IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v54y2021i4d10.1007_s11077-021-09434-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do think tanks generate media attention on issues they care about? Mediating internal expertise and prevailing governmental agendas

Author

Listed:
  • Max Grömping

    (Griffith University)

  • Darren R. Halpin

    (Australian National University)

Abstract

Think tanks are expected to cut through the prevailing short-term government agenda of the day, and to inject long-term perspectives and research-based expertise into policy debates. In order to do so, they need to attract media attention to themselves in connection with those issue areas in which they have expertise, even if government is focusing elsewhere. Yet, existing studies of media attention among organized interests have thus far ignored the issue context. We argue that sinking costs into research in specific policy areas pays off for think tanks by funnelling more media attention towards them. This is notwithstanding the importance of governments’ own issue agendas, which, if a think tank’s expertise aligns with them, further raises media attention. We substantiate these claims with a content analysis of news coverage of 62 Australian think tanks in 19 different policy issue areas. The results broadly support our argument and contribute to studies of policy advisory systems, organized interests, and group-media relations.

Suggested Citation

  • Max Grömping & Darren R. Halpin, 2021. "Do think tanks generate media attention on issues they care about? Mediating internal expertise and prevailing governmental agendas," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 849-866, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:54:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-021-09434-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-021-09434-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11077-021-09434-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-021-09434-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anne Binderkrantz, 2005. "Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and Strategies of Pressure," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53(4), pages 694-715, December.
    2. Bertelli, Anthony M. & Wenger, Jeffrey B., 2009. "Demanding Information: Think Tanks and the US Congress," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(2), pages 225-242, April.
    3. Binderkrantz, Anne Skorkjær & Bonafont, Laura Chaqués & Halpin, Darren R., 2017. "Diversity in the News? A Study of Interest Groups in the Media in the UK, Spain and Denmark," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 313-328, April.
    4. Jason Barabas & Jennifer Jerit, 2009. "Estimating the Causal Effects of Media Coverage on Policy‐Specific Knowledge," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 73-89, January.
    5. Anne Binderkrantz, 2005. "Interest Group Strategies: Navigating Between Privileged Access and Strategies of Pressure," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 53, pages 694-715, December.
    6. Bert Fraussen & Darren Halpin, 2017. "Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 105-124, March.
    7. Craft, Jonathan & Howlett, Michael, 2012. "Policy formulation, governance shifts and policy influence: location and content in policy advisory systems," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 32(2), pages 79-98, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Adrià Albareda & Caelesta Braun & Bert Fraussen, 2023. "Explaining why public officials perceive interest groups as influential: on the role of policy capacities and policy insiderness," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(2), pages 191-209, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Francesca Colli & Johan Adriaensen, 2020. "Lobbying the state or the market? A framework to study civil society organizations’ strategic behavior," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, July.
    2. Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline & Thomas P. Lyon, 2016. "Merchants of Doubt: Corporate Political Influence when Expert Credibility is Uncertain," Working Papers 2016.28, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    3. Caner Bakir, 2023. "The vicious circle of policy advisory systems and knowledge regimes in consolidated authoritarian regimes," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 42(3), pages 419-439.
    4. Naciye Bey, 2022. "Configurational analysis of environmental NGOs and their influence on environmental policy in Turkey," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. David Coen & Alexander Katsaitis, 2021. "Lobbying Brexit Negotiations: Who Lobbies Michel Barnier?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 37-47.
    6. Bert Fraussen & Darren Halpin, 2017. "Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 105-124, March.
    7. Nicole Bolleyer, 2021. "Civil society – Politically engaged or member-serving? A governance perspective," European Union Politics, , vol. 22(3), pages 495-520, September.
    8. Adam W Chalmers, 2013. "With a lot of help from their friends: Explaining the social logic of informational lobbying in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 14(4), pages 475-496, December.
    9. Peter Aagaard, 2022. "A Price to Pay? The Backsides of the Privileged Access to the Political System," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 1157-1171, December.
    10. Nayara F. Macedo de Medeiros Albrecht, 2023. "Bureaucrats, interest groups and policymaking: a comprehensive overview from the turn of the century," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    11. Coban, Mehmet Kerem, 2020. "Diffuse interest groups and regulatory policy change: Financial consumer protection in Turkey," OSF Preprints f6t5y, Center for Open Science.
    12. Danica Fink-Hafner & Sara Bauman, 2023. "Interest Group Strategic Responses to Democratic Backsliding," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(1), pages 39-49.
    13. Keller, Eileen, 2015. "Forging a new Mittelstand compromise : lobbying strategies and business influence after the financial crisis," Economics Working Papers MWP2015/19, European University Institute.
    14. Jesper Dahl Kelstrup, 2017. "Quantitative differences in think tank dissemination activities in Germany, Denmark and the UK," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 125-137, March.
    15. Azad Bali & Darren Halpin, 2021. "Agenda-setting instruments: means and strategies for the management of policy demands [Mayflies and old bulls: Organization persistence in state interest communities]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(3), pages 333-344.
    16. Glatz, Annika, 2013. "Interest Groups in International Intellectual Property Negotiations," Papers 928, World Trade Institute.
    17. Oliver Huwyler, 2020. "Interest groups in the European Union and their hiring of political consultancies," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 333-354, June.
    18. Michael McGann & Emma Blomkamp & Jenny M. Lewis, 2018. "The rise of public sector innovation labs: experiments in design thinking for policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 249-267, September.
    19. Jonathan Lewallen & Sean M. Theriault & Bryan D. Jones, 2016. "Congressional dysfunction: An information processing perspective," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 179-190, June.
    20. Arshed, Norin, 2017. "The origins of policy ideas: The importance of think tanks in the enterprise policy process in the UK," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 74-83.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:54:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11077-021-09434-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.