Abstract
The central argument of The Media Welfare State is that the Nordic media model is closely related to the Nordic welfare system and is highly distinctive in comparison with other media systems. It therefore merits attention from scholars and practitioners both within and outside the Nordic region. The authors, all of them eminent Norwegian media scholars, substantiate their claims regarding this distinctive model by tracing four significant pillars for media policy in the region through history: (a) universal services, (b) editorial freedom, (c) a cultural policy for the media and, finally, (d) a preference for consensual and durable policy decisions based on consultations with both private and public stakeholders. Thus, the book contributes to the field of media policy research in the line of Daniel C Hallin and Paolo Mancini (2004), Trine Syvertsen (2004) and Jonathan Hardy (2008).
The book consists of five main chapters and a conclusion. The first chapter introduces the very concept of the media welfare system model and focuses on its particular Nordic instantiation. Chapter two describes the media use patterns in the region, in particular online and digital media use, and demonstrates how media use in the region is distinctive in relation to other regions because of its high degree of egalitarianism, commonality and interest in information and culture (more than entertainment). It also points out that the level of online media use in the Nordic region is above average with regard to news, shopping and social media. The following chapters focus on, respectively, the press (Chapter three), public service broadcasting (Chapter four) and private media companies (Chapter five) introducing different private–public approaches: the adaptive (Schibsted, owner of major free, paid and online newspapers in the region), the confrontational (The Modern Times Media Group) and the collaborative (Nokia).
The book is well-structured and each chapter and section includes a clear argument backed up by two, three or four perspectives (pillars, explanations, forces, examples, etc.). The authors’ decision to refer to a Nordic media welfare model is reasonable, if not entirely new, and their suggestion for a new interdisciplinary field of research in which media studies and welfare state studies are brought together (p. 3) is a persuasive one. However, the book itself does not pursue this idea, since the ambition is not so much to discuss the welfare state, but instead to address media policy models. In the last chapter, the authors ask themselves how Nordic the model actually is, to conclude that there are many similarities between Nordic countries and other corporatist and social democratic countries (p. 128) and that the most significantly Nordic aspect of the idea is that the Nordic countries constitute a distinct unit, a culturally and politically homogeneous society. Furthermore, some of the data that is used to explain this particular policy model (e.g. media use, online access) is partly based on the generally strong economic conditions in the region in public, business and private contexts. If this is the case, it is the culture and the economy that is distinct, rather than the policy model itself.
The overall aim of the book – to explicate Nordic media policy model and its international relevance in a short format (129 pages) – is refreshing but also challenging. The ambitious idea of looking at media policy and media use in general, and describing the particular social, political, cultural and economic conditions that constitute a Nordic media policy model, is to be welcomed. However, the book’s central aim or purpose remains unclear. It seems to suggest two: first, to offer a contribution to debate about media policy and its shortcomings, and second, to present new research about media policy and media use in the Nordic region. If it is the former, the premise should have been made clear and the arguments presented up front, for example, regarding the predominant crisis discourse both in public debates and research on how traditional institutions, newspapers and public service broadcasters are threatened by globalisation and marketisation (p. 129). If it is the latter, it would have been an advantage to include more thorough in-depth analyses and discussions, for example, about social media use (a topic currently addressed in only two pages), the television industry (not only public service broadcasters) and its digital challenges, and private–public collaborations, and how the commercial and global media sector influences the model.
Syvertsen et al.’s criticism of the predominant crisis discourse in media policy research is important and the enthusiastic presentation of Nordic media policy, previously overlooked in media studies, is welcome, as is the emphasis on how continuity, stability and adaptability are crucial in understanding the quality of this model. However, the argument would be even stronger if it was followed by a more thorough discussion about how we can consider prevailing challenges within the sector, for example, the decreasing trust in public service institutions and young people’s declining interest in news, instead of rejecting these things as crisis discourses. The Nordic welfare model in itself is indeed characterised by continuity, stability and adaptability but is still challenged by decreasing trust and new political agendas.