The political style of the Dutch protest movement Provo was characterized by a considerable orientation to publicity in which television played an important role. In the Netherlands various broadcasting corporations gave this high-profile phenomenon coverage - each in their own way and within different categories of programmes (news programmes debating programmes and talk shows). Provo was therefore far more than just a 'folk devils' phenomenon; television created a multitude of stereotypes and images that were then projected onto the group identity by members of Provo. This case study is intended to be a contribution to the analysis of the dynamic relationship between television and the protest movement in the 1960s and to that of the mediatory role of television in social-cultural change processes in general.

Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision
Tijdschrift voor Mediageschiedenis
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
TMG Journal for Media History; Vol 9, No 1 (2006); 39-90

Pas, Niek. (2006). Protest, public relations en politiek. Provo in de media (1965-1967). Tijdschrift voor Mediageschiedenis, 9(1), 39–90. doi:10.18146/tmg.547