Kinder sind neugierig auf die Welt. Und sie erfahren über diese Welt auch in den Medien, jedoch gibt es nur wenige Medienangebote mit kindgerechten Nachrichten. Dennoch bekommen Kinder Vieles mit: aus Gesprächen von Erwachsenen oder auch aus Nachrichtensendungen und Online-Angeboten, die nicht für Kinder gemacht und geeignet sind. So sind auch Berichterstattungen zu Kriegen, Natur- und sogenannten „humanitären“ Katastrophen sowie zu welt- und innenpolitischem Geschehen Bestandteil der alltäglichen Lebenswelt von Kindern. Diese gehen damit ganz unterschiedlich um. Sie reagieren auf Bedrohliches oder Unverständliches verunsichert, geängstigt oder auch interessiert – sie bleiben jedoch mit ihren Fragen und Ängsten oft allein, denn nicht immer stehen Erwachsene zur Verfügung. Vor diesem Hintergrund haben es sich Kindernachrichtensendungen zur Aufgabe gemacht, Nachrichten auf eine an den Bedürfnissen und Horizonten von Kindern orientierte Weise zu vermitteln. In dieser Ausgabe der Medienwelten analysieren Jessica Klinger und Antje Müller vergleichend die Kindernachrichtensendungen „Newsround“ und „logo!“ und sie stellen heraus, welche Qualitätskriterien mit der Orientierung an dieser Zielgruppe verbunden sein müssen.

Nachrichtensendungen für Kinder sind im Rahmen der politischen Sozialisation bedeutsam und sehen sich mit verschiedenen Anforderungen konfrontiert. In der vorliegenden Studie unterziehen die Autorinnen die deutsche Kindernachrichtensendung Logo! und die britische Kindernachrichtensendung Newsround einem inhaltsanalytischen Qualitätsvergleich. Dazu leiten sie Qualitätskriterien aus normativen, inhaltlichen sowie formalen Beurteilungskriterien aus Rezipienten-, Produzenten- sowie aus wissenschaftlicher Sicht ab, die sie für Aussagen über die Aufbereitung und Eignung dieser Kindernachrichtenprogramme heranziehen. Die Ergebnisse dieser tiefgründigen Analyse bieten detaillierten Aufschluss über Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede der untersuchten Sendungen und ermöglichen so eine differenzierte Betrachtung der Frage danach, was die Qualität von Kindernachrichtensendungen – auch unter interkulturellen Gesichtspunkten – ausmacht. / TV News programs for children, within the context of political socialization, are not only hugely important but are also being faced with constant challenges. The following study focuses on Germany’s Logo! and Britain’s Newsround, two of the larger scale television news programs on offer for children. The study offers ananalytical, quality comparison of the two shows. It looks both at the quality criteria of normative, context-related and formal assessment criteria, whilst exploring the perspective of the recipient, the producer and more scientific approaches. The study concludes with an analysis of the format preparation of the two shows and analyses their respective suitability for children. The study offers a profound insight into the similarities and differences between these two broadcasts and considers how we can attempt to measure the quality of children’s news programs.

