In comparative media system research, scholars have identified three processes of change in media systems: homogenization, heterogenization, and hybridization.
Homogenization towards one model of media systems In the field of comparative media system research, homogenization is defined as the convergence of many media systems towards one specific model, caused by changes in
political and
economic structures, commercialization, and
changes in technology.
Cultural differences between the countries are said to become less important, since a few international
conglomerates dominate the global
media industry. In 2004, the authors Hallin and Mancini attested a convergence of European media systems towards the
Liberal Media System prevalent in North America, the United Kingdom and Ireland. Relating to the convergence of media systems, four constitutive factors can be identified: • Americanization: The changing
organizational structures and behaviors within the
media are heading towards patterns first established in the United States. Moreover, the US American model of politically neutral and professional
journalism is becoming more and more influential for other media systems. The journalistic education of the United States has said to have been a strong influence on journalism cultures worldwide. • Technological change: New
technologies can lead to adaptations by individuals and social
institutions, for instance assuming new communication procedures associated with the new
technology. These effects often produce common practices across different
social contexts. The development of professional
journalism is also connected to
technological change. •
Secularization: The term
secularization describes "the separation of citizens from attachments of religious and ideological 'faiths,' and the decline of institutions based on these faiths". This separation results in a decline of political parties, since they are connected to
ideologies and particular social milieus. Hence,
secularization leads media systems towards the
Liberal Model. • Commercialization: Commercialization can be seen as the most important force of homogenization. It has changed the print
media as well as the electronic
media. The transition of European broadcasting systems, from predominantly public service systems in the 1970s to a system with commercial domination today, gave the strongest impetus for homogenization. Thus, commercialization decreases the ties of media system and
political system. Although a tendency of homogenization towards the
Liberal Model can be attested, there still are important differences between the systems. First of all, the variations between the
political systems of each country seem to persist in the future. Furthermore, the
party and
electoral systems between the countries remain different. Moreover, the
legal systems of the countries are still distinct. Also, even though there is a trend towards neutral journalism,
political parallelism in the national press of
Democratic Corporatist countries still persists and will probably remain in the immediate future. Thus, a complete converge of the media systems seems unlikely. There are also limits and countertendencies against homogenization. There is evidence of countertendencies relating to the reduction of
political polarization and
ideological differences between parties. In some countries, new extremist parties on the far right of the political spectrum arose, motivated through issues of
immigration,
multiculturalism and integration. Moreover, so called
advocacy journalism does not only persist in
Polarized Pluralist countries (especially in Italy, Spain and Greece), but new forms of it are also beginning to proliferate in all kinds of media systems.
Heterogenization of media systems Some scholars argue against the
theory of homogenization of media systems that due to national
political cultures and
institutions, a process of heterogenization rather than homogenization, has to be stated. The countertendencies of homogenization (for instance new right extremist parties, new forms of
advocacy journalism, divergence processes in the styles of election coverage between the United States and Great Britain) lead to heterogenization of the media systems. However, the divergence of media systems is confronted by a much more fundamental convergence between them. Hallin & Mancini also argue that the results of their analysis do not support the thesis of heterogenization of media systems.
Hybridization of media systems Hybrid media systems are defined as a blend of already existing practices and new practices from a new or foreign media system. Foreign models are adapted to the particular
historical, geographical,
social, and
cultural characteristics of the domestic media system. Rather than a temporary state of transformation, hybrid media systems are considered an
equilibrium between two types of practices. Thus, hybrid media systems are mostly located between
authoritarian and
democratic political systems. Although they may have introduced competitive elections, they may not strengthen further
democratic institutions beyond the basic requirements. Therefore, the degree to which hybrid systems adopt
democratic practices can vary from state to state. Hybrid systems build out distinct patterns of politic-media relations with significant differences to Western media systems, for instance the Brazilian media system, which was influenced by the American
journalism model. However, the American
journalism system was not adopted one-to-one, since there "was no solid
market economy,
individualistic culture, or
political culture that valued the freedom of press". Another example is the media system of Poland, which detached itself from its
communist ties in the 1990s and converged towards Western media systems, but still has its Polish specifics, such as the use of
public-service broadcasting as a political instrument. According to the three phases from an
authoritarian to a
democratic media system, the old
authoritarian system ends by the
institutionalisation of
democratic elements (phase 1 and 2). In the third phase, the new hybrid system consolidates
democratic elements, but some elements of the
authoritarian system still exist. Thus, it is difficult to state when the third phase is completed. In Hallin & Mancini's
Comparing media systems beyond the western world (2012), which gives an overview of criticism about their
framework of 2004 and furthermore extends and revises it, Katrin Voltmer states that, instead of media system homogenization towards the
Liberal Model of Hallin & Mancini's framework, transformation processes rather move towards hybrid media systems, since
media markets become more international, but have to adapt to local situations. Thus, the theory of hybridization in media systems is rather an adaption than a counterpart to the theory of convergence. == Outlook ==