of 31
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
1/31
$o&paring -ournalis& $ross$ulturally
4e6ining t7e core concepts 6or e&pirical in9uiry
Comparative journalism research: Welcome to Babylon!
T7e current state o6 t7e co¶tive study o6 =ournalis& could >e su&&ari?ed >est
>y a sentence, Aritten so&e years ago >y Benry Teune C1E: G1H: IJn t7e 6orty or so years o6
co&paring countries on a AorldAide >asis, &uc7 7ad to >e done Ait7 little KnoAledge to
>uild onLM Teune did not address 7is criticis& speci6ically to =ournalis& or &ass co&&unica
tion researc7, >ut to t7e social sciences in generalL N6ter anot7er 15 years o6 researc7, t7is
o>servation still re&ains valid at least 6or our 6ield o6 in9uiryL Pour decades a6ter t7e pioneer
study o6 cReod and BaAley C1GH crosscultural =ournalis& researc7 is &ostly li&ited to a
patc7AorK o6 studies, eac7 o6 A7ic7 eploring only a s&all part o6 t7e >ig pu??le t7at =our
nalis& see&s to >e to usL T7ere are plenty o6 studies eploring t7e interplay >etAeen =ournal
is& and politics, =ournalis& and t7e &arKet econo&y or =ournalis& and cultureL Ut7ers 6ocuson t7e i&pact o6 tec7nology, organi?ation and gender on neAs &aKing, leaving principal
9uestions unansAeredL
Vtill, Ae 7ave only li&ited KnoAledge a>out t7e 6actors A7ic7 &ost s7ape t7e neAs
and t7e structures o6 =ournalis&L Js it politics, econo&y or cultureW Un t7e one 7and, t7ere is
so&e evidence t7at, in ter&s o6 pro6essional vieAs, political in6luences see& to >e &ore i&
portant t7an cultural 6actors CX7u et alL 1H, ot7er studies suggest t7at culture 7as a larger
in6luence on sourcereporter relations7ips t7an pro6essional values CV7in Z $a&eron 2EE\HL
Uverall, t7e vast >ody o6 literature, A7ile representing an increasing interest in crosscultural
researc7, is do&inated >y descriptive co&parisons o6 national =ournalis& syste&s and t7e
people involvedL Nnd &ost un6ortunately, t7ere is virtually no signi6icant t7eoretical
groundAorK ecept t7e study o6 V7oe&aKer and eese C1H or Ballin and ancini C2EEGHL
Jn t7is paper J draA 6ro& t7ree convictions: Pirst, co¶tive researc7 is t7e essen
tial i6 not &ost i&portant strategy to understand t7e nature o6 =ournalis& and 7oA it AorKs
across cultural >oundariesL T7e study o6 =ournalis& certainly needs &ore crosscultural re
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
2/31
searc7, and t7e Isetting is ripe 6or studies t7at incorporate &ore t7an one country in a single
analysisM C^erKoAit?, Ri&or Z Vinger 2EEG: 11HL Vecond, t7e crosscultural study o6 =ournal
is& is poorly conceptuali?edL Jn 6act, large parts o6 e&pirical =ournalis& researc7 are not
penetrated >y t7eory, leaving unclear A7at constitutes t7e co&&on re6erence t7at alloAs 6orco&parisonL T7ird, core concepts in =ournalis& studies are o6ten con6ounded Ait7 one an
ot7erL Ter&s liKe I=ournalis&M, IneAsM, I&ediaM and Ipu>lic co&&unicationM are used as i6
t7ey Aere sel6eplanatory and did not deserve conceptual deli>erationL
C1H _7y is co¶tive researc7 essentialW Ns `o7n C18: H argued, crossnational
researc7 is indispensa>le 6or esta>lis7ing t7e generality o6 6indings and t7e validity o6 inter
pretations derived 6ro& singlenation studiesL Nnot7er i&portant value o6 crossnational
researc7 is t7at it 6orces us to test our interpretations against crossnational di66erences and
inconsistenciesL Ni&s o6 co¶tive researc7 include, according to Rivingstone C2EE\: GH,
i&proving understanding o6 our oAn and ot7er countriesb testing a t7eory across diverse
settingsb ea&ining transnational processes across di66erent contetsb ea&ining t7e local
reception o6 i&ported cultural 6or&sb >uilding a>stract universally applica>le t7eoryb c7al
lenging clai&s to universalityb evaluating scope and value o6 certain p7eno&enab identi6ying
&arginali?ed cultural 6or&sb i&proving international understandingb and learning 6ro& t7e
policy o6 ot7ersL
U6 course, one could argue t7at all social researc7 is co¶tive, as did ^eniger
C12: \5HL ^ut crosscultural studies pose speci6ic conceptual and &et7odological c7allenges
to t7e researc7er C^lu&ler, cReod Z osengren 12b $7ang et alL 2EE1b -o7nson Z Tuttle
2EEEb `o7n 18b Rivingstone 2EE\b oAaK 18HL T7is &ay >e t7e reason A7y &ost co&
parative AorK is not >ased on tailor&ade crosscultural studies >ut on parallel data t7at
7ave >een originally o>tained 6or national purposes C-oAell 18: 1Eb `leinsteu>er 2EEG: 8HLarying conceptuali?ations and de6initions &aKe suc7 co¶tive researc7 di66icult, i6 not
i&possi>le, let alone t7e &et7odologically pro>le&atic nature o6 t7is Kind o6 second7and
co&parisonL enuine co¶tive researc7 on =ournalis& is rare, in particular i6 it involves
&ore t7an tAo countriesL Nn ecellent ea&ple o6 conceptually deli>erate crossnational re
searc7 is, despite t7e sa&ple is li&ited to daily neAs =ournalis& and t7e interpretations are
de>ata>le, t7e Iedia and 4e&ocracyM study C4ons>ac7 Z fatterson 2EEGb fatterson Z
4ons>ac7 1HL
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
3/31
Nlt7oug7 it is increasingly argued t7at t7e nation is itsel6 not a proper unit o6 co&
parison CRivingstone 2EE\: GH, e&pirical crosscultural =ournalis& researc7 is &ostly cross
national Ceese 2EE1: 1HL T7is is still t7e case 6or &ost part o6 co&&unication and &edia
studiesL N long tradition o6 international co&&unication researc7 7as de6ined co¶tiveresearc7 as Ia study t7at co&pares tAo or &ore nations Ait7 respect to so&e co&&on activ
ityM Cdelstein 182: 1GHL ^ut nations are not t7at culturally sel6contained and 7o&ogeneous
as t7e very in6luential AorK o6 Bo6stede C18EH and 7is 6elloAs suggestsL Ns &odern nation
states increasingly consist o6 &ultiple cultures ! suc7 as et7nic and religious groups, dias
poric co&&unities, class cultures or consu&er cultures ! t7e reliance on nations as &ain unit
o6 analysis see&s to >e anac7ronistic and even contrary to everyday li6e eperienceL _e need
to taKe notice o6 t7e 6act t7at t7e nation is only one, and per7aps not even t7e &ost i&por
tant, varia>le out o6 a set o6 organi?ing principles in =ournalis&
C2H Nlt7oug7 co¶tive researc7 7as >een called t7e co&&unication 6ieldhs Ie
tended and etenda>le 6rontierM C^lu&ler, cReod Z osengren 12: \H, co¶tive &et7
odology is rat7er little discussed CRivingstone 2EE\: G8H, and researc7 reports o6ten lacK in
t7eory and conceptuali?ation C$7ang et alL 2EE1HL T7is 7ad &a=or conse9uences 6or t7e co&
parative study o6 =ournalis&, in particular 6or t7e de6inition o6 one o6 t7e principal o>=ects o6
researc7: t7e =ournalistL N looK at _eavers C18aH Ilo>al -ournalistM is revealing: Une
could identi6y virtually as &any de6initions o6 A7o is a =ournalist as t7e nu&>er o6 studies
t7e >ooK coversL Vo&e researc7ers li&ited t7eir survey to neAs people, ot7ers ecluded =our
nalists AorKing 6or popular or specialinterest pu>lications or even &aga?ines in generalL
ost studies included only 6ullti&e editors >ut ecluded 6reelancersL ven &ore strangely,
A7ile t7e &a=ority o6 studies ecluded p7otograp7ers andor ca&era operators 6ro& t7eir
sa&ples, ot7ers did include p7otograp7ersL iven t7is conceptual &ess, any atte&pt to etract &eaning6ul in6or&ation 6ro& t7ese data Aould >e a 7a?ardous ga&eL To &aKe t7is all
Aorse, t7ere is even a signi6icant nu&>er o6 surveys o6 =ournalists t7at did not even atte&pt
to de6ine t7eir o>=ect o6 researc7L Ns Vc7oll C1: \\\H concluded,
t7ese recent studies used eit7er de6initions o6 =ournalis& A7ic7 Aere too narroA or A7ic7 Aere t7eoretically not Aell6ounded and actually &ore i&plicit t7an eplicitL enerally, researc7 A7ic7 a>andonst7eoretical consideration does not &aKe clear A7ic7 area o6 =ournalis& is >eing covered and does not&aKe evident t7e etent o6 its eternal validityL
ranted, to de6ine A7at is =ournalis& and A7o is a =ournalist see&s to >e c7allengingand leads into so&e o6 t7e &ost 7ard6oug7t >attles at t7e 7eart o6 =ournalis& studiesL Jn t7e
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
4/31
jnited Vtates, introductory tet>ooKs typically de6ine a =ournalist as a Iperson A7o gat7ers
CreportsH and processes CAritesH accurate and i&portant in6or&ation so it can >e disse&i
nated to a Aider audienceM CVinger 2EE\: 1GGHL T7is traditional de6inition 7as >een adopted
>y &ost =ournalis& researc7ers around t7e glo>eL _7en particular roles did not 6it t7is de6inition, =ournalists A7o su>scri>ed to t7ese roles Aere si&ply ecluded 6ro& t7e surveyL ^ut
A7y did t7ese researc7ers, t7en, not include f practitioners in t7eir surveys as &any o6
t7e& do also gat7er and process in6or&ationW Nnd A7at a>out t7e correspondents AorKing
6or -ay Renohs ITonig7t V7oAMW Nre t7ey not doing a =ournalisths =o>W
T7is is t7e pro>le& Ait7 de6ining =ournalis& 6ro& t7e perspective o6 =ournalistic prac
tices and routinesL T7e result is a vicious circle su&&ari?ed >y t7e 6or&ula: I-ournalist is
A7o AorKs in =ournalis&, and =ournalis& is A7at =ournalists doLM T7e AorK o6 =ournalists,
entertainers as Aell as f and advertising practitioners 7as converged as all t7ese people are
struggling 6or pu>lic attention, A7ic7 is a li&ited good in pu>lic co&&unicationL Nlso, f
practitioners, 6or instance, si&ulate selective and tetual structures o6 neAs &aKing to get
t7eir &essages t7roug7 t7e neAs &ediaL Uverall, A7en it co&es to de6ine t7e core concepts
o6 t7e 6ield, =ournalis& studies Keeps spinning roundL T7e de>ate still re&ains unresolved
CVinger 2EE\: 15\H, A7ic7 is also a 7eritage o6 7aving >uilt t7ose de6initions around t7e neAs
roo& conceptL
jn6ortunately, t7e cultural analysis o6 =ournalis&, t7oug7 7aving produced an ecit
ing >ody o6 literature, does not provide &uc7 enlig7ten&ent 7ereL Vtill, cultural studies o66er
an poor conceptuali?ation o6 =ournalis&, let alone t7e &ani6old notions o6 culture t7ey su>
scri>e toL Ns pointed out recently >y Xeli?er C2EEG: 18H, cultural studies le6t t7e nuances o6
=ournalis&hs AorKings out o6 its analysisL ^y and large, J sense a tendency in cultural studies
to overstretc7 de6initions, as indicated >y -o7n Bartleyhs C2EEE: G5H Iveryone is a =ournalist,and =ournalis& is everyA7ereML Vuc7 de6initions >eco&e a poor second 6or t7e e&pirical in
9uiry into =ournalis& as t7ey relin9uis7 t7e 7euristic value o6 conceptuali?ationL To put it
>luntly: 4e6initions liKe Ieveryone is a =ournalistM descri>e everyt7ing ! and conse9uently
not7ingL
C\H N great deal o6 Aritings in t7e 6ield continues to con6ound =ournalis& Ait7 ot7er
pro&inent concepts suc7 as, >ut not li&ited to, pu>lic co&&unication, t7e &edia and t7e
neAsL Nlt7oug7 t7e distinction >etAeen t7ese ter&s deserves care6ul deli>eration, &any re
