Authors of a new anthology discuss the Nordic media landscape amidst digital challenges and political transformations. “Looking globally, the Nordic countries are becoming more similar, but there are also domestication processes separating them”, the editors highlight.
In their new anthology The Future of the Nordic Media Model: A Digital Media Welfare State?, published by Nordicom, Peter Jakobsson, Johan Lindell, and Fredrik Stiernstedt explore the media landscape in the Nordic countries, and to what extent there is something unique about the ways in which the media systems in Nordics are organised. Mia Jonsson Lindell, communications officer at Nordicom, met with them in Uppsala to discuss their new book, the renewed role of public service media, and to reflect on the editing process.
Mia Jonsson Lindell (MJL): Could you begin by telling me about the book? What makes the topic intriguing and why it is particularly captivating at this moment in time?
Fredrik Stiernstedt (FS): So, the book is about the media system of the Nordic countries and the challenges that this system is facing in the contemporary situation, in relation to especially digitalisation and the transformation of the media landscape. But it’s also about the political challenges to Nordic media policy and the Nordic media model from different perspectives and with different case studies.
Peter Jakobsson (PJ): A lot of the book is about some of the core issues within comparative media system research, like media policy, media infrastructures, media markets, etcetera. But it also tries to look beyond what we normally see when we talk about media systems – it includes chapters about the intersection between social welfare and digital media, public libraries as a media infrastructure, and the environmental impact of media systems.
Johan Lindell (JL): I would also like to say something about this whole idea of what a media system is. In a sense, there is this idea connected to what Peter just said, that this notion of media systems promotes a different kind of focus compared to much of previous research preceding the publication of Hallin and Mancini’s book on comparing media systems from 2004. Our book is building upon that tradition and the idea that there is something peculiar about the ways in which media in the Nordics are organised.
FS: Yes, and that has of course been a question as well, is there a Nordic specificity or is there a Nordic media system at all? The starting point for the book is that there is something within the Nordic countries that is specific. But we are not certain ourselves on the matter, it depends a bit on the perspective.
JL: I would say that the different chapters in the book also point in different directions. The chapter from Kim Schrøder and colleagues, for example, points towards a low level of fragmentation and exposure to news across different social strata in all the Nordic societies, whereas the chapter on media accountability by Randa Romanova and Mats Bergman points towards differences between the Nordic countries. So again, it all depends on the perspective.
A shifting media landscape
MJL: In the anthology, many references are made to The Media Welfare State (by Syvertsen & colleagues). That book was published almost ten years ago, in 2014. Is there a need for a new book about media in the Nordic countries? Why? What is it, you mean, that has happened since 2014?
JL: One of their arguments was that the Nordic media welfare state is sort of resilient and remains intact in the midst of digitalisation. In a sense, it’s kind of nice to revisit this issue ten years later and pick up where they argue that this system would remain relatively intact throughout these digital challenges or transformations.
PJ: I think that you can argue that Syversten and colleagues wrote their book at the end of the beginning of the changes that we are now experiencing.
FS: Yes, I agree. Obviously, these transformations and changes have enhanced and become much more deepened since then. Now, we also have the political transformations not only in the Nordics, but in the whole of Europe. We are experiencing, for example, a loosened consensus around public service and more regulation of digital platforms, questions that were not even on the table ten years ago. So, there are a lot of new development that challenges the traditional Nordic model, all connected to increased digitalisation.
PJ: I have one good example of what we mean when we say that the consequences of digitalisation have become deepened since the publication of the “original book”. When I teach, I often use the graph that illustrates digital advertising investments that go to Nordic actors, and to actors outside of the Nordic countries. The first time that more money goes outside of the Nordic countries is 2015, so exactly one year after the publication of their book, something happened with the media markets in the Nordic countries. So, the point is, a lot has happened since that book was published.
FS: Questions related to more social development such as environmental issues and global warming, which we now must address when we discuss media models for the future, was not as important or discussed in the early 2010s when the original book was written. That’s another kind of more general development that forces us to raise new questions and new perspectives. So, there’s a lot of reasons why this book is timely and a must-read!
MJL: Yes, sounds like it! Back to something we touched upon before: the question about a “Nordic model”. What is your answer – is there a Nordic model? And have the Nordic countries – over time – become increasingly similar to each other, or is the development instead going in the opposite direction?
JL: Again, it largely depends on the perspective taken. Looking globally, they are becoming more similar, but there are also domestication processes and in certain respects, these are distinct, and they are separated from one another. But do we have a Nordic media model? Maybe we still we do. Public service is strong, press freedom is high, news circulation is wide, press subsidies are quite similar, and media trust is relatively high. It’s so much hinged upon the variables or the perspectives that are taken into account, I’d say.
FS: As an example, we can look at the two chapters on digital infrastructures – they point to the differences in how the infrastructure is underlying the digitalisation, and though this is a global development, it’s expressed in different ways in the Nordic countries.
The evolving role of public service media
MJL: Even if two of the chapters concern public service, do you think perhaps it could have been a reasonable expectation to have more chapters about public service? Since public service is one of the cornerstones of The Media Welfare State from 2014?
JL: Certainly, we could have explored it further.
FS: The Nordic public service media companies have been very important for the development of the Nordic media systems overall; they have been at the forefront of a lot of media developments in the Nordic countries. But that also means that there is a lot of excellent research on public service media companies out there. We’re not saying there doesn’t remain a lot of interesting research to be done, but it also means that we don’t regret as much that we didn’t focus on that in this book.
MJL: In your final chapter, you present some thoughts about a renewed role for Nordic public service media. Can you develop these thoughts a little bit? Do you see any disadvantages to the public service media getting a more central position?
PJ: As Fredrik said, they’ve been at the forefront in so many ways. But what we see as a future risk is that they are becoming slightly irrelevant from an audience perspective. They will need to develop beyond the broadcasting model.
JL: This is perhaps one of the main challenges with regard to the continuity of the Nordic media model; public service has been a key pillar, but it’s also the most contested pillar at the moment in terms of the political struggles and the discourse around the existence of public service media.
FS: In a way, public service as an idea also sums up much of what you could say is the content of a Nordic media model, for example, a strong focus on universalism and egalitarianism. The strength of the public service idea could be used to move forward in an increasingly digital media landscape. There are, of course, also problems with enlarging the idea of public service and moving it towards new media forms, but it’s also – and more importantly perhaps – a resource, or something that is hopeful for the future.
Reflections on editing
MJL: For a few years now, you have acted as editors for the anthology that is now being published. Do you have any wise advice you would like to share? Is there anything, in hindsight, you would have done differently?
PJ: It’s been mostly enjoyable. If you have an idea, just go for it!
FS: Sure. Perhaps one thing that we could have done differently though, is that we were very open in the call for papers. We didn’t really approach people from the start and invite them specifically – that might have been something to do. It turned out very good anyway, but we could have been more selective from the start about what kind of chapters we wanted. We did get contributions from all the Nordic countries though, which we are very happy about!
PJ: Well, we didn’t get much on public service…
FS: No, and that is something we could have done, we could have invited someone to contribute especially with that.
MJL: Thank you for this nice chat and I hope the book will be read my many!
Read the book
The Future of the Nordic Media Model: A Digital Media Welfare State?
