Taking the public seriously: three models of responsiveness in media and journalism

Abstract

Media and journalists have an uneasy relationship with their public. They are there for them, but not so much to listen as to speak to -to inform them about what goes on in society, the facts and figures, backgrounds and opinions they deem relevant, interesting, in the public interest or exciting for people to know. Journalists feel slightly uncomfortable when the public respond, especially with criticism of their performance. When their professional roles, reliability and integrity are called into doubt, journalists are often more self-referential (listening to their colleagues) than responsive (listening to their audiences); even when they are aware that more than a third (37 percent) of the European public tend not to trust television and almost half (48 percent) feel equally negative about the press (Eurobarometer 67, 2007). At the same time, journalists need their public, if only to survive in a competitive media market, a fact of which managers and owners may be more acutely aware.The ambiguity of this relationship between journalists and public has recently increased and been put to the test by at least four -interrelated and mutually reinforcing -developments: two inside and two outside the direct realm of journalism. In the first place, with increasing competition between and commercialization within media, and decreasing loyalty and changing news consumption patterns of their audiences, a shift can be noted from a supply to a demand market in communication (Van Cuilenburg, 1998). Media no longer decide exclusively what the public should read, watch or listen to based on what the former think the latter need as democratic citizens. Rather, the assumed wishes and desires of the public have become more decisive for what the media provide. Consequently, the selection of news (what is relevant and important?) could well be based more on market considerations, of what sells and is attractive for the public, than on in the public interest.

Civic journalism meets civic social science: foregrounding social determinants in health coverage

“…What we see here is a shift in emphasis away from journalists telling people what they should be concerned about towards extending the range of voices in societal conversations about what matters to the public (Brants & de Haan, 2010;Deuze, 2005;Hodgetts et al, 2008a;Meijer, 2010). This shift can be facilitated by collaborations between journalists, social scientists and community groups (cf., Salleh, 2008).…”

Amatöörikuvien läheisyys kriisiuutisissa toimittajien ja yleisön tulkitsemina

“…Hujanen jakaa tämän läheisyysstrategian yhtäältä yhteiskunnalliseen (keskustelevaan ja palvelevaan) linjaan ja toisaalta markkinalähtöiseen (elämykselliseen ja viihteelliseen) linjaan (vrt. myös Brants & de Haan 2010). Strateginen tavoite "lähelle pääsemisestä" on näkynyt esimerkiksi yhteiskunnallista linjaa edustavassa kansalaisjournalismin perinteessä, jossa yleisö ymmärre-tään kansalaisiksi ja jossa alleviivataan journalistien tiiviimpää yhteistyötä heidän kanssaan (Ahva 2010).…”

¿(Para) ciudadanos o espectadores? Periodismo político chileno y sus modelos profesionales de aproximación a la audiencia

“…En esta línea, las investigaciones recientes han estudiado la diversificación de modelos de periodismo en relación con la forma en que conciben y abordan al público, tanto como ciudadanos, consumidores, clientes o espectadores, sin que estos "roles" deban ser mutuamente excluyentes (Eide y Knight, 1999;Costera Meijer, 2003;Brants y De Haan, 2010;Atkinson, 2011). Apoyando esta diversificación en el abordaje de los contenidos, diversos estudios han detectado cambios significativos en las prioridades informativas de las audiencias, así como una notable brecha entre la agenda propuesta por los medios y las noticias más leídas/vistas/escuchadas por el público.…”

“…Específicamente, la expansión del infoentretenimiento en el periodismo político en las ultimas décadas representa un cambio decisivo en sus contenidos (Brants y De Haan, 2010;Kristensen y From, 2012). En efecto, la introducción generalizada de temáticas y recursos narrativos del entretenimiento en la cobertura política podría implicar una nueva forma de acercarse e interpelar al público.…”