From Europeanisation to EU-ization: The Media Case

Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; December 2023 ISSN: 2325-8071 E-ISSN: 2325-808X Published by Redfame Publishing URL: http://smc.redfame.com From Europeanisation to EU-ization: The Media Case Stylianos Papathanassopoulos1, Andrea Miconi2, Sara Cannizzaro2 Department of Communication and Media Studies - National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece 1 Libera Università di Lingue e Comunicazione IULM, Milan, Greece 2 Correspondence: Stylianos Papathanassopoulos, Department of Communication and Media Studies - National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece. Received: September 4, 2023 doi:10.11114/smc.v11i7.6362 Accepted: November 10, 2023 Online Published: November 16, 2023 URL: https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v11i7.6362 Abstract It is widely argued that the success of the European Union has delivered more than half a century of peace, stability, and prosperity in Europe, and that this is the outcome of the Europeanization process. In this paper we support the idea that although Europeanization is a fashionable concept, it is also a contested one. We consider, among others, that the main achievement of the European Union as harmonization of the regulatory frameworks among its 27 member states, is the outcome of an EU-ization process that has gradually developed in the 30 years at least. We use the case of media regulation initiated by the European Union to show that the case of EU-ization, at least in the communications landscape, seems to be the driver of the incremental engagement of the EU in the sector. Keywords: communication, digitalization, Europeanisation, EU-ization, media, platforms, regulation 1. Introduction Although a unified Europe remains primarily a vision, the European Union (EU) is far from the Federation which the most passionate enthusiasts hope for. It is nevertheless more state-like, some of them even have a common currency while the EU member states exhibit both similarities and crucial differences. This condition makes it possible for the EU to work based on common values and to a certain extent, on common objectives. ‘Europeanization’ is a fashionable but contested concept, it can be understood as a complex process of political and policy ‘transfer’, since it affects all EU member states. Recent developments like the eurozone crisis or Brexit have led the news media at least in the EU countries to start discussing Europe, Europeanization, and the future of the EU. In trying to find an operational definition of Europeanization, we argue that the main and principal goal of the EU is the harmonization of the regulatory aspects in most of the sectors of the economy. Within this context, one can see a narrowed dimension, or a modern variant of Europeanization, the so-called EU-ization. In this paper, we use the case of media regulation initiated by the EU to show that EU-ization, at least in the communications landscape, seems to be the driver of the incremental engagement of harmonization in the media sector, an engagement that has led to the gradual coordination of the media systems within the EU. While 40 years ago the EU (then European Communities) was seen as an outsider of the media landscape, nowadays the EU has been welcomed in all aspects of the communication domain of the member states (and not only). At the end of the process, it remains unclear whether the Europeanization rhetoric is fading because the goal has been eventually achieved, or it has lost its original attractiveness (Manierskza, 2015, 151). 2. Europeanization or EU-ization? As Radaelli (2000, 26–27) notes ‘large-scale policy transfer is involved in the so-called acquis communautaire, the body of European legislation that candidate countries must accept before joining the Union’. This is because the dynamics of Europeanization can be ‘understood in terms of a limited set of ordinary processes of change, well known from other institutionalized systems of governance’ (Olsen 2002, 923). In effect, the acquis communautaire has not only been expanded in the last decades, but it has become more complex. As the phenomenon is way more complex, it is both Europeanity and Europeanisation that can be envisaged. The concept of Europeanisation is not easily reducible to a single, linear process. Rather, it operates on multiple dimensions, each with its own distinct characteristics and implications. In effect, the “concepts of Europeanity and Europeanisation (E&E) are linked but distinct phenomena” (Carpentier, 2021, 100). Others have summarized this complexity, by pointing out that “European identity exists on 394 Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; 2023 different levels, cultural and political and is contested.” (Delanty and Rumford, 2005, 68). Carpentier et al. (2023, 101) argue that one can construct a taxonomy that encompasses both a culturalist-discursive lens and a structural-material perspective when examining the dynamics of Europeanity and Europeanisation. Furthermore, according to the classical