Media Pluralism in Latvia 2002–2020

Abstract

This paper offers an overview of specific characteristics of newspaper output and publishing trends in Latvia, aiming to assess whether the newspaper output in Latvia plays the roles theoretically ascribed to newspapers, namely, the roles related to democracy and community building. It is argued that media pluralism is crucial for executing these roles. The assessment of pluralism is based on an exploratory analysis of quantitative data on newspaper output in Latvia. The analysis is accompanied by a discussion of challenges experienced in the newspaper publishing field in Latvia and elsewhere that can potentially hinder the ability of newspapers to execute the roles theoretically ascribed to them. Finally, insights gained during the research process are shared regarding research required to further the analysis of newspaper output in terms of plurality in the sense of access to different news sources and, by extension, perspectives and public representation.

KEYWORDS:

• Newspaper industry
• media pluralism
• public representation
• media and democracy
• localness
• sense of community

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 Nielsen, “Introduction”; Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Closed Doors, Empty Desks”, 1; Ferreira et al., “Deliberative Journalism and Citizenship”, 2–5; Wessels et al., RegPress project final report, 29–30, 38–41.

2 Fowler, “Regional Press Challenges”, 38; Nielsen, “Introduction”, 7.

3 Clark, “From The Silent Watchdog”, 187.

4 Nielsen, “Introduction”, 11; Fowler, “Regional Press Challenges”, 38.

5 Ibid., 14–17.

6 Ibid., 16–17.

7 Ibid., 16.

8 Nielsen, “Introduction”, 16–17; Wessels et al., RegPress project final report, 16–20.

9 Waschková Císařová, “Shattering the Myth?”, 106; Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Closed Doors, Empty Desks”, 6.

10 Wessels et al., RegPress project final report, 17–20, 48.

11 Wessels et al., RegPress project final report, 39–44, 51; Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Closed Doors, Empty Desks”.

12 Liepa and Liepa, “Characteristic Trends”, 284.

13 Ibid., 284.

14 Ibid., 276–278, 285–2*6.

15 Wessels et al., RegPress project final report.

16 Ibid., 32.

17 Ibid., 61.

18 Šulmane and Uzule, “Latvijas mediju vides raksturojums”, 130.

19 Liepa and Liepa, “Characteristic Trends”, 274–275, 285.

20 Wessels et al., RegPress project final report, 20, 36.

21 Centrālā statistikas pārvalde, Population at Beginning.

22 The majority of bilingual newspapers in Latvian and Russian and newspapers in Russian are published in administrative territories—mainly Riga and Daugavpils—with larger population and a high density of Russian speakers.

23 Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Challenges of Media Concentration”, 173.

24 Mažylė, “Lithuanian Parliamentary Election”.

25 Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Challenges of Media Concentration”, 173.

26 Jastramskis, Rožukalne and Jõesaar “Media Concentration in the Baltic States”, 29.

27 Likumi.lv, “On the Press”, Section 102.

28 See for example Dimants, “Media Ownership Transparency and Editorial Autonomy”; Jastramskis, Rožukalne and Jõesaar, “Media Concentration in the Baltic States”; Rožukalne, “Latvian Print Media as Opinion Leaders”.

29 Rožukalne, “Latvian Print Media as Opinion Leaders”, 70.

30 For case studies on Russian media see for example Kudors and Pelnens, “Diverging Faces”.

31 Jastramskis, Rožukalne and Jõesaar, “Media Concentration in the Baltic States”, 37, 43.

32 Rožukalne, “Media Pluralism Monitor 2016”, 5–6.

33 For case studies on Czechia, Poland, and Hungary see for example Hutchison, “European Union and Press”; Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Closed Doors, Empty Desks”; Metykova and Waschkova Cisarova, “Challenges of Media Concentration.”

34 Dimants, “Media Ownership Transparency and Editorial Autonomy”, 248–49, 256–59; Rožukalne, “Media Pluralism Monitor 2016”, 6–7.

35 Balčytienė, “Baltic Media Structures and the Influence of Media”, 54–55.

36 Rožukalne, “Media Pluralism Monitor 2016”, 76.

37 Waschkova Cisarova, “Comparing Czech and Slovak Council Newspapers”, 64–65; Dimants, “Media Ownership Transparency and Editorial Autonomy”, 258.

38 Nielsen, “Introduction”, 13; Clark, “From The Silent Watchdog”, 185.

39 Waschková Císařová, “Czech Local Press Content”, 107.

40 Waschková Císařová, “Czech Local Press Content”, 108; Waschková Císařová, Macek and Macková, “Shattering the Myth?”, 20.

41 Nielsen, “Introduction”, 6–7; Leurdijk, Nieuwenhuis and Poel, “The Newspaper Industry”, 148.

42 Nielsen, “Introduction”, 3, 8–9; Leurdijk, Nieuwenhuis and Poel, “The Newspaper Industry”, 149; Murschetz and Friedrichsen, “Does Online Video Save”, 115.

43 Newman et al., Reuters Institute.

44 Matthews, “Ideological Challenge”, 19; Hutchison, “European Union and Press”, 54; Clark, “From The Silent Watchdog”, 190–191; Rouger, “What Future”, 824; Wessels et al., RegPress project final report, 68.

45 Liepa and Liepa, “Characteristic Trends”, 273.

46 Matthews, “Ideological Challenge”, 13–14; Price Opportunities and Challenges.

47 Liepa and Liepa “Characteristic Trends”, 272; Latvijas Fakti, Pētījums par Latvijas iedzīvotāju, 30–31.

48 Hutchison, “European Union and Press”, 55.

49 Likumi.lv, “Par konceptuālo ziņojumu”.

50 Ibid.

51 Ibid.

52 Ibid.

53 Ibid.

54 Ibid.

Additional information

Funding

This research is funded by the Latvian Council of Science, project ‘Latvian Memory Institution Data in the Digital Space: Connecting cultural heritage’, project No. lzp-2019/1-0365.

Notes on contributors

Elza Ungure

Elza Ungure, Krājuma veidošanas nodaļa, Latvijas Nacionālā Bibliotēka, Mūkusalas iela 3, Rīga, LV-1423, Latvija. E-mail [email protected].