searc7ers speaK o6 It7e &ediaM as i6 t7is Aould sel6evidently re6er to =ournalis& or t7e neAs
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
5/31
_7ile t7e relation >etAeen =ournalis& and pu>lic co&&unication Aill >e discussed in an
ot7er section o6 t7is paper, J Aill >rie6ly outline 7oA J use t7e notions o6 t7e &edia and t7e
neAsL J understand t7e &edia as t7e carriers o6 pu>lic co&&unication>ecause t7ey transport
&ani6old contents generated >y =ournalis&, f, advertising and entertain&entL ^ecause t7e&edia carry 9uite di66erent Kinds o6 content, =ournalis& cannot >e identi6ied >y t7e &ediu&L
Nlso, t7e &edia are distinct 6ro& &edia organi?ations, A7ic7 7ost t7e &edia and use t7e&, i6
t7ey are organi?ed around co&&ercial principles, to &aKe pro6itL
eAs, on t7e ot7er 7and, Iis t7e product o6 t7e =ournalistic activity o6 pu>lici?ingM
CVc7udson 2EE\: 12HL T7e circulation o6 neAs as output o6 =ournalis& is not li&ited to tradi
tional &ass co&&unicationb t7ere are &any Aays o6 alternative =ournalis&, not to &ention
t7e Ionline c7allengeM to =ournalis& suc7 as personally tailored neAs outlets C4aily MeH or
Ae> logs CVinger 2EE\: 1\HL BoAever, not every neAs produced as suc7 is necessarily con
su&ed as neAsL T7ere is neAs consu&ed as entertain&ent CVtep7enson 1GH ! and enter
tain&ent consu&ed as neAs C4elli $arpini Z _illia&s 2EE1HL T7us, A7at is neAs is not e
clusively decided >y neAs people, >ut is identi6ied and negotiated t7roug7 t7e processes o6
pu>lic co&&unication, involving producers andconsu&ersL evert7eless, 6or t7e analysis o6
t7e production side, t7e neAs ! including 7ard neAs, so6t neAs, cele>rity neAs and ot7er
6or&s ! is, >y de6inition, t7e genuine and eclusive product o6 =ournalis&L Por t7e study o6
=ournalis&, t7e neAs is relevant as point o6 re6erence as to A7at etent t7e structures o6 neAs
production, t7e individuals involved and t7e constraints under A7ic7 t7ey operate do actu
ally s7ape t7e output o6 t7eir pro6essional AorKL
T7is Aay o6 conceptuali?ation &eans t7at Ae 7ave to de6ine =ournalis& 6irst, and t7en
de6ine its structures Corgani?ations, progra&s and routines, rolesH, pro6essionals and cul
turesL T7is is t7e &ain o>=ective o6 t7is essay: Jt intends to provide a conceptual 6ra&eAorK6or crosscultural co&parisons o6 =ournalis& syste&sL ^y clari6ying and de6ining core con
cepts 6or e&pirical researc7, t7is paper seeKs to o66er a central point o6 re6erence necessary
6or t7e co¶tive study o6 =ournalis&L T7e essential advantage o6 suc7 a central re6erence
lies in its potential to ensure 6unctional e9uivalence o6 concepts, A7ic7 is a &et7odological
cornerstone in co¶tive researc7 C-oAell 18b van de i=ver Z Reung 1b _irt7 Z `ol>
2EE\HL
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
6/31
Levels of analysis
^e6ore Ae turn our attention to t7e de6inition o6 =ournalis&, Ae need to organi?e our
conceptual AorK >y identi6ying t7e levels o6 analysisL V7oe&aKer and eese C1b also:eese 2EE1H 7ave &ade an ecellent contri>ution 7ere Ait7 t7eir 7ierarc7yo6in6luences
&odelL T7ey de6ined 6ive levels o6 analysis, ranging 6ro& t7e &ost &icro to t7e &ost &acro:
t7e individual, &edia routines, organi?ation, etra&edia and ideological levels CV7oe&aKer
Z eese 1: GHL T7ere are ot7er atte&pts A7ic7 7ave t7eir origin in t7e er&an discourseL
_eisc7en>erg C15: H, 6or instance, developed an Ionion &odelM 7aving 6our IsKinsM, eac7
o6 A7ic7 s7aping t7e neAs: t7e &edia syste&s Ccontet o6 nor&sH, &edia institutions Ccontet
o6 structuresH, &edia content Ccontet o6 6unctionsH and t7e =ournalists Ccontet o6 rolesHL
4ons>ac7 C2EEE: 8EH, on t7e ot7er 7and, distinguis7ed t7e sp7eres o6 t7e individual, pro6es
sional, institutional and societal in6luencesL
Por reasons o6 clear syste&atics, J 7ave 6ound it &ore e66icient to AorK Ait7 a socio
logical &acro&eso&icro distinctionL Vuc7 an approac7 Aas originally proposed >y sser
C2EEEH and 4eu?e C2EE2aH, >ut J &ade so&e signi6icant &odi6ications to it Csee Ta>le 1HL T7e
societal level, A7ic7 is t7e &ost &acro, consists o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere as t7e i&&ediate envi
ron&ent o6 =ournalis& and t7e etrapu>lic sp7ere, A7ic7 is t7e environ&ent o6 t7e pu>lic
sp7ere itsel6L J Aill conceptuali?e t7e pu>lic sp7ere, A7ic7 is only an unsatis6actory transla
tion o6 t7e er&an concept Ik66entlic7KeitM, in t7e 6olloAing sectionL T7e structural level
C&esoH co&prises t7e internal structures o6 =ournalis& consisting o6 editorial organi?ations as
Aell as =ournalistic progra&s, routines and rolesL T7ese structures are usually insensitive to
t7e peculiarities o6 events or individuals, and t7ey 7ave proved to e66ectively reduce t7e
co&pleity o6 daytoday neAs &aKingL T7e individual level C&icroH, on t7e ot7er 7and, isstrongly sensitive to t7e =ournalistsh >acKgrounds in s7aping t7e contents and 6or& o6 t7e
neAsL
Ta>le 1: Revels o6 analysis
Level Scope Dimensions
societal &acro pu>lic sp7ere, etrapu>lic sp7ere
structural &eso organi?ations, progra&s and routines, roles
individual &icro =ournalistsh >acKgrounds
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
7/31
The macro level: defining journalism
Nccording to t7e Aell KnoAn AorK o6 eorge Vpencer ^roAn C1: 1H, o>servers de
6ine o>=ects t7roug7 &aKing distinctionsL Jn order to de6ine =ournalis&, Ae t7us 7ave to draA
a line >etAeen =ournalis& and non=ournalis&L J argue t7at t7e >est Aay to identi6y =ournal
is& is t7roug7 adopting postfarsonian syste&s t7eory as developed >y t7e er&an soci
ologist iKlas Ru7&ann C15, 1, 2EEEa, 2EEE>HL Ru7&annhs syste&s t7eory is a >ranc7 o6
general di66erentiation t7eory A7ic7 is rooted in t7e AorK o6 &ile 4urK7ei& C18\H and
Talcott farsons C151HL 4i66erentiation t7eory 7olds t7at increased co&pleity o6 society re
9uires 6unctional di66erentiation o6 social roles and institutions CBallin Z ancini 2EEG: HL
Vtill, t7e AorK o6 Ru7&ann does not receive t7e attention it deserves 6ro& t7e international acade&yL evert7eless, in er&any, Nustria and VAit?erland, Ru7&annhs AorK 7as
>een 9uite in6luential on t7e t7eori?ing o6 =ournalis&L T7e 6olloAing tAo sections Aill, t7ere
6ore, 7eavily draA on t7e literature 6ro& t7e er&anspeaKing countriesL ^ut >e6ore J co&e
to t7is, J Aill >rie6ly outline t7e &ain ideas o6 Ru7&annhs ground>reaKing t7eoretical 6ra&e
AorK, alt7oug7 t7e vast nu&>er o6 7is pu>lications as Aell as t7e co&pleity o6 t7e t7eory
&aKe t7is virtually i&possi>leL
Nccording to Ru7&annhs Isecond order syste&s t7eoryM CReydesdor66 1: 28GH,
&odern society copes Ait7 increasing social co&pleity, selectivity and contingency t7roug7
di66erentiation into social syste&s Cpolitics, laA, econo&y, education, etcLH, eac7 o6 A7ic7
6ul6illing a speci6ic 6unction t7at is essential to &aintain order Ait7in societyL T7ese 6unc
tional syste&s are not constituted t7roug7 a particular group o6 individuals, >ut t7ey solely
consist o6 co&&unication and its attri>ution to actionL Vocial syste&s process &eaning, oper
ate sel6re6erentially and are sel6organi?ingL T7ey are sel6organi?ing inso6ar as t7ey create
t7eir oAn >oundaries and internal structures, and t7ey are sel6re6erential >ecause t7eir ele
&ents re6er to t7e syste& itsel6L Punctional syste&s can >e identi6ied t7roug7 t7eir pri&ary
6unction and &aintain t7eir >oundaries >y operating >inary codes 7aving a positive value
A7ic7 re6ers to t7e syste& itsel6 and a negative value A7ic7 re6ers to t7e syste&hs environ
&entL Jn t7e syste&hs operations, t7e code is &ediated t7roug7 progra&s A7ic7 assign posi
tive and negative code values to occurrencesL N special type o6 social syste&s, >eside interac
tion syste&s, are organi?ationsL Urgani?ations are >uilt around t7e co&&unication o6 deci
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
8/31
sions, t7ey are t7e predo&inant and &ost e66ective structures t7at 7elp 6unctional syste&s to
&aintain t7eir operations CRu7&ann 2EEEaHL
-ournalis& in t7e pu>lic sp7ere
J 7ave argued elseA7ere t7at =ournalis& 7as evolved as one o6 t7e pro6essional areas
o6 pu>lic co&&unication A7ic7 constitute t7e pu>lic sp7ere Cmmmmmmm1 2EEG: \5HL T7e
pu>lic sp7ere as a 6unctional syste& operates according to a distinct logic o6 its oAnL Jt >e
ca&e necessary due to t7e trans6or&ation o6 society 6ro& seg&entary to 6unctional di66eren
tiation as t7is process caused at tAo t7ree serious t7reats to t7e 6a>ric o6 society: sel6reliance,
&ultiperspectivity and social eclusionL
C1H iven t7eir autono&ous and sel6re6erential nature, social syste&s increasinglyoperate sel6centered and inconsiderate toAard t7e etent to A7ic7 t7eir operations pollute
t7e environ&ent CVc7i&anK 2EEE: 18HL Por instance, t7e pri&ary goal o6 politicians is to >e in
poAerL folitical decisions t7us 7ave so&eti&es negative conse9uences in t7e econo&ic sys
te&, alt7oug7 t7ey are e66ective in t7e political syste&L
C2H N 6unctionally di66erentiated society alloAs a &ultiplicity o6 potential and e9uiva
lent perspectives >ecause no syste& can legiti&i?e its particular perspective as >eing supe
rior to ot7ers Csposito 2EE2: 2EEb `o7ring Z Bug 1: 1HL 4i66erent perspectives &ost
liKely result in di66erent representations o6 reality: _7ile t7e political syste& &ay vieA e6
6orts to sta>ili?e a dictatorial regi&e as legiti&ate 6or political reasons, t7e laA syste& &ig7t
consider suc7 assistance inappropriate as it i&plicitly >acKs violations o6 7u&an rig7tsL
Ns a conse9uence, society 7ad to institutionali?e t7e pro>le& o6 ena>ling social co
orientationL T7ere6ore, a social syste& pu>lic sp7ere 7as evolved A7ose 6unction is to 6acili
tate a co&&on, socially >inding re6erence necessary 6or t7e coorientation o6 t7e social uni
verse t7roug7 providing in6or&ation o6 i&&ediate topicalityL _7ile less co&ple societies
&aintained social coorientation pri&arily t7roug7 interpersonal co&&unication, &odern
society needs to distinguis7 >etAeen interpersonal co&&unication and pu>lic co&&unica
tionL Ns social co&pleity groAs, pu>lic co&&unication ! and =ournalis& as part o6 it ! 7as
co&e to rival interpersonal co&&unication as pri&ary source o6 social coorientationL
Jn ot7er Aords: T7e e&ergence and evolution o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere is a reaction o6 t7e
&odern society to co&pensate 6or t7e pro>le&s caused >y 6unctional di66erentiationL N si&i
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
9/31
lar conceptuali?ation 7as >een suggested >y er7ards C1GH, `o7ring C1H, rKe C2EEEH
and ot7ersL T7e pu>lic sp7ere, A7ic7 itsel6 is constituted t7roug7 pu>lic co&&unication,
