Flinders provides a thought-provoking piece on possible pathologies of democratic accountability. This note, however, points out some weaknesses in this line of thinking. The assumptions about the etiology of democratic pathologies are not always robust, the symptoms are dramatized, and there is an inferential jump from anecdotal evidence to a general diagnosis about the health of democracy. This article mainly discusses two partly inaccurate descriptions and qualifies the conclusions based thereon: one on the deleterious role of the media and one on the penetration of “monitory democracy” in contemporary governance.
AveryJ. M. (2009). Videomalaise or virtuous circle?International Journal of Press/Politics, 14, 410-433.
2.
BovensM. (2005). Public accountability. In FerlieE.LynnL.E.Jr.PollittC. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public management (pp. 182-208). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
3.
ChambersS. (2004). Behind closed doors: Publicity, secrecy, and the quality of deliberation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12, 389-410.
4.
ColemanS.BlumlerJ. G. (2009). The Internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice and policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
CrozierM. J.HuntingtonS. P.WatanukiJ. (1975). The crisis of democracy: Report on the governability of democracies to the Trilateral Commission. New York: New York University Press.
6.
DaltonR. J. (2004). Democratic challenges, democratic choices: The erosion of political support in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
7.
DaltonR. J.CainB. E.ScarrowS. E. (2003). Democratic publics and democratic institutions. In CainB. E.DaltonR. J.ScarrowS. E. (Eds.), Democracy transformed? Expanding political opportunities in advanced industrial democracies (pp. 250-275). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
8.
EdelenbosJ.EshuisJ. (2011). The interplay between trust and control in governance processes: A conceptual and empirical investigation. Administration & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/009539971141387610.1177/0095399711413876
9.
ElsterJ. (Ed.). (1998). Deliberative democracy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.
EsserF.PfetschB. (2004). Meeting the challenges of global communication and political integration. In EsserF.PfetschB. (Eds.), Comparing political communication (pp. 384-410). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
FlindersM. (2011). Daring to be a Daniel: The pathology of politicized accountability in a monitory democracy. Administration & Society, 43, 595-619.
12.
GeorgeA. L.BennettA. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
HajerM. A. (2009). Authoritative governance: Policymaking in the age of mediatization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14.
HallR. B.BierstekerT. J. (2002). The emergence of private authority in the international system. In HallR. B.BierstekerT. J. (Eds.), The emergence of private authority in global governance (pp. 3-22). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15.
HallinD. C.ManciniP. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
HealdD. (2006). Transparency as an instrumental value. In HoodC.HealdD. (Eds.), Transparency: The key to better governance? (pp. 59-73). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17.
HirschlandM. J. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and the shaping of global public policy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
18.
HoodC. (2007). What happens when transparency meets blame-avoidance?Public Management Review, 9, 191-210.
19.
KeaneJ. (2009). The life and death of democracy. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
20.
LupiaA. (2003). Delegation and its perils. In StrømK.MüllerW. C.BergmanT. (Eds.), Delegation and accountability in parliamentary democracies (pp. 33-54). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
21.
ManinB. (1997). Principles of representative government. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22.
MarchJ. G.OlsenJ. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. New York, NY: Free Press.
23.
MayntzR. (2008). Von der Steuerungstheorie zu Global Governance. Politische Vierteljahresschrift Sonderheft, 41, [From steering theory to global governance] 44-60.
24.
NaurinD. (2007). Behind closed doors: Transparency and lobbying in the European union. Colchester, UK: ECPR Press.
25.
NewtonK. (2006). May the weak force be with you: The power of the mass media in modern politics. European Journal of Political Research, 45, 209-234.
PhilpM. (2009). Delimiting democratic accountability. Political Studies, 57, 28-53.
28.
PoguntkeT.WebbP. (Eds.). (2005). The presidentialization of politics: A comparative study of modern democracies. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
PollittC.BouckaertG. (2004). Public management reform: A comparative analysis (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
30.
PollittC.HupeP. (2011). Talking about government: The role of magic concepts. Public Management Review, 13, 641-658.
31.
PutnamR. D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization, 42, 427-460.
32.
RokkanS. (1966). Norway: Numerical democracy and corporate pluralism. In DahlR. A. (Ed.), Political oppositions in Western democracies (pp. 70-115). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
33.
RousseauJ.-J. (1973). The social contract and discourses (ColeG. D. H., Ed. & Trans.; revised and augmented by J. H. Brumfitt & J. Ch. Hall). London, UK: Dent.
34.
RubensteinJ. (2007). Accountability in an unequal world. Journal of Politics, 69, 616-632.
35.
SchulzW. (2004). Reconstructing mediatization as an analytical concept. European Journal of Communication, 19, 87-101.
36.
SlaughterA.-M. (2004). A new world order. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
37.
SperlingV. (2009). Altered states: The globalization of accountability. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
38.
Spörer-WagnerD.MarcinkowskiF. (2011). Politiker in der Oeffentichkeitsfalle? Zur Medialisierung politischer Verhandlungen in nationalen Kontexten. Politische Vierteljahresschrift Sonderheft, 44, [Politicians in the publicity trap? On the mediatization of political negotiations in national contexts] 416-438.
39.
Stone SweetA. (2004). Islands of transnational governance. In AnsellC. K.Di PalmaG. (Eds.), Restructuring territoriality: Europe and the United States compared (pp. 122-144). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
40.
StreetJ. (2001). Mass media, politics and democracy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
41.
UrbinatiN.WarrenM. E. (2008). The concept of representation in contemporary democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 387-412.
