The US: So Close, Yet So Far Away

The U.S. has become part of our everyday life. But have we ventured too close? This feature delivers a retrospective of Danish media coverage of the U.S. from 1971 to today.

Have we gotten any wiser about the U.S. over the past 40 years of journalism? Are we better able now to understand and asses the economy, society, culture and politics of the U.S. than we were 40 years ago? Does foreign coverage about the U.S. influence our viewpoints? Does it ensure that we get a varied knowledge of the U.S.? Does it stimulate us to become more engaged in society’s large and small decisions?

In our new book on journalism, we have analyzed all matters about the U.S. in selected newspapers from 1971 to 2011. One of our main conclusions is that the U.S. has become more important in daily life in Denmark. In 1971, the U.S. was far away — a society we didn’t quite understand. The way newspapers portrayed it made it seem distant and incomprehensible. Americans’ more moralistic approach to daily life, in particular, was a source of Danish disapproval. In Jyllands-Posten, we read articles on American college parties where red strawberry juice was served when alcohol was “triply banned.”* A film review in Politiken about a woman who was being oppressed by her husband said, “She has shown men that she is worthy, but is that really how it works in the U.S.?” — implying that women’s oppression lived on in the U.S. unlike in Denmark.*

The U.S. was seen as a strange, righteous country where people weren’t as uninhibited as in Denmark. Jyllands-Posten reported on three female teachers at a university in Connellsville, Pa. who threatened to emigrate after having been sacked. Their offence was wearing trouser suits to lessons.*

The media attached importance to the war the U.S. was waging in Vietnam. The U.S. had problems with race riots. But Americans also put people on the moon again in 1971. We watched with a mixture of admiration and surprise. The U.S. was far away. A trip to the U.S. was an event.

In 2011, the U.S. has in many ways become part of everyday life in Denmark, which is reflected clearly in the media. The Danes consume the products of American culture every day. These include American films, books, TV shows and news stories. From the weather forecast in Atlanta to the surfeit of American news stories compared to news from other parts of the world, all newspapers tell the same tale. The cultural supply is enormous. Now, there are detailed business analyses on the American economy and firms. In 1971, there were none. Today’s breaking news includes the ups and downs on Wall Street. It is as if there is a direct tie to the daily American reality through the media.

The U.S. is present even in our subconscious. Many years of news and interaction have solidly imprinted American perspectives on us. The narrative style developed in the U.S. has been adapted to our needs in media, literature, film and TV. Advertising concepts and methods have been transferred and applied in Denmark for quite some time now.

One news article from 1971 warned us to protect ourselves against the American condition of having many different credit cards. Looking through modern eyes, this seems like a news story from olden days. Now, Danish newspapers make apps for the newest American smartphones and Google Street View can show us both Scott Street in San Francisco and Ydunsvej in Aarhus, Østerbrogade in Copenhagen.

Danish companies have merged with American companies and adopted their corporate culture. We “coach” on the American business model and we “headhunt,” even though we have no equivalent words in Danish. We do personality tests after the American model. We speak English at work.

And then there’s the matter of language. If you compare the number of English words in papers from 1971 to the number in 2011, you find that English words and concepts have become natural elements in our media coverage. Danish newspapers run business sections, and the home section is titled “Living.” Words like “testing,” “ranking” and “branding” have also entered the Danish language.

Finally, American high politics have come closer to us. We take part in the U.S.’ wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have become our wars too. We participated in Libya alongside American planes and bombs. We have shifted significantly closer to the U.S. in our foreign policy over the past 40 years. In 1971, Foreign Minister Poul Hartling sent a request to the U.S. that sought a negotiated solution to the Vietnam War, and there was a desire for Denmark to recognize North Vietnam. In the same year, we became allies with the U.S. in our foreign policy. But behind Hartling’s decision was a wish to rise above the East-West divide and avoid getting caught up in the middle of a possibly violent confrontation. We were set on avoiding military force and instead relying on negotiated solutions.

Today, the media and the public have a different view, even though Denmark is much more integrated with Europe economically and politically than we were in 1971. Back then, we were still debating whether the European Free Trade Association was the right choice for Denmark. Despite the greater focus on Europe, the U.S. still takes first place in our foreign policy universe. The U.S. is our central ally, and the U.S. plays a lead role in Danish security. This was how it worked under George W. Bush, and it remains unchanged under the leadership of Barack Obama and Helle Thorning. Therefore, we have good reason for covering American high politics as thoroughly as we do in daily newspapers. Coverage of the U.S. has become a political necessity. The media reflects this.

The anti-Americanism that was obvious in 1971 has been replaced by passivity. There is very little discussion in the media of Denmark’s “American” orientation. It seems it is hard to separate Denmark from the U.S. We have become active spectators to practically all parts of American domestic policy. Apparently, the Danes show significant interest in even the most obscure political and cultural discussions and phenomena in the U.S. The most viewed satiric news program in Denmark is John Stewart’s “The Daily Show,” with over 30,000 viewers. This show requires an understanding of Americanisms and current American domestic politics to be appreciated, and it seems that Danish viewers possess exactly this.

Our media coverage has become a mirror of American media products. Our criticism of the U.S. in today’s media is often a reflection of internal American criticism rather than anti-Americanism. Although we have become close to America and know more trivia about the American community, economy and politics than in 1971, we are still highly ambivalent about the U.S. and the relationship between our opinion and our real understanding of it is unclear. The ambivalence is evident in media coverage of America: The U.S. is both fascinating and repulsive. It is both too much and too little. It is both something that draws us in and something from which we wish to distance ourselves.

Maybe the issue is that we have become too close to everything American. We have almost become a part of America. This makes it hard for us to accept American people’s choices of politicians who don’t fit into the Danish perception of the world and its most important values. This can lead to exaggerated dissociation, which we saw under Bush, and it is apparent in other areas.

Even when it isn’t an election year, there is intense coverage of American high politics. The attention the media gives the tea party is out of proportion with the support the tea party receives from the American population. But the movement’s radical notions on morality and wish to phase out government make it a good read both in the United States and in Denmark. For most Americans, extensive coverage of a minority is a minor problem. But for the Danish readership, tales about minorities distort the image of the average American’s political orientation. Danish readers thus may have become too close to the U.S. to get the overall view and image of the U.S in the right proportion.

Proximity and ambivalence are the biggest media-related challenges. The unresolved ambiguity continues to define the limits of how well we really understand the U.S. That is why there is still much to do for journalists and the media, who have made it their task to interpret and explain the U.S. in our hearts.

To mark the 40th anniversary of its law on journalism program, a new book was published this week by researchers at the Danish School of Media and Journalism, which calls attention to changes in journalism since 1971: Roger Buch (Ed.), “Forandringens Journalistik.”

*Editor’s note: The authors provided the following references for the articles they cited: JP 14/2 1971: 39; 16/2 1971st: 11; JP 11/2 1971.