ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

Asymmetric representation of actors in German federalism - Subnational politicians and their positions in the public debate during the COVID-19 pandemic

Democracy
Federalism
Public Policy
Communication
Comparative Perspective
Public Opinion
Policy-Making
Iris Reus
Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg
Iris Reus
Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg

Abstract

Unlike in 'normal' times, many political decisions during the COVID-19 pandemic were made by governments and not parliaments. Since it is difficult to understand how they came about from the outside, when the usual parliamentary documentation is not available, the public debate in the media played a major role in information. The media did not only regularly report on policies applied in the 16 states, but also provided space for politicians from the 16 state governments to comment on their decisions and plans. The following analysis is based on the evaluation of around 3,000 articles from 20 regional and nationwide newspapers. Two periods were selected at the end of the two lockdowns in which key political decisions were made to ease the previous restrictions. The analysis follows a mixed methods approach. The first quantitative part evaluates how often the 16 prime ministers appear in the reporting. Moreover, a network analysis is carried out to show the combinations in which the actors appear over time. However, the analysis is not limited to the names mentioned but also codes to which parties the politicians belong. The second, qualitative part examines how the politicians' statements can be classified in terms of content. This makes it possible to check whether certain people or certain positions are represented more frequently than others. The broad representation of different positions in the public debate is particularly important in times of crisis with limited parliamentary participation. Federalism works here against 'lonely' decisions and favours a differentiated discussion. 16 prime ministers can contribute 16 potential policy solutions to the debate - and are heard by the public because of their decisive role in policy-making. The comparison between the 16 states in the media puts governments under pressure to justify both restrictions and the easing of measures. Considering the massive restrictions imposed to combat the pandemic, federalism thus offers an opportunity for democracy and transparency.