Europeans don’t feel the same way a war 100 kilometers from the front than 3,000. While 71% of the social debate in Eastern Europe revolves around the war in Ukraine, in Spain this share only reaches 17%. So this … reflects a report by the consultancy Llorente y Cuenca, entitled “VDL 2.1: unified voice, fragmented audience”, which studies and compares the public conversation on the Old Continent. This public conversation is understood as the sum of institutional discourse, media coverage and citizen debate.
Based on the data analyzed, the report reveals a clear dissonance between the narratives circulating in Europe and the perception of the danger linked to the conflict in Ukraine. The conclusion is clear: on the eastern flank, the proximity of the conflict takes precedence over other priorities. “In countries like Latvia, Slovakia or Estonia, the public conversation is monopolized by the Russian threat and defense, reaching figures of up to 71% of the conversation on social network X,” the report says.
Such figures contrast with the reality experienced on the western flank, notably in Spain and Portugal – the two countries geographically furthest from the conflict – where the same conversation in 17% and 20%, respectively. All this despite the fact that the war in Ukraine monopolizes the 38% of media coverage.
This gap between the media agenda and citizens’ concerns is particularly visible in Spain. Even if security and defense are the most important subjects for the media, “they only concentrate two out of ten messages in public opinion”. Are Thematic subjects represent 25% of national media coverageand in the north-east of the EU, five out of ten stories revolve around this topic.
On the other hand, “democracy and values concentrate 44% of social interest in Spain and are consolidated as the main priority of European public opinion (37%)”. Paradoxically, this great interest does not indicate an imminent institutional crisis: according to the 2024 democracy index of “The Economist”, Spain has climbed two positions, to 21st place in the world, remaining firmly in “full democracy”.
However, this coexistence of multiple geopolitical sensitivities and national priorities under one roof is starting to become an obstacle to making common decisions of greater importance.
This question of perspective resides, mainly, in one of the bastions of European Union: pluralism. But this European plurality presents itself as a two-sided coin. The economic union between the different states that make up the EU has not succeeded in bringing about a union in the same way on the level of identity. Geographic difference, mainly, as well as linguistic and cultural differences, fragment the alliance’s internal public debate.
In Poland or in the Baltic Statesthere persists a feeling of insecurity which manifests itself in public debate for several reasons. The main ones are the geographical proximity of the war and the Kremlin’s own experiences with hybrid attacks, added to the rhetoric of the NATO Secretary General, Marc Rutte. In this sense, the uncertainty of the American president also emerges, Donald Trumpon whether it would comply with Article 5 of the Atlantic Alliance if activated.
Thus, Brussels must operate in an environment where “public attention is fragmented, audiences are segmented and broadcast channels are multiplying”. “The fragmentation of European public opinion and the tendency to favor more concrete issues with immediate impact make it difficult for messages to resonate fully,” says Llorente and Cuenca’s report. This bipolarity places the Union faced with the challenge of bringing together two divergent realities before one of the threats ends up shattering the common project.
Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine continues. Moscow is trying to continue invading the territory and kyiv insists on not ceding even one iota of its territory. The United States is rushing to reach a peace agreement and the European Union, seeing how its leadership is fading, is rethinking its rearmament taking into account the proximity of the conflict.
Competitiveness above all
Faced with these difficulties, under the leadership of Ursula von der Leyen, the EU has tried to unify its voice with iron discipline. 47% of the commissioners’ speeches focus on a threat more intangible than the war in Ukraine: competitiveness.
For years, the EU has prioritized its role as a global arbiter and regulator of new technologies, a strategy that has discouraged the creation of its own technological powerhouses. After missing the boat during the first wave of the digital revolution, and in the absence of its own “Big Tech”, the Old Continent lives under the influence of the American “magnificent seven” – Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla and Nvidia.
Despite Von der Leyen’s obsession, the message does not penetrate. Although the Commission attempts to prioritize concepts such as “innovation” and “investment” – the most repeated semantic fields in their speeches – competitiveness represents barely 21% in the field of public debate between citizens.
This disconnect is even more pronounced if we take into account media interest. Even if European media coverage reaches 21%, its impact is diluted in the social sphere: “Only 4% of public opinion messages revolve around competitiveness“.
About The Author
