The study “Public Critique by Journalists and Politicians as a Process of Democratic Legitimization” by Cédric Tant from Université libre de Bruxelles took a look at the relationship between journalists and politicians, proposing instead of just reactions, it is meaningful metadiscursive articulation that serves a democratic purpose. 

Although the relationship between journalists and politicians has been researched much, few studies consider both of them as part of democratic institutions, and this research seeks to look at them from the lens of legitimacy.

As critique is at the heart of the research, the author seeks to answer the question on what it means to be critical. He conceives it as a metadiscursive process (Blommaert 2005 etc.), where the critique makes it possible to reorganize the discourses surrounding a situation. In this context, the critique articulates democracy.

The concept of articulation, then, is the linking of discursive discursive elements together to give them a certain meaning. They are very often used in public communication, especially when the concept is not fixed, like freedom, journalism, or democracy. 

Public critique then arises from political and journalistic discourses, and this process plays a role in the relationship between politicians and journalists. For example, when these two groups blame each other, it can be divided into specific criticisms and generalized criticism. 

Specific criticism, according to the author, arise from breaches of the communication contract (Charaudeau 1994) between the two. For example, a politician might deny a journalist the ability to make an announcement, instead relying on their own social media. On the other side, a breach might be when journalists do not respect the “off the record” announcement.

General criticism might arise from differences in the views on issues such as history, where the watchdog role of journalists might sometimes be resented or it might in itself prompt criticism of politicians. 

However, there is more than criticism, as both parties do need each other. This is why the relationship is characterized by interdependence: not just by periods of criticism but by periods of appeasement.  

In conclusion, the article views critique not just as a reproach, but also as a participation in the public sphere as a place for constructing democratic public debate. Public critique offers a way to understand contemporary democratic dynamics.

The article “Public Critique by Journalists and Politicians as a Process of Democratic Legitimization” by Cédric Tant is in the The International Journal of Press/Politics (free abstract).

Picture: Untitled by Joao Cruz

License Unsplash.