Publications / Other reports / 2003 / 2003:009 I verdens rikeste land
I verdens rikeste land
Oslo: NOVA (2003)
The report analyses how five Norwegian newspapers covered the welfare state from 1969 to 1999. We follow the research design from Stefan Svallfors’ study of Swedish newspapers, and combine quantitative and qualitative content analysis. In the first part of the report, we discuss how media coverage may influence public opinion and political decision-making. Second, changes in the Norwegian economy, welfare state institutions, politics and media, that may affect media coverage of the welfare state, are discussed. In the main part of the report, we analyse changes in the media coverage in three main areas. First, which policy programmes and benefits received most attention in the press? Our data show that health care and elder care were covered broadly. Unemployment was also among the main issues in the newspapers, especially when unemployment was high. Second, which angles did the press use to describe the welfare state? Most of the articles dealt with problems concerning distribution and administration. Different cash benefits, as well as poverty and unemployment, were usually covered in terms of distribution and redistribution. Coverage of health care and child welfare focused more often on how the clients and patients were treated by the service providers. Very few articles focused on the costs of the welfare state, or on clients who took advantage of the system. The main criticism against the welfare state was that benefits and services were insufficient and scarce – not that too much money was spent. Third, whose voices were heard in the press? Most sources were different elite groups: politicians, bureaucrats and welfare service providers. However, these groups played many roles in the press. Sometimes they presented political proposals, sometimes they were ‘whistle-blowers’ who exposed errors and defects, and sometimes they were held responsible for such shortcomings. Although the elites dominated the coverage during the whole period, patients and clients gradually received more attention. Towards the end of our period, they were more frequently the main source of the articles. In addition, interviews with clients and patients were increasingly used to exemplify the contents of statistical reports or the impact of policy proposals.