From public discourse to public normality: how the media construct a new conservatism
The public debate ignited around Maria Karystianou’s statement on abortion is not merely another episode of cultural confrontation. It is an indicative example of how the media—through the language they choose and the frame within which they place a statement—actively contribute to shaping a new, often subterranean, wave of conservatism in public discourse.
The statement itself, presented in fragmentary form as an “opinion in favor of public deliberation on abortion,” was almost immediately displaced from the terrain of social and public-health discussion into the field of moral conflict. The issue was not posed as a right, nor as a matter of women’s access to healthcare services, but as a “controversial values question.” This shift is not neutral. It is deeply political.
As Simon and Jerit note in their theoretical approach, the media function as a critical intermediary between political discourse and public opinion—not simply by transmitting information, but by reconstructing its meaning. When the media choose to foreground certain words, phrases, or reactions and to silence others, they effectively determine which interpretation will become dominant. The public does not form an opinion on the full discourse, but on the version of the discourse that is presented to it.
In the case of abortion, the selection of terms such as “moral dilemma,” “question of life,” or “public deliberation” does not merely describe reality—it produces meaning. It moves the discussion from the level of individual rights to the level of collective judgment and moral supervision. It is a linguistic mechanism that, according to political communication theory, renders certain political positions more “reasonable,” more “moderate,” and ultimately more socially acceptable.
The media’s contribution here lies not only in amplifying conservative voices, but in naturalizing the conservative frame. When a well-established right is presented as an object of negotiation or “dialogue,” it ceases to be self-evident. As Simon and Jerit emphasize, repeated exposure of the public to such frames leads to a gradual reconfiguration of political attitudes—not through persuasion, but through habituation.
This is the crucial point: contemporary conservatism is not imposed through bans; it is introduced linguistically. It does not appear as extreme, but as “rational,” “debatable,” “balanced.” The media, operating as a filter of political discourse, help create an environment in which the contestation of rights is not presented as regression, but as a mature social discussion.
The Karystianou case reveals precisely this process. The public sphere was not organized around the actual conditions that lead a woman to an abortion, nor around social inequalities or support structures. Instead, it was organized around a moralized narrative in which the media acted as a catalyst—not because they “took a side,” but because they chose the frame.
Within this frame, conservatism does not need to shout. It only needs to be spoken with the right words, at the right moment, by the right outlets.
Further reading
Simon, A. F., and Jerit, J. (2007). “Toward a theory relating political discourse, media, and public opinion.” Journal of Politics, 69(1), 254–271. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00526.x.
Note on the article image
The image used in the article is a photomontage of Hannah Höch’s Cut with the Kitchen Knife Dada Through the Last Weimar Beer-Belly Cultural Epoch in Germany (1919–1920). The work is a sharp cultural critique of the early Weimar Republic. Using material cut from newspapers, magazines, and mass-culture print media, Höch depicts public life as a field “assembled” from fragments: politicians, military figures, technology, spectacle, mass gatherings. The cut-and-paste aesthetic itself functions as a commentary on the confusion and contradictions of the new order, while the title (“beer-belly culture”) satirizes a complacent, male-centered normality. The “kitchen knife”—a domestic symbol—becomes a tool for dismantling public power and gender hierarchies, with an emphasis on the “New Woman” and on the entanglement of politics, images, and mass stereotypes.
Text: Aristonikos_