public Sphere – is a space where individuals can come together to discuss and influence political
action.
Examples of Political Communication
• Campaigning: During elections, candidates engage in various forms of communication to
persuade voters through speeches, debates, advertisements, and social media outreach.
In summary, political communication is essential for understanding how politics operates in
society by examining how information flows between different stakeholders involved in
governance.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE MASS MEDIA

Mass media refers to methods of communication that can reach a large and potentially
unlimited number of people simultaneously. Television and newspapers are the most important
examples; others are posters, radio, books, magazines and cinema.

In these brave new worlds of total and totally controlled communication, mass media
would be used to create people with the knowledge and attitudes specified by the political elite.
Such visions proved to be fanciful but the broadcast media, like news- papers earlier, did serve as
agents of national integration. In most countries, a small number of national channels initially
dominated the airwaves, providing a shared experience for a dispersed population of everything
from national events to popular entertainment.

To understand contemporary trends in the communications media, we must begin by

placing the mass media in a historical context. This task is a political assignment since the
expansion of mass communication was intimately linked to the growth of the state, especially in
the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A history of politics must also be, in part, a history of
communication.
 Two Preliminary Point of Mass Media

First

From writing through printing to television, each stage in media evolution has indeed
generated more controversy than consensus due to its profound impact in society’s structures and
values. Media evolution has introduced a multitude of platforms and voices, leading to a wide
range of opinions and interpretation.

Second

Technological determinism says that a society is defined by its technology. Technological

determinism is a theory that suggests technology is the primary driver of societal change and
shapes human behavior and culture. Just like the telegraph, the telephone and the internet were
each consciously developed to improve communication across distance. Telephones and internet
have profoundly shaped modern society by enhancing communication capabilities, facilitating
access to information, and fostering innovation across various sectors.

THE MEDIA: CONTEMPORARY TRENDS

In the first decade of the twenty-first century, the three major trends in communications
are commercialization, fragmentation and globalization. The combined political effect of these
developments is to reduce national political control over broadcasting, permitting consumers
either to choose their own political programming or increasingly to escape from politics altogether.

Commercialization

Commercialization in mass media refers to the process by which media outlets including
radio, television, newspaper, and online platforms, prioritize profit generation through advertising
and commercial interests over public service or informational content.

Example: During election seasons, especially in national level, the media outlets often give
more attention to well-known candidates, just like what Donald Trump did during 2016 election
in United States. Because of his ability to generate controversy and public interest, he won against
Hillary Clinton and became the 45th President of the United State. Donald Trump campaign was
accused of actively seeking to deter a significant number of black Americans from voting. This
effort reportedly involved targeting approximately 3.5 million black American voters in key
battlegrounds states. Trump used the different social media platforms just like Twitter and
Facebook to disseminate negative advertisements which aimed to dissuading them from
supporting Hillary Clinton.

Fragmentation

Fragmentation is mass media refers to the dispersion of viewers or listeners across various
media channels, resulting in more choices for consumers and make it more challenging for
advertisers to reach their target audience.

Example: Before, people relied only on a few major networks for news and entertainment.
But nowadays, there are hundreds of channels and platforms where anyone can access information.
The shift from traditional broadcast television to online streaming and social media has also led to
fragmentation.

Globalization

Globalization in mass media is a process where the system of communication and

information reaches audiences throughout the world by crossing national boundaries. The
advancement of technologies, particularly the internet and satellite communications, has
accelerated the transfer of knowledge and culture beyond national borders. Furthermore, mass
media which includes radio, television, and social media is increasingly used as a main means of
disseminating knowledge and concepts.

Example: The rapid advancement of technology and internet has made it possible for
knowledge to be disseminated more quickly and widely, giving more people the chance to get
involve in politics.

THE MEDIA IN ESTABLISHED GOVERNMENT

The Media Game

Players are the Government and the journalist. Recognizing the influence of the media,
governments and parties make enormous efforts to influence coverage. Governing parties, in
particular, devote considerable attention to informing, cultivating and seeking to manipulate the
journalists whose reports achieve national coverage.

Spin doctor is a critical term applied to public relations experts working for politicians.
The spin doctor’s job is to encourage favorable media coverage for a party or its leader.

Television And Newspapers

In nearly all established democracies, television has become the preeminent mass medium.
Television is a visual, credible and easily digested format which reaches almost every household,
providing the main source of political information. In election campaigns, for instance, the
television studio has become the main site of battle. The party gladiators participate through
appearing on interviews, debates and talk shows; merely appearing on television confirms some
status and recognition on candidates. Ordinary voters consume the election, if at all, through
watching television. T e l e vision is a distorting mirror on the world. The more compressed news
coverage becomes, the less accurate the TV lens must be.
Television tells us what happened; but Newspapers provide more detailed, in-depth
reporting and analysis. Including editorials, and investigate journalism. Newspapers serves as
historical record, documenting events.
Broadcast news can only cover one story at a time whereas newspapers can be scanned
for items of interest and can be read at the user’s convenience. In many if not all democracies,
newspaper circulations remain large. In Japan, Britain and Scandinavia, most adults still read a
daily news- paper.
Reinforcement, Agenda-Setting And Framing

In the 1950s, before television became preeminent, the reinforcement thesis held sway
(Klapper, 1960). The reinforcement theory proved its value half a century ago and even today many
studies of media impact find only limited effects (Gavin and Sanders, 2003). Even so,
reinforcement is surely too limited as an account of media effects today. Party loyalties are now
weaker, and television more pervasive, than in the 1950s. For this reason, the agenda- setting view
of media impact has gained ground.
The agenda-setting perspective contends that the media (and television in particular) influence
what we think about, though not necessarily what we think. Walter Lippman’s (1922) view of the
press is applicable to the media generally: ‘it is like a beam of a searchlight that moves restlessly
about, bringing one episode and then another out of the darkness and into vision’.
Public opinion can simply refer to (1) ‘the range of views on some controversial issue
held by some significant portion of the population’ (Qualter, 1991). More ambitiously, the term
can denote (2) the informed judgment of a community on an issue of common concern, where
that judgment is formed in the context of shared political goals.

THE MEDIA IN NEW DEMOCRACIES

The media is central to democratic participation. It creates an arena for the exchange of
opinion, discussion and deliberation – a space sometimes referred to as the ‘public sphere’.

It provides a channel of communication between politicians and the public, allowing

politicians to communicate their beliefs and proposals, giving the public the information that they
need in order to participate, and allowing the voices of the public to be heard by politicians. One
approach is highly pragmatic: public opinion is simply what the public thinks about a given issue,
nothing more and nothing less.

THE MEDIA IN AUTHORITARIAN STATES

If democracy thrives on the flow of information, authoritarian rulers survive by limiting

free expression, leading to journalism which is subdued even when it is not subservient.

Lack of resources within the media sector usually increases vulnerability to pressure.
Official television stations and subsidized newspapers reproduce the regime’s line while critical
journalists are harassed and the entire media sector develops an instinct for self- preservation
through self-censorship.