Veteran Lebanese journalists often recount that former Egyptian president and the symbol of Arab nationalism Jamal ‘Abd al-Nasir’
1
would retire each night with an array of Lebanese publications on his pillow.
2
While the golden age of the Lebanese press is arguably over, the variegated and opinionated Lebanese media continues to be regarded as unique. Reflecting the political system, the Lebanese media system is pluralistic and, despite considerable limitations, relatively free. The weakness of the state has meant that the media enjoy a margin of freedom
. This freedom, however, varies with the political climate, with restrictions often coming at the hands of the non-state actors
who largely own and instrumentalize the media.
This book assesses the so-called disoriented and fragmented Lebanese media system from a comparative perspective (Dajani 1992).
Comparative studies in the field of media and communications have in recent years become “fashionable” (Gurevitch and Blumler 2004, p. 327), with recurring calls for “communication theorising to develop itself comparatively” (Park and Curran 2000, p. 3). Undoubtedly, the power of comparative research to shed light on otherwise overlooked phenomena, establish typologies and allow for the formation of theories (Esser and Hanitzsch 2012, p. 4) has led to the increase in comparative research in the field. The impacts of globalization
—both real and mythical
3
—have also propelled comparative media research.
Of the numerous contributions, the typology and framework developed by Daniel Hallin and Paolo Mancini “Comparing Media Systems” have come to be regarded as seminal and have initiated a riveting debate on media typologies, systems, forces of globalization
and convergence
. A series of studies attempting to apply the typologies beyond the Western world followed, including an edited work by the two authors emphasizing the need to critically assess the dimensions and cautioning against “fitting” media systems from the rest of the world under their ideal types. The volume also included contributions by other researchers who have critically examined a variety of national media systems vis-à-vis the Hallin and Mancini
framework. Yet, despite the calls to de-Westernize or even the “moral imperative to internationalise” media studies (Thussu 2009, p. 27), most of these works have thus far focused on the Western world.
The Lebanese media system is therefore probed using the prism of the Hallin and Mancini
framework assessing to what extent this system “fits”, if at all, under any of their three suggested “ideal types”: the Mediterranean or Polarized Pluralist Model
, the Democratic Corporatist
or North European Model and the Liberal
or North Atlantic Model. In attempting to apply the framework to the Lebanese media system, this research therefore also critically assesses the complex dimensions developed by the two scholars and suggests others pertinent to the local cultural and political context. While responding to the recurring call for comparative work in the field, the study is careful not to universalize the Western democratic experience as Downing (1996) and Park and Curran (2000), among others, have cautioned. Indeed, the Hallin and Mancini framework is used in this study as a scholarly springboard in an effort to take their framework and models beyond the established democracies of the Western world: Europe and North America. Therefore, in addition to critically assessing the Lebanese media system by using the variables put forth by Hallin and Mancini—with necessary contextual amendments and additions—the work culminates in the suggestion of new variables and an amended model—CriSPP
(Crisis
-prone, small
, Polarized Pluralist). The amended model, a variation on the Polarized Pluralist Model
, emphasizes the salient features of crisis and the impact of state size, in addition to the general characteristics of the Polarized Pluralist Model
. This heeds Hallin and Mancini
’s caveat that their framework and models are “limited” to the West and should rather serve as an “inspiration” for a process of re-modeling by adapting their models to a given context or by the creation of new models (Hallin and Mancini 2004, p. 306).
The work is introduced by a chapter describing the research aims and the structure of the book. This introductory chapter is followed by the theoretical framework, Chapter 2, which offers an in-depth evaluation of pertinent sources on comparative media research, endeavors in the field and the benefits of such studies. In particular, the Hallin and Mancini
framework, its relevance and the debate this work has triggered regarding convergence
and globalization
will be assessed critically. Chapter 2 also surveys political patterns and characteristics, including the nature of the state; its size, strength, and its system of governance; power-sharing. These emerge as central dimensions characterizing the Lebanese political and—by extension—media systems. The history and political system of Lebanon as well as the literature used in this study will also be evaluated in this chapter.
