Most research in journalism and communication studies that I have exposed to discuss the definition of newsworthiness and conceptualisation of news values. The theory believes news workers determine what will be investigated and reported based on some certain perceived qualities, thus possibly considering online and offline journalists to have a similar standard of producing news. In another perspective, Henkel et al. (2020) draw attention to the professional principles possessed by online and offline journalists, which is refreshing to explore a diversity of professional journalism practices through an empirical approach.
Journalist as a multi-roles player
The study analyses shared ideologies among online and offline journalists under four values (Deuze, 2019): Public service, Objectivity, Ethics, and Autonomy. The research questions and measurement of factors give me new insights into the roles of journalists within an interactive media environment including government, audience and media organisation. Under Public service, the element “Influencing politics” evaluates how journalists perceive their impacts on public opinions, social change, and advocacy of public participation in political topics. Since it is crucial for journalistic works to resonate with their readers, the research also reviews the relationship of journalists with the public as their audience and consumers. By assessing the business aspect, journalists are viewed as obliged to serve their readers and somewhat allow their readers to dictate the newsworthiness of their works. Autonomy is defined as the freedom of journalists in selecting and deciding news contents to be published. That being said, journalists are seen as not only the content creators but also subordinates of an organisation, under potential restrictions, censorship, political pressure, being bound to legislations and involved in the profit outlook of their news company.
Journalism practice in distinctive platforms
It is interesting that the research shows no significant differences between online and offline journalists in employing the four values of journalism ideology as in Deuze’s framework. As some previous studies, I once held the idea that traditional media are subject to vigilant editorial control and censorship, whereas digital outlets provide journalists with more freedom of expression and autonomy. Offline media are merely meant for reporting whilst online outlets are able to cover more opinions and personal profiles, thus adopt greater objectivity. However, this research has given me a fresh perspective of the convergence and divergence of off- and online platforms.
The research distinguishes between “offline”, “mixed”, “moderated online” and “unmoderated online” group of journalists. Compared to other online news workers, the moderated online group, those who work for an online outlet with offline parentage, reveals the most prominent difference from their counterparts of offline platforms. According to the findings, the moderated online group believes catering to the audience is more important than serving political purposes. This seems reasonable as traditional media have transformed dramatically with online extensions to propel revenues in the digital era. Thereby, the focus of journalistic works, influenced by the online environment, is shifted to increase readership.
Journalist and politics
The most noteworthy difference in this off- and online comparison as discussed by the research is about the element of watchdog journalism, under Public service. The finding indicates that online journalists are somewhat less keen on investigating and gathering information about wrongdoings of powerful people in politics. This delivers a new view as I thought the Internet-based environment would offer more opportunities for online journalists to conduct their investigation quickly and publish their stories with fewer restrictions.
A presence of the geographical attribute when the study compares between off- and online journalists in Eastern and Western European regions is intriguing. Compared to Eastern European offline journalists, the research shows that their online counterparts consider influencing politics and public more important and they are less interested in serving their audience as consumers. This is explained by the idea that some Eastern European media organisations have moved to digital to mitigate political pressures. As such, it confirms my understanding that the professional practice of journalists is undoubtedly impacted by their socio-political circumstance.
Conclusion
The study of Henkel et al. (2020) captures a comprehensive dimension of off- and online journalists, within the context of Central Eastern and Western Europe. As the borderline between these two outlets is becoming blurry in the digital age, extending the knowledge regarding their principles and professional practices has offered me a new perspective of a career in journalism. I understand the importance of practising these values as well as the evolving roles and influence of the Internet in journalism. This significantly enables me to make a better decision on the types of platform, media organisation, content and political context that I would like to work in the future.
Comments