An upcoming special issue of Nordicom Review will explore the evolving landscape of visual political communication in the Nordic countries. A Call has been issued for contributions addressing not only the content, strategies, and effects of visual political communication, but also accounting for their broader impact on society. A particular focus is on how visual strategies interact with core Nordic democratic values, such as openness, inclusivity, and (political and media) trust.
Nordicom has recently issued a Call for papers for a special issue of Nordicom Review. The editors, Franziska Marquartof the University of Copenhagen and Xénia Farkas of DIGSUM at Umeå University, invite scholars from the fields of media, communication, political science, and related disciplines to submit extended abstracts exploring the evolving landscape of visual political communication in the Nordic countries. Kristin Clay, manuscript editor at Nordicom, discussed the theme, importance, and possible contributions of the upcoming special issue with the editors.
Kristin Clay (KC): We are very much looking forward to collaborating with you on this special issue. Why don’t you start by summing up what you mean by visual political communication?
Xénia Farkas (XF): Thank you, Kristin – we are equally excited to collaborate with you.
In response to your question: Visual political communication encompasses all forms of political communication that involve visual elements. This includes traditional materials such as political posters, television advertisements, and newspaper images, as well as digital content like visuals on social media platforms. It also extends to the visual presentation of political actors themselves – their facial expressions, gestures, attire, and overall public appearance. In essence, any visual aspect that conveys or reinforces political meaning falls within the scope of visual political communication.
Visual political communication encompasses all forms of political communication that involve visual elements. This includes traditional materials such as political posters, television advertisements, and newspaper images, as well as digital content like visuals on social media platforms.
Franziska Marquart (FM): I agree! And one crucial aspect of visual political communication is how visuals are interpreted by different audiences. The meaning of an image or video is not fixed; it’s shaped by the viewer’s cultural background, political beliefs, and even their media literacy. For example, a protest image can evoke empathy in some viewers and fear or disapproval in others, depending on their prior attitudes and its framing. So, we need to think critically about the role of context, identity, and ideology in creating and negotiating visual meaning.
KC: With the rise of digital media platforms, the visual dimensions of political discourses are changing quickly. And political messages are more and more accompanied by images, memes, and videos, among others. What are the benefits of this, and what are the potential dangers? What topics and questions regarding this would you like to see explored in the issue?
FM: Two things stand out for me here: first, how digital visual content – especially memes and short-form videos – has democratised political expression. Citizens can participate in political discourse in creative, often humorous ways that were previously reserved for journalists or political elites, and this participatory culture can foster engagement and a sense of agency. But it also raises questions about the line between satire and misinformation, so that’s a downside. And then there is the speed at which visual political content is posted and consumed on digital platforms: TikTok, for example, promotes endless scrolling, where users look at a post for literally one or two seconds before continuing, and political content competes with other categories that users may find much more interesting. So, this invites a passive and low-effort mode of engagement where content is absorbed quickly and often forgotten just as fast. Political messages may be seen, but not necessarily processed, let alone remembered or reflected upon. What I would love to see explored (or investigate myself, actually) is how passive scrolling compares to more active forms of engagement – such as commenting, sharing, or looking for content – in terms of political learning and opinion formation.
XF: Politics has always been inherently visual; however, scholarly attention to its visual dimensions has emerged relatively late. Over the past decade, political communication research has undergone a notable visual turn, driven in part by the rise of social media platforms and their affordances, which have significantly amplified the role of visual content in political discourse. Among the various benefits of amplified visual political communication, two aspects are particularly noteworthy. First, visual content has a unique capacity to evoke emotional responses more immediately than purely textual information. This emotional resonance enhances the memorability and persuasiveness of political messages, potentially mobilising support, raising public awareness, and stimulating democratic engagement. Second, images and videos can transcend linguistic and literacy barriers, making political communication more accessible to diverse and global audiences. However, these developments also present considerable challenges. For example, the emotionally charged visuals, especially those portraying enemies or injustice, can deepen ideological divides and reinforce confirmation bias. Further, while simplification can help understanding, it can also strip away context, leading to misunderstandings or reductive, oversimplified narratives that distort reality. Also, political actors may weaponise visual content to shape public opinion with manufactured content, that is, visual disinformation with edited, decontextualised, or doctored images and videos.
Politics has always been inherently visual; however, scholarly attention to its visual dimensions has emerged relatively late. Over the past decade, political communication research has undergone a notable visual turn, driven in part by the rise of social media platforms and their affordances, which have significantly amplified the role of visual content in political discourse.
