Media subsidy program evaluation: Into the (un)known to safeguard a pillar of democratic society

Abstract Information: Journalistic media still play a crucial role in democratic societies. From information to discourse to critical inquiry, they are supposed to provide grounds to form opinions and make informed decisions. Journalism faces diverse challenges on financial, professional and social dimensions. All of which lead to structural crises (Nielsen, 2024, 2016). Particularly, platform operators successfully compete for advertising revenues for nearly two decades now. They facilitate legacy media’s loss of relevance as information gatekeepers and severely challenge their established role, albeit without rendering them irrelevant for recipient’s information bouquet (Jarren et al., 2019, p. 417). Controversially, algorithmically generated public spheres are under suspicion to cause further fragmentation and polarization of audiences and subsequently citizens. Ultimately, they render the democratic public sphere dysfunctional (Porlezza, 2021, p. 70). The outlined situation proves as especially unfavorable for local journalism. Given their naturally smaller potential and total audience on the local level, decrease in sales and advertising revenues threatens its very existence (Röper, 2022, p. 302). In light of these economic hardships but also social and political repercussions, questions of state support for media organizations in the form of media subsidies become more prevalent than ever (Bleyer-Simon & Nenadic, 2021). Recent discussions to enhance direct and indirect subsidies are highly controversial, however. Counterintuitively, journalists and media managers as potential beneficiaries prominently voice their opposition (Vuilleumier, 2022). Critique ranges from potential state interference in press freedom, to inefficient resource allocation and incentivizing outdated business models (Kaltenbrunner, 2021, p. 8; Murschetz & Trappel, 2013, p. 377). Regardless, the most recent reform of the Interstate Treaty on the Collaboration of Berlin and Brandenburg regarding the Media enables the Media Authority Berlin-Brandenburg (Mabb) to financially support journalistic projects directly (§8 (1) 12 MStV BE-BB, 2019; § 4 Fördersatzung Lokaljournalismus). The project outlined here evaluates the media subsidy program implemented under the above legislation. Following the framework by Sager et al. (2019, pp. 97-117), program is evaluated on the five levels of (1) input (policy concept), (2) implementation (organization), (3) output (activities), (4) outcome and (5) impact. Across these five levels, the project evaluates the program on three dimensions: (A) normative, (B) journalistic and (C) economic criteria. The result is a 5x3 matrix applicable to media subsidy evaluation. For this evaluation, a mixed-method approach applies. Firstly, document analysis provides data to identify the program theory and evaluation criteria. Secondly, content analysis of supported journalism project provides insight into the journalistic dimension. Finally, semi-structured focus group interviews with regular citizens will provide priceless insight into the normative effects of the subsidy program. Particularly of interest for this year’s conference are normative criteria. The evaluation specifically includes members of (civil) society from those local areas with subsidized media projects. By interviewing what the author labels as ‘local influencers’, e.g. church members, sports associates, local NGOs activists et cetera, underrepresented voices find consideration in this evaluation.