How does great power security assistance affect civil-military relations in developing states? Great powers use security assistance in the form of arms, equipment, and training not only to build capacity but also to impart values and norms in developing militaries. The United States and other liberal powers, for example, explicitly try to promote civilian control of the military and respect for human rights. Yet security assistance frequently seems to produce norm-violating militaries instead. Policymakers tend to chalk failures up to insufficient emphasis on socialization, while scholars favor rationalist arguments that stress interest misalignment between providers and recipients. By contrast, I argue that norm violations tend to occur not because assistance fails to impart norms, but because it does not impart them quickly enough relative to increases in military capacity and because—in the case of liberal providers—it imparts conflicting norms. Moreover, counter-messages from competing providers dilute the efficacy of socialization attempts. In this dissertation, I argue that we must disaggregate how security assistance changes military beliefs as well as military behavior. Accordingly, the first part of the dissertation examines the conditions under which security assistance leads to shifts in military beliefs. I argue that security assistance can socialize recipient militaries to adhere to norms such as respect for human rights and civilian control of the military, but such norm-abiding behavior is likely to emerge only under certain conditions. First, because it is hard to change beliefs about standards of appropriate behavior in the security domain, socialization requires extensive military training and interaction over time. Moreover, socialization will only occur when there are no competing norms being promoted by other providers. Even if socialization occurs, however, there is no automatic guarantee that behavior will change because behavior is the output of multiple forces including norms, interests, and capabilities. In the second part of the dissertation, I argue that a powerful feature of foreign military training is its ability to alter all three elements of decision-making. However, foreign military training can strengthen military capacity faster than it socializes norms of restraint. When organizational interests are threatened, militaries with enhanced capabilities from security assistance may be more likely to intervene politically or abuse human rights. Second, liberal assistance imparts norms with potentially contradictory implications for behavior. Conflict between liberal norms can arise when political leaders, who militaries are supposed to obey, order the military to harm the population that they are supposed to protect. The contradiction can lead to perverse behavioral outcomes by reducing support for both of the conflicting norms. The dissertation uses micro-level, sub-national, and cross-national data to test the arguments both between and within countries. My empirical focus is on Africa, where many states receive assistance from multiple providers. To evaluate the effects of socialization on belief change, I conduct an original survey of the Liberian military, which the United States rebuilt after Liberia’s civil war ended in 2003. The survey includes an experiment in which soldiers hear a scenario about civilians ordering the military to repress protests, engendering conflict between the two liberal norms. I find that higher levels of training strongly increase support for liberal norms. The experimental evidence suggests, however, that exposure to norm conflict leads to reduced support for both norms and the effects are strongest among soldiers with more US training. To examine the effects of counter-messages from competing providers, I conduct a case study of the Tanzanian military, which Canada and China concomitantly tried to train during the 1960s. Canada attempted to build a liberal military in Tanzania, while China sought to shape a socialist military (China prevailed). The case study draws on hundreds of archival documents from the Canadian military training mission to process trace Canada’s influence and socialization attempts. Finally, to test the link between security assistance and military behavior, I build a new dataset of military involvement in politics and human rights abuses across Africa from 1999 to 2010. Quantitative analyses demonstrate that US foreign military training corresponds to less military interference in politics and repression. These effects are strongest at higher levels of training and training has stronger effects on military behavior than other forms of security assistance. But there is a catch: rapid increases in training appear to drive worse outcomes. By showing the ways, some of them unexpected, that security assistance can change military beliefs and behavior, this study illuminates both the promise and pitfalls of security assistance as a tool of statecraft.

Pourquoi des électeurs membres des classes populaires et socialisés à gauche votent-ils à droite ? Alors que les enquêtes sociologiques portent essentiellement sur l’abstention, le vote à gauche et la présence de l’extrême droite en milieu populaire, cette thèse aborde un phénomène électoral peu étudié : le vote de droite en milieu populaire. Les propriétés sociales des électeurs ne pouvant pas, à elles seules, expliquer ce choix électoral, c’est par une enquête ethnographique associée à une entreprise monographique, menée sur un quartier d’habitat social niçois entre 2014 et 2016 que sont définis les « sens » du vote de droite en milieu populaire. Un suivi au long cours des électeurs dans leur environnement a permis d’établir que ce vote n’est pas simplement le fait d’individus socialisés à droite et/ou appartenant aux franges supérieures des classes populaires et/ou en situation d’ascension sociale. Il concerne aussi des électeurs socialisés à gauche, situés dans les segments les plus précarisés des catégories populaires. La thèse montre qu’ils votent à droite sans exprimer des préférences politiques de droite, mais en cherchant une réponse à leurs demandes sociales. Dans ces conditions, les mêmes attentes sociales peuvent se traduire par des choix électoraux différents, tels qu’un vote à droite à une élection locale et un vote à gauche à l’élection présidentielle. Ces variations électorales, qui font sens pour l’électeur et ne renvoient pas à un déficit de compétence politique, s’expliquent par une entreprise d’ancrage et de travail politiques intenses de candidats situés à droite. Ils endossent leur rôle d’élu de proximité en euphémisant leur affiliation partisane, manifestent des dispositions sociales qui autorisent l’identification des électeurs, redistribuent des biens publics et disposent, sur le terrain, de puissants relais dans le tissu social. Ainsi, une forte dynamique d’encadrement des classes populaires peut produire, localement, une incitation au vote à droite chez les plus précarisés d’entre eux. Le sens qu’ils assignent à ce choix n’est dès lors pas en rupture avec leurs préférences politiques et est ajusté à leurs attentes et dispositions sociales. C’est donc à l’intersection de la sociologie des électeurs et de la sociologie du métier d’élu que se déchiffrent les sens du vote. / Why do working class voters, whose socialization lies on the left, eventually choose right wing candidates? While most of the scholarship on contemporary politics tends to focus either on the growth of the far-right, abstention or the decline of left-wing activism, this thesis studies a phenomenon that has, so far, attracted little attention. A two-year ethnographic inquiry into a working-class district of Nice shows, instead, the many meanings a right-wing vote has for the poor, and how support for conservative candidates is often shaped by dynamics that have little to do with the voters’ social attributes. Studying voters in their social environment attests, as one would expect, that right-wing suffrage within the working classes regards its higher, ascending stratas, whose claims for status and respectability is better defended by conservative candidates. However, this thesis also shows how and why the latter’s campaigns can meet the expectations, representations and standards of the more vulnerable and precarious segments of these classes, sometimes socialized to left-wing values. In such conditions, the same social expectations can translate into contradicting ballots at a local election and for a national poll, such as a presidential election. These electoral variations, which make sense for the electors, are not the result of ignorance or political illiteracy. They can be explained by the long-term rooting of conservative leaders, who embrace their role as representatives and shape their discourses and practices to better answer the expectations of lower class citizens: they perform their roles according to working class standards, share public goods and widen their leadership thanks to strong men on the field. Therefore, a tight control of low-income neighborhoods can locally produce a conservative support among the poor and the most vulnerable, as long as right-wing candidates adjust themselves to the needs and expectations of their clients and do not seem to contradict their immediate interests. It is, therefore, by embracing both electoral and elite sociology that one can decipher and understand the meaning of local polls.