&aintains its >oundaries >y t7e code pu>lic attentionpu>lic attentionCer7ards 1G: 8b
_ester>arKey 1: 151HL T7e operations o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere as social syste& are t7us >uiltaround raising and processing pu>lic attentionL T7is vieA alloAs to integrate t7e &ani6old
areas o6 pu>lic co&&unication suc7 as =ournalis&, pu>lic relations Cincluding propagandaH,
advertising and entertain&ent into t7e pu>lic sp7ereL Jt 7as >eco&e increasingly o>vious
t7at even t7e neAs 7ave to grip t7e attention o6 t7e audiences in order to get t7eir &essages
t7roug7 C^ird 2EEE: \1HL
Jn &y vieA, =ournalis& is li&ited to pro6essionaloperations ! and t7us li&ited to t7e
AorK o6 pro6essional individualsL _7ile t7e rise o6 convergence and &ulti&edia, >oosted >y
t7e rapid develop&ent o6 t7e internet, indeed poses a c7allenge to t7e traditional notion o6
&ass co&&unication, t7e eistence and legiti&ation o6 =ournalis& is not endangered >y t7e
e&ergence o6 Ae> logs or a&ateur online &ediaL Nlt7oug7 &any >loggers do per6or& a
=ournalistic role and apply tec7ni9ues o6 pro6essional =ournalis&, Ae> logging itsel6 is not
necessarily a pro6essional enterpriseL Vinger C2EE\: 1GH 7as pointed out t7at, 6ro& a socio
logical perspective, a Key aspect in de6ining an occupation as a pro6ession is A7et7er society
regards it as suc7L ^ut t7e &ost i&portant t7ing a>out pro6essions is t7at t7ey 7ave devel
oped speci6ic pro6essional nor&s and ideologies CBallin Z ancini 2EEG: \5H as Aell as
&ec7anis&s o6 sel6control and 9uality &anage&entL -ournalis& gains its credi>ility 6ro&
7aving its pro6essionals su>scri>ing to t7ese sel6i&posed structuresL BoAever, it 7as to >e
noted t7at recent pro6essional =ournalis& also 7as a lot o6 in7erent 6laAs as 6orce6ully argued
>y c$7esney C2EE\: \E5H A7o even suggests t7at Ito re&ain de&ocratic, to continue to e
ist, =ournalis& &ust >eco&e LLL unpro6essionalML-ournalis& is one i6 not t7e &ost i&portant pro6essional area o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere as
its contri>ution to &odern society is essentialL Pirst, =ournalis& counteracts t7e ecessive in
crease o6 syste&ic sel6reliance t7roug7 covering t7e negative conse9uences o6 t7e sel6
re6erential operations o6 social syste&sL Vecond, =ournalis& generates points o6 re6erence
needed 6or social coorientation in a &ultiperspective societyL T7ese t7eoretical considera
tions &ust lead to t7e conclusion t7at t7e pri&ary 6unction o6 =ournalis&, as >eing part o6 t7e
pu>lic sp7ere, is not to si&ply provide in6or&ation, >ut to alloA t7e cooriention o6 social
syste&s and t7e individuals A7o live Ait7in t7eir scope Jn a Aorld A7ere essentially all
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
10/31
Kind o6 in6or&ation is accessi>le via internet, =ournalis& &oves aAay 6ro& &erely disse&i
nating in6or&ation to selecting A7at is relevantL eAs people t7us >eco&e Isearc7 enginesM
CBartley 2EEE: G\H t7at 7elp t7eir audiences to navigate t7roug7 t7e pro>le&s o6 everyday
li6eL -ournalis& increasingly >uilds its t7e&atic coverage around everyday li6e issues andprovides sel67elp, advice, guidance and IneAsyoucanuse ite&sM Cide and `nig7t 1:
52b jnderAood 2EE1: 1E12HL
-ournalis&, entertain&ent, f and advertising
N6ter 7aving de6ined t7e pu>lic sp7ere, Ae need to discri&inate =ournalis& 6ro&
ot7er pro6essional areas o6 pu>lic co&&unication, t7ree o6 A7ic7 are pu>lic relations, adver
tising and entertain&entL Nlt7oug7 t7ere are no 6unctional di66erences >etAeen =ournalis&and non=ournalistic pu>lic co&&unication as t7ey su>=ect t7eir operations to t7e sa&e sys
te& code, J 7ave identi6ied at least t7ree di&ensions to distinguis7 =ournalis&, f, advertis
ing and entertain&ent at t7e operational level Csee Pigure 1HL T7e 6irst di&ension, t7e pri
&ary in6or&ation value, re6ers to t7e traditional distinction >etAeen 6act and 6iction as sug
gested, 6or instance, >y Vc7oll C1: \\GHL ^ecause co&&unication &essages usually contain
co&ple in6or&ation, t7e individual scores on t7is ais 7ave to >e seen as rat7er relative to
one anot7er: &ostly 6actual C6actual6ictionalH and &ostly 6ictional C6actual6ictionalHL T7e
second di&ension, A7ic7 J call t7e intended e66ects, deals Ait7 A7et7er a co&&unicated
&essage is intended to 7ave a particular e66ect on attitudes andor >e7aviors CeLgL positive
perception o6 a co&pany, purc7ase decisionsH as proposed >y _ilco, Nult and Ngee C1:
1\HL farallel to t7is ais, t7ere is a t7ird di&ension A7ic7 is indicative o6 A7et7er t7e co&
&unication goalso6 a particular &essage co&e 6ro& t7e inside CIinternally de6inedMH, or t7e
co&&unication goals are eternally de6ined >y a client or 7ost organi?ationL
Nccording to t7is 6ra&eAorK, =ournalis& s7apes its &essages in a Aay t7at is &ostly
6actual, A7ile co&&unication goalsare internally de6inedand 7ave no intention to result in
c7anges o6 attitudes and >e7aviorso6 t7ose A7o consu&e t7e &essagesL fu>lic relations, on
t7e ot7er 7and, does &ostly rely on 6acts, >ut its co&&unication goals are eternally de6ined
CeLgL political parties, co&paniesH and 7ave t7e intention to alter attitudes and >e7aviors o6
t7eir audiencesL Unce pu>lic relations a>andons t7e value o6 6actual co&&unication, it Aill
loose its pu>lic credi>ility and, t7us, t7e a>ility to get its &essages unadulteratedly accepted>y =ournalis&L Vuc7 conse9uences 7ave >een eperienced >y propaganda, a 6or& o6 political
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
11/31
f A7ic7 overly adopts 6ictional co&&unicationL Ndvertising 7as very &uc7 in co&&on
Ait7 pu>lic relationsL Jt relies &ainly on 6ictional in6or&ation as it does not depict t7e genu
ine reality, >ut it tells us A7at s7ould >e t7e desira>leCVc7&idt 2EE2: 1E2HL
Pigure 1: 4istinction o6 =ournalis&, f, advertising and entertain&ent
Vource: adapted 6ro& mmmmmmmmm C2EEG: 52H
T7e Ientertaini?ationM o6 t7e neAs 7as provoKed &uc7 criticis&, suc7 as t7e one ar
ticulated >y $7ala>y C2EEE: \5H A7o sees entertain&ent ItaKing overM =ournalis&: I_e are
Aitnessing t7e transition 6ro& entertaining neAs produced as neAs to neAs produced as
entertain&entLM sser C1a: 212H re&inded us, 7oAever, t7at t7e ta>loidi?ation o6 neAs
papers >egan to appear a>out one century agoL Jn 6act, t7e distinction >etAeen neAs and
entertain&ent is Iin7erently ar>itraryM C4elli $arpini Z _illia&s 2EE1: 12H as >ot7 in6or&a
tion and entertain&ent are independent 9ualities o6 production, contents and consu&ptionL
Jn &y vieA, entertain&ent is di66erent 6ro& pu>lic relations and advertising >ecause co&
&unication goals are internally de6ined and t7ere is no pri&ary intention to alter attitudes
and >e7aviors o6 t7e audiencesL ntertain&ent is also di66erent 6ro& =ournalis& and pu>lic
relations as it &ainly re6ers to 6ictional in6or&ationL Ns part o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere, entertain
&ent is co&ple&entary to =ournalis& >ecause it provides a stage to re7earse alternative deci
sions in a virtual Aorld Ait7out 6acing t7e conse9uences decisions 7ave in t7e real Aorld
CrKe 2EE2: 85HL
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
12/31
The meso level: defining the structures of journalism
Urgani?ations
eAs is produced &ainly in organi?ational settingsL T7e organi?ation is, as Ae KnoA
6ro& t7e early studies o6 ^reed C155H, ie>er C1GH and 7l C1H, one o6 t7e &ost i&por
tant 6actors A7ic7 s7ape t7e pro6essional vieAs and t7e AorK o6 =ournalistsL J argue t7at, con
trary to &any co&&onplace assu&ptions, =ournalistic content is produced neit7er >y pro6es
sional organi?ations nor >y &edia organi?ationsL Ns a &atter o6 6act, t7e neAs is produced
>y editorial organi?ations, and all organi?ations t7at produce neAs are relevant to t7e study
o6 =ournalis&, regardless o6 t7e c7annel used 6or &essage distri>utionL
T7at said, t7e study o6 =ournalis& indeed deals Ait7 t7ree >asic types o6 organi?ations A7ic7 need to >e discri&inated 6or reasons o6 clear conceptuali?ation: T7e editorial
organi?ation is &ostly represented >y t7e concept o6 t7e neAsroo&, A7ile t7e ter& &edia
organi?ationCI>oardroo&MH re6ers to corporate structures A7ic7 are >ound to t7e rationali
ties o6 t7e econo&ic syste& Cco&&ercial &ediaH or t7e political syste& Cpu>lic service &e
diaHL fro6essional organi?ations, on t7e ot7er 7and, are organi?ed groups o6 pro6essionals
A7ere =ournalists are &e&>ers o6 CeLgL =ournalistsh associationsHL Nlt7oug7 editorial organi?a
tions are usually integrated in t7e corporate structures o6 larger &edia organi?ations, >ot7
types o6 organi?ations pursue di66erent goals: ditorial organi?ations ai& to generate pu>lic
attention, A7ereas co&&ercial &edia organi?ations seeK to convert t7is pu>lic attention into
pro6itL T7us, editorial organi?ations &ust >e conceptuali?ed as structures t7at >elong to t7e
pu>lic sp7ere, A7ile &edia organi?ations are part o6 t7e econo&ic syste& ! or, in t7e case o6
pu>lic service &edia, part o6 t7e political syste&L ditorial organi?ations, to >orroA a ter&
6ro& Nlt&eppen C2EE5: 11EH, IdeliverM contents to &edia organi?ations A7ic7 provide t7e&
Ait7 operational resourcesL T7e relations7ip >etAeen t7e neAsroo& and t7e >oardroo& t7us
7ave to >e understood in ter&s o6 relations >etAeen organi?ations o6 di66erent typeL
ditorial organi?ations 7ave developed tAo >asic types o6 structures 6or t7e e66ective
&anage&ent o6 decisions: ertical structuresco&&and and control t7e organi?ationsh opera
tions t7roug7 t7ree >asic levels o6 7ierarc7yL T7ese levels can >e de6ined >y t7e etent o6 edi
torial responsi>ility: Un t7e 7ig7est level are =ournalists A7o 7ave pri&arily strategic respon
si>ility 6or t7e organi?ationhs positioning, ground rules and >asic principles CeLgL editors inc7ie6, progra&&ing directors, eecutive producers and t7eir deputiesHL T7e second level in
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
13/31
editorial 7ierarc7y is co&posed o6 =ournalists A7o assu&e tactical responsi>ility in dayto
day operations CeLgL desK 7eads, >eat and &anaging editors, producersHL T7e loAest level is
de6ined t7roug7 =ournalists A7o 7ave only little editorial responsi>ility suc7 as reporters,
neAs Ariters, investigators, correspondents or p7otograp7ersL Ns 6or t7e 7ori?ontal di66erentiation, one can identi6y tAo di66erent structures: t7e traditional divisional >eat structure
Cpolitics, econo&y, local neAs, etcLH and a seg&entation into 6unctional roles Creporters, edi
tors, co&&entatorsHL _7ile t7e 6unctional structure is a typical c7aracteristic o6 NngloVaon
neAsroo&s, editorial organi?ations in so&e uropean countries ! especially in er&any !
