Rethinking the European blogging competition 2009 launched by the European Journalism Centre in Brussels 26-27 Jan. 2009. The EJC brought 81 bloggers, representing all 27 member states, to Brussels for a kick-off meeting to launch a six-month blogging competition.

“Moses calling from Brussels: EUCommunication Policy…nul points”

There is no doubt that nation states are the dominant frame of reference and belonging for a vast majority of EU citizens. The question is IF and HOW an additional collective “Heimat” can be invented or constructed as a vehicle to legitimise the EU’s present and future goals.

It is not as difficult as it seems. What IS needed is talent, common endeavour and dedication. What is NOT needed are well-paid Brussels based civil servants “playing” at being journalists, or communication policy makers appointed by indifferent national governments achieving indifferent goals. Communicating Europe cannot be an automated procedure. You cannot simply push a button to win the hearts and minds of individuals.

Moreover, further European integration can no longer rely on citizens’ usually silent permissive consensus.

The following article explores the fragmented European self-contradictory communicative space and ways to overcome the solitude of being a pro-EU netizen, dealing with the sentimental pseudo-dilemma: national sovereignty versus European loyalty.

Dealing with the problematic term “e-participation” within the European online realm

Myth: The Internet could become the abstract, symbolic and, at the same time, tangible platform for European political activism.

Reality: Online mediatisation of self-perceptions in a post-modern era can be very problematic. Does joining Facebook groups and community platforms (e.g. www.thinkaboutit.eu), necessarily mean that you are engaged in political activism and can finally make a difference? On the contrary, it might end up being a theoretical oxymoron, an empty undelivered promise, a wishful rhetorical referent or an “empty signifier”. Questions about whether online identities are continuous with offline selves (interaction with the real world) are dominant and self-evident. This is a core issue in the emerging European e-agora: bridging the gap between digitally mediated virtual space and real, flesh and blood individuals who comprise physical communities.

Virtual environments are valuable as places where we can acknowledge our inner diversity. But we still want an authentic experience of self. One’s fear is, of course, that in the culture of simulation, a word like authenticity can no longer apply. (Turkle, 1996)[1]

As stated at the “European blogging competition” Event in Brussels “never have so many people written so much to be read by so few” [2]. Publishing articles on EU Elections using blogs and Facebook groups is like throwing a grain of sand into the Sahara desert.

It might end up being an autistic, hopeless self-repeated action, which might give you the false impression that you have done your duty as an active citizen. Alas, this is the same sand in which you proudly hide your head like a pan-European ostrich.

New media vs Traditional Media : a Pyrrhic victory

The feathers of that ostrich reminded me of the importance of putting both our feet on solid ground. Why spend taxpayers’ money on autonomous, self-selective, self-motivated bloggers from around EU, mostly Euro-enthusiasts, who participate a priori in a discussion originated by them, with them, for them within the context of social networking sites?

To avoid misunderstanding: why only do that? Why not buy advertising time from Public broadcasting networks (ERT Greece, RAI Italy, BBC UK etc.) or from Commercial private channels since – according to Euro barometer [3] – television is perceived as the preferred source for information, followed by daily newspapers, taking of course into consideration the rules regarding political advertising and broadcasting for elections which differ from state to state.[4]

Who will buy the advertising time? Politicians / parties within member states. Why them? Because they are democratically elected. Why not the European Commission? The argument has always been that any “broadcasting / advertising” by the EP or Commission would be tantamount to political interference in the domestic affairs of a member state.

So, why this all of the sudden shift of interest to New Media? Who is so naïve as to believe that the New Media alone will be the panacea for the communications and therefore democratic deficit of EU? No need to repeat that we DO need opinionated bloggers. Let me remind you that TIME’s Person of the Year 2006 [5] was the anonymous blogger and commentator of sites. Blogging is also of great benefit for the journalists of the traditional media. However, on top of that, we need effective channels of European mass communication.

Based on personal observation, the EU is over-represented [6] on the internet. The existential question is: who is listening and moreover who cares, “given the plethora of message-providers and the mounting traffic of content, among the most daunting problems arising is, firstly, that of infoflation (data richness), a term that synthesises the term information with that of inflation in order to highlight attendant problems of entropy”.[7]

Reality: By adopting a more moderate techno-enthusiasm, we might re-evaluate the significance and tremendous power of “officially” moderated, controlled, organised and managed television as we know it. I am not afraid to use the words “controlled and moderated” when referring to western media, which have never been the “sanctuary of impartiality and objectivity”, as they proudly proclaim, comparing themselves to the media from so-called developing countries.

Is it too late to start in February implementing a communications strategy targeting the Euro-elections which take place in June, bearing in mind that such a strategy has to be implemented in common ways throughout the 27 member states involved?

Yes, there is no need to dispute the fact that blogging and in general the New Media played an important role in the recent American elections. However, we all remember that President Obama’s communication strategy reached its peak on Oct. 29, when the Democrats bought 30 minutes of prime time on major TV networks for a programme on air from 8 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. In the footsteps of Obama? Not really.[8]

Dealing with Self-perceptions: internalising external signals and messages with EU content is based on the originators of messages and mediation itself.

Myth: The EU is a monolithic, bureaucratic monster. EU politics are not sexy.