Nachrichtensendungen für Kinder sind im Rahmen der politischen Sozialisation bedeutsam und sehen sich mit verschiedenen Anforderungen konfrontiert. In der vorliegenden Studie unterziehen die Autorinnen die deutsche Kindernachrichtensendung Logo! und die britische Kindernachrichtensendung Newsround einem inhaltsanalytischen Qualitätsvergleich. Dazu leiten sie Qualitätskriterien aus normativen, inhaltlichen sowie formalen Beurteilungskriterien aus Rezipienten-, Produzenten- sowie aus wissenschaftlicher Sicht ab, die sie für Aussagen über die Aufbereitung und Eignung dieser Kindernachrichtenprogramme heranziehen. Die Ergebnisse dieser tiefgründigen Analyse bieten detaillierten Aufschluss über Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede der untersuchten Sendungen und ermöglichen so eine differenzierte Betrachtung der Frage danach, was die Qualität von Kindernachrichtensendungen – auch unter interkulturellen Gesichtspunkten – ausmacht. / TV News programs for children, within the context of political socialization, are not only hugely important but are also being faced with constant challenges. The following study focuses on Germany’s Logo! and Britain’s Newsround, two of the larger scale television news programs on offer for children. The study offers ananalytical, quality comparison of the two shows. It looks both at the quality criteria of normative, context-related and formal assessment criteria, whilst exploring the perspective of the recipient, the producer and more scientific approaches. The study concludes with an analysis of the format preparation of the two shows and analyses their respective suitability for children. The study offers a profound insight into the similarities and differences between these two broadcasts and considers how we can attempt to measure the quality of children’s news programs.

No description available.

No description available.

<p>Political socialization has been of interest to political science and communication scholars for decades. Focusing primarily on parents, few studies have examined how peer relationships can affect the political socialization process. Additionally, much of the literature does not examine political socialization past the age of 18. Using social penetration theory, this study proposes that the unique features of the college context—independence, new relationships, political organizations—make it a particularly ripe context for political socialization to occur. The study utilized a survey-based to test this assumption and examine if/how college students between the ages of 18 and 24 are communicating with their peers and to what political socialization effect. The findings contribute to political socialization literature, social penetration theory, and our understanding of how young people talk about politics.</p>

Objective – Views surrounding COVID-19 are divided. The objective of this thesis is to investigate if views surrounding COVID-19 can be inferred based on college-level demographics. I explore the views of undergraduate students at the University of Central Florida. Methods – A link to the questionnaire created through Qualtrics was sent out to university leaders asking them to distribute it accordingly among their respective undergraduate populations. Students (N=149) responded to questions about issues related to COVID-19, college-level demographics, and political attitudes. The data was analyzed using both descriptive and inferential analysis. Results – Students still viewed COVID-19 as a serious issue (79%). (44%) were concerned about issues other than the direct health implications and (28%) viewed the public response as an overreaction. Seniors were more likely to say it is important to know others’ vaccination status. Those in the College of Engineering/Computer Science were most supportive of Trump’s handling of COVID-19 and viewed the pandemic as less serious. They were also less supportive of vaccine mandates and less likely to change their behavior than Arts and Humanities students. Only the CDC received majority support as a helpful source of information about COVID-19. Conclusions – Further research needs to be undertaken using a larger and more representative sample to better understand how college-level demographics interact with political behavior. The CDC should be the chief source of information regarding public health. And schools should address the different concerns students have about the pandemic while also making sure students who disagree with public health measures have avenues to express their opinion.

No description available.