From Veep, to House of Cards or the West Wing, TV shows are some of the most common introductions to the US political system and political life in Washington DC. European politics also received the TV treatment, but the focus has long been national politics with the EU always off-stage, a place of ‘gravy trains’ (Yes Minister) where ‘no one hears you scream’ (Borgen). This is finally changing: since 2020, the Brussels bubble has its own sitcom, Parlement, which follows the adventures (and personal and professional growth) of Samy Kantor, a bumbling French Parliamentary Assistant to a constantly bemused MEP.

Building on an analysis of the first three seasons and interviews with members of the Brussels bubble whose jobs are represented in the show, the paper aims to make three contributions. First, it examines the visions of European integration and especially the cross-cultural communication challenges and clichés the show vehiculates. Second, it reflects on the way EU decision-making processes are portrayed and explained, both internal to the Parliament and how the Parliament engages with the Council of the European Union and the Commission. Third, it analyses the show’s broader attitude to politics. At a time of growing populism and anti-politics backlash, the paper argues that Parlement manages to laugh at its characters while striking a much more hopeful note on the value and principles of political action than most recent political shows.

In the dynamic realm of the digital age, memes have transcended their initial role as internet satire, evolving into influential instruments that wield significant power in shaping public opinion and moulding political narratives. This qualitative study delves into the perceived importance of meme creators, shedding light on the motivations, intentions, and strategic approaches of six key individuals driving this transformative phenomenon. Through in-depth, semi-structured interviews, the research unveils the conscious efforts of meme creators to move beyond surface-level humour, strategically employing persuasive elements to challenge mainstream narratives, foster critical thinking, and influence political behaviour.

Beyond their comedic façade, meme creators are increasingly recognised as active participants in the political arena, disrupting traditional communication paradigms. This study underscores their role in resonating with diverse audiences, steering conversations, and democratising political engagement. Acknowledging the participatory nature of online culture, meme creators not only establish dynamic spaces that transcend entertainment but also cultivate the concept of a "third place." In doing so, they foster a sense of community and shared identity within meme communities, further solidifying their importance in the digital landscape.

This research provides a nuanced understanding of the intricate relationship between memes, persuasion, and the evolving landscape of digital political engagement. By delving into the minds of meme creators, the study enriches our comprehension of their motivations, highlighting the profound impact of political memes in shaping the tapestry of political engagement. As memes seamlessly permeate online conversations, grasping the complex dynamics that define contemporary political discourse becomes imperative.

The study emphasises the pivotal role meme creators play in challenging traditional norms and creating a space for alternative perspectives. It underscores their ability to initiate critical conversations, instigate reflection and reactions and ultimately contribute to the diversification of political discourse. In an era where memes serve as potent tools for communication and influence, understanding the strategic minds behind these creations becomes paramount for navigating the multifaceted landscape of digital politics. As the influence of memes continues to burgeon, this research underscores the pressing need to comprehend the profound implications of meme creators on the ever-changing canvas of political engagement in the digital age.

The 3 Grand Tours (France, Italy, Spain) are focal points of the road cycling calendar for riders, sponsors and audiences alike. Throughout the postwar period, each of the organisers has engaged in assorted actions to use the opportunity to promote socio-political agendas, including European integration. From the 1992 Tour de France's extensive celebration of the Maastricht Treaty to the promotion of the Green Deal and NextGen programmes at the 2021 Giro d'Italia, the synergies extend beyond simple commercial gains. The paper considers the extent to which each side has driven these burgeoning relationships and the tensions that aside from the Tours' nation-specific origins. It argues that while offering another pathway to popular support, the EU remains a marginal part of the overall interests of the sport, especially in an era of increasing sportswashing.

The cycling world’s governing body UCI (Union Cycliste Internationale) has long been a champion of the internationalisation of the sport. From La Tropicale Amissa Bongo and the Tour Colombia, to the Japan Cup and the Tour Down Under, today pro cycling teams from across the world compete across the world from early January to well into October. Yet, at the same time the annual cycling calendar still revolves around the five Monuments (Milan-Sanremo, Ronde van Vlaanderen, Paris-Roubaix, Liège-Bastogne-Liège, and Giro di Lombardia) and the three 'Grand Tours' (Giro d'Italia, Tour de France, and Vuelta a España), whcih all take place in Europe. This paper looks into how some of Europe’s main cycling news sites have reported about the internationalisation of the sport during the last decade. It argues that while many of these races are covered extensively, to many cycling enthusiasts the season still only ‘really' begins with the first European races and the Belgian classics in particular, and ends after the Giro di Lombardia.