Earlier this month, POLITICO published its POLITICO 28 Class of 2020, an “annual ranking of the people shaping European politics and policy.” The inclusion of far-right politicians like Götz Kubitschek and Viktor Orbán in the list of “dreamers” has generated an acute response from academics, who criticized POLITICO for mainstreaming the far right. This criticism is motivated by the fact that these are politicians who are advocating ideas and policies that are systematically undermining the tenets of liberal democracy.
The way in which the media chooses to deal with the far right is one of the thorniest debates in democratic politics; specifically, it raises questions about the degree of tolerance the media should display toward the often intolerant views proclaimed by populists, radicals and extremists.
There is no blueprint on how the media should deal with the far right. In theory, journalists can choose between three strategies. First, media practitioners can “isolate” far-right politicians by treating them as pariahs. The aim of this strategy is not to ignore them but to make clear their ideas and policies lie outside the bounds of democratic discourse.
Second, journalists can take a confrontational stance and delegitimize their policies through overtly critical news coverage.
The third strategy is to accommodate the far right by offering a platform to politicians or incorporating some of their rhetoric in the news coverage. Unwittingly or not, by classifying politicians and activists from the far right as “dreamers,” this is the strategy POLITICO seems to have taken.
There are clear differences throughout Europe regarding how the media chooses to deal with the far right. My research shows that in the Netherlands and Flanders, members of the media have gradually become more accommodating toward the far right, whereas Walloon and Luxembourgish journalists generally adhere to strict demarcation.
To be sure, the role of the media should not be overstated; media coverage does not automatically lead to electoral success, and there are other factors at play that help explain the rise of the far right.
But there is ample evidence that media behavior does not simply reflect but also shapes the electoral advances of far-right parties. The media can play an instrumental role in disseminating xenophobic, ethno-nationalist and racist messages, and contribute to legitimizing their cause by removing the “stigma of extremism.” Particularly in the earlier phases of a party’s life cycle, media coverage can be an important asset to gain national visibility and legitimacy.
The decision by POLITICO to list Kubitschek and Orbán as dreamers risks mainstreaming and normalizing the far right. It also raises the following question: What is the role of the media in a democratic society? Are journalists gatekeepers or “neutral” transmitters of information? This is a question that members of the media as well as academics should continue to ask.
Léonie de Jonge
Assistant professor in European politics and society at the University of Groningen
Groningen, the Netherlands