Siyasal Hesap verebilirlik, İletişim ve Demokrasi: Medyalaştırılmış bir Kurgu mu?

Yıl 2018, Sayı: 30 - MEDYA ve DEMOKRASİ, 1 - 12, 25.10.2018

Ekmel Geçer

https://doi.org/10.17829/turcom.429912

Öz

Bu
çalışma siyasal iletişimde hesap verebilirliği tanımını vermeyi, nasıl işlediğini
anlatmayı ve siyasal kampanyaların muhatabı olan seçmenlerin siyasilerin
sorumluluğundan ne anladığını ve onu politikacıları kontrol için nasıl kullanmaları
gerektiğini anlatmaya çalışmaktadır. Bunu yaparken, hesap verebilirliğin demokratik
toplumsal katılımı ve kontrolü inşa edip edemeyeceğini de analiz edecektir.
Teorik tartışmalardan da faydalanarak, (a) siyasilerin seçmenle iletişim kurma
yolları hakkında ipuçları, (b) izlenebilirliği ne denli dikkate aldıkları, (c)
propaganda yöntemleri ve (d) kişisel imajlarını nasıl oluşturdukları
incelenmiştir. Literatürse analizlerin verdiği sonuçlar; özellikle Türkiye
kontekstinde, liderin karizmasını devam ettirmek için kurgusal (doğal olmayan)
iletişim yöntemlerine ve mübalağaya başvurdukları, medyadan sansasyonel bir
anlatımı istedikleri ve destek artacaksa hesap verebilirliğin ve demokratik
perspektifin görmezden gelinebilir olduğunu düşündüklerini göstermiştir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Siyasal iletişim, politikacılar, medya, demokrasi, propaganda, hesap verebilirlik

Political Accountability, Communication and Democracy: A Fictional Mediation?

Öz

This
study aims to give the description of the accountability in political
communication, how it works and how it helps the addressees of the political campaigns
to understand and control the politicians. While doing this it will also
examine if accountability can help to structure a democratic public
participation and control. Benefitting from mostly theoretical debates, the
article (a) to give insights of the ways political elites use to communicate
with the voters (b) how they deal with accountability, (c) to learn their
methods of propaganda, (d) and how they structure their personal images? The
theoretical background at the end suggests that the politician, particularly in
the Turkish context, may sometimes apply artificial (unnatural) communication
methods, exaggeration and desire sensational narrative in the media to keep the
charisma of the leader and that the accountability and democratic perspective
is something to be ignored if the support is increasing. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Political communication, politicians, media, democracy, propaganda, accountability

Kaynakça

• Akay, A. (2012). Siyasal Iletisim Danismanligi (Political Communication Consultancy). Istanbul: Nobel.
• Archetti, C. (2014). Politicians, Personal Image and the Construction of Political Identity: A Comparative Study of the UK and Italy. New York: Palgrave.
• Barthless, R. and Howard, R. (1993). Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography. London: Vintage.
• Beus, J. (2005). “Audience Democracy: An Emerging Pattern in Postmodern Political Communication” in Brants, K. and Voltmer, K. (ed), Political Communication in Postmodern Democracy: Challenging the Primacy of Politics. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, pp. 19-38.
• Birks, D. F. and Southan, J. M. (1990). “The potential of marketing information systems in charitable organisations”, Journal of Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 8. 4: pp. 15–20.
• Birsen, H. (2010). “Presentation of Primary News Sources in Local Press”, Erciyes University Communication Faculty Journal, 1.3: pp. 7-22.
• Bourdieu, P. (1992). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Bourdieu, P. (2012). On Television. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Brent, M. and Dent, F. (2010). The Leader's Guide to Influence: How to Use Soft Skills to Get Hard Results. Pearson: New York.
• Ceron, A. (2017). Social Media and Political Accountability: Bridging the Gap between Citizens and Politicians. Cham: Palgrave.
• Chomsky, N. and Herman, E. (1995). Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media. London: Vintage.
• Goldberg, B. (2008). Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
• Grabe, M. E. and Bcuy, P. E. (2009). Image Bite Politics: News and the Visual Framing of Elections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hawthorne, J., & Warner R., B. (2015). The Influence of User-Controlled Messages on Candidate Evaluations. In V. A. Farrar-Myers, & J. S. Vaughn, Controlling the Message: New Media in American Political Campaigns (pp. 155-180). New York: New York University Press.
• Heywood, A. (2012). Political Ideologies: An Introduction. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Kejanlioglu, B. (2008). Uzan Cem. In L. L. Kaid, & C. Holtz-Bacha, Encyclopedia of Political Communication (p. 804). London: Sage.
• Kelly, G. (2018). Because I Say So: Media Authenticity in the Age of Post-Truth and Fake News. In C. Prado, America's Post-Truth Phenomenon: When Feelings and Opinions Trump Facts and Evidence (pp. 38-58). California: ABC-CLIO, LLC.
• Kentel, F. (1991). “Demokrasi, Kamuoyu ve Iletisime Dair (About Democracy, public opinion and communication)”, Birikim, 30. pp. 35-55.
• Lee, T. and Odugbemi, S. (2011). “How can citizens be helped to hold their governments accountable?” in Lee, T. and Odugbemi, S. (ed), Accountability Through Public Opinion. Washington: World Bank Publications, pp. 415-427.
• Macionis, J. and Plummer, K. (2011). Sociology. Essex: Pearson Education.
• Mazzoleni, G. (2016). The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Mcnair, B. (2007). An Introduction to Political Communication. London: Routledge.
• Morris, T. and Goldsworthy, S. (2012). PR Today: The Authoritative Guide to Public Relations. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Mulgan, R. (2002). “Accountability: A ever expanding concept?”, Public Administration, 78.3: p. 555-573.
• Mutlu, E. (1998). Iletisim Sozlugu (Communication Dictionary). Ankara: Ark Bilim Sanat.
• Postman, N. (2005). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin.
• Powell, L., & Cowart, J. (2017). Political Campaign Communication: Inside and Out. London: Routledge.
• Rigel, N. (2009). İleti Tasarımında Haber (News in message design). İstanbul: Der Yayınları.
• Sampson, E. (1996). The Image Factor: A Guide to Effective Self-presentation for Career Enhancement. London: Kogan Page.
• Schultz, D. (2012). Politainment: The Ten Rules of Contemporary Politics: A citizens' guide to understanding campaigns and elections. Minnesota: Hamline University School of Business.
• Scott, C. (2000). “Accountability in the Regulatory State,” Journal of Law and Society, 27.1: pp. 38-64.
• Semetko, H. A. and Scammel, M. (2012). Handbook of Political Communication. London: Sage.
• Stanyer, J. (2007). Modern Political Communication: Medicated Politics in Uncertain Times. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Street, J. (2001), Mass Media, Politics and Democracy. New York: Palgrave.
• Street, J. (2004). “Celebrity Politicians: Popular Culture and Political Representation”, The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 6.4: pp. 435-452.
• Street, J. (2007). The Celebrity Politician: Political Style and Popular Culture. In J. Corner, & D. Pels, Media and the Restyling of Politics: Consumerism, Celebrity and Cynicism (pp. 85-98). London: Sage.
• Stromback, J. and Kiousis, S. (2011). Political Public Relations: Principles and Applications. London: Routledge.
• Theaker, A. (2011). The Public Relations Handbook. London: Routledge.
• Uztug, F. (1999). Siyasal Marka (Political Brand). Ankara: Mediacat.
• Uztug, F. (2004). Siyasal Iletisim Yonetimi (Political Communication Management). Istanbul: Mediacat.