Whose media freedom is being defended? Norm contestation in international media freedom campaigns
Whose media freedom is being defended? Norm contestation in international media freedom campaigns
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/joc/jqac045
复制
发表时间：
2022-12
影响因子：
7.9
通讯作者：
M. Scott;Mel Bunce;M. Myers;Maria Carmen Fernandez
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Scott;Mel Bunce;M. Myers;Maria Carmen Fernandez
本文分析了国际倡导运动如何接近和定义媒体自由，以及影响这一过程的因素。它通过对媒体自由联盟（由50多个国家组成的政府间合作伙伴关系）进行为期两年的案例研究来做到这一点，其中包括对主要利益相关者的55次采访、观察和文件分析。这一具有启发性的案例揭示了媒体自由的规范是如何在国际舞台上构建和争议的，以及它们对记者、媒体自由和地缘政治的影响。我们表明，该联盟采取了以国家为中心，以问责为重点，对媒体自由的负面理解。这种话语使狭隘的、被动的和“资源不足”的支持媒体自由的方法合法化，重点是“其他”国家。我们认为，关键规范的研究提供了一个有用的棱镜理解这个联盟的运作，以及更普遍的媒体自由的全球政治。这些发现对理解“规范创业”、“媒体帝国主义”和“媒体自由”本身具有重要意义。
This article analyses how international advocacy campaigns approach and define media freedom, and what influences this process. It does this through a two-year case study of the Media Freedom Coalition—an intergovernmental partnership of over 50 countries—that included 55 interviews with key stakeholders, observations, and document analysis. This revelatory case sheds light on how norms of media freedom are constructed and contested on the international stage, and their implications for journalists, media freedom and geo-politics. We show that the Coalition adopted a state-centric, accountability-focused, and negative understanding of media freedom. This discourse legitimized a narrow, reactive, and “resource-light” approach to supporting media freedom, focused on “other” countries. We argue that critical norm research provides a helpful prism for understanding this Coalition’s operations, and the global politics of media freedom more generally. These findings have important implications for understandings of “norm entrepreneurship,” “media imperialism,” and “media freedom” itself.