The media hold democratically elected leaders accountable by exposing corruption and policy failures. Although many politicians accept media criticism as intrinsic to liberal democracy, some politicians rein in freedom of the press or intimidate media outlets to silence their critics. We identify circumstances that motivate and enable presidents to curb media freedom in presidential democracies. We argue that (a) presidents who hold ideological positions contrary to those of the mainstream media adopt the media as viable opponents in the absence of an effective electoral opposition, and (b) the media are vulnerable to presidential infringements on their freedom where legislatures and judiciaries hold weak powers relative to presidents, and are therefore unable to constrain presidents’ actions against media freedom. We support our argument with quantitative analyses of press freedom ratings in presidential and semi-presidential democracies from 1993 to 2013.
AlemánE.TsebelisG. (2005). The origins of presidential agenda-setting power in Latin America. Latin American Research Review, 40, 3-26.
2.
BaekM. (2009). A comparative analysis of political communication systems and voter turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 53, 376-393.
3.
BakerA.GreeneK. F. (2011). The Latin American left’s mandate: Free-market policies and issue voting in new democracies. World Politics, 63, 43-77.
4.
BalánM. (2011). Competition by denunciation: The political dynamics of corruption scandals in Argentina and Chile. Comparative Politics, 43, 459-478.
5.
BaltagiB. H.WuP. X. (1999). Unequally spaced panel data regressions with AR(1) disturbances. Econometric Theory, 15, 814-823.
6.
BanksA. S. (2013). Cross-national time-series archive. Jerusalem, Israel: Databanks International.
7.
BaumM. A.GroelingT. (2009). War stories: The causes and consequences of public views of war. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8.
BeckerL. B.VladT.NusserN. (2007). An evaluation of press freedom indicators. International Communication Gazette, 69, 5-28.
9.
BehmerM. (2009). Measuring media freedom: Approaches of international comparison. In CzepekA.HellwigM.NowakE. (Eds.), Press freedom and pluralism in Europe: Concepts and conditions (pp. 23-36). Chicago, IL: Intellect Books.
10.
BesleyT.PratA. (2006). Handcuffs for the grabbing hand? Media capture and government accountability. The American Economic Review, 96, 720-736.
11.
BoasT. C. (2012). Mass media and politics in Latin America. In DominguezJ. I.ShifterM. (Eds.), Constructing democratic governance in Latin America (4th ed.). Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from http://people.bu.edu/tboas/media_LA.pdf
12.
BoasT. C.HidalgoF. D. (2011). Controlling the airwaves: Incumbency advantage and community radio in Brazil. American Journal of Political Science, 55, 868-884.
13.
BrockwehlA. (2013, June13). Ecuador’s new law dispels the myth of “media democratization” in Latin America. Freedom at Issue Blog. Retrieved from http://www.freedomhouse.org/blog
14.
CamajL. (2013). The media’s role in fighting corruption: Media effects on governmental accountability. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 18, 21-42.
15.
CañizálezA.Lugo-OcandoJ. (2008). The media in Venezuela: The revolution was televised, but no one was really watching. In Lugo-OcandoJ. (Ed.), The media in Latin America (pp. 193-210). New York, NY: Open University Press.
16.
CingranelliD. L.RichardsD. L.ClayK. C. (2014). The CIRI human rights dataset. Retrieved from http://www.humanrightsdata.com
17.
CollingsA. (2001). Words of fire: Independent journalists who challenge dictators, drug lords, and other enemies of a free press. New York: New York University Press.
CoppedgeM. (1997, November). A classification of Latin American political parties (Working Paper 244). South Bend, IN: Kellogg Institute, University of Notre Dame.
20.
CorralesJ.PenfoldM. (2007). Venezuela: Crowding out the opposition. Journal of Democracy, 18, 99-113.
21.
DahlR. A. (1998). On democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
22.
De BoefS.KeeleL. (2008). Taking time seriously. American Journal of Political Science, 52, 184-200.
23.
de SmaeleH. (2006). “In the name of democracy.” The paradox of democracy and press freedom in post-communist Russia. In VoltmerK. (Ed.), Mass media and political communication in new democracies (pp. 35-48). New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
DjankovS.McLieshC.NenovaT.ShleiferA. (2003). Who owns the media?The Journal of Law and Economics, 46, 341-380.
25.
DrukkerD. M. (2003). Testing for serial correlation in linear panel-data models. The Stata Journal, 3, 168-177.
26.
EgorovG.GurievS.SoninK. (2009). Why resource-poor dictators allow freer media: A theory and evidence from panel data. American Political Science Review, 103, 645-668.
27.
ElgieR. (2005). Variations on a theme: A fresh look at semipresidentialism. Journal of Democracy, 16, 98-112.
28.
Flores-MacíasG. A. (2010). Statist vs. pro-market: Explaining leftist governments’ economic policies in Latin America. Comparative Politics, 42, 413-433.
29.
FoxE.WaisbordS. (Eds.). (2002). Latin politics, global media. Austin: University of Texas Press.
GiannoneD. (2014). The political and ideological dimension of the measurement of freedom of information. Assessing the interplay between neoliberalism and the Freedom of the Press Index. International Communication Gazette, 76, 505-527.
33.
GraberD. (2003). The media and democracy: Beyond myths and stereotypes. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 139-160.
34.
GuntherR.MughanA. (2000). The media in democratic and nondemocratic regimes: A mutlilevel perspective. In GuntherR.MughanA. (Eds.), Democracy and the media: A comparative perspective (pp. 1-27). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35.
HallinD. C.ManciniP. (Eds.). (2012). Comparing media systems beyond the western world. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
36.