model defined by Harmsen and Wilson (2000), for instance, at least seven dimensions can be singled out: Europeanization as the emergence of a European governance; as a national adaptation of common standards; as policy isomorphism; as modernization; as the reconstructions of identities; as transnationalism and cultural integration; or as the plain process of ‘joining Europe’. In a similar vein, Olsen (2002) has come to identify five different ideas of Europeanization, which are shortly supposed to be: change in external territorial boundaries; development a proper European governance; penetration of EU rules into local institutional systems; political project aiming at unifying the continent; and finally, exportation of European rules beyond the European territory itself. The very definition of Europeanisation also happens to vary based on the geographical perspective. For what concerns the European Union itself, Europeanisation is mostly a matter of legitimacy: how the EU is perceived from the citizens in all member States and to which extent people feel to be represented by their representatives in Brussels. Territory is a key dimension of Europeanisation. Carpentier et al. (2023, 111) hold that European territory is a geographical (therefore very material) space occupied by those people considered Europeans. The geography of the European territory is the landmass of the European continent, even though its Eastern boundaries have never been clearly set (Barreneche, 2021). Europeanisation, as a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, possesses the potential to instigate significant transformations in the organization of territorial entities within the European continent. At its core, Europe comprises sovereign nation-states, each occupying a distinct and defined geographical space. Nevertheless, Europeanisation extends beyond the traditional boundaries of nation-states, encompassing horizontal interactions among various actors, including national, subnational, supranational, and transnational entities, as well as non-European Union (EU) states and organizations (see Carpentier et al., 2023, 111-112). In Western Europe, the Europeanization process somehow rhymes with that of globalization, it having to do with the post-national organization of contemporary economics and society – as in Castells’ juxtaposition between the space of flows and the space of places (Castells 1996). A main difference emerges in the case of Central Europe, where the – so to speak – pan-European project is also perceived as an actual realization of the ultimate national values (Habermas, 2012). Values here refer to essential values that are said to characterize Europe, although more relationist approaches, for example those studying representations of Europe (as shown on this map) “would argue that these European values have been hegemonized”. (Carpentier et al., 2023, 109). As posed by Hasan (2021) European values are seen as enlightenment values, defined as fundamental (human) rights that have been expressed in several key European Union documents (and translated into legal frameworks), such as the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000), or the Treaty of Lisbon (2007). In the context of this document (Article 2), it is asserted that these principles are evident within a society characterized by the prevalence of pluralism, the absence of discrimination, the presence of tolerance, the implementation of justice, the demonstration of solidarity, and the achievement of gender equality. Institutional communication strategies play a pivotal role in shaping public perceptions and promoting societal values. For example, the European Commission's official Instagram account serves as an exemplary case study of how a supranational institution utilizes this platform to convey its commitment to democracy, transparency, human rights, solidarity, and sustainability (Barreneche 2021). However, various variations of institutional communication, including contested versions, inevitably feature on media content circulating on global media platforms. Territory and values are connected to media systems. In fact, there are no clear boundaries between Western, Central and Eastern countries - or media systems, as pointed out by Mancini and Zielonka (2012). According to some scholars, in Eastern Europe, the Europeanization process is finally one with the modernization process, it being perceived as the right occasion for getting rid of old habits, social roles and the more (Dobek-Ostrowska & Glowacki, 2021). In this specific respect, a similarity can be found with some analysis of Italian, Greek and Turkish cases and therefore with the Mediterranean media system. In other words, Europeanization is an incremental process (Ladrech, 1994, 70). One facet of Europeanisation centers on the E&E political-institutional aspect of European governance. This dimension encompasses the establishment of supranational political institutions, such as those associated with the EU. Additionally, it pertains to special partnerships and cooperative arrangements among national