English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

When outside actors criticize domestic rights and freedoms, do voters take notice? We argue that messages coming from outsiders who condition resources on democracy, and who have expertise in democracy promotion, are more likely to change minds. We also argue that partisanship is a moderating variable when it comes to the impact of outside messages: partisan elites help amplify or lessen the impact of outside messages. We offer evidence from a series of survey-experiments we deployed in Turkey, focusing on the roles of the European Union and of the European Court of Human Rights as sources criticism of domestic freedoms. We show that emphasizing expertise and conditional benefits can cause more belief updating. We also show that pro-government voters are likely to change their minds but that opposition supporters may do so as well. Non-partisan voters show some evidence of backlash, possibly because they are disengaged and alienated from elites. The argument has implications for the ability of outside actors to influence domestic-level processes related to democracy in countries in imperfect democracies and in countries sliding towards authoritarianism.

International actors as critics of domestic freedoms: the role of expertise and benefits