Media Strategies in Policy Advocacy

• In Event: 2020 Politics of Education Yearbook. School Choice Policy and Politics Around the Globe: Sociological Contributions

Abstract

Objective
This study treats Indiana (2010-2018) as a case in which to examine media-based coverage, deliberation, and ethical and empirical framings as school choice reforms were being taken up and as they accelerated. In the US, school choice has largely been a state or local concern. Within the timeframe studied, Indiana transformed into perhaps the leading state in school choice reforms (Turner, Weddle, & Balonon-Rosen, 2017). Our focus reflects an interest in examining the media as an intermediary space that can be exploited or utilized for policy promotion.

Perspectives
A key goal for policymakers and influencers is to create “subjects predisposed toward the values” embodied by particular policies (Rizvi & Lingard, 2009, p. 22), chiefly by defining and framing issues, problems, and solutions through the media. Media, by definition, serves as an intermediary, connecting groups by conveying information. Many advocacy Intermediary Organizations (IOs) have started their own media efforts, such as EdChoice’s podcast, The 74, Education Post, or Choice Media to advance particular policy agendas. But media can also be the space for more passive IOs, as is quite often the case with more traditional forms of media outlets. These are not themselves active promoters of the ideas associated with a policy network, but can instead be utilized by that policy network around a particular agenda. While op-eds by policy advocates in prestigious, mainstream media outlets are an obvious example of such use of media as a passive intermediary space, other examples abound, such as an advocacy organization getting its people on camera.

Methods and Data Sources
We conducted Nexus Uni searches for Indiana-pertaining school choice news. Results were arranged by date, and (after some snowballing also occurred) a database containing 1,136 unique (non-duplicative) items was created. We then applied a discursive analysis to these articles, seeking to identify patterns in relationship to our main research question, which related to the nature and evolution of mediatized justifications for Indiana school choice programs.

Results
Analyses revealed both repetitive and shifting justifications as school choice reforms were advanced, and fluctuating (though generally increasing) amounts of critique and questioning. Although not entirely clean, we discerned patterns related to three main phases: In the first, “ethicization,” school choice was frequently framed as a social justice issue. There was little or no in-depth coverage of how/why these reforms were being financially and strategically pursued/supported. In the second phase, “epitomization and expansion,” Indiana was promoted as a choice darling, and advocates’ attention shifted toward doing more, even as it became increasingly clear that stated intentions/justifications were misaligned with reform realities. Finally, in the third phase, “retrenchment and ideolization,” advocates were increasingly pressured to respond to critiques, but still pressed forward, often with some degree of impunity given initial promises.

Scholarly Significance
The Indiana case offers insights in understanding how mediatization of policy problems around school choice shapes conceptualizations of a complex issue. Specifically, it highlights the role of media as an intermediary organization (IO), showing its frequent use/function as an inert, non-critical vessel of political messages.

Authors

• Joel R Malin, Miami University - Oxford

• Chris Lubienski, Indiana University

• Queenstar Mensa-Bonsu, Miami University