According to the article Presses and Democracies by Daniel C. Hallin and Robert Giles, it mainly talks about the differences among media systems and especially the western media system.
During the early times, what the media should be and do were proposed into four models which were authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility and communist. By doing the research of Europe and North America, the differences among media systems are connected with other characteristics of political and social systems.
In the western world, people identify the media systems as three models. The first is the liberal model. Second is the polarized pluralist model. The third is the democratic corporatist model. Each of these models is important and has their own characteristics.
The liberal model which is common in the United Sates, British and former British colonies has three primary characteristics: commercial newspapers developed early, state intervention is limited, and the objectivity norm is a strong form of journalistic professionalism.
For the polarized pluralist model, it is significantly different from the liberal model and was widely used in the southern Europe. The state has played an interventionist role in the media system and political parallelism is also high in the southern Europe. Journalistic professionalism developed slowly.
In the third place, the democratic corporatist model is another system and has developed in some central and northern European countries. The system not only combined by the free press and active government intervention but also combines the political parallelism and strong journalistic professionalism. It less tied to the objectivity norm and involves in a higher level of formal institutionalization.
The article states that the differences among the three systems are result from the secularization of European society. The expansion of commercial media also influences on the differences. Political cultures and political systems still differ, even among the relatively similar countries of North America and western Europe.
Sources:Overholder,Geneva. Press and Democracies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2005.1-15. Print.
Accurate summarization of the article; just needs some minor editing.
回复删除You did a good job in summarizing the article. Even though its not very detail, but generally I can understand what it is about and I guess other people does too. Nice work!!!
回复删除It could use some clarification on what point you were trying to make but it summarized the article otherwise pretty well...
回复删除The summary was well done, but I wasn't sure on what your reaction was to this article.
回复删除well you did you good job by summarizing this artical
回复删除The summary is good and I understand what the article about. Good work and keep going.
回复删除A nice summary, futhermore your summary is an organized. I think, you need to write some thing about your opinion in the conclusion. Indeed you did a good job.
回复删除your ideas are will arranged and you have the pain points included. that shows you understood the article.
回复删除a good summary,but it seems like you need a good ending, that will be better!!!^^
回复删除very clear summary! it was great on reading your summary cuz it does make sense and i like your editting about dividing the summary into several short paragraphs. good job!
回复删除Well done, I really like your summary and the ideas that you came up with. I think you can make the conclusion more clearly. nice one
回复删除Good job, you got some nice and clear ideas. for improvment you can try on your conclusion parts.
回复删除good job. clearly idea and information but i think you need clearefy your conclusion.
回复删除good jobo it was clear to understandbal
回复删除great job! little edting would make it perfect!
回复删除very well in depth summary, just need a reaction to the article. good job.
回复删除