The European Union’s Underperformance:

An Analysis of the

Role of National Media Fragmentation

and

EU Communication Strategies
EUROPE-IS-US supported by Mistral.ai; September 7, 2025

• The EU faces significant challenges including economic instability, migration, climate change, and geopolitical tensions, which require cohesive action.

• National media across member states often prioritize local political agendas, leading to fragmented and biased coverage of EU-wide challenges.

• The EU’s public relations and communication strategies have limited effectiveness due to language diversity, bureaucratic jargon, and competition with national narratives.

• Local political powers frequently prioritize national interests over EU-wide objectives, complicating policy implementation and decision-making.

• Voter exposure to predominantly local or nationalistic media narratives shapes public opinion, influencing EU-level decision-making and trust in EU institutions.

Introduction

The European Union (EU) is widely perceived as underperforming in addressing its complex, multifaceted challenges—ranging from economic instability and migration to climate change and geopolitical tensions. This underperformance is often attributed to institutional design flaws, political fragmentation, and communication failures. This report critically examines two interconnected factors that contribute to this underperformance: the inadequate or fragmented voicing of pan-European challenges by national press media across member states, and the effectiveness of the EU’s own public relations and communication strategies. It assesses how these dimensions interact with structural political constraints imposed by member states prioritizing local agendas, as well as the role of voter exposure to predominantly local or nationalistic media narratives in shaping public opinion and EU-level decision-making.

Defining “Underperformance” in the EU Context

The EU’s underperformance manifests in several measurable ways: slow decision-making, failure to address crises effectively, lack of public trust, and inconsistent policy implementation across member states. Quantitative indicators such as Eurobarometer surveys reveal declining public trust in EU institutions, with only 50% of citizens describing the EU’s impact on their daily lives as positive despite 73% believing their country benefits from EU membership [1]
Policy implementation delays and discrepancies in areas like climate targets, migration management, and defense readiness further illustrate this underperformance. Comparative analysis with other multilateral organizations shows the EU struggling with coherence and speed in crisis response, particularly in foreign policy and security domains [2][3]

Qualitative assessments from think tanks (e.g., Bruegel, European Council on Foreign Relations) highlight that the EU’s economic statecraft and geopolitical approach are often fragmented by member states’ divergent interests, limiting the EU’s ability to act decisively and cohesively [3][4]. The EU’s development policy, for instance, has shifted towards a geopolitical lens, focusing on neighborhood security and raw material access rather than sustainable development, reflecting a reactive rather than proactive stance [2].

The Role of National Press Media in Shaping EU Narratives

National media across EU member states tend to prioritize local political agendas over EU- wide challenges, leading to fragmented and often biased coverage. Comparative examples

show that coverage of major EU crises—such as the Eurozone crisis, migration, and the Green Deal—varies widely. German media, for instance, often provide detailed, analytical coverage of EU policies, while Hungarian media may emphasize nationalistic narratives that frame EU actions as threats to sovereignty [2][3].

Structural limitations contribute to this fragmentation. The lack of EU-specialized journalists, commercial incentives favoring sensationalized or nationalistic narratives, and language barriers hinder comprehensive pan-European reporting [2]. Case studies of crises like Brexit and the COVID-19 vaccine rollout reveal how national media framed these events through divergent lenses, reinforcing local political divides rather than fostering EU-wide solidarity [2].

Audience exposure to these narratives is amplified by algorithms and social media, which create echo chambers that reinforce nationalistic or localized views. Research from the Reuters Institute Digital News Reports shows that social media platforms often filter news consumption, limiting exposure to diverse European perspectives [5]. Exceptions exist, such as Politico Europe and Euractiv, which successfully bridge local and EU narratives by providing nuanced, multilingual coverage and fostering a European public sphere [2].

The EU’s Public Relations and Communication Strategies

The EU institutions have developed extensive public relations and communication strategies to engage citizens directly. The European Commission’s “Stronger Together” campaign and the European Parliament’s “This Time I’m Voting” initiative aim to foster a sense of European identity and participation [6][7]. However, these efforts face significant barriers: language diversity complicates messaging, bureaucratic jargon alienates citizens, and competition with national governments’ messaging dilutes impact [6].

The EU’s communication policy emphasizes listening to the public, explaining policy impacts locally, and connecting through preferred media. Yet, the complexity of EU policies and the lack of emotional storytelling often fail to resonate with citizens [7]. Success stories like Erasmus+ and EU COVID recovery funds demonstrate that campaigns with clear, tangible benefits and broad public buy-in can overcome these barriers by combining effective messaging with direct citizen engagement [7].