HallinD. C.PapathanassopoulosS. (2002). Political clientelism and the media: Southern Europe and Latin America in comparative perspective. Media, Culture & Society, 24, 175-195.
Holtz-BachaC. (2004, July 25-30). What is “good” press freedom? The difficulty of measuring freedom of the press worldwide. Prepared for presentation at the International Association for Media and Communication Research (AIMCR) annual conference, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
39.
HughesS.LawsonC. (2004). Propaganda and crony capitalism: Partisan bias in Mexican television news. Latin American Research Review, 39, 81-105.
40.
HughesS.LawsonC. (2005). The barriers to media opening in Latin America. Political Communication, 22, 9-25.
KeeferP. E. (2012). Database of Political Institutions 2012 (World Bank Report No. WPS2283). Research on Macroeconomics and Growth, The World Bank Group. Retrieved from http://go.worldbank.org/2EAGGLRZ40
KitzbergerP. (2010, November). The media activism of Latin America’s leftist governments: Does ideology matter? (GIGA Working Paper No. 151). Hamburg, Germany: German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
48.
KucinskiB. (2003). Jornalistas e Revolucionários: Nos Tempos da Imprensa Alternativa [Journalists and revolutionaries: During the time of the alternative press] (2nd ed.). São Paulo, Brazil: Editora da Universidade de São Paulo.
49.
LaevenL.ValenciaF. (2012, June). Systemic banking crises database: An update (IMF Working Paper 12/163). Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund.
50.
LauríaC. (2011, September1). Confrontation, repression in Correa’s Ecuador (Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) Reports: Ecuador). Retrieved from http://cpj.org/x/4552
51.
LawsonC. H. (2002). Building the fourth estate: Democratization and the rise of a free press in Mexico. Berkeley: University of California Press.
52.
LevitskyS.RobertsK. M. (Eds.). (2011). The resurgence of the Latin American left. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
53.
MarshallM. G.GurrT. R.JaggersK. (2014). Polity IV project: Political regime characteristics and transitions, 1800-2013. Dataset users’ manual. Vienna, VA: Center for Systemic Peace.
54.
MatosC. (2011). Media and democracy in Brazil. Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 8, 178-196.
55.
McMillanJ.ZoidoP. (2004). How to subvert democracy: Montesinos in Peru. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18, 69-92.
56.
MorganJ. (2011). Bankrupt representation and party system collapse. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
57.
MorgensternS.Pérez-LiñánA.NegriJ. J. (2008). Parliamentary opposition in non-parliamentary regimes: Latin America. Journal of Legislative Studies, 14, 160-189.
58.
MurilloM. V.OliverosV.VaishnavM. (2010). Dataset on political ideology of presidents and parties in Latin America. Columbia University. Retrieved from http://www.virginiaoliveros.com
59.
NegrettoG. L. (2006). Minority presidents and democratic performance in Latin America. Latin American Politics and Society, 48, 63-92.
60.
NorrisP. (2000). A virtuous circle? Political communications in post-industrial democracies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
61.
Pérez-LiñánA. (2007). Presidential impeachment and the new political instability in Latin America. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
62.
Pérez-LiñánA.CastagnolaA. (2009). Presidential control of high courts in Latin America: A long-term view (1904-2006). Journal of Politics in Latin America, 1, 87-114.
63.
PintoJ. (2008). Muzzling the watchdog: The case of disappearing watchdog journalism from Argentine mainstream news. Journalism, 9, 750-774.
64.
PortoM. (2007). TV news and political change in Brazil: The impact of democratization on TV Globo’s journalism. Journalism, 8, 363-384.
65.
RafskyS. (2012). Both sides cry “press freedom” in Argentine newsprint battle. CPJ Blog: Press Freedom News and Views. Retrieved from http://cpj.org/x/477c
66.
RossM. L. (2001). Does oil hinder democracy?World Politics, 53, 325-361.
67.
SamuelsD. J.ShugartM. S. (2010). Presidents, parties, and prime ministers: How the separation of powers affects party organization and behavior. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
68.
SeawrightJ. (2012). Party system collapse: The roots of crisis in Peru and Venezuela. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
69.
SkidmoreT. E. (1988). The politics of military rule in Brazil, 1964-1985. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
70.
SteinE. A. (2008). Leading the way: The media and the struggle against authoritarian rule (Doctoral dissertation). University of California, Los Angeles.
71.
SteinE. A.KellamM. (2014). Programming presidential agendas: Partisan and media environments that lead presidents to fight crime and corruption. Political Communication, 31, 25-52.
72.
United Nations Development Programme. (2004). Democracy in Latin America: Towards a citizens’ democracy. New York, NY: Author.
VoltmerK. (2013). The media in transitional democracies. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
75.
VonDoeppP.YoungD. J. (2013). Assaults on the fourth estate: Explaining media harassment in Africa. Journal of Politics, 75, 36-51.
76.
WaisbordS. R. (2000). Watchdog journalism in South America: News, accountability, and democracy. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
77.
WaisbordS. R. (2002). Antipress violence and the crisis of the state. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 7, 90-109.
78.
WaisbordS. R. (2006). In journalism we trust? Credibility and fragmented journalism in Latin America. In VoltmerK. (Ed.), Mass media and political communication in new democracies (pp. 64-77). New York, NY: Routledge.
79.
WeylandK.MadridR. L.HunterW. (2010). Leftist governments in Latin America: Successes and shortcomings. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
80.
Whitten-WoodringJ. (2009). Watchdog or lapdog? Media freedom, regime type, and government respect for human rights. International Studies Quarterly, 53, 595-625.
81.
WiesehomeierN.BenoitK. (2009). Presidents, parties, and policy competition. The Journal of Politics, 71, 1435-1447.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
