94 BJR GB News Without Journalists

D o ssie r
News without
Journalists
real threat or horror story?
Copyright © 2010
SBPJor / Sociedade
Brasileira de Pesquisa
Erik Neveu
em Jornalismo Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Rennes (France)
ABST R ACT Journalism as a profession and know-how is caught up in a

whirlwind of changes. The end of the newspaper would not
automatically mean the end of journalism or of journalists, but it
is difficult to imagine how the institution´s collapse could occur
without triggering an earthquake in the definition and practice
of journalism. Journalism as a professional culture with codified
abilities and characteristics runs the risk of being diluted and
transformed into the vague continuum of those who are already
known as “information workers”. This article will suggest how
several contemporary trends are challenging and redefining
journalistic practice. The objective of this article is to advocate
the possibility of defining the journalist as someone who collects
facts that are not on a screen in his office, as someone who talks
to the audiences that are not just consumers and as someone who
maintains sufficient autonomy to practice the skills of a critical
verifier of the news.
Key-words: journalism, transformations, role of the journalist,
trends.
This paper’s title may sound bombastic. I fear that it is simply realistic. Journalism
as a profession and know-how is caught in a whirlwind of changes.
The nature of the media, of skills and knowledge traditionally linked to
the idea of journalism is changing with a combination of brutality and
anxiety, but also of excitement and innovation. A prominent manager
of the French press, Bernard Poulet, wrote a much debated book a few
months ago whose title is simply The end of newspapers (La fin des
journaux, 2009)? The end of newspapers would not automatically mean
the end of journalism or journalists, but it is hard to imagine how the
collapse of the institution, which has been the cradle of the profession,
of its working culture and identity, could occur without triggering an
earthquake in the definition and practice of journalism. The threat can
be simply expressed: Journalism, as a professional culture with codified
and peculiar skills runs the risk of being watered-down into the blurred
continuum of those already called “information workers”.
To answer the question which structures this contribution, I will
BRAZILIANJOURNALISMRESEARCH-Voume6-Number1- 2010 29
Erik Neveu
develop a three-fold analysis. I will come back to an over-debated

question of defining a journalist first, briefly covering this topic that fills
bookshelves and special issues of journals. Yet, how is it possible to
consider the future of journalists, without paying a little attention to the
history and current state of their identities?
From this definition, another part of this article will suggest how
several contemporary trends are challenging and redefining the practice
of journalism. Three of these major changes should be mentioned, which
belong to different time-frames. The first and oldest is the growing ability
of sources to combine direct pressure put on journalists with the soft-
power of ready-made supplies of news, that need little more that a cut
and paste operation to fill the pages and air time of the press and media.
A second structuring trend is linked to the re-organization of capitalism
and corporate management at the end of the blooming years 1945-75
(What the French coin as the “Trente Glorieuses”). The ownership of media
and press groups during this period shifts from small familial groups to
mega-corporations, increasing the pressure for profitability, and thereby
redefining the practical conditions of the work of journalists. The last
trend is the most recent and comes from the changes in the information
supply, speed of coverage, and templates produced by the success of
the Internet and its websites. However, the Internet has produced a
chain reaction through the process called convergence, merging and
combining television, radio and press with online news sites.
The last part of this contribution will consider how journalism and
its professional identity are threatened and redefined. Its aim is not
to forecast an always changing future – even if suggesting that the
disappearance of many daily newspapers or their new positioning as
niche-media for reduced and often privileged readership sounds more like
cold realism than like science fiction. If trying to map the future structure
and hierarchy of media and media uses is closer to reading in tea leaves
than social sciences, I would plead the possibility of identifying some
paths and strategies to avert the worst, to safeguard – without mystifying
it – a definition of the journalist as someone collecting facts other than
on a screen in his/her office, as someone speaking to audiences who are
not only consumers but citizens, someone keeping enough autonomy to
practice the skills of a critical news checker, and not the ambiguous task
of laundering as “news” the messages and speeches of the authorities
and powerful institutions.
The inescapable preliminary definition: Journalist/Journalism
30 BRAZILIANJOURNALISMRESEARCH-Voume6-Number1- 2010
News without Journalists
The demands of social science (the rule of the preliminary definition

