ABSTRACT

Media systems where political parallelism co-exists with political clientelism have contradictory influences on journalistic practices. Journalists are encouraged to actively defend a cause and influence public opinion while expected to remain subservient to their political masters. The media studies literature has analyzed the impact of political parallelism and clientelism separately, without reflecting on the tensions that emerge when they operate together. The article examines journalism under instrumentalized political parallelism and argues that it plays out in a field defined by both horizontal and vertical conflicts. We add an elite-grassroots analytical perspective to the inter-elite tensions associated with a polarized public sphere. Political parallelism in non-democratic contexts seemingly leaves little room for journalistic agency, as the politically powerful tend to instrumentalize media outlets. However, by looking closely at the case of Lebanon, we argue that journalists are still able to act independently of and contrary to the elite's intentions. The empirical analysis shows how journalists navigate vis-à-vis the politicians by playing the relations game, exploiting internal contradictions in the system and connecting with popular grievances. The article contributes new knowledge about journalists’ resilience to instrumentalization in a context of media/politics connections that is commonly found outside the West.

摘要

政治平行性与政治客户主义并存的媒体系统对新闻实践具有相互矛盾的影响。鼓励记者积极捍卫事业并影响公众舆论，同时期望他们仍然服从于政治家。媒体研究文献分别分析了政治并行性和客户主义的影响，但没有反映它们共同运作时出现的紧张局势。本文在工具化的政治平行性下考察了新闻业，并认为新闻业在水平和垂直冲突所界定的领域中发挥着作用。我们在与两极化的公共领域相关的精英之间的紧张关系中加入了精英草根的分析视角。非民主背景下的政治平行性似乎给新闻代理机构留下了很小的空间，政治上有实力的人往往会利用媒体手段。但是，通过密切关注黎巴嫩的情况，我们认为记者仍然能够独立于精英人士的意图而采取行动。实证分析表明，记者如何通过玩关系博弈，利用系统内部的矛盾并与民众的不满联系来与政治家相对。本文在西方以外通常存在的媒体/政治联系的背景下，为新闻工作者在工具化过程中的适应力提供了新的知识。实证分析表明，记者如何通过玩关系博弈，利用系统内部的矛盾并与民众的不满联系来与政治家相对。本文在西方以外通常存在的媒体/政治联系的背景下，为新闻工作者在工具化过程中的适应力提供了新的知识。实证分析表明，记者如何通过玩关系博弈，利用系统内部的矛盾并与民众的不满联系来与政治家相对。本文在西方以外通常存在的媒体/政治联系的背景下，为新闻工作者在工具化过程中的适应力提供了新的知识。