&ostly assign t7eir =ournalists to a particular desK C4ons>ac7 15: 25b sser 18: \8HL
Urgani?ations do allocate resources to t7eir operationsL Jnspired >y t7e AorK o6 id
dens C1: 1EEH, Ae can distinguis7 tAo >asic types o6 resources: Nut7oritative resources
re6er to t7e capacity to organi?e and coordinate t7e editorial AorK t7roug7 organi?ational
KnoAledge, leaders7ip sKills, in6luence, reputation, i&age and social connectionsL Nllocative
resources, on t7e ot7er 7and, involve aspects o6 t7e &aterial Aorld suc7 as capital, goods or
t7e conditions o6 production CNlt&eppen 2EE5: 51HL Jn =ournalis&, t7ese 6actors co&e into
play t7roug7 t7e editorial 7ierarc7y Caut7oritativeH and 6actors t7at s7ape t7e process o6
neAs productions suc7 as tec7nical e9uip&ent, ti&e and &oney CallocativeHL
oles
oles are, according to Ru7&ann C15H, structures o6 social syste&s and 7ave to >e
conceptuali?ed as >eing independent 6ro& t7e individualL Ns per&anent social structure, a
particular role does not IdieM Ait7 t7e person A7o su>scri>ed to it CRu7&ann 15: \1HL
Jndividuals in a &odern society si&ultaneously occupy a &ultitude o6 roles: as 6a&ily &e&
>ers, students, consu&ers, co&&unity &e&>ers and ot7ersL Jn =ournalis&, Ae &ust distin
guis7 >etAeen tAo >asic Kinds o6 roles, pro6essional roles CeLgL as &e&>ers in =ournalistsh
associationsH and occupational roles CeLgL in neAsroo&sHL _it7in neAsroo&s, 7oAever, t7ere
are =ournalistic and non=ournalistic roles CVc7oll 1: \\5HL
ost i&portantly,=ournalistic roles s7ould 7ave at least so&e direct editorial respon
si>ility 6or t7e in6or&ation t7ey co&&unicate C_eaver Z _il7oit 11: 22EHL Nccording to
Vc7oll C1: \\5H, non=ournalistic sta66 includes assistants, producers, li>rarians, p7otogra
p7ers, &oderators, ca&era operators, audio tec7nicians and si&ilar pro6essionalsL T7e pro>le& Ait7 t7is a prioride6inition is t7at so&e producers, p7otograp7ers or &oderators &ay
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
14/31
7ave editorial responsi>ilities, and i6 t7ey are ecluded 6ro& t7e outset, Ae Aill never KnoA
A7et7er t7is conceptual decision Aas according to t7e realities o6 t7e organi?ations under
investigationL J Aould suggest to include t7ese pro6essionals 6irst, e&pirically deter&ine
t7eir editorial responsi>ilities and t7en eclude t7e& i6 t7e value is ?eroLeneric occupational rolesin =ournalis& deal Ait7 It7e process o6 preparing t7e raA
&aterials o6 t7e &edia 6or disse&ination CiLeL editorial processH as Aell as t7e act o6 o>taining
and Ariting or >roadcasting t7e results o6 neAsAort7y events or develop&ents CiLeL report
ingHM CVc7oll 1: \\5HL T7e &ost i&portant distinction is, as pointed out >y sser C18:
\81H, >etAeen IneAs gat7erersM and IneAs processorsM, t7e 6or&er typically represented >y
t7e reporter and t7e latter >y t7e editorL Vince =ournalistic roles di66er considera>ly ! 6or in
stance >etAeen er&an and NngloVaon neAsroo&s ! due to particular 7istories and cul
tures, general roles s7ould >e identi6ied e&pirically, per7aps >y cluster analysis o6 so&e
&easure&ent o6 t7e =ournalistsh occupational activitiesL jsing t7is &et7odology, a er&an
survey 6ound eig7t occupational roles ! t7e investigator, Ariter, selector, neAs processor, tet
processor, ad&inistrator, tec7nician and &oderator ! CVc7oll Z _eisc7en>erg 18: EH,
A7ereas a study in Jndonesia identi6ied only 6our >asic roles, t7e editor, reporter, &anager
and producer CBanit?sc7 2EEG: 15HL
fro6essional rolesin =ournalis&, on t7e ot7er 7and, go >eyond occupational AorK pat
ternsL any, t7oug7 not all and in so&e countries not even &ost, =ournalists are &e&>ers o6
=ournalistsh associations or ot7er independent organi?ations A7ic7 are co&&itted to t7e in
terests o6 =ournalists as group o6 pro6essionalsL T7ese organi?ations play an i&portant role
Ait7 regard to =ournalis&hs identity, sel6control and 9uality &anage&ent &ostly t7roug7
i&posing et7ical standards to t7e AorK o6 its pro6essionalsL Ut7er di&ensions o6 pro6essional
roles are not visi>le at 6irst 7andL Vo&e o6 t7e &ost opa9ue structures t7at s7ape t7e neAs aret7e =ournalistsh role perceptions CI&edia roleM, Ipro6essional vieAsMH, >ut t7e etent to A7ic7
t7ese vieAs in6luence t7e output o6 =ournalis& still re&ains unclearL Nlt7oug7 t7e percep
tions o6 &edia role are o6ten seen as individual c7aracteristics, t7ey nonet7eless represent a
structure t7at is articulated and internali?ed t7roug7 =ournalis& education and neAsroo&
sociali?ationL
T7e analysis o6 t7e =ournalistsh role perceptions 7as a long tradition, triggered >y t7e
AorK o6 $o7en C1\: 2EH A7o classi6ied a IneutralM and a Iparticipant roleM and -anoAit?
C15: 18H A7o discri&inated t7e IgateKeeperM 6ro& t7e IadvocateM ost pro&inently
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
15/31
_eaver and _il7oit C11: 115H distinguis7 an IinterpreterM, Idisse&inatorM and Iadversar
ialM, A7ile 4ons>ac7 and fatterson C2EEG: 2H identi6ied 6our types o6 roles, t7e Ipassive
neutralM, Ipassive advocateM, Iactive neutralM and t7e Iactive advocateML Nlt7oug7 t7e dis
se&inator role see&s to >e &ost on t7e rise Ceese 2EE1: 18Gb _eaver 18>: G8H, it 7as >eenc7allenged >y nor&ative concepts suc7 as pu>liccivic =ournalis& Cerrit 15b osen 1H,
develop&ent =ournalis& C$7alKey 1EH and peace =ournalis& Caltung 2EE2HL Jn e&pirical
researc7, t7e di&ensions o6 t7e =ournalistsh role perceptions are usually etracted 6ro&
&easure&ents o6 t7e su>=ective i&portance o6 particular co&&unication goals A7ic7 are
t7en su>=ected to 6actor analysisL any studies >orroAed ite&s 6ro& t7e IN&erican -ournal
istM studies o6 _eaver and _il7oit C11, 1H, >ut t7eir operationali?ation see&s to >e &ore
re6lective o6 t7e typical _estern values o6 neAs &aKingL N &odi6ication o6 t7ese ite&s needs
to >e placed on t7e researc7 agenda, so&e suggestions Aere &ade recently >y a&aprasad
C2EE1H and a&aprasad and `elly C2EE\HL
frogra&s and routines
T7e processes o6 gat7ering and editing neAs in =ournalis& is largely routine AorKL Jn
6act, &ost part o6 t7e =ournalistsh =o> is standardi?ed t7roug7 pro6essional routinesL iven t7e
li&ited resources editorial organi?ations 7ave, t7ese routines 7elp t7e =ournalists to process
t7e vast a&ount and co&pleity o6 in6or&ation A7ic7 t7ey are 6acing in everyday AorKL Nl
t7oug7 t7e ter& IroutinesM is &ore popular in t7e NngloVaon literature, J pre6er to call
t7ese structuresprogra&sas t7is is t7e corresponding concept in syste&s t7eoryL Nccording
to Ru7&ann C1: 5EH, progra&s are epectations A7ic7 go >eyond t7e scope o6 a particu
lar decisionL
Jn t7is regard, ^l>au& C1G: 28GH identi6ied 6ive types o6 =ournalistic progra&s
A7ic7 7ave di66erent AorK patterns: t7e progra&s o6 presentation, organi?ation, selection,
in6or&ation collection and c7ecKingL Nlt&eppen C2EEE: \EE1H, on t7e ot7er 7and, classi6ied
6our progra&s A7ic7 consist o6 t7e editing, selection, presentation and issue routinesL Jn
co&>ination and &odi6ication o6 ^l>au&hs and Nlt&eppenhs AorK, J suggest t7e 6olloAing
classi6ication o6 =ournalistic progra&s:
!" frogra&s o6 organi?ationalloA t7e coordination o6 neAsroo& decisions and
control t7e 6loA o6 AorKL
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
16/31
!" frogra&s o6 topicalitys7ape t7e internal >alance o6 t7e neAs coverage C&ore
sports, &ore politics or &ore local neAsH and identi6y issues A7ic7 deserve par
ticular e&p7asisL
!" frogra&s o6 selectiondeter&ine t7e neAsAort7iness o6 a particular occurrence,
t7ey are usually a66iliated Ait7 neAs valuesL
!" frogra&s o6 investigationsu>su&e all activities o6 in6or&ation gat7ering, in
cluding attending press con6erences and ot7er, &ore active types o6 in6or&ation
seeKingL
!" frogra&s o6 editingdo structure t7e Ariting and processing neAs accountsL
T7ey usually re6er to particular neAs 6or&ats CgenresH suc7 as report, 6eature oreditorialL
!" frogra&s o6 presentationorgani?e t7e Aay in A7ic7 t7e neAs is presented
t7roug7 activities suc7 as, >ut not li&ited to, &oderating, designing or arrang
ing contentL
!" frogra&s o6 evaluation6unction as tool supporting t7e veri6ication o6 content,
t7e crossc7ecKing o6 6acts and t7e internal evaluation a6ter t7e issueprogra&7as >een pu>lis7ed>roadcastedL
The micro level: defining journalists
Jn order to >e relevant as o>=ects o6 study in co&&unicator researc7, individuals 7ave
to &eet certain conditions: Pirst, t7ey operate =ournalistic progra&sL Vecond, t7ey su>scri>e
to =ournalistic rolesL T7ird, t7ey are e&>edded, in one Aay CeLgL 6ullti&e editorH or anot7er
CeLgL 6reelance correspondentH, in t7e structures o6 editorial organi?ationsL Pourt7, t7ey proc
ess pu>lic co&&unication accounts according to t7e criteria o6 =ournalis& C&ainly 6actual
in6or&ation values, no intended e66ects, internal de6ined co&&unication goalsHL Pi6t7, t7ey
orient t7e&selves >y t7e 6unction o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere CcoorientationH and operate its sys
te&ic code Cpu>lic attentionHL
T7is Aay o6 de6ining =ournalists 7as serious conse9uences 6or co&&onplace de6ini
tions o6 =ournalis& ! and also 6or t7e sel6perceptions o6 &any =ournalistsL J6, 6or instance, t7e
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
17/31
PUm eAs talKing 7ead eil $avuto C2EE\H puts 7i&sel6 an IN&erican 6irst, =ournalist sec
ondM, t7en 7e clearly leaves t7e ground o6 =ournalis& and enters t7e 6ield o6 propaganda,
A7ic7 is part o6 political pu>lic relationsL onet7eless, one &ig7t argue t7at t7is vieA leads
to t7e conse9uence t7at 6laAs in =ournalis& A7ic7 arise 6ro& >lurring t7e >orderlines >etAeen =ournalis&, f, advertising and entertain&ent are, >y de6inition, ecluded 6ro& t7e
analysis o6 =ournalis& and, t7us, 6ro& any critical assess&ent o6 neAs &aKingL J6 t7is is true,
t7e criticis& t7en 7as to >e addressed to t7e pu>lic sp7ere as suc7, including all Kinds o6
pu>lic co&&unication and, &ost i&portantly, t7e audiencesL T7e real pro>le& is t7at t7is
Kind o6 non=ournalistic co&&unication is treated as i6 it Aas =ournalis&>y >ot7 t7e =ournal
ists t7e&selves and t7eir audiences ! and so&eti&es also >y t7e acade&yL
Unce one 7as identi6ied t7e individuals t7at 6it t7e 7ere o66ered de6inition o6 A7o is a
=ournalist, t7e researc7er &ay encounter t7e pro>le& t7at t7ese individuals so&eti&es do
not eclusively produce =ournalistic contentL CVi&ilarly, t7ere are so&e editorial organi?a
tions A7ic7 produce =ournalistic and non=ournalistic content at t7e sa&e ti&eLH any 6ree
lancers are 6orced to si&ultaneously AorK 6or =ournalistic &edia and pu>lic relations or ad
vertisingL Nlso, it is not unusual t7at pro&inent =ournalists appear in advertise&ents and
co&&ercialsL Ut7ers &ay see t7eir AorK in =ournalis& =ust as a sideline =o>L Jn a survey o6
er&an online =ournalists Ae 7ave, t7ere6ore, 6ound it use6ul to distinguis7 >etAeen t7ree
types o6 =ournalists A7o >elong eit7er to t7e core, inner edge or outer edge o6 =ournalis&
CR66el7ol? et alL 2EE\HL T7e core, representing t7e genuine ele&ents o6 =ournalis&, consists o6
pro6essionals A7o draA t7eir overall inco&e &ostly Cq5EH 6ro& AorKing in =ournalis&L T7e
inner edge, on t7e ot7er 7and, su>su&es individuals &aKing ten to 5E percent o6 t7eir entire
earnings in =ournalis&, A7ile t7e outer edgere6ers to t7ose A7o draA only less t7an ten per
cent o6 t7eir overall inco&e 6ro& pro6essional =ournalistic activitiesL Jt &ay >e inspiring toalso include t7ese >oundary areas in t7e study o6 =ournalis& as &any neA develop&ents
CeLgL Ae> logsH 6irst appear in t7ese areas >e6ore t7ey 7it t7e &ore genuine 6ields o6 =ournal
is&L
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
18/31
Journalism cultures
T7e co¶tive study seeKs to identi6y t7e si&ilarities and di66erences in glo>al
=ournalis&, &ostly a&ong nations as o>=ects or units o6 analysisL J6 researc7ers 6ind di66erences, t7ey are 9uicK to speaK o6 I=ournalistic culturesM or IneAs culturesM Ait7out giving a
clear idea to A7at etent t7ese o>served di66erences are attri>uta>le to cultureL ^ecause na
tions, 6or instance, di66er on &any di&ensions, t7ese dissi&ilarities could also arise 6ro&
econo&ic develop&ents or, &ost liKely, 6ro& t7e political syste& CX7u et alL 1: 85HL Nlso,
in &any studies t7e notion o6 culture is itsel6 rat7er underconceptuali?ed, A7ic7 &ay 7ave
to do Ait7 t7e 6act t7at Iculture is too glo>al a concept to >e &eaning6ul as an eplanatory
varia>leM Cvan de i=ver Z Reung 1: \HL
evert7eless, t7e di66erent cultures o6 =ournalis& A7ic7 evolve in particular cultural
settings are an intriguing area 6or co¶tive AorK Curevitc7 Z ^lu&ler 2EEG: \\HL _it7
t7is regard, cultural studies assess t7e culture o6 routine in daytoday neAs &aKing CNllan
1H and re6lect on =ournalis& as part o6 popular culture CeLgL 4a7lgren 12b Bartley 1HL
T7ere is a great deal o6 inspiring literature 6ocusing on t7e neAs as 6or& o6 culture in cultural
studies, and noone could su&&ari?e it >etter t7an ic7ael Vc7udson in 7is >ooK IT7e Voci
ology o6 eAsM C2EE\: 1EH:
Vtill, neAs is organi?ed >y a set o6 literary conventions, a part o6 culture t7at reproduces aspects o6 a larger culture t7at t7e reporter and editor &ay never 7ave consciously articulatedL eAs is produced >ypeople A7o operate, o6ten unAittingly, Ait7in a cultural syste&, a reservoir o6 stored cultural &eaningsLJt 6olloAs conventions o6 sourcing A7o is a legiti&ate source, speaKer, or conveyer o6 in6or&ation to a=ournalistL Jt lives >y unspoKen preconceptions a>out t7e audience less a &atter o6 A7o t7e audience actually &ay >e t7an a pro=ection >y =ournalists o6 t7eir oAn social AorldsL eAs as a 6or& o6 culture incorporates assu&ptions a>out A7at &atters, A7at &aKes sense, A7at ti&e and place Ae live in, andA7at range o6 considerations Ae s7ould taKe seriouslyL
Xeli?er C2EEG: 1\2E1H recently identi6ied si trends in t7e cultural analysis o6 =ournalis&, 6ocusing on t7e AorldvieAs o6 =ournalists, t7e practices o6 =ournalis&, t7e >reac7es o6
=ournalis&, t7e 6or&s o6 =ournalis&, t7e representations o6 =ournalis& and t7e audiences o6
=ournalis&L _7ile Xeli?er centers 7er classi6ication around A7at is t7e o>=ect o6 researc7, J
propose an analytical taono&y A7ic7 is >uilt around di66erent notions o6 cultureL J t7ere6ore
distinguis7 >etAeen territorial, essentialist, li6estylespeci6ic, valuecentered and organi?a
tional =ournalis& culturesL T7is classi6ication &ay not >e e7austive, 7oAever, and t7ere is
also a signi6icant overlap a&ong t7ese types o6 =ournalis& cultures due to 7istorical linKs
>etAeen t7e&
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
19/31
Territorial =ournalis& cultures
T7e classi6ication and description o6 territorial =ournalis& cultures 7as its origin in t7e
co&parison o6 tAo or &oregeograp7ically CspatiallyH de6ined syste&sL T7is could >e nations
C4ons>ac7 Z fatterson 2EEGH, regions, Buntingtonhs C1H Icivili?ationsM, language areas
Ait7in countries C$anada: fritc7ard Z Vouvageau 18b VAit?erland: arr et alL 2EE1H or
even C6or&erH states Ait7in a particular nation Cast and _est er&any: Vc7n>ac7, Vtr?e
>ec7er Z Vc7neider 1Gb Vc7oll Z _eisc7en>erg 18HL ost popular, 7oAever, is t7e co&
parison o6 nationsL T7is &ay 7ave to do Ait7 t7e 6act t7at nations Iare usually t7e only Kinds
o6 units availa>le 6or co&parison, and t7ey are >etter t7an not7ingM CBo6stede 2EE1: \HL
$o¶tive studies 6ocusing on nations as o>=ect or unit o6 analysis are Aell docu
&ented in =ournalis& researc7, so&e ea&ples o6 genuine crossnational co&parisons are t7e
Iedia and 4e&ocracyM study C4ons>ac7 Z fatterson 2EEGb fatterson Z 4ons>ac7 1H,
t7e 22nations survey o6 Vplic7al and VparKs C1GH, t7e study o6 urevitc7, Revy and
oe7 C1\H, t7e lo>al Monitoring fro=ectCVpears Z Veydegart 2EEEH as Aell as co&parisons
o6 er&any and reat ^ritain Csser 18b `c7er 18H, Jsrael and t7e jnited Vtates C^er
KoAit?, Ri&or Z Vinger 2EEGH and `orea and t7e jnited Vtates CV7in Z $a&eron 2EE\HL ost
co&parisons, as stated earlier in t7is paper, are >ased not on tailor&ade crossnational researc7es >ut on second7and analyses o6 singlenation studies CeLgL, 4eu?e 2EE2>b _eaver
18>HL Ns pointed out >y -oAell C18: 1EH, it goes Ait7out saying t7at international co&
parisons >ased on t7ese sorts o6 data are 7ig7ly pro>le&aticL
^ut t7is is not t7e only pro>le& crossnational researc7 7as to 6aceL Nlt7oug7 I&any
p7eno&ena are still de6ined in national ter&s Cnational >roadcasters, education syste&s,
gross national productHM CRivingstone 2EE\: G8EH, t7e nation as center o6 gravity 6or t7e proc
esses o6 identity>uilding is increasingly c7allenged >y neA, Itranslocal culturesM Ced
erveen fieterse 1G: 1H t7at go >eyond traditional 6or&ations o6 InationalM culturesL T7us,
=ournalis& researc7, as &any ot7er 6ields in t7e social sciences, 7as to 6ree itsel6 6ro& t7e as
su&ption t7at, in a Aorld o6 &ultiple cultures, identity could >e etracted pri&arily 6ro&
Inational culturesML $o¶tive =ournalis& researc7 7as to >eco&e crosscultural instead o6
crossnationalL Nlso, as nations are 6ar 6ro& sel6contained, closed or 7o&ogeneous CRiving
stone 2EE\: GH, one 7as to taKe into account t7at >etAeencountry variances &ay >e s&aller
t7an Ait7incountry variations CVc7euc7 1E: \EH ! a pro>le& A7ic7 is o6ten overlooKed in
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
20/31
ssentialist =ournalis& cultures
T7e second Aay o6 identi6ying =ournalis& cultures is a66iliated Ait7 essentialist no
tions o6 culture A7ic7, >y and large, draA 6ro& t7e >elie6 t7at cultures 7ave a true essenceL
T7is perspective &ostly deals Ait7 t7e conse9uences o6 race, et7nicity and gender A7ic7 are
seen as c7aracteristics around A7ic7 pluralistic cultures condenseL BoAever, t7ere are ot7er
criteria A7ic7 could >e also conceptuali?ed as essences o6 culture, suc7 as age, educationCal
capitalH, religion or territorialityL
Jn t7e study o6 =ournalis&, t7is particular strand in researc7 is do&inated >y t7e dis
cussion o6 A7et7er gender does deter&ine t7e editorial productL T7is acade&ic de>ate is
centered around an assu&ed I7ege&onic &asculinityM A7ic7 is seen to govern neAs values
C4elano 2EE\: 25H and a neAsroo& culture t7at cultivates a I&anasnor& and Ao&anas
interloper structureM Coss 2EE1: 5\5HL Vo&e aut7ors suggest t7e eistence o6 a socalled
I6e&inine =ournalis&M C`euneKe, `riener Z ecKel 1: G1H A7ic7 grounds on t7e >elie6