Political Fragmentation and Local Priorities

The tension between EU-level goals and member states’ local interests exacerbates communication gaps and policy implementation challenges. National governments often weaponize EU narratives for domestic political gain, blaming “Brussels” for unpopular policies while taking credit for successful ones [2][3]. This dynamic undermines trust in EU institutions and complicates coherent policy-making.

Mechanisms like the Conference on the Future of Europe have attempted to align local and EU priorities by involving citizens directly in shaping the EU’s agenda. These initiatives show potential but face challenges in translating broad citizen input into concrete policy changes 8. Specific policy examples illustrate how local politics hinder EU-wide solutions: climate targets are resisted by member states prioritizing economic competitiveness, rule-of-law disputes are politicized, and fiscal rules are unevenly applied [2][3].

Voter Behavior and Media Consumption

Voters’ reliance on national media shapes their perceptions of the EU, influencing trust levels and political behavior. Eurobarometer data indicate that trust in national governments often exceeds trust in EU institutions, partly due to media narratives that frame EU policies as distant or ineffective [1]. Misinformation and populist parties exploit media fragmentation to amplify anti-EU sentiments, as seen in Brexit and Dutch EU treaty rejections [5][9].

Demographic divides reveal that younger, urban, and more educated voters are generally less susceptible to localized narratives and more supportive of EU integration. However, the overall media environment, dominated by nationalistic and partisan outlets, limits the dissemination of balanced EU information [5][9].

Comparative Perspectives

Comparisons with other multilateral organizations (e.g., UN, ASEAN) or federal systems (e.g., U.S., Germany) show that the EU’s challenges in communication and public engagement are not unique but are exacerbated by its complex multilingual and multicultural environment.
These entities often employ centralized communication strategies and invest in cross-border media platforms to foster a shared narrative, which the EU struggles to replicate [2].

Potential Solutions and Reform Proposals

Experts propose several actionable recommendations to improve EU communication and media collaboration:

• Media Reforms: Establishing cross-border media funding initiatives (e.g., Creative Europe program), supporting fact-checking initiatives, and developing a pan-European public broadcaster to provide balanced, multilingual coverage [2].

• EU PR Overhaul: Simplifying messaging, leveraging local influencers, decentralizing communication to regional hubs, and adopting more emotional and relatable storytelling [6][7].

• Educational Initiatives: Integrating EU affairs into school curricula and expanding exchange programs to foster a European public sphere and increase civic engagement [8].

These proposals align with the EU’s Action Plan for Democracy and civil society calls for greater transparency and citizen involvement [8].

Counterarguments and Limitations

While media fragmentation and PR ineffectiveness contribute to the EU’s underperformance, they are not the sole causes. Institutional design flaws, such as the lack of a fiscal union and the principle of subsidiarity, create structural constraints that limit the EU’s ability to act decisively [10][11]. Geopolitical constraints and divergent national interests further complicate unified action [2][3]. Thus, media and PR issues may be symptoms of deeper systemic challenges rather than root causes.

Summary Table:
Comparative Analysis of Media Framing and EU PR Efforts

Aspect	Description	Impact on EU Performance
Political Fragmentation	Member states prioritize local interests, weaponize EU narratives for domestic gain	Hinders coherent policy-making and implementation
EU PR Strategies	Multilingual, bureaucratic, often lacks emotional appeal; some successful campaigns (e.g., Erasmus+)	Limited resonance, struggles to compete with national narratives
Media Framing	National media prioritize local agendas; EU issues sensationalized or marginalized	Reinforces fragmentation, undermines trust
Comparative Examples	Other multilateral/federal systems employ centralized communication strategies	EU lags due to complexity and lack of shared media platforms
Voter Exposure & Behavior	Reliance on national media; demographic divides in EU support	Shapes public opinion, influences electoral outcomes

Conclusion

The European Union’s perceived underperformance is significantly influenced by the inadequate and fragmented voicing of pan-European challenges by national press media and the limited effectiveness of the EU’s public relations and communication strategies. These factors interact with structural political constraints imposed by member states prioritizing local agendas and voter exposure to predominantly local or nationalistic media narratives. The result is a fragmented public sphere that undermines trust, complicates policy implementation, and limits the EU’s ability to act cohesively on its most pressing challenges.

While the EU has developed sophisticated communication tools and initiatives, they often fail to resonate due to language barriers, bureaucratic messaging, and competition with entrenched national narratives. The media landscape, dominated by local political interests and amplified by social media algorithms, further entrenches these divides. Addressing these communication and media challenges through reforms and educational initiatives is essential to foster a more unified European narrative and enhance the EU’s overall performance.

However, it is critical to recognize that media and PR shortcomings are symptomatic of deeper institutional and geopolitical constraints. A holistic approach that addresses both

communication failures and structural limitations is necessary for the EU to navigate its complex challenges effectively and regain public trust and cohesion.