This morning I was once again interviewed live on the “Good Morning Europe” programme on Euronews and talked to lead anchor Alasdair Sandford about the resignation of Slovak Prime Minister Igor Matovic, the old-new government of designated Prime Minister Eduard Heger, Slovakia’s management of the Covid19-pandemic and the country’s relationship with the EU.
This morning I was once again interview live on the “Good Morning Europe” programme on Euronews and talked to lead anchor Rosie Wright about the continuing coalition crisis in Slovakia, where Prime Minister Matovic’s offer to resign and the resignation of Economy Minister Richard Sulík have made a collapse of the government increasingly likely. You can watch the full interview below – my comments have also been translated for the German, Portuguese, Spanish, French, Italian, Russian, and Hungarian version of the Euronews website.
This morning I was live on the “Good Morning Europe” programme on Euronews and talked to lead anchor Rosie Wright about the political situation in Slovakia, where the unilateral decision of Prime Minister Matovic to buy 2m doses of the Russian Sputnik V vaccine has triggered a government crisis. You can watch the full interview below.
The Volkswagen Foundation has announced that a joint grant application I submitted together with my colleagues Christoph Hönnige (Leibniz University Hannover) and Dominic Nyhuis (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill) in response to its call for projects on the “Digital Society” has been approved for funding.
Our project “Courts Under Pressure: How Social Media Change Political Discourse About the Rule of Law in Modern Democracies” will investigate the ways in which social media has changed discussions about and public attacks on Constitutional and Supreme Courts in Germany, the UK, Estonia and Poland over the last 10 years. Overall, our project will receive a total of €507.800 and will run for three years. It is one of only two projects to be based at Leibniz University Hannover as part of this funding line.
You can find a brief project description below:
“Courts Under Pressure: How Social Media Change Political Discourse About the Rule of Law in Modern Democracies”
Social media is fundamentally changing the nature of political discourse in modern democracies by allowing political actors to circumvent media gatekeepers. Especially right-wing populists have benefited from the changing media landscape. Given their disdain for an independent judiciary, social media has allowed populists to attack high courts in a way that was inconceivable under the conventional model of journalistic gatekeeping. On a theoretical level, our project highlights the potentially detrimental effects of elite discourses on social media, while focusing on high courts as a key pillar of liberal democracy. Showing how social media are abused to undermine the rule of law is particularly worrisome for new democracies where independent judiciaries are viewed as a last line of defence against authoritarian tendencies. The project compares elite discourses on high courts in Germany, the UK, Poland and Estonia over a ten-year period by analyzing print media content and social media use by political actors. The project makes use of large-scale web data collection and automated text analysis to systematically trace discourses on the rule of law. Based on the results, the project will seek to raise awareness among journalists about the challenges associated with an overreliance on social media in their reporting.
Prof. Dr. Christoph Hönnige, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Dr. Philipp Köker, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Prof. Dr. Dominic Nyhuis, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
VW Stiftung / MWK Niedersachsen (Die Digitale Gesellschaft)
A new article co-authored with Christoph Hönnige, Dominic Nyhuis, Philipp Meyer and Susumu Shikano has been published in Political Research Exchange. In it, we in investigate the visibility of British MPs in newspaper reporting on Brexit between July 2017 and March 2019. You can find the abstract below:
Dominating the debate: visibility bias and mentions of British MPs in newspaper reporting on Brexit
Brexit has been the most important issue in British politics in recent years. Whereas extra-parliamentary actors dominated the run-up to the 2016 referendum, the issue moved back to Parliament after the vote. This paper analyses newspaper reporting on Brexit in major British outlets during the post-referendum phase from July 2017 to March 2019. We study the visibility of Members of Parliament to assess whether the debate was balanced between parties and individual MPs relative to their vote and seat share. We conduct an automated text analysis of 58,247 online and offline newspaper articles covering the ideological spectrum from left to right, and from pro-Brexit to anti-Brexit. Our main findings are: (1) Conservative politicians dominated the debate, and (2) organized pro-Brexit MP pressure groups such as ‘Leave Means Leave’ were disproportionally more visible. This means that reporting was biased towards Conservative MPs and within the Conservative Party towards supporters of a hard Brexit. These findings are remarkably stable across different types of newspapers. The results challenge previous analyses that found a higher degree of balance in reporting but corroborate recent studies on the tonality of Brexit reporting that found a pro-Brexit bias.
You can read the full article here (open access): https://doi.org/10.1080/2474736X.2020.1788955