1. How do public managers perceive (and deal with) media attention for supervisory organizations? Professor Mark van Twist 14th EPSO Conference Utrecht (October 12th 2012)

2. Outline Theoretical perspectives on the relation between media and governance processes Practical positions on the relation between media and governance processes Data gathered from the EPSO members on the relation between media and supervisory organizations Four paradoxes relevant to understanding the relation between media and supervisory organizations

3. Public relations Perspective Agenda setting Perspective Mediatization Perspective Focal pointSelling messages and using the media Agenda setting and impact of the media Developments in the media landscape FocusOrganizationIssueContext Research questions How are messages communicated effectively through media to an audience? What factors influence the issues on political and administrative agendas? How is news created and to what extent is media logic taking over other domains (politics, administration etc)? Interesting phenomena to look at Ways to communicate ideas, closeness of relations of journalist with politicians and how journalists are 'used' or vice versa. Dynamics of agenda forming, windows to put issues on agendas and media influence to create 'windows‘. Signs of adaptation of political and administrative life to media logic. Reporting in media on governance processes Three perspectives on the influence of media

4. Mediatization perspective Informational biases in the media (Bennett, 2009): – Personalization – Dramatization – Fragmentation – Athority disorder bias Media logic ‘invading’ and ‘colonizing’ other domains

5. Three positions in practice on influence of media Persevering fatalists (undergoing the media logic) Resilient adaptors (bending the media logic) Active communicators (using the media logic) Public Relations Perspective XXX Agenda setting Perspective XX Mediatization Perspectief XXX

6. View of mediaPrescription for policyView of governance Perservering fatalists Media as independent negative force, highly biased, that should make more room for balanced news Not much can be done. Very difficult to cope with media logic, limited influence on media Media disturb governance and steering, make things complex, are a disturbing and often annoying factor for public managers Resilient modifiers Media as 'natural phenomenon‘, that definitely show signs of 'media logic' but can be influenced You cannot really influence media. Be pragmatic and think about what you want to communicate Media are an inherent element of governance and should be taken as it comes and managed as good as possible Active communi- cators Media are just as dependent on the dynamics of the governance process as they shape it. Create strong images and communicate them, go along with the complex decision- making process. In highly complex and dynamic governance processes the media can be an instrument in the hands of public managers.

18. Discussion: four paradoxes First paradox: good supervision is invisible in the media, exactly because the supervision is successful. Second paradox: when supervision becomes visible, it is usually framed as ‘failing’ in the blame game. Third paradox: not only critical reports make supervision vulnerable, supportive reports do so even more. Fourth paradox: the essence of supervision is making sure everything is allright by exposing what is wrong.

19. Contact Netherlands School of Public Administration J. (Jorren) Scherpenisse Lange Voorthout 17 2514 EB The Hague Telephone: +31 70 30 24 933 e-mail: steen@nsob.nlsteen@nsob.nl www.nsob.nl/en Erasmus University Rotterdam Departement of Public Administration Prof. Dr. M. (Mark) van Twist Postbus 1738 3000 DR Rotterdam Telephone: +31 70 30 24 932 e-mail: m.vantwist@fsw.eur.nlm.vantwist@fsw.eur.nl or twist@nsob.nltwist@nsob.nl