The Influence of the Internet on European Journalism
Leopoldina Fortunati, Mauro Sarrica, John O’Sullivan, Aukse Balcytiene, Halliki Harro-Loit, Phil Macgregor, Nayia Roussou, Ramo´n Salaverr´ıa, Federico de Luca
Leopoldina Fortunati, Mauro Sarrica, John O’Sullivan, Aukse Balcytiene, Halliki Harro-Loit, Phil Macgregor, Nayia Roussou, Ramo´n Salaverr´ıa, Federico de Luca
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14 (2009) 928-963, 2009
International Communication Association
doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01476.
PDF
Abstract
This study investigates how European journalists evaluate the changes that have occurred in their profession since the Internet has been integrated in newsrooms. How do journalists perceive the features and innovations associated with the Internet? What are the principal changes in the profession? Do practitioners believe that the quality of journalism has been raised or lowered? To answer to these research questions, we carried out a survey across 11 European countries–Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, United Kingdom, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden–of 239 journalists, working for 40 of the most-read print/online news outlets in these countries. The survey shows that the opportunity to use the Internet to reinforce the social functions of journalism has not been fully recognised.
Conclusion
doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01476.
Abstract
This study investigates how European journalists evaluate the changes that have occurred in their profession since the Internet has been integrated in newsrooms. How do journalists perceive the features and innovations associated with the Internet? What are the principal changes in the profession? Do practitioners believe that the quality of journalism has been raised or lowered? To answer to these research questions, we carried out a survey across 11 European countries–Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, United Kingdom, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden–of 239 journalists, working for 40 of the most-read print/online news outlets in these countries. The survey shows that the opportunity to use the Internet to reinforce the social functions of journalism has not been fully recognised.
Conclusion
This research confirms at a pan-European level the results which have emerged in other studies concerning the influence of the Internet in the journalism in Europe (Paulussen, 2004; van der Wurff & Lauf, 2005).
The social construction of journalism we observed is twofold:
On the one hand, journalists positively assess the role of the Internet in the material, practical organization of their labour. They welcome the Internet when it suits their professional skills, practices, and purposes: This tool speeds up and facilitates the functions of journalism, it improves the work’s impact on audiences, and it enables a more visible and public relationship with readers. Through the Internet, journalists take the opportunity to enhance their communicative performance and the interactive potentiality of the communication channel. In short, the main advantages relate to three themes: speed, breadth of diffusion, additional information, and interactivity with readers.
On the other hand, journalists hesitate, as argued by O’ Sullivan and Heinonen (2008), to abandon the conventions of traditional journalism, both at organizational and at professional level. Moreover, they are suspicious of the unreliability of online information and acknowledge the greater difficulty of distinguishing credible content. More importantly, perhaps, our respondents do not perceive the Internet either as an instrument that can enhance politics in its different elements-defence of democracy, a check on politicians, influence on public opinion and the political agenda, analysis and interpretation of complex issues-or as a merely business-oriented medium that offers a more useful platform for advertisers.
In sum, as we look at the power dynamics between journalists and media owners, the multimedia journalist appears among publishers’ strategic goals rather than among the professional aspirations of our respondents. Moreover, they consider print and Web journalism two distinct jobs, which present severe limits of interchangeability. This attitude towards the effects of the Internet on their profession is strengthened also by their concern about the unreliability of online information. The negative picture of the Internet put forward appears to be consistent with the difficulties journalists have in producing new strategies to manage the changes occurring in the norms and standards of their profession (Ruggiero, 2004). For example, looking at the ongoing power dynamics within modern societies, and the accessibility of direct sources offered by the Internet, it may be argued that journalists have lost some of their status, as they no longer can be considered the sole gatekeepers of news (Singer, 1998).
On the other hand, journalists hesitate, as argued by O’ Sullivan and Heinonen (2008), to abandon the conventions of traditional journalism, both at organizational and at professional level. Moreover, they are suspicious of the unreliability of online information and acknowledge the greater difficulty of distinguishing credible content. More importantly, perhaps, our respondents do not perceive the Internet either as an instrument that can enhance politics in its different elements-defence of democracy, a check on politicians, influence on public opinion and the political agenda, analysis and interpretation of complex issues-or as a merely business-oriented medium that offers a more useful platform for advertisers.
In sum, as we look at the power dynamics between journalists and media owners, the multimedia journalist appears among publishers’ strategic goals rather than among the professional aspirations of our respondents. Moreover, they consider print and Web journalism two distinct jobs, which present severe limits of interchangeability. This attitude towards the effects of the Internet on their profession is strengthened also by their concern about the unreliability of online information. The negative picture of the Internet put forward appears to be consistent with the difficulties journalists have in producing new strategies to manage the changes occurring in the norms and standards of their profession (Ruggiero, 2004). For example, looking at the ongoing power dynamics within modern societies, and the accessibility of direct sources offered by the Internet, it may be argued that journalists have lost some of their status, as they no longer can be considered the sole gatekeepers of news (Singer, 1998).