t7at t7ere are 6unda&ental di66erences >etAeen &en and Ao&en: _7ile social gender i&ages
associate &asculinity Ait7 IrigorM and IausterityM, 6e&inity is a66iliated Ait7 t7e notions o6
Iso6tnessM and Ie&pat7yM Ci>id: \HL
Vo&e researc7ers assu&e t7at neAs &aKing Aill e&p7asi?e t7e values o6 7ar&ony,>rot7er7ood, a66iliation and co&&unity ! and &ove aAay 6ro& t7e Idic7oto&ous and con
6lictrelated values o6 victoryde6eatM ! as Ao&en increasingly enter neAsroo&s and 6ill Key
positions in =ournalis& CRavie Z Re7&an_il?ig 2EE\: 8HL altung C2EE2: 28H, A7o >elieves
t7at Ao&en are &ore interested in positive neAs t7an &en, even epects an Ieplosion in
peace reportingM 6ro& Ao&en =ournalistsL evert7eless, A7ile t7ere see&s to >e at least
so&e evidence t7at gender &aKes a di66erence in =ournalis& CNr&strong 2EEGb $ra6t Z _anta
2EEGH, &ost studies suggest t7at t7e di66erences >etAeen &en and Ao&en =ournalists are o6
only &inor conse9uences 6or t7e editorial product CRavie Z Re7&an_il?ig 2EE\b o>inson
Z Vaint-ean 18b _eaver 1HL
Ri6estylespeci6ic =ournalis& cultures
_7ile t7e notion o6 essentialist =ournalis& cultures deals Ait7 t7e conditions and
conditionings o6 7u&an eistence, t7e li6estylespeci6ic =ournalis& cultures re6er to t7e prac
tices t7ese conditions produceL Nccording to t7e inspiring AorK o6 t7e Prenc7 sociologist
fierre ^ourdieu C1 18GH social classes possess varying levels o6 di66erent types o6 capital
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
21/31
Csocial, econo&ic and culturalH, and t7e possession o6 capital is predicted >y social originL
T7e 9uantu& and structure o6 capital are, &ediated t7roug7 t7e 7a>itus, &a=or deter&inants
o6 li6estyle, and t7is Aill >e represented in patterns o6 cultural practiceL Ba>itus &eans t7e
Ipracticeuni6ying and practicegenerating principle LLL, t7e internali?ed 6or& o6 class condition and o6 t7e conditionings it entailsM C^ourdieu 18G: 1E1HL Ns epression o6 Iconditioned
and conditional 6reedo&M ! and not as si&ple deter&inis& ! t7e 7a>itus relates social origin
to cultural practice A7ic7 is Io>=ectively ad=usted to t7e particular conditions in A7ic7 it is
constitutedM C^ourdieu 1: 5HL
Ri6estyle is Ia unitary set o6 distinctive pre6erences A7ic7 epresses t7e sa&e epres
sive intention in t7e speci6ic logic o6 eac7 o6 t7e sy&>olic su>space, 6urniture, clot7ing, lan
guage or >ody 7eisM C^ourdieu 18G: 1\HL Jn ot7er Aords, li6estyles are >undles o6 socially
distinctive practices in everyday li6et7at signal identity, identi6ication and distinction, A7ile
t7ey trigger t7e e&ergence o6 su> culturesL Jn =ournalis& studies, it Aould >e interesting to
KnoA 7oA t7ese li6estyles and su> cultures s7ape t7e neAs or &ay even condition neAs
roo& practicesL T7is >eco&es even &ore i&portant since t7e idea o6 culture >ased on s7ared
traditions and co&&unal identity 7as lost its capacity to de6ine social eistence as a totality
and is increasingly replaced >y consu&er li6estyles CTaylor 2EE2: G8E1HL
aluecentered =ournalis& cultures
T7e idea o6 valuecentered =ournalis& cultures lays e&p7asis on t7e assu&ption, de
rived 6ro& cultural ant7ropology, t7at cultures can >e identi6ied and descri>ed t7roug7 t7eir
underlying values, attitudes and >elie6sL N very co&&on distinction is &ade >etAeen indi
vidualistic and collectivistic cultures C`i& et alL 1Gb critically: oronov Z Vinger 2EE2HL e
searc7 suggests t7at t7is distinction &ay >e onedi&ensional at t7e ecological level CiLeL co&
paring nationsH, >ut at t7e individual level >ot7 individualis& and collectivis& see& to >e
independent 6ro& eac7 ot7er CJto 12: 2Gb `agitci>asi 1G: 5HL Nnot7er, &ore sop7isti
cated cultural distinction Aas &ade >y ary 4ouglas C12, 1H, A7o used a tAo
di&ensional gridgroup&odel to analytically classi6y 6our cultures: t7e 6atalist, 7ierarc7ist,
individualist and egalitarian culturesL Jn =ournalis& studies, 4ouglash $ultural T7eory 7as
>een applied >y Banit?sc7 C2EEG: 85HL
Bo6stede C18EH, in 7is land&arK AorK I$ulturehs $onse9uencesM Crevised: 2EE1H,identi6ied 6our >asic di&ensions o6 cultural variance a&ong nations: poAer distance, indi
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
22/31
vidualis&, &asculinity and uncertainty avoidanceL Nlt7oug7 7e later added a 6i6t7 di&en
sion, long ter& orientation, 7is AorK also received &uc7 critical attention CeLgL cVAeeney
2EE2HL Nnot7er atte&pt to deter&ine t7e 6unda&ental di&ensions o6 cultural variance is t7e
_orld alues Vurvey C_VH under t7e lead o6 onald Jngle7artL Pro& a co&parison o6 Enations, t7e aut7ors o6 t7e study etracted tAo >asic di&ensions re6lecting crossnational
polari?ation >etAeen traditional versus secularrational orientations toAard aut7ority and
survival versus sel6epression values CJngle7art Z ^aKer 2EEE: 2\HL
Une ea&ple o6 7oA t7e ant7ropological discussion o6 social and cultural values 7as
in6luenced our 6ield is t7e searc7 6or IpanNsian valuesM in Nsian =ournalis&L T7e literature
7as singled out certain core ele&ents as constitutive o6 Nsian values including responsi>ility,
co&&unalis& and consensus, 7ar&ony and social sta>ility, 6ilial piety, respect 6or order and
aut7ority Cassey Z $7ang 2EE2: 8b _ong 2EEG: 2HL Jt is assu&ed t7at t7ese values so&e
7oA 7ave an i&pact on t7e editorial productL BoAever, given Nsiahs diversity o6 religions,
ideologies, traditions, political syste&s and levels o6 develop&ent CNli 1: 1GH, t7ere
see&s to >e no consensus Ait7in Nsia Ia>out A7at Nsian alues are, in =ournalis& or in any
t7ing elseM Casterton 1: 1HL
Urgani?ational =ournalis& cultures
T7e concept o6 organi?ational cultures Cor Icorporate culturesMH draAs 6ro& t7e con
viction t7at t7ere are no universal solutions to organi?ation and &anage&ent pro>le&s
CBo6stede 2EE1: \\HL T7is strand o6 organi?ational researc7, A7ic7 >orroAs &any o6 its con
ceptuali?ations 6ro& ant7ropology, Aas particularly cultivated t7roug7 t7e AorK o6 Uuc7i
C181H, 4eal and `ennedy C182H as Aell as feters and _ater&an C182HL N co&&only used
de6inition is provided >y Vc7ein C12: 12H A7o descri>ed organi?ational cultures as a
pattern o6 s7ared >asic assu&ptions t7at t7e group learned as it solved its pro>le&s o6 eternal adaptation and internal integration, t7at 7as AorKed Aell enoug7 to >e considered valid and, t7ere6ore, to >etaug7t to neA &e&>ers as t7e correct Aay to perceive, t7inK, and 6eel in relation to t7ose pro>le&sL
Urgani?ational cultures t7us are collective values and practices t7at distinguis7 t7e
&e&>ers o6 one organi?ation 6ro& anot7erL N great deal o6 organi?ational researc7 in =our
nalis& studies suggests t7at corporate values are o6 increasing i&portance to editorial proc
esses as Aell as to recruit&ent CBolli6ield, `osicKi Z ^ecKer 2EE1b Roo&is Z eyer 2EEEHL
T7ese develop&ents 7ave evoKed t7e ranKand6ile =ournalistsh resistance to t7e per&eation
o6 &arKeting values into t7e neAsroo& leading to a Icultural >attleM un6olding in neAs or
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
23/31
gani?ations as t7ey >eco&e &ore integrated Cade 2EEG: G2HL Vi&ilarly, Vinger C2EEG: 1GH o>
served a Iclas7 o6 culturesM a&ong neAspaper, television and online neAsroo&s as a reac
tion to processes o6 convergenceL Nnot7er >ranc7 o6 researc7, &ostly a66iliated Ait7 t7e con
cept o6 I=ournalistic routinesM, is largely concerned Ait7 pro6essional su> cultures t7at go>eyond organi?ational >oundariesL T7is perspective 7as its origin in t7e early 1Es and
clai&s t7e eistence o6 a co&&on =ournalistic culture C^ant? 185b ricson, ^araneK Z $7an
18b olotc7 Z Rester 1Gb Tuc7&an 1\b Xeli?er 1\HL
N study o6 t7e vast literature on t7e topic reveals, 7oAever, a nota>le variance in
de6initions o6 t7e ter& organi?ational culture and, even &ore, in t7e use o6 t7e ter& culture
CNlvesson 2EE2: \HL Vo&eti&es aut7ors re6er to values, anot7er ti&e to practicesL oreover,
so&e researc7ers linK organi?ational culture to t7e &edia organi?ation as suc7, ot7ers to
neAsroo&s only or to depart&ents t7ereo6L Jn order to avoid conceptual con6usion, Ae
s7ould speaK o6 organi?ational cultures A7en Ae re6er to neAsroo&s or t7eir su> units CeLgL
eA orK Ti&esvsL Nsa7i V7i&>unculturesH and o6 pro6essional cultures A7en Ae re6er to
co&&on values and practices t7at transcend organi?ational >oundaries CeLgL print vsL online
&edia cultures, editor vsL reporter culturesHL Jnterdependencies >etAeen neAsroo&s and
>oardroo&s s7ould >e conceptuali?ed as relations7ips >etAeen di66erent organi?ational cul
tures C&arKetingadvertisingdistri>ution vsL neAsroo& culturesHL
Implications for the sampling of journalists
T7e conceptuali?ation A7ic7 J 7ave proposed in t7is paper is a AorK in progressL J do
not suggest t7at an ulti&ate de6inition o6 =ournalis& is possi>le or even desira>leL NlAays
A7en Ae t7inK t7at Ae 6ound a use6ul de6inition, t7e o>=ect o6 researc7 again slips out 6ro&our 7andsL J 6ound Ru7&annhs sociological AorK inspiring, >ut 7e conceptuali?ed society in
>inary ter&s: Vo&et7ing is or is not closed, sel6re6erential or sel6organi?ingL T7is AorKs 6ine
as analytical device, >ut reality is croAded Ait7 gradual di66erencesL T7ere are various de
grees o6 closeness, sel6re6erence or sel6organi?ationL
