This study seeks to explore the relation between the elusive scholarly concept and the media framing of the role and practice of lobbying. The longitudinal study analyses a time period of 10 years in Sweden when lobbying has taken on an increasingly influential role in the political system. The results, based on a content analysis of news articles and opinion editorials in five national newspapers and trade media, illustrate that the perception of lobbying is without nuance and a common negative frame is present and continues to be reproduced. Furthermore, a clear contradiction is evident in the relation between the scholarly debate and the mediated debate of the practice. The article discusses what this setting and inconsistency implies for current society and democracy, and the citizen trust in political representatives and institutions.
BadieBBerg-SchlosserDMorlinoL (2010) International Encyclopedia of Political Science. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
2.
BaumgartnerFRBerryJMHojnackiMet al. (2009) Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BennettAElmanC (2006) Qualitative research: Recent developments in case study methods. Annual Review of Political Science9: 455–476.
4.
BennettWLEntmanRM (2001) Mediated Politics: Communication in the Future of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BoddewynJJ (2012) Beyond ‘The evolving discipline of public affairs’. Journal of Public Affairs12: 98–104.
6.
CamposNFGiovannoniF (2007) Lobbying, corruption and political influence. Public Choice131: 1–21.
7.
CoombsWTHolladaySJ (2013) It’s Not Just PR: Public Relations in Society. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
8.
DavidsonS (2015) Everywhere and nowhere: Theorising and researching public affairs and lobbying within public relations scholarship. Public Relations Review41: 615–627.
9.
DavidsonSRoweO (2016) Emerging from the shadows? Perceptions, problems and potential consensus on the functional and civic roles of public affairs practice. Public Relations Inquiry5: 5–32.
10.
De VreeseC (2014) Mediatization of news: The role of journalistic framing. In: StrömbäckJEsserF (eds) Mediatization of Politics: Understanding the Transformation of Western Democracies. New York: Palgrave McMillan, pp. 137–155.
11.
De VreeseCH (2005) News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal+ Document Design13: 51–62.
12.
DühringL (2015) Lost in translation? On the disciplinary status of public relations. Public Relations Inquiry4: 5–23.
13.
EdwardsL (2012) Defining the ‘object’ of public relations research: A new starting point. Public Relations Inquiry1: 7–30.
14.
EisingR (2007) Institutional context, organizational resources and strategic choices explaining interest group access in the European Union. European Union Politics8: 329–362.
15.
EntmanRM (2004) Projections of Power: Framing News, Public Opinion, and US Foreign Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
EsserFStrömbäckJ (2014) Mediatization of Politics: Understanding the Transformation of Western Democracies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
17.
EsserFStrömbäckJde VreeseCH (2012) Reviewing key concepts in research on political news journalism: Conceptualizations, operationalizations, and propositions for future research. Journalism13: 139–143.
18.
EstebanJRayD (2006) Inequality, lobbying, and resource allocation. The American Economic Review96: 257–279.
19.
FalascaKNordL (2013) Structures, strategies and spin: Government communication. In: SandersKCanelMJ (eds) Government Communication: Cases and Challenges. New York: Bloomsbury, pp.27–44.
20.
FleisherC (2012) Anniversary retrospective, perspective and prospective of corporate public affairs: Moving from the 2000+ PA Model toward Public Affairs 2.0. Journal of Public Affairs12: 4–11.
21.
GarstenCRothsteinBSvallforsS (2015) Makt utan mandat: De policyprofessionella i svensk politik. Stockholm: Dialogos Förlag.
22.
GeorgeALBennettA (2005) Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
23.
HallP (2015) The Swedish administrative model. In: PierreJ (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Swedish Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.299–314.
24.
HillMVaroneF (2014) The Public Policy Process. New York: Routledge.
25.
IhlenØBerntzenØ (2007) When lobbying backfires: Balancing lobby efforts with insights from stakeholder theory. Journal of Communication Management11: 235–246.
26.
IhlenØVan RulerB (2009) Introduction: Applying Social Theory to Public Relations. New York: Routledge.
LarssonL (2006) Public relations and democracy: A Swedish perspective. In: L’EtangJPieczkaM (eds) Public Relations Critical Debates and Contemporary Practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp.123–142.
29.
LarssonL (2007) Public trust in the PR industry and its actors. Journal of Communication Management11: 222–234.
30.
LarssonL (2009) Stadig misstro mot lobbyismen. In: WeibullLHolmbergS (eds) Svensk höst. SOM-undersökningen 2008. Göteborg: Göteborgs Universitet, pp.155–163.
31.
LoweryD (2007) Why do organized interests lobby? A multi-goal, multi-context theory of lobbying. Polity39: 29–54.
32.
MahoneyC (2008) Brussels versus the Beltway: Advocacy in the United States and the European Union. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
33.
MilbrathLW (1963) The Washington Lobbyists. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
34.
MoloneyK (2002) Rethinking Public Relations: The Spin and the Substance. London: Routledge.
35.
NaurinD (2007a) Backstage behavior? Lobbyists in public and private settings in Sweden and the European Union. Comparative Politics39: 209–228.
36.
NaurinD (2007b) Deliberation behind Closed Doors: Transparency and Lobbying in the European Union. Colchester: ECPR Press.
37.
NothhaftC (2011) Transparent lobbying? En studie av politisk påverkan i Europaparlamentet. In: FalkheimerJHeideM (eds) Strategisk kommunikation – Forskning och praktik. Lund: Studentlitteratur AB, pp.91–110.
38.
NownesAJ (2006) Total Lobbying: What Lobbyists Want (And How They Try to Get It). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
NownesAJDeAlejandroKW (2009) Lobbying in the new millennium: Evidence of continuity and change in three states. State Politics & Policy Quarterly9: 429–455.
40.
PeterssonO (2015) Rational politics: Commissions of inquiry and the referral system in Sweden. In: PierreJ (ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Swedish Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, pp.650–662.
41.
ReinemannCStanyerJScherrSet al. (2012) Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism13: 221–239.
42.
RiffDLacySFicoF (2014) Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research. New York: Routledge.
43.
ScheufeleDATewksburyD (2007) Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication57: 9–20.
44.
SchwarzmantelJJ (1994) The State in Contemporary Society: An Introduction. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester.
45.
ShahDVMcLeodDMGotleibMRet al. (2009) Framing and agenda setting. In: NabiRLOliverMB (eds) The Sage Handbook of Media Processes and Effects. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp.83–98.
46.
SomervilleI (2011) Managing public affairs and lobbying: Persuasive communication in the policy sphere. In: MossDDeSantoB (eds) Public Relations: A Managerial Perspective. London: SAGE, pp.167–192.
47.
StrömbäckJ (2011) Lobbyismens problem och möjligheter: Perspektiv från dem som både lobbar och har blivit lobbade. Stockholm: Precis.
48.
StrömbäckJNordL (2008) Media and politics in Sweden. In: StrömbäckJOrstenMAalbergT (eds) Communicating Politics: Political Communication in the Nordic Countries. Gothenburg: Nordicom, pp.103–121.
49.
SvallforsS (2016a) Out of the golden cage: PR and the career opportunities of policy professionals. Politics & Policy44: 56–73.
50.
SvallforsS. (2016b) Politics as organised combat – New players and new rules of the game in Sweden. New Political Economy21: 505–519.
51.
TallbergJBeachDNaurinDet al. (2011) Makten I Europa: Demokratirådets rapport 2011. Stockholm: SNS Förlag.