However, journalists, it seems, have adopted a passive stance and have not sought, in the context of the Internet to effect a professional shift or to propose (or impose) themselves in a new leading role, i.e. as professionals who are the principal point of reference, able to select, to frame, and to interpret relevant news within the overwhelming chaos of information. Nor have they succeeded in using the Internet to improve the core of values which traditionally were at the basis of the journalism ethics (Evans, 1999). The ‘‘normalization’’ and ‘‘domestication’’ of the traditional values of journalism were effected long before the advent of the Internet. But, if there was a hope that the Internet could provide some possibility to support and reinforce the social functions of journalism, this survey suggests that this opportunity has not been recognised. Journalists, at the time the research was conducted, were a social group in defence, trying to resist the changes introduced or potentially introduced by publishers and readers through the Internet.
As regards the relationship between them and the readers in this new Internet landscape, on the one hand there emerges the indifferent attitude of publishers and editors towards interactivity; on the other, journalists are divided among themselves about the interpretation of readers’ needs or preferences, but the majority is convinced that the audience still prefers print newspapers.
Furthermore, this research confirms that journalists’ perception and evaluation of the changes occurring in the world of journalism following the advent of the Internet depends on a series of differentiation variables, such as gender, age, country, professional profile (print or online), length of work experience, and intensity of Internet use.
Some caveats should be stressed at this point.
As regards the relationship between them and the readers in this new Internet landscape, on the one hand there emerges the indifferent attitude of publishers and editors towards interactivity; on the other, journalists are divided among themselves about the interpretation of readers’ needs or preferences, but the majority is convinced that the audience still prefers print newspapers.
Furthermore, this research confirms that journalists’ perception and evaluation of the changes occurring in the world of journalism following the advent of the Internet depends on a series of differentiation variables, such as gender, age, country, professional profile (print or online), length of work experience, and intensity of Internet use.
Some caveats should be stressed at this point.
Respondents of the most-read, generalist, daily newspapers of 11 European countries voluntarily took part to our research. Thus, it is possible that our picture reflects the state of the main newsrooms, but we cannot exclude the fact that those who decided to participate also were those more motivated to express their positive or negative opinions on the Internet. Further research could expand our results by taking into account other European countries and other kinds of newspapers, and by collecting data with randomized samples. Moreover, the dimension of the sample should be enlarged: Although the convenience sample of the present study is quite large and some of its characteristics are similar to the overall population distribution, we can consider the results only as indicative of some trends. It is worth noting that, due to recruitment procedure and dimensions, our respondents do not constitute a representative sample and thus our results cannot be properly generalized to the European journalist population.
As already noted, some of the regression analyses explain only limited percentages of variance. We elected to present them equally in order to provide indicative results. Further research is required to assess empirically some of the questions that this investigation has raised. Third, as in other fields, the speed of advances in the digital domain requires further efforts to investigate how more recent technological innovations have been socially interpreted, reconstructed, and implemented in journalistic work.
The research, however, adds some new perspectives in the landscape of journalism studies. It differs from previous research in that the study raises the possibility of tracing a variegated map of differences inside the world of journalism. First of all, the resistance and ambivalence towards the Internet are expressed especially by print journalists and light Internet users. This tends to confirm again that those who express negative attitudes towards a technology are those who have less familiarity with it and who use it less (Fortunati & Manganelli, 1998). This means the journalists who work exclusively offline (or identify themselves as such) are less likely to respond positively to innovation. This defensive posture, however, carries a risk of being counterproductive, as it excludes the possibility of framing the Internet as a tool to promote a new role for journalists that could enhance their role in society. Second, journalism culture is very much influenced by the general background of the individual country. Even if some common trends emerge, North-South differences are strong. Southern journalists are affected by a social context which is less embracing of the Internet, while Northern journalists reflect an attitude of general appreciation of the net in their countries. Third, gender differences are shown emerging.
As already noted, some of the regression analyses explain only limited percentages of variance. We elected to present them equally in order to provide indicative results. Further research is required to assess empirically some of the questions that this investigation has raised. Third, as in other fields, the speed of advances in the digital domain requires further efforts to investigate how more recent technological innovations have been socially interpreted, reconstructed, and implemented in journalistic work.
The research, however, adds some new perspectives in the landscape of journalism studies. It differs from previous research in that the study raises the possibility of tracing a variegated map of differences inside the world of journalism. First of all, the resistance and ambivalence towards the Internet are expressed especially by print journalists and light Internet users. This tends to confirm again that those who express negative attitudes towards a technology are those who have less familiarity with it and who use it less (Fortunati & Manganelli, 1998). This means the journalists who work exclusively offline (or identify themselves as such) are less likely to respond positively to innovation. This defensive posture, however, carries a risk of being counterproductive, as it excludes the possibility of framing the Internet as a tool to promote a new role for journalists that could enhance their role in society. Second, journalism culture is very much influenced by the general background of the individual country. Even if some common trends emerge, North-South differences are strong. Southern journalists are affected by a social context which is less embracing of the Internet, while Northern journalists reflect an attitude of general appreciation of the net in their countries. Third, gender differences are shown emerging.
Despite the fact that a higher presence of women in newsrooms has up to now not changed the logic and the quality of the framing of news (probably due also to the weaker professional positions which they have occupied), women appear to emphasise more the importance of the Internet with respect to both politics and business. They are also more sensitive towards the opportunity to improve the relationship of journalists with their audience, and are more convinced that the audience needs to receive not only information but also to interact with journalists. Conversely, women are also less concerned that the Internet represents a menace to the quality of journalism, but at the same time they are more concerned with the superficiality of journalism in the Internet era.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου