Introduction. It has been shown that media agenda, political agenda and the public agenda are interdependent in complex ways. A significant part of political communication, for instance, takes place in the op-ed pages of leading newspapers. Here, we investigate the particular factors that define the media agenda, the schedule as is the case for the said op-ed pages. The investigation focuses on Lithuanian data. Methods. We report from an inquiry which triangulates the perceptions and auto-reflection of (1) editors of the main mainstream outlets, (2) experts who authored published opinion pieces; that also compares these data points to (3) published opinion articles. The focus is on the education policy in 2021–2022 in Lithuania. Analysis. Four different potential agenda factors are individuated: the willful pursuit of the editorial boards (assignment of topics to authors), the selectivity of the editorial boards (selection, rejection, of topics suggested by the authors), context (political agenda causing a particular topic to be brought forth), and dialogue, polemics, between the authors. Results. It is clear that all of these factors contribute but in a weak way, and none of them actually dominate the formation of the agenda as is the case in opinion journalism. Conclusion. The deliberate choice on the part of the editorial boards to leave the formation of the agenda to chance is the reason the end product – the op-ed pages and the resulting discussion of public policy – is chaotic, fragmented, unprincipled and unfocused, flat and lacking in substance. In this, the editorial boards exhibit a certain willingness to abandon their commitment as a gatekeeper and as a watchdog.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.