entities, such as institutions responsible for national welfare states. Certain scholars consider this dimension to be the central element within Europeanisation processes, playing a pivotal role in shaping the concept of Europeanity and contributing to its development (Carpentier et al., 2023). Another but similar procedure takes place for the EU to achieve its main and principal goal, i.e., the Europeanisation and harmonization of the regulatory aspects in most of the sectors of the economy. In this respect, one has to take into consideration a narrowed dimension (or even the normative approach) of the Europeanisation, the so-called EU-ization 395 Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; 2023 (Flockhart, 2010). EU-ization differs from Europeanization due to its: focus on the EU and because it is predominantly concerned with ‘political encounters’, where specific political entities such as the EU and Member State representatives engage in the transfer of institutional and organizational practices and policies. EU-ization is a small, but important part of the much broader and longer-term process of Europeanization, which is predominantly concerned with ‘cultural encounters’ (Flockhart, 2010, 790-91). EU-ization, therefore, can be considered as a modern variant of Europeanization and provides us with a contemporary condition within which the Europeanization process operates (Mannin, 2013, 19-20). One could add that EU-ization is an EU-centric perspective and at the same time is situated in time and space (Smith, 2013). In effect, it entails the gradual dissemination and assimilation of cultural norms, values, and beliefs across geographical and temporal dimensions within European nation-states, encompassing both the European Union and the populace residing therein. EU-ization could be understood as a multifaceted process characterized by the exchange and adoption of organizational, institutional, and policy practices within the EU or through direct engagement with the EU. This phenomenon particularly pertains to regulatory aspects and aligns with the historical context of states seeking accession to the EU. Importantly, EU-ization is closely intertwined with prior stages of Europeanization, and in contemporary times, it is challenging to envision Europeanization occurring without some level of influence from EU-driven processes. 3. Media Systems and EU-ization In the case of media and telecommunications policy, in most cases, if not all, ‘member states have sought to retain primary responsibility for communication policy, with the EU relegated to a supportive role. The Commission, on the other hand, acting as a ‘policy entrepreneur’ has sought ‘both to expand its competences and to coordinate a European response to the new international market and technological challenges’ (Humphreys, 2006). The outcomes of these interactions and interplays have obviously varied from one sector to another. Whilst the processes of EU-ization have modified public policies, political agendas, and governing styles of national political actors, they have also had to meet the challenges to those changes from within member states (Papathanassopoulos and Negrine, 2011). EU-ization could be also used as a smokescreen for domestic political strategies and as a powerful domestic political resource for driving through. A controversial example here would be the way in which a particular construction of Europe can be used as a means of blocking or encouraging change in candidate member states. For instance, the EU asks that candidate countries align with their media systems in general, and broadcasting, in particular, to the EU Directives (Rosenbaum, 2003). Former Eastern European countries also had prerequisites for EU membership including, for example, adjusting their broadcasting systems to the old Television Without Frontiers Directive and transforming their state television companies to Western-style public service broadcasters (Papathanassopoulos, 2018). In effect, the aim of the then European Community to harmonize and eventually to ‘Europeanize’ the audio-visual sector began in 1983 with the publication of the ‘Realities and tendencies of European television’ report which led to a much-discussed Green Paper (in 1984) and then to the well-known Directive for a Television without Frontiers, which became the Audiovisual Media Services Directive in 2007 with its subsequent revisions (Papathanassopoulos, 2018). One can also envisage ‘EU-ization’ as a two-stage process: one from above, written from Brussels and confined to members states (for instance, all EU legislation on the communications sector); and one from below, the EU responds to ‘desires’ of the member-states to deal, for instance, with the Tech Giants or when larger European countries created pressure for change and therefore asked for new policies in the 1980s (Papathanassopoulos and Negrine, 2011). However, EU-ization, especially in a media narrative, may also cause Euroscepticism too. As Segesten and Bossetta (2019, 1052) note: ‘Although Euroscepticism implies an opposition to the EU