KC: What was your motivation for embarking on this special issue journey? For example, you mention in the Call that the developments in visual political communication call for examination of their broader societal embeddedness and implications for trust, engagement, and democratic resilience. Can you give some examples?
FM: To be honest, we started this project because we thought it would be fun to examine this topic that we both have been working with over the past years from a decidedly Nordic perspective, since neither of us is actually from the Nordics originally. I like to think that this outsider–insider position gives us a unique lens to reflect on how visual political communication plays out in societies that are often seen as highly digital, media-savvy, and democratic, yet also quite distinct in their political cultures. And then scholarly work, especially if it’s comparative in nature, is often characterised by this outsider–insider position of course. At the same time, we were motivated by the opportunity to think comparatively and explore how these dynamics manifest in societies with different media cultures, political traditions, and levels of polarisation.
XF: The growing importance of visual political communication in digital media ecosystems has far-reaching implications for trust, engagement, and democratic resilience. Visual disinformation, for example, with doctored images of political enemies, outgroups, or misleading infographics can destabilise democratic processes. And since people tend to believe more what they see than what they just hear, visual information disorder is even more dangerous than purely textual disinformation. Another example is related to the logic of social media. Platforms like Instagram or Facebook prioritise visual content that is engaging, often promoting emotionally charged visuals over fact-based political communication. Together with the current ongoing trends in politics, such as the widespread popularity of populist actors, and the appearance of new actors in political communication, such as political influencers, social media and the logic of algorithms create structural biases in visibility and amplify actors who are adept at visual storytelling. These developments also intersect with and intensify other trends in contemporary politics, such as the personalisation of political communication. As a result, the focus often shifts toward individual figures rather than parties, institutions, or policy platforms, further obscuring substantive political debate and undermining democratic deliberation.
The growing importance of visual political communication in digital media ecosystems has far-reaching implications for trust, engagement, and democratic resilience. Visual disinformation, for example, with doctored images of political enemies, outgroups, or misleading infographics can destabilise democratic processes.
KC: Coming back to your outsider–insider perspective of the Nordics – it’s the same for me, by the way – how is the Nordic context different from other countries or regions, do you think? You address that despite the Nordic reputation for institutional trust, transparency, and democratic participation, it is yet experiencing some political polarisation, populist rhetoric, and digital disinformation. What aspects of this dimension would you like to see addressed by the contributors?
XF: The Nordic region presents a fascinating case for studying visual political communication because it sits at the intersection of high democratic stability and emerging challenges related to digital media, polarisation, and disinformation. Despite the Nordic countries’ strong reputations for institutional trust, transparency, high media literacy, and democratic participation, they are not immune to the global currents of populism, polarisation, and digital manipulation. This contradiction makes the region particularly valuable for comparative and context-sensitive research. I would be especially interested in how the far-right or populist actors in the Nordic countries are using visual media to challenge mainstream political narratives, or how visual disinformation is circulated and received in countries with high trust in journalism and education.
FM: Definitely; I would also be curious to see contributions exploring how Nordic audiences engage with political visuals across media. For example, do high trust and media literacy shape how they interpret disinformation or emotionally charged content? What role do mainstream or public service media play, particularly in contrast to digital platforms? And how do politicians and political strategists adapt to the contrast between traditional political restraint and the more provocative style of social media?
KC: Since the theme is visual political communication, it opens up for a greater interdisciplinarity. Perhaps thinking outside the box a bit, who would you like to see submit an abstract beyond the fields of media, communication, and political science?
FM: It would be exciting to include voices from tech or data science, especially those studying algorithms, visual misinformation, or AI-generated content. And scholars in psychology or cognitive science could contribute valuable knowledge about how people process visual information or form emotional responses. But I’d be hesitant to exclude any discipline from the get-go – we’re looking forward to a range of submissions!
It would be exciting to include voices from tech or data science, especially those studying algorithms, visual misinformation, or AI-generated content. And scholars in psychology or cognitive science could contribute valuable knowledge about how people process visual information or form emotional responses.
XF: I think visual political communication is a broad field that can be examined from a wide range of perspectives, so besides scholars from the fields of political science and media and communication studies, we also welcome authors from the fields of sociology, visual culture, and digital humanities.
FM: And if I may add one more thing: Authors who are in doubt about whether their work fits our call should just get in touch and ask! We would be happy to hear your thoughts and ideas. And even though we both come from pretty empirical backgrounds, we are open to theoretical and conceptual work too – especially if it helps us think differently about how visuals function in political life.
Read the full Call for papers here: https://www.nordicom.gu.se/en/latest/news/call-papers-visual-political-communication-nordic-region-strategies-narratives-and