so dear to Durkheim), propose a clear analysis and definition of the
character and job of a journalist, threatened with disappearance, and with
high risks for the bio-diversity of democratic life. Defining journalism is
both a major risk and the raison d’être of too many books and studies; I
will briefly confront this question here.
Suggesting a transnational and non-historical definition of the
journalist (“A journalist is….”) would be falling into the essentialist
fallacy for at least four reasons. Journalism belongs to history with
various types of submission to, or autonomy from the literary, political,
and economic fields. Its levels of institutionalization (training schools,
professional norms, and self-organization of the profession) are highly
diverse. It is possible, as Dan Hallin and Paolo Mancini (2004) have
recently proposed, to develop typologies and mappings of journalism
using these parameters, but this would not produce a unified description
of The Journalist.
Journalism is embedded in national traditions. Jean Chalaby
(1998) has shown how an Anglo-American pattern was formed in the
early twentieth century, and how it continues to be a major reference.
However, the French practice has long been different, closer to literature,
and more politically committed. The research developed by Afonso de
Albuquerque (2005) or José Marques de Melo (2009) shows that Brazilian
journalism was initially closer to the French literary style, and later with
the Diário Carioca and the Folha de São Paulo closer to the American
pattern, yet it still kept a strong peculiarity which they connect to the
political vision of the “Poder Moderador”.
If one considers the gathering of news, or its processing into papers
and reports, the core practices of the profession have also been varied
and changed. Denis Ruellan (1993) has given a stimulating approach
which he coined the professionalism of the blurred (professionalisme du
flou). Reading about Brazilian journalism, I recently discovered how the
famous Brazilian journalist Gaspari reached a high level of productivity
when collecting interviews at Galeão Airport. Gaspari asked politicians
flying to Brasília to simply sign interviews that he himself had written,
cutting, pasting and improving the politician’s statements made in other
places. The trick was highly efficient, but would probably never be taught
in any journalism textbook!
If a strong definition is impossible, the reason is also that Journalism
is always struggling to protect its borders, or more precisely, to control
and to define its moving “frontier”. The more organized the profession,
Erik Neveu
the more efficient its “border patrol”. Being considered as a journalist

could mean having specific training in a journalism school. The small
town correspondent who works part-time, the academic who writes
his weekly column would not be labeled as “true” journalists, but the
process of frontier building and frontier control would also mean co-
opting new professions (journalism on the Internet) and organizing
hierarchies (Press vs. Media, TV journalists being long considered
as simple talking heads or dispatch readers). Thus, it is pointless to
search for the essence of journalism, which has training, tasks and
skills that could be similar everywhere, or simply consensual. Should
one conclude that it is definitely impossible to approach any definition
that would make sense to analysts from different countries? It seems
more reasonable, and closer to reality, to suggest that different ways of
practicing “journalism” can be nevertheless linked to some landmarks or
professional imaginary which goes beyond time and space borders. Five
of them must be briefly mentioned.
Researchers drawing on Michel Foucault (Chalaby 1998, Ringoot and
Utard 2005) have highlighted how journalism is an “order of discourse”.
Journalism is a highly codified way of writing and speaking, with
templates and genres of papers, rhetoric organization (the importance
of the lead, the five Ws rule). These rules of journalistic writing/
speaking also organize journalism as a specific language, different from
the language and rhetoric of politics, advertising, or literature. This
journalistic discourse can be very different in Brasília, Rome, and Boston;
it will be identified as journalistic1 in all of these places
Journalism is also a practice of fact gathering, fact selecting and
processing which would transform facts into news. An enormous variety
of practices can be linked to this definition. However it is reasonable
to argue that all share the claim that journalism is not (or should not
be) the docile echo of messages and information produced by sources
(companies, rulers, administrations). The classical distinction theorized
by Tunstall (1971) between “gatherers” and “processors” emphasizes
the existence of these two poles of journalistic practice: collecting facts,
processing and ranking them to produce stories and reports.
Journalism claims a peculiar kind of authority. The meanings of
words such as objectivity, reliability or accountability know many
variations. But they share a core meaning: “We do not tell tales, we
check, we take care that we are saying/printing respects the ‘material’
facts”. Journalists are usually specialized (in sports, business, politics,
science, local news, etc.), even when this specialization is to produce
general information or comments on very varied topics (columnists).

