{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025985663082437275, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007168458781362007, 'mean_word_length': 5.275280898876405, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
La Communication politique

previous discussions or outline a future research agenda. The latter might have been particularly worthwhile in relation to current debates around mediatization/media life (Deuze, 2011; Livingstone, 2009). Of course, there are many ways to approach such a topic, and Mihelj has done an excellent job in synthesizing what is an extremely diverse literature in such a clear and accessible manner. However, I did wonder whether the first (theoretical) part might have been better complemented by a series of extended case studies (say, for argument’s sake, India, Yugoslavia, China, USA and Brazil) that could be used to both interrogate the analytical framework being put forward and develop some of the subsequent discussions around conflict reporting, gender and so on in a more coherent manner. These thoughts aside, Mihelj should be congratulated for not only challenging some of the most tired clichés around nationalism, globalization and the role of the media but, above all, providing an analytical framework that offers a useful starting point for further research into this topic.