Search

This article sets out to analyse the intertwining of everyday media use and people's views and opinions on communications policy issues. This is an interesting question because public service broadcasting in Finland is funded by a licence fee. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that the public service broadcaster (the Finnish Broadcasting Company YLE) has a felt need to demonstrate to its viewers that the company has a necessary and legitimate role and that it commands a significant share of viewers. However research has devoted only limited attention to the importance of viewer ratings to YLE's primary customers, i.e. ordinary viewers. If a person spends a lot of time watching YLE programmes, does this mean they are also in favour of a communications policy that aims to safeguard YLE's position? Or vice versa, if a person spends most of their time watching commercial channels, does this mean they are more likely to take a critical stance towards YLE's programme policy or the legitimacy of the company? The dataset consists of 22 qualitative interviews in which the informants are asked about their everyday media use and their views and opinions on media policy issues. The results show that the interviewees take a favourable view on the Finnish Broadcasting Company YLE and its public service broadcasting policy, irrespective of their current viewing habits. In part, the defence of public service broadcasting production can be explained by the individual's desire to secure the diversity of television programmes. Furthermore, the support for public service broadcasting policy among the interviewees is explained by this being compatible with the great value commonly attached to individual self-development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The argument put forward in this article is that empirical research on structural differentiation in western cities is so heavily focused on the accumulation of deprivation that the content and regional concentration of upward social mobility has largely remained unexplored. Working from this vantage-points the article presents an empirical analysis of the differentiation of the elite in the metropolitan area of Helsinki, Finland. The result is unexpected and surprising: The internal differentiation of the elite in the Helsinki region resembles the picture put forward by Pierre Bourdieu on the differentiation of modern French society (1984). Bourdieu's description reveals a process of social differentiation that is not based merely on differences in economic capital (incomes and property), but also on cultural capital , which traces back to each individual's origin but above all educational level. Bourdieu even draws a graphic representation of the differentiation of French society in which these two structural determinants - economic and cultural capital create a two-dimensional space within which they key groups of French society are located. Each of these groups is characterised by distinctive ways of thinking, forms of self-consciousness and modes of differentiation. The empirical analysis presented in the article reveals the same kind of social differentiation in the Helsinki region. The result can be regarded as a surprise as both the national welfare regime and the local political tradition have been specifically geared towards social equalisation and integration. International comparisons have additionally shown that the region is exceptionally homogeneous. However, with a small unit of spatial analysis and a research design that allows the appearance of multiple dimensions, a structure of differentiation emerges that closely resembles Bourdieu's description. The result lends further support to the view that Bourdieu's theory applies not only to France, but also describes the internal structuration of western society more generally. This, together with the fact that the question has received only scant attention in international urban studies, opens up an interesting tentative hypothesis: it is possible that the multidimensional differentiation of the elite is, in fact, a universal structure of European metropolises and that the only reason it hasn't yet been presented is that no one has been specifically looking for it. International comparisons based on this perspective would obviously be needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the mid-1980s onwards, many sectors of public administration in Finland began to move from resource governance to market governance. Since then, real markets or quasi-markets as well as competition legislation designed to make these markets work more efficiently, have assumed ever greater significance. This article attempts to explain why this largely neo-liberal economic policy has not become a swearword in Finland (at least not a very nasty one), but the radical reforms have been allowed to go ahead without any major resistance. The empirical material consists of government documents produced in connection with the key legislative changes mentioned above. The examination draws on the methods of discourse analysis: the main focus is on the premises to which the authors appeal in their committee reports and in the preambles to the relevant bills. The results show, first, that even though the changeover to a competition economy received its main impetus from a report by the decentralisation committee, the motivations presented in that report were based on an entirely different set of values, namely those of democracy and citizen participation. It was clear enough that no-one was going to call into question the need for improved service standards in public administration, yet the changes were not justified in the proposal by referring to a model where public services would be upgraded according to customer demand. The critical intelligentsia of the 1980s were also quite critical of the state, and therefore it was difficult for them suddenly to stand up in defence of the state and state bureaucracy, even though their criticism was driven in part by the neo-liberal thinking made famous by the Reagan and Thatcher administrations. The reform of competition legislation, on the other hand, was defended by direct reference to the basic principles of capitalism. Even on the political left, confidence had waned in scientific planning and in the theory that the econom... [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]