Content area
Abstract
I examine the effects that the press has on citizens in dictatorships, focusing on the media's influence on expression of opposition. Even when censored, some media test the government's limits; the government's reaction to these challenges provides potential opponents with a barometer for government tolerance of public dissent. Using this information, opposition leaders then decide when and what types of actions to undertake. Censored or pro-government media also can contribute to individual's participation in opposition by generating common knowledge of other people's intended behavior. The knowledge that many others also oppose the regime and plan to express their opposition can encourage someone to do the same. During political openings, as the media liberalize they expose citizens to new information about corruption, human rights abuses and policy criticism, generating increasing opposition. In these ways, the media help opposition leaders coordinate effective anti-regime actions in dictatorships.
In authoritarian regimes the media also can affect public opinion in much the same way they do in democracies. By presenting elite opinions on key issues, the media help citizens form opinions about matters that are pertinent to their decision making. Public opinion data show that citizens adopt positions following changes in elite stances on key issues as reported in the news. These changes in public opinion are mediated by individuals' ideology and political awareness. As censorship subsides during political liberalization, media coverage includes more opposition voices. People who are exposed to this coverage, pre-disposed to support the opposition, and politically aware enough to take in the elite cues will adapt their own opinions accordingly. I test these expectations using evidence from Brazil, showing that changes in media coverage preceded changes in public opinion on issues related to authoritarian rule.
Based on an analysis of content in the mainstream newspapers in Brazil and Chile, I show that coverage in pro-government media assists opposition activists in assessing risk and helps ordinary citizens make decisions by developing common knowledge. On the other hand, the alternative press provides critical information and a means for communication that more directly facilitate the opposition's coordination of mass actions. While the media help civil society leaders gauge the risks they face in organizing antigovernment mass actions, the media serve the armed opposition in more direct ways by publicizing their actions, in turn increasing pressure on the government to make concessions. My research reveals that both mainstream and opposition media help keep activists and the masses informed, even in dictatorships.
