Media-Government-Public: Coalitions and Oppositions

Abstract

Triangles, famously, describe coalitions and oppositions. It may be useful to think of the news as a triangle of relations among M, G and P, that is, among Media, Government (or Establishment), and People. Thus, “routine news” is typically initiated by G, resulting in a coalition with M. “Investigative reporting” of accidents and scandals is initiated by M, and aims for a coalition with P in opposition to G. Similarly, a “revolutionary scenario” is initiated by P against G, seeking to enlist M. A “disaster” scenario introduces a subversive agent S, aiming to undermine the system, but tempting M into a hate-love relationship.

Notes

1. These models are abstractions, of course. They relate, first of all, to classic nation-states and do not take account of globalization. Secondly, they intentionally avoid the complex reality of multiple Gs, Ms, and Ps. Thus, in the real world, the establishment (G) obviously includes multiple and conflicting voices, the media are obviously diverse, and the people are not only plural but themselves have access to new media which gives them voice.

2. Georg Simmel is cited here for his pioneering discussion of the triad and of other structural implications of group size. But apart from our overall debt to Simmel, we do injustice to the subtleties and complexities of his discussion. Caplow (1968) and Gamson (1961) have expanded on Simmel's propositions on coalition-formations in triads. At the conclusion of the argument, we have thrown in an allusion to the possible relevance to Heider's (1958) “balance theory.” And, throughout, we have incorporated (and credited) the relevant work of Harvey Molotch.

3. For recent empirical support for this scenario, see Reich (2009), who finds that most routine stories are initiated by sources, that the typical story includes 2.5 sources, and that a journalist's investment in a story is reactive rather than proactive.