Jn reality, >oundaries >etAeen =ournalis& and non=ournalis& are o6ten not as clear
cut as syste&s t7eory suggestsL 4i66erentiation t7eory 7as signi6icant li&ititations, in particu
lar A7en it co&es to deal Ait7 processes o6 dedi66erentiation o6 &edia syste&s, caused >y
increasing co&&erciali?ation CBallin Z ancini 2EEG: 288 5H T7ere6ore J adopted
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
24/31
Ru7&annhs syste& t7eory as a 7euristic tool6or t7e identi6ication o6 =ournalis& and its struc
tures Ait7 regard to e&pirical researc7L
T7e conceptuali?ation J presented 7ere could >e a t7eoretically 6ounded starting point
6or t7e e&pirical de6inition o6 =ournalistsL Jnspired >y so&e ideas o6 Vc7oll C1, 1H J suggest t7e 6olloAing strategy o6 sa&pling =ournalists 6or purposes o6 co¶tive e&pirical
researc7:
Pirst, co&pile a list o6 all &edia t7at potentially transport =ournalistic contentL T7en,
draA a sa&ple and eclude nonperiodical &ediaL Nlso leave out &edia outlets pu>lis7ed
less t7an once a &ont7 and t7ose Ait7 a circulation o6 less t7an 1E,EEE copies due to t7eir
li&ited i&pact on t7e pu>lic sp7ere, as suggested >y Vc7oll C1: \\\5HL
Vecond, c7ecK t7e sa&ple 6or =ournalistic contentL J suggested to de6ine =ournalis& as
part o6 t7e pu>lic sp7ere A7ose 6unction is to 6acilitate a co&&on, socially >inding re6erence
6or social coorientation t7roug7 providing in6or&ation o6 i&&ediate topicalityL -ournalis&
is distinct 6ro& ot7er areas o6 pu>lic co&&unication as it pri&arily relies on 6actual in6or&a
tion, A7ile its co&&unication goals are internally de6ined and 7ave no intention to pro&pt
c7anges o6 attitudes and >e7aviorsL Jn t7is Aay, non=ournalistic content suc7 as non6iction
literature, pu>lic relations, advertising, entertain&ent, 6iction and a&ateur =ournalis& can >e
ecluded 6ro& t7e analysisL Nlt7oug7 &any corporate Ae> sites include =ournalistic content,
t7e selection o6 neAs is &ostly re6lective o6 t7e organi?ationhs co&&unication goalsL J6 t7at is
t7e case, eclude t7ese &ediaL ^e aAare t7at =ournalis& is &ostly not t7e only Kind o6 con
tent t7e &edia disse&inateL T7ey also circulate content 6ro& f, advertising and entertain
&entL
T7ird, identi6y editorial organi?ations t7at produce t7ese &ediaL eAs as t7e eclu
sive output o6 =ournalis& is produced in organi?ational settingsb t7us all organi?ations t7atproduce neAs are relevant to t7e study o6 =ournalis&L ^e aAare t7at editorial organi?ations
so&eti&es also produce pu>lic content ot7er t7an =ournalis&L Nlso, so&e editorial organi?a
tions &ay produce &ore t7an one neAs outletL
Pourt7, deter&ine =ournalistic roles A7ic7 &aKe use o6 =ournalistic progra&sL J de
6ined progra&s o6 organi?ation, topicality, selection, investigation, editing, presentation and
evaluationL -ournalistic roles s7ould assu&e at least so&e direct editorial responsi>ility 6or
t7e in6or&ation t7ey co&&unicateL `eep in &ind t7at so&e =ournalistic progra&s are also
operated >y pu>lic relations advertising and entertain&ent
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
25/31
Pi6t7, identi6y pro6essional individuals t7at su>scri>e to =ournalistic rolesL Jn case
t7ere are pro6essionals A7o do not 6ill t7ese rolespri&a 6acie, do not eclude t7e& 6ro& t7e
outsetL at7er, deter&ine t7eir editorial responsi>ilities e&pirically and t7en eclude t7e& i6
t7e value is ?eroL ^e aAare t7at individuals also su>scri>e to ot7er roles in society, so&e o6t7e& &ay even produce f, advertising and entertain&ent contentL ^e also aAare t7at in
di66erent cultures t7ere are varying conventions regarding proper =o> titlesL
J6 you 6ind nota>le di66erences >etAeen t7e units under co&parison, eplain A7y
t7ese di66erences occurred and A7ic7 6actors account 6or &ost part o6 t7e varianceL _7en
culture is involved, eplicate t7e notion o6 culture you 7ave in &ind and ela>orate t7e di66er
ent Cterritorial, essentialist, li6estylespeci6ic, valuecentered and organi?ationalH =ournalis&
cultures you 7ave 6oundL 4o not li&it your study to t7e assess&ent o6 a prioride6initions o6
cultureL at7er, open up yoursel6 6or t7e possi>ility t7at your data &ay also reveal =ournal
is& cultures ot7er t7an A7at you 7ave epectedL
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
26/31
References
Nli, UL NL C1H Nsian values in =ournalis&: idle concept or realistic goalWh, ppL 1G152 in L asterton CedHNsian alues in -ournalis&L Vingapore: NJ$L
Nllan, Vtuart C1H eAs cultureL ^ucKing7a&: Upen jniversity fressLNlt&eppen, `L4L C2EEEH ntsc7eidungen und `oordinationenL 4i&ensionen =ournalistisc7en Bandelnsh, ppL 2\\1E in L R66el7ol? CedH T7eorien des -ournalis&usL in disKursives Band>uc7L _ies>aden: _estdeutsc7er erlagL
Nlt&eppen, `L4L C2EE5H-ournalis&us und Medien als Urganisationssyste&eL Reistungen, VtruKturen und Manage&entL _ies>aden: erlag 6r Vo?ialAissensc7a6tenL Cin printH
Nlvesson, L C2EE2H jnderstanding organi?ational cultureL Rondon: VageLNr&strong, $L RL C2EEGH T7e Jn6luence o6 eporter ender on Vource Velection in eAspaper Vtoriesh,-ournalis&
Z Mass $o&&unication wuarterly81C1H: 1\15GL^ant?, $L L C185H eAs organi?ations: con6lict as cra6ted cultural nor&h, $o&&unication8C2H: 2252GGL^eniger, -L L C12H $o&parison, yes, >ut t7e case o6 tec7nological and cultural c7angeh, ppL \55E in -L L ^lu&
ler, -L L cReod Z `L L osengren CedsH $o¶tively speaKing: co&&unication and culture across
space and ti&eL eA>ury farK, $N: VageL^erKoAit?, 4L, L Ri&or Z -L Vinger C2EEGH N crosscultural looK at serving t7e pu>lic interest: N&erican and Js
raeli =ournalists consider et7ical scenariosh,-ournalis&5C2H: 15181L^ird, L VL C2EEEH Pacing t7e distracted audience: =ournalis& and cultural conteth,-ournalis&1C1H: 2\\L^l>au&, ^L C1GH-ournalis&us als so?iales Vyste&L esc7ic7te, Nusdi66eren?ierung und ersel>stxndigungL
Upladen: _estdeutsc7er erlagL^lu&ler, -L L, -L L cReod Z `L L osengren C12H Nn introduction to co¶tive co&&unication researc7h,
ppL \18 in -L L ^lu&ler, -L L cReod Z `L L osengren CedsH $o¶tively speaKing: co&&unicationand culture across space and ti&eL eA>ury farK, $N: VageL
^ourdieu, fL C1H Uutline o6 a t7eory o6 practiceL $a&>ridge: $a&>ridge jniversity fressL^ourdieu, fL C18GH 4istinction: a social criti9ue o6 t7e =udge&ent o6 tasteL $a&>ridge, N: Barvard jniversity
fressL
^reed, _L C155H Vocial control in t7e neAsroo&: a 6unctional analysish, Vocial Porces\\CGH: \2\\5L$avuto, L C2EE\H N&erican 6irst, =ournalist secondh, PUmeAsLco&, posted 28L\L2EE\,
7ttp:AAAL6oneAsLco&storyE,2\\,825EG,EEL7t&lL$7ala>y, -L `L C2EEEH -ournalis& studies in an era o6 transition in pu>lic co&&unicationsh,-ournalis&1C1H: \\\L$7alKey, NL C1EH 4evelop&ent -ournalis&L eA 4el7i: iKas fu>licationL$7ang, TL`L Ait7 fL ^erg, NL ingBi& Pung, `L 4L `edl, $L NL Rut7er Z -L V?u>a C2EE1H $o&paring nations in
&ass co&&unication researc7, 1E: a critical asses&ent o6 7oA Ae KnoA A7at Ae KnoAh, a?ette\C5H: G15G\GL
$o7en, ^L $L C1\H T7e press and 6oreign policyL frinceton, -: frinceton jniversity fressL$ra6t, VL Z _L _anta C2EEGH _o&en in t7e neAsroo&: in6luences o6 6e&ale editors and reporters on t7e neAs
agendah,-ournalis& Z Mass $o&&unication wuarterly81C1H: 12G1\8L4a7lgren, fL C12H Jntroductionh, ppL 12\ in fL 4a7lgren Z $L VparKs CedsH-ournalis& and popular cultureL
Rondon: VageL4eal, TL L Z NL NL `ennedy C182H $orporate cultures: t7e rites and rituals o6 corporate li6eL eading, N: Nddi
son_esleyL4elano, NL C2EE\H _o&en =ournalists: A7aths t7e di66erenceWh,-ournalis& VtudiesGC2H: 2\28L4elli $arpini, L mL Z ^L NL _illia&s C2EE1H Ret us in6otain you: politics in t7e neA &edia environ&enth, ppL 1E
181 in _L RL ^ennett Z L L nt&an CedsH Mediated politics: co&&unication in t7e 6uture o6 de&ocracyL$a&>ridge: $a&>ridge jniversity fressL
4eu?e, L C2EE2aH-ournalists in T7e et7erlands: an analysis o6 t7e people, t7e issues, and t7e CinterHnationalenviron&entL N&sterda&: NKsant Ncade&ic fu>lis7ersL
4eu?e, L C2EE2>H ational neAs cultures: a co&parison o6 4utc7, er&an, ^ritis7, Nustralian and jLVL =ournalistsh,-ournalis& Z Mass $o&&unication wuarterlyC1H: 1\G1GL
4ons>ac7, _L C15H Rapdogs, Aatc7dogs and =unK=ard dogsh, Media Vtudies -ournalCGH: 1\EL4ons>ac7, _L C2EEEH -ournalisth, ppL 51 in L oelleeu&ann, _L Vc7ul? Z -L _ilKe CedsLH Pisc7er ReiKon
fu>li?istiK MassenKo&&uniKationL t7 edL PranK6urt a& ain: Pisc7er Tasc7en>uc7 erlagL
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
27/31
4ons>ac7, _L Z TL L fatterson C2EEGH folitical eAs -ournalists: fartisans7ip, fro6essionalis&, and foliticaloles in Pive $ountriesh, ppL 2512E in PL sser Z ^L f6etsc7 CedsLH $o&paring folitical $o&&unication:T7eories, $ases, and $7allengesL eA orK: $a&>ridge jniversity fressL
4ouglas, L C12H isK and >la&e: essays in $ultural T7eoryL Rondon Z eA orK: outledgeL4ouglas, L C1H atural sy&>ols: eplorations in cos&ology: Ait7 a neA introductionL Rondon Z eA orK:
outledgeL
4urK7ei&, L C1\\18\H Un t7e 4ivision o6 Ra>or in VocietyL eA orK: ac&illanLdelstein, NL VL C182H $o¶tive co&&unication researc7L ^everley Bills, $N: VageLide, L Z L `nig7t C1H fu>licprivate service: service =ournalis& and t7e pro>le&s o6 everyday li6eh, uro
