Bo Laursen

Recognizing the important role that media work can play for interest groups in securing their members’ interests, the purpose of this study is to more precisely explore the reasons why “insider” interest groups that participate in valuable face-to-face lobbying with policy makers might supplement their lobbying efforts with media work despite the inherent risk of doing so. Through interviews with press contact staff at 52 Danish insider interest groups, we find that media work is conducted in order to (1) motivate policy makers to address particular issues in ways that are favorable to the organization, (2) manage the ongoing face-to-face lobbying process, and (3) strengthen relationships to policy makers. While the first reason neatly reflects the well-known agenda-setting strategy in which raising public awareness on political issues is central, the remaining more surprising and underexplored reasons indicate a need to revise our assumptions about media work in politically motivated organizations. Our proposal is three-fold: Because interest groups view political actors as key consumers of news stories, media work should no longer be conceptualized as an exclusively outside strategy; we should sharpen our appreciation of the importance of political finesse, in addition to media savvy, amongst press staff in politically driven organizations; and finally, as part of the ever-growing mediatization of politics, we should recognize that political processes that traditionally have taken place in face-to-face lobbying, such as relationship building, are now also taking place in the news media.

Social actors see exposure in the news media as attractive for publicity purposes and are under pressure to adapt their press work to a ‘media logic’ in order to be attractive sources for journalists and editors. This article investigates the European Parliament’s press officers’ professional practices in the light of mediatization and government communication theories. Without one pan-European public sphere, the European Parliament, like the other European Union (EU) institutions, competes with national actors for the news media’s attention in the EU’s 28 national public spheres, where EU affairs do not tend to get a media coverage that matches the EU’s considerable influence on European citizens’ daily lives. This study, which is based on in-depth interviews with European Parliament press officers, concludes that these professionals are indeed attuned to a ‘media logic’ in their communication efforts, and that they face a daily professional challenge as they attempt to promote the European Parliament and its activities to the news media in a way that won’t compromise their credibility as government sources. The study provides new insights into communicative aspects of EU governance, and particularly into the thinking that guides the efforts of these European Parliament officials to increase European citizens’ awareness of, and support for, the European Parliament that is meant to voice the citizens’ concerns in political processes at the EU level.

Government communication plays a key role in democratic societies as it helps public understanding of government policies and raises awareness of the roles and actions of decision makers. Within the European Union (EU) polity, communication plays a crucial role for citizens' support for the European integration process. Despite the increasing relevance of communication about major activities of the EU, studies on the EU institutions' communications are scarce, and very little is currently known about the external communication of the Council of the EU. Focusing on the media relations activities of the Council, this paper investigates the communication practices and roles of press officers working in the Council's General Secretariat as perceived by these government communicators themselves. Qualitative interviews with the press officers, analysis of Council documents, participation in their work processes and observations of their professional behaviour were used to establish the empirical basis of the study. The findings highlight the apolitical and reactive nature of these European civil servants' communication activities and identify some of the institutional and political challenges that they face in the performance of their professional duties.