Reality: Pirandello could give the answer: “It Is So (If You Think So)” [9] . How many of us really believe that British, German or Italian politics are more “attractive” and “glamorous” compared to EU politics? Let’s try to answer this question honestly. And please exclude Carla Bruni or Berlusconi’s hair colour. Why is political discourse within member states “hot” but “old-fashioned” and “boring” in the EU? Because a bunch of honorable and well-respected (?) journalists in each member state – depending on the degree of national or their boss’s euroscepticism – say so! As the BBC Brussels correspondent Mark Mardell [10] remarked at the TH!INKABOUTIT event “there are pan-European issues to be broadcast, but I am not sure if the media will decide to promote them”. Tony Barber [11] from the Financial Times mentioned that one pan-European issue to be addressed in the future is the economic crisis, which according to him will influence the debate over Euro-elections.

Issues such as citizens’ identification and association with EU were also raised, but nobody had the answer, apart from a few ideas suggested by the BBC correspondent: “an EU president for instance (as this is proposed by the Lisbon Treaty) will help people to associate themselves with the faceless EU [12]. The EU president could mobilise the EU citizens.”

Bloggers’ meeting with MEPs and EU officials at the EP

JMECE Lab had the chance to ask Steve Clark from the WebComm Unit of the EP to comment on the following remarks made by focus group participants. That focus group [13]was recently convened in conjunction with Professor Juliet Lodge in a relatively poor north-east port, Hull, UK.

“The EuroparlTV website was regarded with the same disinterest. One student said he would find it more useful if such a channel were done by an independent company instead of the European Parliament. The EuroparlTV website was seen, in the words of students, as “propaganda.”" Mr. Clark, who spoke at the Brussels Event about the “EP online: web communications now and in the future”, denied that the EU is trying to proselytize or disseminate propaganda, underlining the fact EU citizens are not “stupid” and they understand when they are being brainwashed. He also seemed familiar with all the arguments against this new initiative, the web based parliamentary TV.

Finally, bloggers from around Europe joined three MEPs, Christopher Fjellner (EPP), Richard Corbett (PES) and Jules Maaten (ALDE) in a stimulating discussion on web, bloggers and networkers. Dr. Richard Corbett, one of the first blogger MEPs, noted that he does not allow comments on his blog because of the potential misuse of that feature by other parties, which would use his e-space to promote their own interests. The reactions by members of the audience interrupted the discussion: “no comments, means no Blogging!” Dr. Corbett had to clarify that “all comments are welcome via e-mails”. However, the “instant response” feature of blogging is in this way erased.

The discussion was moderated by Mrs. Marjory van den Broeke, Head of press at the Parliament, who referred to herself and her colleagues as “civil servants”. What the EU needs is talented trend setters and dedicated opinion leaders [14], not Eurocrats, who aim to create “a common sentimental basis”, “a special feeling of co-belonging” starting from 9 to 5 everyday, except weekends [15]. The EU is a sui generis political organisation, which needs individuals who can be engaged in the creation of a common European public sphere “in the making”.
Rhetoric Question for homework!

Is it too late to start in February implementing a communications strategy targeting the Euro-elections which take place in June, bearing in mind that such a strategy has to be implemented in common ways throughout the 27 member states involved?

Notes:
[1] Turkle, S. (1996). Virtuality and its discontents: Searching for community in cyberspace. The American Prospect,24, 50-57.
[2] http://cincypg.org/node/29 / The New York Times’ statement on blogging.
[3]http://www.euractiv.com/en/enlargement/eurobarometer-eu-citizens-badly-informed-enlargement/article-111414
[4] For more on that issue check the Euro election books by Juliet Lodge and Val Herman, especially Direct elections to the European Parliament. London: Macmillan.,1982.
[5] http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
[6] The core question is NOT whether to create one more common communicative e-space, as suggested e.g. via the European Parliament’s webTV, but to gain more visibility for the existing ones and – from DG Communication’s point of view – to analyse the innumerable contributions by netizens so far. In addition to that, as Raymond Frenken, creator EUX.TV (a web-based channel with EU content http://eux.tv), mentioned a web- based TV channel is not profitable, unless you have a lot of daily hits. European politics won’t attract attention.
[7] Sophia Kaitatzi-Whitlock 2008, Web 2.0 Interactive: the rise of popular agency and its impact, (unpublished paper part of a lecture at LSE, May 2008 available on line: http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/informationSystems/newsAndEvents/2008events/whitlock.htm)
[8] http://adage.com/campaigntrail/post?article_id=131618
[9] Così è, se vi pare!
[10] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/markmardell/
[11] http://blogs.ft.com/brusselsblog
[12] One can argue that the reason, after all, for making the EU faceless in the first place was to encourage policy solutions in the common interest of the whole EU rather than a specific member state.
[13] The two focus groups with young British vocational education students met at Hull College on 14 January 2009. The first group comprised 12 participants, all male, with a median age of 23 years old. The second group was formed by 10 students (8 males and 2 females), their median age being 18 years old.
[14] See an interesting effort to “use” public figures to communicate EU: the well known in Europe Greek-French journalist Nikos Aliagas promoting EU environmental policy http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=glNHqBuGv-0&feature=related .
[15] I would also like to mention a comment by a journalist in charge of unloading new texts on Europe.eu site during a confidential discussion we had in Brussels. He remarked “these texts which I write for Europe.eu are so boring, that I myself don’t want to read them again!”