Affective Polarization, Democratic Backsliding, and the Binding Role of Media Systems

Political Theory Seminar with Alasia Nuti, York University.

What should the role of the media be in a liberal democracy? In this paper, we identify a new role, arguing that no account of the functions that the media should play in a liberal democracy is satisfactory without it. This role, called “the binding role” of the media, enlists media channels in the task of preventing democratic backsliding. It does so by calling on the media to keep together on an affective level the supporters of competing political camps. To define the binding role, we build on empirical political science, which pays close attention to, one the one hand, the link between the fragmentation and partisanship of media systems and affective polarization, and, on the other hand, the impact of affective polarization on democratic erosion. We argue that our new binding role of the media is distinct from the traditional roles assigned to the media, i.e., to give voice to multiple partisan groups, provide the public with the necessary information and critical skills to contribute to democratic life, and act as watchdogs against abuses of power. While we suggest that only a pluralistic account matching the binding role of the media with at least some of the other three is fitting for a liberal democracy, the binding role is so important that it imposes a side constraint never to be crossed in the fulfilment of the other roles – a side constraint forbidding the pursuit of inter-party animosity as such that the empirical literature identifies as especially pernicious in many countries including the US. Finally, we explore the tensions between our binding role and the other roles that the media are traditionally said to have to play in a liberal democracy. As for the role of the media as channels of partisan voice, which more starkly collide with the binding role, we propose two principles (called “accuracy first, partisanship second” and “don’t diminish, just criticize” principles) that specify the side constraint imposed by the binding role on expressing partisanship. In contrast, when it comes to possible tensions with the educational and watchdog roles, we show that they are not as strong as they might appear.

For further information and to receive the paper in advance, please contact Christian Rostbøll, cr@ifs.ku.dk.