Finally, journalists, as members of any profession, are acting out myths
(Le Bohec, 2000) which give meaning to their job, make it a noble task.
Among the most structuring of these myths one must mention the idea
of serving the public, of seeking objective reports of events, or being a
shield for democracy.
Journalists: endangered species?

Another common denominator in the multi-faceted ways of being a
journalist today is that all face strong shocks and challenges. One can
imagine that tomorrow, a not so distant tomorrow, journalists would
be replaced by information workers, shorthand for a conglomeration of
jobs and activities with the common dimension of offering audiences
news and information. The Internet is boosting the development of this
new professional space. How would journalists dissolve into a broader
group of information workers? Three types of explanations can make
sense out of this change. Starting with the process having the deepest
historical roots, I will first pay attention to the combined process
of source professionalization and to the multiplication of the news-
producing institutions. The analysis will then shift toward the effects of
stronger commercial logics, of a change of balance between what was
coined by Tunstall (1971) as the Press/Media enterprise (the corporate
dimension) and the news production enterprise (journalism). Finally, I
will focus on the most recent move, exploring the impact of the Internet
on journalism. The result of these explorations can draw a rough sketch
of the information workers that are replacing journalists.
From sources to communication floods

One of the basic skills of a journalist is that of building a network of
sources: contacts, partners, or “deep throats” from the social world(s),
covered by one’s newsbeat. These sources give institutional news, leaks,
or background elements to make sense of the facts. Nevertheless, one
of the challenges of journalism is that such sources are never passive,
but pro-active. They work each and every day to flood news-desks with
flows of official reports, press releases, and invitations to pseudo-events.
Often, they behave as the public relations offices or the heralds of
companies and institutions that employ or support them. This problem is
not new. It can be traced back to as early as the 1920’s by Lippman in the
U.S. What changed since these years? Mainly three things: the first is the
process, cleverly analyzed and coined by Philip Schlessinger (1987) as
Erik Neveu
“source professionalization”. Administrations, companies, and NGO’s are

using public relations and communication experts who are well skilled
and often former journalists. They know how to anticipate the timing,
the template and the visions of newsworthiness of the press and media.
A second trend comes from the fact that the army of spin-doctors,
public relations and communication experts is now much bigger in most
democracies that the number of journalists. Aeron Davies (2002) has
described western societies as “public relations democracies”. His book
highlights how the production of economic information, which makes
sense for major actors of business, is under strong control from the
communication services of big companies and banks. The third change is
how sources have developed various and powerful tactics to gain power
over journalists. The rise of spin-doctoring in politics is too visible. One
should also think of the production of media events which give birth to a
virtual reality of artificial situations, scene-setting public problems from
media events. Michael Schudson mentions the fact that Reagan was seen
on U.S. TV screens congratulating the winners of competitions during the
Los Angeles Para-Olympic Games at the very moment when his policies
were curtailing the welfare budgets for crippled people. French President
Sarkozy has transformed into an art this ability to identify the symbolic
spot for an event or social problem, to express strong empathy with
those facing the burdens of difficulties, to make vocal announcements
of new laws and decisions that often have a follow-up limited to the
organization of a new on-the-spot visit and the broadcasting of a new
statement or promise. The major trick of sources is to be more journalist
than journalists: why spend time to shoot some images if Greenpeace
offers an exciting footage of noisy Geiger counters around the French
nuclear waste treatment plant of La Hague, or thrilling views of activists
protecting whales with their small boats facing the mighty harpoons of
whale-hunters? Sources can also use the big stick, the threat of a very
costly legal suit which the British Guardian experienced (Rusbridger,
2009a) when it published reports on the strategies of “tax optimization”
(this very phrase being a successful public relations attempt to substitute
for cheating on their fiscal obligations) of the Tesco group.
Of course, journalists are not powerless or blind when facing
these threats and challenges. They were able to develop a new skill:
deconstructing and criticizing media events, or spin-doctoring, but their
imagination and competence cannot modify hard facts. There are more
public relations experts and more professionals of communication and
advertising producing news, much more than journalists, and they tend
to have higher budgets and more time.
Rising business pressures