pean -ournal o6 $o&&unication1GCGH: 5255GLricson, L, fL ^araneK Z -L $7an C18H isuali?ing deviance: a study o6 neAs organi?ationL Toronto: jniversity
o6 Toronto fressLsposito, L C2EE2H Vo?iales ergessenL Por&en und Medien des edxc7tnisses der esellsc7a6tL PranK6urt a&
ain: Vu7rKa&pLsser, PL C18H ditorial structures and AorK principles in ^ritis7 and er&an neAsroo&sh, uropean -ournal o6
$o&&unication1\C\H: \5GE5Lsser, PL C1H: hTa>loidi?ationh o6 neAs: a co¶tive analysis o6 NngloN&erican and er&an press =ournal
is&h, uropean -ournal o6 $o&&unication1GC\H: 21\2GLsser, PL C2EEEH -ournalis&us vergleic7enL -ournalis&ust7eorie und Ko¶tive Porsc7ungh, ppL 12\1G5 in L
R66el7ol? CedLH T7eorien des -ournalis&usL in disKursives Band>uc7L _ies>aden: _estdeutsc7er erlagL
ade, fL -L C2EEGH eAspapers and organi?ational develop&ent: &ange&ent and =ournalist perception o6 neAsroo& cultural c7angeh,-ournalis& and $o&&unication Monograp7sC1HL
altung, -L C2EE2H feace =ournalis& a c7allengeh, ppL 2522 in _L `e&p6 Z BL Ruostarinen CedsLH olL 2: -ournalis& and t7e eA _orld Urder: Vtudying _ar and t7e MediaL te>org: ordico&L
er7ards, -L C1GH folitisc7e k66entlic7KeitL in syste& und aKteurst7eoretisc7er ^esti&&ungsversuc7h, ppL 1E5 in Pried7el& eid7ardt CedLH k66entlic7Keit, k66entlic7e Meinung und so?iale eAegungenL Upladen: _estdeutsc7er erlagL
iddens, NL C1H $entral pro>le&s in social t7eory: action, structure and contradiction in social analysisL ^erKe
ley, $N: jniversity o6 $ali6ornia fressLie>er, _L C1GH eAs is A7at neAspaper&en &aKe ith, ppL 1\182 in RL NL 4eter Z 4L L _7ite CedsLH feople,society and &ass co&&unicationL eA orK: Pree fressLL
rKe, NL C2EEEH Vyste&t7eorie AeiterdenKenL 4as 4enKen in Vyste&en als Beraus6orderung 6r die -ournalis&us6orsc7ungh, ppL G\5G5G in L R66el7ol? CedLH T7eorien des -ournalis&usL in disKursives Band>uc7L_ies>aden: _estdeutsc7er erlagL
rKe, NL C2EE2H jnter7altung als so?iales Vyste&h, ppL \\ in NL ^au& Z VL -L Vc7&idt CedsLH PaKten und PiKtionenL z>er den j&gang &it MedienAirKlic7KeitenL `onstan?: j`L
urevitc7, L Z -L L ^lu&ler C2EEGH !Vtate o6 t7e Nrt o6 $o¶tive folitical $o&&unication esearc7: foised6or aturityW!, ppL \25\G\ in PL sser Z ^L f6etsc7 CedsLH $o&paring folitical $o&&unication: T7eories,$ases, and $7allengesL eA orK: $a&>ridge jniversity fressL
urevic7, L, L L Revy Z JL oe7 C1\H T7e glo>al neAsroo&: convergences and diversities in t7e glo>ali?a
tion o6 television neAsh, ppL 1521 in fL 4a7lgren Z $L VparKs CedsLH $o&&unication and citi?ens7ip:=ournalis& and t7e pu>lic sp7ereL Rondon Z eA orK: outledgeLBallin, 4L $L Z fL ancini C2EEGH $o&paring Media Vyste&s: T7ree Models o6 Media and foliticsL eA orK:
$a&>ridge jniversity fressLBanit?sc7, TL C2EEGH-ournalis&us in JndonesienL NKteure, VtruKturen, Urientierungs7ori?onte, -ournalis&usKul
turenL _ies>aden: 4eutsc7er jniversitxtserlagLBartley, -L C1H fopular reality: =ournalis&, &odernity, popular cultureL Rondon: NrnoldLBartley, -L C2EEEH $o&&unicative de&ocracy in a redactional society: t7e 6uture o6 =ournalis& studiesh,-ournal
is&1C1H: \G8LBo6stede, L C18EH $ulturehs conse9uences: international di66erences in AorKrelated valuesL ^everley Bills, $N:
VageLBo6stede, L C2EE1H $ulture!s $onse9uencesL Vecond dition: $o&paring alues, ^e7aviors, Jnstitutions and Ur
gani?ations Ncross ationsL T7ousand UaKs, $N: VageLBolli6ield, NL $L, L L `osicKi Z RL ^L ^ecKer C2EE1H Urgani?ational vsL pro6essional culture in t7e neAsroo&:
television neAs directorsh and neAspaper editorsh 7iring decisionsh,-ournal o6 ^roadcasting Z lectronic
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
28/31
Buntington, VL fL C1H T7e clas7 o6 civili?ations and t7e re&aKing o6 Aorld orderL eA orK: Vi&on Z Vc7usterLJngle7art, L Z _L L ^aKer C2EEEH oderni?ation, cultural c7ange, and t7e persistence o6 traditional valuesh,
N&erican Vociological evieA5C1H: 151LJto, L C12H T7eories on interpersonal co&&unication styles 6ro& a -apanese perspective: a sociological ap
proac7h, ppL 2\828 in -L L ^lu&ler, -L L cReod Z `L L osengren CedsLH $o¶tively speaKing:co&&unication and culture across space and ti&eL eA>ury farK, $N: VageL
-anoAit?, L C15H fro6essional &odels in =ournalis&: t7e gateKeeper and t7e advocateh,-ournalis& wuarterly52CGH: 182, 2L
-o7nson, -L 4L Z PL Tuttle C18H fro>le&s in intercultural researc7h, ppL G1G8\ in L `L Nsante Z _L ^LudyKunst CedsLH Band>ooK o6 international and intercultural co&&unicationL eA>ury farK, $N:VageL
-oAell, L C18H BoA co¶tive is co¶tive researc7Wh, N&erican e7avioral VcientistG2C2H: 181L`agitci>asi, $L C1GH N critical appraisal o6 individualis& and collectivis&: toAard a neA 6or&ulationh, ppL 525
in jL `i&, BL $L Triandis, $L `agitci>asi, VL$L $7oi Z L oon CedsLH Jndividualis& and collectivis&:t7eory, &et7ods, and applicationsL T7ousand UaKs, $N: VageL
`euneKe, VL, L `riener Z L ecKel C1H on leic7e& und jngleic7e&L Prauen i& -ournalis&ush, und6unKund Pernse7enG5C1H: \EG5L
`i&, jL, BL $L Triandis, $L `agitci>asi, VL$L $7oi Z L oon C1GH Jntroductionh, ppL 11 in jL `i&, BL $L Triandis, $L `agitci>asi, VL$L $7oi Z L oon CedsLH Jndividualis& and collectivis&: t7eory, &et7ods, andapplicationsL T7ousand UaKs, $N: VageL
`leinsteu>er, BL -L C2EEGH !$o&paring ass $o&&unication Vyste&s: edia Por&ats, edia $ontents, and ediafrocesses!, ppL G8 in PL sser Z ^L f6etsc7 CedsLH $o&paring folitical $o&&unication: T7eories, $ases,and $7allengesL eA orK: $a&>ridge jniversity fressL
`c7er, L C18H ^lood7ounds or &issionaries: role de6initions o6 er&an and ^ritis7 =ournalistsh, uropean-ournal o6 $o&&unication1C1H: G\GL
`o7n, L RL C18H $rossnational researc7 as an analytic strategyh, ppL 1E2 in L RL `o7n CedLH $rossnationalresearc7 in sociologyL eA>ury farK, $N: VageL
`o7ring, L C1H 4ie PunKtion des _issensc7a6ts=ournalis&usL in syste&t7eoretisc7er ntAur6L Upladen:_estdeutsc7er erlagL
`o7ring, L Z 4L att7ias Bug C1H k66entlic7Keit und -ournalis&usL Xur otAendigKeit der ^eo>ac7tunggesellsc7a6tlic7er Jnterdependen? in syste&t7eoretisc7er ntAur6h, Medien -ournalC1H: 15\\L
Ravie, NL Z VL Re7&an_il?ig C2EE\H _7ose neAsW 4oes gender deter&ine t7e editorial productWh, uropean-ournal o6 $o&&unication18C1H: 52L
Reydesdor66, RL C1H Ru7&annhs sociological t7eory: its operationali?ation and 6uture perspectivesh, Vocial Vcience Jn6or&ation\5C2H: 28\\EL
Rivingstone, VL C2EE\H Un t7e c7allenges o6 crossnational co¶tive &edia researc7h, uropean -ournal o6$o&&unication18CGH: G5EEL
R66el7ol?, L, TL wuandt, TL Banit?sc7 Z `L4L Nlt&eppen C2EE\H Unline=ournalisten in 4eutsc7landL Xentrale^e6unde der ersten eprxsentativ>e6ragung deutsc7er Unline=ournalistenh, Media ferspeKtivenC1EH: GG8L
Roo&is, 4L Z fL eyer C2EEEH Upinion Ait7out polls: 6inding a linK >etAeen corporate culture and pu>lic =ournal
is&h, Jnternational -ournal o6 fu>lic Upinion esearc712C\H: 228GLRu7&ann, L C15H Vocial Vyste&sL Vtan6ord, $N: Vtan6ord jniversity fressLRu7&ann, L C1H 4ie esellsc7a6t der esellsc7a6tL PranK6urt a& ain: Vu7rKa&pLRu7&ann, L C2EEEaH Urganisation und ntsc7eidungL Upladen Z _ies>aden: _estdeutsc7er erlagLRu7&ann, L C2EEE>H T7e eality o6 t7e Mass MediaL Vtan6ord, $N: Vtan6ord jniversity fressLarr, L, L yss, L ^lu& Z BL ^on6adelli C2EE1H-ournalisten in der Vc7Aei?L igensc7a6ten, instellungen,
in6lsseL `onstan?: j`Lassey, ^L RL Z RL NL $7ang C2EE2H Rocating Nsian values in Nsian =ournalis&: a content analysis o6 Ae> neAs
papersh,-ournal o6 $o&&unication25CGH: 81EE\Lasterton, L C1H Jntroductionh, ppL 15 in L asterton CedLH Nsian values in =ournalis&L Vingapore: NJ$Lc$7esney, L _L C2EE\H T7e pro>le& o6 =ournalis&: a political econo&ic contri>ution to an eplanation o6 t7e
crisis in conte&porary jV =ournalis&h,-ournalis& VtudiesGC\H: 2\2L
cReod, -L L Z VL L BaAley C1GH fro6essionali?ation a&ong neAs&enh,-ournalis& wuarterlyG1CGH: 525\LcVAeeney, ^L C2EE2H Bo6stedehs &odel o6 national cultural di66erences and t7eir conse9uences: a triu&p7 o6
6ait7 a 6ailure o6 analysish, Bu&an elations 55C1H: 8118L
7/28/2019 Hanitzsch Comparing
29/31
erritt, 4L C15H fu>lic =ournalis& and pu>lic li6e: A7y telling t7e neAs is not enoug7L Billsdale, -: rl>au&Lolotc7, BL Z L Rester C1GH eAs as purposive >e7aviour: on t7e strategic use o6 routine events, accidents
and scandalsh, N&erican Vociological evieA\C1H: 1E1112Lederveen fieterse, -L C1GH lo>alisation as 7y>ridisationh, Jnternational VociologyC2H: 1118GLoAaK, VL C18H $o¶tive studies and social t7eoryh, ppL \G5 in L RL `o7n CedLH $rossnational researc7 in
sociologyL eA>ury farK, $N: VageLUuc7i, _L L C181H T7eory X: 7oA N&erican >usiness can &eet t7e -apanese c7allengeL eading, N: Nddison
_esleyLfarsons, TL C151H T7e Vocial Vyste&L lencoe, JR: Pree fressLfatterson, TL L Z _L 4ons>ac7 C1H eAs decisions: =ournalists as partisan actorsh, folitical $o&&unication
1\CGH: G55G8Lfeters, TL -L Z L BL _ater&an, -rL C182H Jn searc7 o6 ecellence: lessons 6ro& N&ericahs >estrun co&paniesL eA
orK: Barper Z oALfritc7ard, 4L Z PL Vouvageau C18H T7e =ournalists and =ournalis&s o6 $anadah, ppL \\\\ in 4L BL _eaver
CedLH T7e glo>al =ournalist: neAs people around t7e AorldL $ressKill, -: Ba&pton fressLa&aprasad, -L C2EE1H N pro6ile o6 =ournalists
