Do communicators take over? Mediatization and conflicts in civil society

Abstract

AbstractThe article investigates internal strategies and struggles in civil society organizations' (CSOs') policy advocacy work from the vantage point of policy professionals by using the concepts of field, symbolic capital, and logics. A main claim is that mediatization acts as a strategic‐tension mechanism within a CSO, putting communicators at the center of policy units, which in turn is consequential for the strategies chosen for the organization's policy work. In this way, mediatization as a process celebrates certain professionals and strategies as particularly relevant, creating frustration among employees not specializing in communication. The study identifies a trend for organizations to put more resources and influence into communication and less into actual policy analysis. This article combines research on organizational logics, policy professionals, and mediatization by drawing on 38 interviews with, and ethnographic work among, policy professionals in Sweden, Latvia, and the Netherlands.Related ArticlesSelling, Niels, and Stefan Svallfors. 2019. “The Lure of Power: Career Paths and Considerations among Policy Professionals in Sweden.” Politics & Policy 47(5): 984–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12325.Svallfors, Stefan. 2016. “Out of the Golden Cage: PR and the Career Opportunities of Policy Professionals.” Politics & Policy 44(1): 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12149.Svallfors, Stefan, Erica Falkenström, Corrie Hammar, and Anna T. Höglund. 2022. “Networked Reports: Commissioning and Production of Expert Reports on Swedish Health Care Governance.” Politics & Policy 50(3): 580–97. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12462.