Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T01:07:31.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparative Political Communications: Common Frameworks or Babelian Confusion?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2013

Pippa Norris
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Articles
Information
Government and Opposition , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , 2009 , pp. 321 - 340
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2009.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Chaffee, S. H., Political Communication: Issues and Strategies for Research, Sage Annual Reviews of Communication Research 4, Beverly Hills, Sage, 1975, p. 319.Google Scholar

2 Blumler, J. G. and Gurevitch, M., The Crisis of Public Communication Communication and Society 6, London and New York, Routledge, 1995, p. 237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 See, for example, Kelly, M., Mazzoleni, G. and McQuail, D., The Media in Europe: The Euromedia Research Group, 3rd edn, London and Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 2004, p. 274.Google Scholar

4 Hallin, D. C. and Mancini, P., Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics, Communication, Society, and Politics 15, Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, 2004, p. 342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Strömbäck, J. and Kaid, L. L., The Handbook of Election News Coverage Around the World, ICA Handbook Series 19, New York, Routledge, 2008, p. 450.Google Scholar

6 Boix, C. and Stokes, S. C., The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics, Oxford Handbooks of Political Science 11, Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 1021.Google Scholar

7 www.QoG.org.Google Scholar

8 Norris, P., ‘The Globalization of Comparative Public Opinion Research’, in Robinson, N. and Landman, T. (eds), The Sage Handbook of Comparative Politics, London, Sage, 2009.Google Scholar

9 George, Alexander L. and Bennett, Andrew, Case Studies and Theory Development, Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2004.Google Scholar

10 Ragin, C. C., Fuzzy-Set Social Science, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2000, p. 352.Google Scholar

11 Chakravartty, P. and Zhao, Y., Global Communications: Toward a Transcultural Political Economy, Critical Media Studies 11, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield, 2008, p. 359.Google Scholar

12 Rantanen, T., The Media and Globalization, London and Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 2008, p. 180.Google Scholar

13 Geddes, B., Paradigms and Sand Castles: Theory Building and Research Design in Comparative Politics, Analytical Perspectives on Politics 10, Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2003, p. 314 Google Scholar; Dogan, M. and Pélassy, D., How to Compare Nations: Strategies in Comparative Politics, Chatham, NJ, Chatham House, 1984, p. 185.Google Scholar

14 Mill, J. S., Principles of Political Economy: With Some of their Applications to Social Philosophy, 2 vols, London, J.W. Parker, 1848.Google Scholar

15 Esser, F. and Pfetsch, B., Comparing Political Communication: Theories, Cases, and Challenges, Communication, Society, and Politics 16, Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, 2007, p. 418.Google Scholar

16 Sartori, G., Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis, Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, 1976.Google Scholar

17 Duverger, M., Les partis politiques, Sciences politiques, Paris, Colin, 1951, p. 476.Google Scholar

18 Rae, D. W., The Political Consequences of Electoral Laws, rev. edn, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 1971, p. 203.Google Scholar

19 Lijphart, A., Democracies; Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries, New Haven, CT, Yale University Press, 1984, p. 229.Google Scholar

20 Siebert, F. S., Peterson, T. [and] Schramm, W., Four Theories of the Press: The Authoritarian, Libertarian, Social Responsibility, and Soviet Communist Concepts of what the Press Should Be and Do, Urbana, University of Illinois Press, 1956, p. 153.Google Scholar

21 De Smaele, H., ‘The Applicability of Western Media Models on the Russian Media System’, European Journal of Communication, 14: 2 (1999), pp. 173–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

22 D. McQuail, Mass Communication, Sage Benchmarks in Communication 5, London and Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 2006, p. 4.Google Scholar

23 Blumler and Gurevitch, The Crisis of Public Communication. Google Scholar

24 Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems. Google Scholar

25 Eurostat, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu.Google Scholar

26 Strömbäck and Kaid, The Handbook of Election News Coverage.Google Scholar

27 Djankov, S., McLiesh, C., Nenova, T. and Shleifer, A., ‘Who Owns the Media?’, Journal of Law & Economics, 46: 2 (2003), pp. 341–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 Strömbäck and Kaid, The Handbook of Election News Coverage.Google Scholar