In early 2020, the Greek government launched the "Stay at Home" Campaign, a fund ostensibly designed to support the financially struggling media industry during the COVID-19 pandemic while promoting public health messages. However, this initiative, known as the "Petsas List" after the government representative who spearheaded it, was widely perceived as a manipulative attempt to control the media narrative and bolster the government's image, particularly regarding its pandemic restrictions. This perception stemmed from the Greek media system's inherent problems, including close ties between politicians, journalists, and media owners, leading to a concentrated industry lacking professionalism and independence. The "Petsas List" further fueled this distrust as less than 1% of the €20 million fund went to media outlets critical of the government, with some funds even allocated to non-existent websites. This study aims to investigate how the "Petsas List" impacted public perception of media independence by analyzing Twitter discourse surrounding the campaign in the three months preceding Greece's second lockdown in November 2020. A decline in media independence can result in a discourse controlled by powerful elites, hindering the media's watchdog role and impacting public trust. This research contributes to the broader literature on global mass media industry problems, the decline in media independence, and its contribution to democratic recession, particularly within the context of Greece's experience which involved some of the most severe violations of freedoms in Europe during the pandemic.

The paper reviews existing literature on the challenges faced by the mass media industry globally, including the decline in media independence and its contribution to democratic backsliding. It discusses how right-wing populist governments often use narratives blaming the media for spreading misinformation to justify controlling the news. The literature highlights the importance of media independence for a functioning democracy, allowing journalists to hold power accountable and promote societal development. The study also examines how government funding of media, when implemented in a controversial and opaque manner, can undermine this independence and fuel anti-media sentiment. Existing research on similar instances of media control in countries like Austria and the Philippines is also discussed, demonstrating a global trend of governments attempting to influence or suppress critical media coverage.

This study employed Ideological Discourse Analysis (IDA), a qualitative method under the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) umbrella, to analyze 1632 tweets using the hashtag #Petsas_list (#Λιστα_Πετσα) on Twitter between September and November 2020. This period encompassed Greece's second COVID-19 lockdown and rumors of a new media funding scheme, further fueling public skepticism. The timeframe was chosen to study public sentiment towards the campaign after the media outlets had received the funds. The data was collected manually, encompassing all tweets under the specified hashtag. IDA was chosen to understand how the tweets constructed ideological narratives of "us" (citizens) versus "them" (the government and the media). The analysis focused on three key aspects of ideological constructions identified by Van Dijk (1995, 2013): dramatization (exaggeration and overemphasis of information to support one side), fallacies (use of unreasonable argumentation to make claims believable), and the positive/negative representation of the ingroup (citizens) and the outgroup (government and media). The study identified two main categories of ideological constructions: (a) the "Petsas List" as a tool for controlling the media, and (b) the support for the government by the perceived "corrupt" media. The study presents exemplar tweets to illustrate these constructions, highlighting how users expressed their anti-media sentiment through these narratives.

The analysis revealed two prominent ideological constructions within the Twitter discourse: First, the "Petsas List" was portrayed as a tool for government control over the media. Users highlighted how the funding scheme was used to influence media coverage, favoring outlets supportive of the ruling party and suppressing critical voices. This narrative was strengthened by examples of the government's allegedly controlling which topics were covered by the media and attempts to distract from scandals. This construction used dramatization and fallacies to portray the government's actions as manipulative and undermining of democratic processes. Second, the analysis identified a strong anti-media sentiment, portraying journalists and media outlets as corrupt and complicit in supporting the government. This perception was largely fueled by the belief that the "Petsas List" had biased the media landscape, making them tools of the government. This construction involved dramatizing the scale of government influence and negatively representing the targeted media outlets. The study also noted the emergence of terms like "Petsas List's Media" ("Petsomena Media") which became associated with outlets seen as pro-government, indicating a shift in public perception. While the general public's trust in media is often low in Greece, certain journalists who challenged the government were positively represented as examples of professional integrity, suggesting a desire for objective and critical journalism. Some users highlighted examples from international news outlets to highlight discrepancies and contrast them with the allegedly biased Greek coverage. The Twitter discourse revealed a complex interplay between public distrust of the media, perceived government manipulation, and a desire for independent and critical journalism.

The findings demonstrate how a controversial and non-transparent media funding scheme can fuel anti-media sentiment and undermine public trust in the press. The government's attempts to control the narrative through financial incentives backfired, generating a counter-narrative of government manipulation and media complicity on social media. This highlights a broader trend of right-wing populist governments using tactics to control or suppress critical media coverage, creating challenges for journalistic independence and democratic processes. The study's findings align with existing research showing a decline in media independence and rise of anti-media sentiment globally. The use of Twitter provides a unique insight into public perception and opinion formation during the pandemic, revealing the power of social media in shaping political discourse. The study's focus on Greece's unique political and media landscape adds an important case study to the broader literature on media control and democratic backsliding.

This study contributes to understanding the impact of government media funding schemes on public perception of media independence and democratic processes. The findings suggest that non-transparent and controversial funding can fuel anti-media sentiment and reinforce perceptions of media complicity with the government. Future research should investigate similar cases across different contexts to develop a comprehensive understanding of this phenomenon. This includes investigating other funding schemes and examining the evolution of online discourse relating to media trust and independence. Furthermore, comparative studies could investigate the effect of different levels of media concentration and the strength of journalistic ethics codes on the effectiveness of media funding initiatives.

This study focuses solely on Twitter data from Greece, limiting the generalizability of the findings to other contexts. The study focuses on a specific hashtag, potentially excluding other relevant conversations. The reliance on qualitative analysis using IDA limits the statistical generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, the data is unavailable due to GDPR regulations, limiting the potential for further analysis by other researchers.