Chapter 2 will be followed by a thorough assessment of the Lebanese media system vis-à-vis the Hallin and Mancini
dimensions, including the development of media markets, the variable of “political pluralism”, the degree of development of journalistic professionalization
, and the degree and nature of state intervention. This useful set of indicators as well as amended and other suggested variables will be used in analyzing the Lebanese media system. This section draws on more than 60 semi-structured interviews as well as existing qualitative and quantitative data.
4
The book culminates in Chapter 4, which describes the necessary amendments required for the set of indicators suggested by Hallin and Mancini
. It also explicates the salient features identified as influencing the Lebanese case and potentially other similar national media systems. Based on the Lebanese media system, the amended media model, the CriSPP Model
, will also be presented in this chapter. Finally, the work concludes with a chapter recapping the main findings of the work as well as with suggestions for further research, namely, media systems that may potentially fit the model suggested in the penultimate chapter.
Notes
- 1.Jamal ‘Abd al-Nasir was the president of Egypt from 1956 to 1970. His success in nationalizing the Suez Canal in 1956, his “political” victory in the ensuing Suez Crisis, and his strong support of the Palestinian cause alongside other feats made him the leader and symbol of Arab Nationalism, which dominated the 1960s and aspired toward a close union of Arab countries (Hourani 1991, p. 407). Arab Nationalism, which is sometimes referred to as Nasirism, “was embodied ... in the personality of Jamal ‘Abd al-Nasir” (Hourani 1991, p. 351).
- 2.Author’s interview with Khalil Khoury, editor-in-chief of El-Sharq newspaper, conducted on October 27, 2010. According to the political analyst Nicolas Nassif, a private jet flew in to Beirut every morning since the beginning of ‘Abd al-Nasir’s reign and returned to Cairo with 102 publications for the rais (Arabic for “president”). Cf. Nassif, N. (September 26, 2013). Abdul-Hamid al-Sarrage: hal yatad-akarahu al-lubna–nı-u–n? (Arabic for “Abdul-Hamid al-Sarrage: do the Lebanese remember him?”) Al-Akhbar . Retrieved from http://al-akhbar.com/node/192080. At the time, the press in Lebanon was the freest, drawing readers “far beyond the frontiers of the country” (Hourani 1991, p. 393).
- 3.Allusion to Kai Hafez’s The Myth of Media Globalisation (2007), which argues that despite a growing exchange between media systems, media globalization has been overstated. Instead, the nation-state remains very pertinent to the nature of the media system.
- 4.A series of interviews were conducted in Lebanon in September and October 2010, January, May, June 2011 and April 2015. The interviewees included a large population of elite decision-makers closely linked to the Lebanese media and political system.
Bibliography
Dajani, N. (1992). Disoriented Media in a Fragmented Society: The Lebanese Experience. Beirut: American University of Beirut Press.
Downing, J. D. H. (1996). Internationalizing Media Theory: Transition, Power, Culture. London: Sage.
Esser, F., & Hanitzsch, T. (2012). On the why and how of comparative inquiry in communication studies. In F. Esser & Hanitzsch, T. (Eds.), Handbook of Comparative Communication Research (pp. 3–22). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.
Gurevitch, M., & Blumler, J. G. (2004). State of the art of comparative political communication research: Poised for maturity? In F. Esser, & B. Pfetsch (Eds.), Communication, Society, and Politics. Comparing Political Communication. Theories, Cases, and Challenges (pp. 325–343). Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hourani, A. H. (1991). A History of the Arab Peoples. London: Faber & Faber.
Park, M.-J., & Curran, J. (Eds.) (2000). De-Westernizing Media Studies. London: Routledge.
Thussu, D. K. (Ed.) (2009). Internationalizing Media Studies. London: Routledge.