and European integration, a Europeanized media discourse on Euroscepticism may facilitate mutual understanding and foster cross-border dialogue among Europeans’. The latest eurozone crisis and its implications for the European project were sound examples where the media discourse about the laden debt-countries was a major issue. In effect, that media discourse was both Europeanized and narrated in a similar manner across national contexts, media outlets and public opinion (Papathanassopoulos, 2015). In other words, while in the past news on European issues had a small presence in the European media (de Vreese 2002), during the eurozone crisis most, if not all, topics like Europe, the EU, eurozone and its future were almost daily in the media of the EU countries at least (Picard, 2015). Wide-scale comparative research confirms that the attention towards the EU peaks in occurrence of the most critical moments, including the negotiations over public debt, the bailout debate, and the financial downturn (see Sarikakis, Kouku and Winter, 2018; Hänska and Bauchowitz, 2019; Bee and Crona, 2020). It is undeniable, in our perspective, that such attention comes at the price of an unprecedented unpopularity of European institutions: in the aftermath of 396 Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; 2023 2008 crisis, in fact, the EU has moved from being considered beneficial to the population of its Members States, to being held responsible for the “economic situation” and for “not supporting more fiscal solidarity” across the countries (Bouin 2018, 29-31). In effect, this media coverage reflects the three criteria mentioned by Schlesinger’s (1999) to determine the extent to which we can speak of a European public sphere: (a) a distinctly European news agenda, (b) European news that is consumed daily, and (c) a recognition of EU citizenship beyond the nation state and an affective orientation toward Europe. We don’t argue that these criteria have been fulfilled due to EU-ization, but EU’s responses (legislation, fiscal measures) have played a role. One has also to consider how influence is reconstituted into some form of impact, be it a new structure of governance or rules, a new way of implementing directives or perhaps even stalling on these. Additionally, we need also to consider whether the influence and transfer into some measurable impact is positive or negative. The communication sector is a field in which one can clearly see this incremental intervention of the EU. It is a part of a negotiation process that results in most of cases in a compromise of competing local interests and policies, as well as a careful but precarious balance between the implementation of fair competition policies—for instance, in the telecommunication and commercial broadcasting sectors— and protection of public services and state support, such as public service broadcasting or support for film productions (Papathanassopoulos and Negrine, 2011). Most importantly, the process of incremental intervention involves coming out with precise (and renewable) EU laws aiming at the EU-ization (or harmonization) of the sector. This is also evident in the recent initiatives of the EU regarding the Digital Service Act (DSA) and the Digital Markets Act (DMA) (European Commission 2020a; 2020b) aiming to provide a comprehensive framework for the EU regulation of online platforms. One can trace this process in respect of the EU’s involvement in the media and the broader communications sector, initially in the television system, then in telecommunications, later in new media–related policy issues, such as net neutrality, or for stricter protections of Europeans online privacy, protections against risks, and extent of surveillance to protect copyright. 4. Concluding Remarks While the question of the EU's competence in these matters has continued to fascinate many commentators and scholars, there is now no doubt that the EU has fully embraced the entire communication sector – from the old ‘audio-visual’ media sector right through to the ‘global information society’ (see also Papathanassopoulos 2018). The EU has intervened in all aspects of the communications sector, and the European Commission considers itself the initiator as well as the watchdog of a harmonized European communication landscape. In effect, the EU through the European Commission has not only been a policy initiator, but also the stimulator for providing a harmonized European communications landscape and for launching European media in the platformization era. There are several initiatives in this regard. The Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act aim to create a safer digital space where the fundamental rights of users are protected and to establish a level playing field for businesses (European Commission 2020b); The European Media Freedom Act (2022), a new set of rules to protect media pluralism and independence in the EU that seek to ensure that media – public and private – can operate more easily across borders in the EU internal market, without undue pressure and taking into account the digital transformation of the media space or the Artificial Intelligence Act that attempts to regulate the ethical and fair use of AI. These policy initiatives indicate, if not prove, that at least in the communication sector, the harmonization (or EU-ization) of media systems could not be advanced without the intervention of the EU. New initiatives are on the pipeline such as the ‘European Media Data Space’, support for media that serve the public interest, in ‘Creative Europe’, or even a permanent ‘News Media Fund’. All these policies and initiatives confirm that the EU remains an exemplary laboratory of comprehending harmonization in practice, an Heraclean task, and are more effective for a Europeanized communications landscape compared to vague nations of Europeanisation, and the EU, at least, in the media field, has entered the phase of the EU-ization. In the platformization era, this has become more important. As media and communication systems converge in Europe at least, and as new, mostly US, tech giants enter the field, it seems certain that isolated member states cannot deal with issues and factors that have a European dimension, transecting and at the same time accepting national borders and EU citizens. Acknowledgments We would like to thank our colleagues from the "Horizon 2020 Project EUMEPLAT- European Media Platforms: Assessing Positive and Negative Externalities for European Culture" for helping to shift perceptions of Europeanization and Europeanity. Authors contributions Dr. Papathanassopoulos was responsible for the original draft preparation, conceptualization, and analysis. All authors were responsible for writing-review, data curation, and contributing to analysis. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. 397 Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; 2023 Funding This paper is part of a project that has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101004488. The information and views in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions nor bodies, nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained herein. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Informed consent Obtained. Ethics approval The Publication Ethics Committee of the Redfame Publishing. The journal’s policies adhere to the Core Practices established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally double-blind peer reviewed. Data availability statement The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions. Data sharing statement No additional data are available. Open access This is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Copyrights Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s), with first publication rights granted to the journal. References Barreneche, M. S. (2021). Values: A Core Component in the Discursive Construction of Europe and the EU. Social Semiotics, 33(4), 683-696. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2021.2010499. Bee, C., & Chrona, S. (2020). Austerity and fragmentation: Dynamics o Europeanization of media discourses in Greece and Italy, Communications, 45(1), 864-892. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2020-2090 Bouin, O. (2018). The End of European Integration as We Knew it: A Political Economy Analysis. In M. Castells et al. (Eds) Europe’s Crises (pp. 11-48). Cambridge: Polity. Bugdahn, S. (2005). Of Europeanization and domestication: the implementation of the environmental information directive in Ireland, Great Britain, and Germany. Journal of European Public Policy, 12(1), 177-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350176042000311961 Carpentier et al. (Carpentier, N, Hroch, M., Cannizzaro, S., Miconi, A. and Doudaki, V.) (2023). ‘Bridging the Discursive and Material Dimensions of Europeanity and Europeanisation: A Participatory Semantic Map Approach’. Observatorio-OBS, 17(1), 100-132. https://doi.org/10.15847/obsOBS17120232251. Carpentier, N. (2021). The European assemblage: A discursive-material analysis of European identity, Europaneity and Europeanisation. Filosofija. Sociologija, 32(3), 187-195. https://doi.org/10.6001/fil-soc.v32i3.4495 Castells, M. (1996). The Rise of The Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell. Delanty, G., & Rumford, C. (2005). Rethinking Europe: Social Theory and the Implications of Europeanization (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203640050. Dobek-Ostrowska, B., &Gromacki, M. (eds) (2021). Democracy and Media in Eastern and Central Media 25 years On. New York: Peter Lang. European Commission. (2020a). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a single 398 Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; 2023 market for digital services (Digital Services Act) and amending Directive 2000/31/EC. COM (2020) 825 final. 15 December. European Commission. (2020b). Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on contestable and fair markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act). COM (2020), 842 final. 15 December. Flockhart, T. (2010). Europeanization or EU-ization? The Transfer of European Norms across Time and Space. Journal of Common Market Studies,48(4), 787-810. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02074.x Gille, Z., & O’ Riain, S. (2002). Global Ethnography. Annual Review of Sociology 28(1), 271-95. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.140945. Habermas, J. (2012). The Crisis of European Union: An Answer. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hänska, M., & Bauchowitz, S. (2019). Can social media facilitate a European public sphere? Transnational communication and the Europeanization of Twitter during the Eurozone crisis, Social Media & Society, 5(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119854686 Harmsen, R., & Wilson, T. M. (2000). Introduction: Approaches to Europeanization. Yearbook of European Studies, 14, 13-26. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004333369 Hasan, R. (2021). Modern Europe https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv3029sk1 and the Enlightenment. Eastbourne: Sussex Academic Press. Humphreys, P. (2006). Globalization, Regulatory Competition, and EU Policy Transfer in the Telecoms and Broadcasting Sectors. International Journal of Public Administration, 29(4-6), 305-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900690500437055 Ladrech, R. (1994). Europeanization of domestic politics and institutions: the case of France. Journal of Common Market Studies, 32(1), 69-88. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.1994.tb00485.x Lippert, B., Umbach, G., & Wessels, W. (2001). Europeanization of CEE executives: EU membership negotiations as a shaping power. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(6), 980-1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760110098314 Mancini, P., & Zielonka, D. (2012). Introduction. International Journal of Press/Politics, 174(3), 379-387. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161212452959 Manierskza, E. (2015). The East Meets the West in Contemporary Eastern European Films. In N. Bondebjerg, N. Redvall, & A. Higson (Eds.), European Cinema and Television. Cultural Policy and Everyday Life (pp. 151-168). London: Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137356888_8 Mannin, M. (2013). Evaluating the Europeanization Effect’. In C. Bretherton, & Mannin, M. (Eds), The Europeanization of European Politics. Europe in Transition: The NYU European Studies Series (pp. 205-212). Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137275394_1 Marciacq, F. (2012). The Political Geographies of Europeanisation: Mapping the Contested Conceptions of Europeanisation. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 8(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v8i1.353 Olsen, P. J. (2002). The Many Faces of Europeanization. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(5), 921-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5965.00403 Papathanassopoulos, S. (2015). European Media Views of the Greek Crisis. In S. Schifferes, & R. Roberts, R. (Eds), The Media and Financial Crises: Comparative and Historical Perspectives (pp. 103-118). London: Routledge. Papathanassopoulos, S. (2018). The Europeanization of the European Media: The Incremental Cultivation of the EU Media Policy. In d’Haenens, L., Sousa, H. & Trappel, J. (Eds), Comparative Media Policy, Regulation and Governance in Europe’s Unpacking the Policy Cycle (pp. 117-132). Bristol: Intellect Publishers. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv36xw2pp.10 Papathanassopoulos, S., & Negrine, R. (2011). European Media: Structures, Politics and Identity. Cambridge: Polity. Picard, R. G. (Ed.) (2015). The Euro Crisis in the Media Journalistic Coverage of Economic Crisis and European Institutions. London: I.B. Tauris. https://doi.org/10.5040/9780755694990 Radaelli, M. C. (2000). Policy Transfer in the European Union: Institutional Isomorphism as a Source of Legitimacy. Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13(1), 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1111/0952-1895.00122 Rosenbaum, J. (2003). In the EU's Image: Transformation of Broadcasting in Five Central and Eastern European Countries. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Marriott Hotel, 399 Studies in Media and Communication Vol. 11, No. 7; 2023 San Diego, CA, May 27. Paper retrieved from http:// www.allacademic.com/meta/p111848_index.html. Sarikakis, K., Kouku, A., & Winter, L. (2018). “Banal” Europeanized National Public Spheres? Framing the Eurozone Crisis in the European Elite Press, International Journal of Communication, 12, 3454-3472. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/6360 Schlesinger, P. (1999). Changing spaces of political communication: The case of the European Union. Political Communication, 16, 263-279. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198622 Segesten, A. D., & Bossetta, M. (2019). Can Euroscepticism Contribute to a European Public Sphere? The Europeanization of Media Discourses on Euroscepticism across Six Countries. Journal of Common Market Studies, 57(5), 1051-1070. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12871 400