Managerial imperative, pressures for higher profit rates have had a
significant impact on the newsrooms in recent years (McManus, 1995;
Neveu, 2009). To prevent any ambiguity, it must be made clear that
managing networks or producing journals has never been a philanthropic
activity, and that media and press companies, as any other kind of
business, must earn money. Trying to make profit with news-making is
neither something new nor something morally or politically shocking,
but at least two major trends emphasize these changes.
Many studies, especially those concerning the media groups in the
U.S., have shown that a process of capitalist concentration has targeted
press companies. When 80% of the press in the U.S. belonged to family-
centered companies in 1950, 80% of the press and networks are now
owned by huge media groups. The same trend exists in France (Lagardère,
Bolloré, EMAP) or Brazil (Globo). The consequences of these changes are
striking. Many groups are expecting from the media and press two-figure
profit rates, and achieved them between 1990 and 2010, with the profit
margin reaching even 35% in some slots of the regional press in the
U.K. (Engel, 2009). The organizational structures of news-making have
changed, weakening the symbolic border between Church and State,
the newsroom, the commercial and managerial services. Managers have
gained power over editors (Underwood, 1993). More and more often
coming from MBA courses or branches of business without relation to
the world of news-making, they view it as a business. They define the
editorial contents that will maximize audience and profits, and read the
newsroom activity as costs to be reduced and cash pumps with room for
improvement. Unimaginable in the past, meetings involving advertisers,
managers, and journalists are becoming less unusual.
Recording these changes without jumping directly to political or
moral criticisms implies taking into consideration their practical impact on
journalists and their careers. The answer is not ambiguous. Maximizing
audiences and profits while reducing production costs means downsizing
the newsrooms and correspondents’ networks, curtailing budgets for
reporting and recruiting risky freelance journalists. This growing army of
freelancers, under the constant menace of unemployment, is more open
to editors’ “friendly” suggestions on how to frame or to angle a paper
before any legwork. Lacking the collective solidarity of a newsbeat,
or simply of the documentary resources from a newspaper’s archives,
Erik Neveu
they are also weaker in regard to sources. These evolutions redefine

newsworthiness according to the ability of newsbeats and the style of
reports that maximize audiences and prevent the excess of critical spirit
capable of harming or producing reactions from important advertisers.
A journalist from Le Monde used to say that in some supplements of his
newspaper – known as “advertising traps” – the right style of writing was
“One subject, one verb, one compliment”. James Hamilton is probably
a good interpreter of the times when he offers an economic rewriting
of the famous rule of the five Ws to produce an “economic theory of the
News: Who cares about a particular piece of Information? What are they
willing to pay to obtain it? Where can media outlets or advertisers reach
these people?” (2006, p 7). Since the web allows audience selection and
targeting of an extraordinary precision, such trends have a bright future.
If one considers the power balance in the press and media worlds, it
is also clear that the institutions which worked as checks and balances
for journalists, and against management, have often been weakened. The
NUJ trade union has been seriously defeated in the U.K by Murdoch and
the number and influence of the “sociétés de rédacteurs” are shrinking
in French media. It is thus logical to see this managerial redefinition
of journalism moving towards the training stage. The appointment of
J Lavine, professor of management as the head of the Northwestern
University Medill School of Journalism triggered a fierce debate in the
U.S. in 2006. He quickly gave a growing importance to courses such
as management and media economics, to skills such as mastering
multimedia work or better understanding the wishes of “audiences and
consumers” (Schulman, 2006). Elisabeth Bird (2009) tells the story of the
Pasadena Now online, where almost all of the Californian staff was fired.
Raw information was sent by e-mail to a cheaper newsroom in India,
plugged into the flow of press agencies; the coverage of the city council
was done by a webcam covering all its debates and a software company
has even recently launched a program capable of writing basic sports
reports (Football, Baseball) using statistics on scores, ball possession,
fouls or off-sides; the program user can even select different styles with
a more or less formal language2. Such examples are not representative,
or not yet, but they show that questioning the future of journalists is
not simply a horror story. The working conditions in the understaffed
newsrooms of the free dailies which cover significant market shares (25%
of the total circulation in France) offer another glimpse of the future.
All of these trends go back twenty or thirty years. They have
been significantly amplified by causes rooted in a shorter time-frame.
The rise of the Internet is central here, even if it cannot be considered

the only explanation for the most recent and dramatic changes. The
French national daily newspapers, for instance, were losing readers and
advertising before the advent of a strong online news supply, and the
success of the free dailies is another explanation of their current crisis.
The impact of the Internet

The impact of the Internet has stricken the press and journalism
which were already in serious trouble. It can be considered a three-
fold impact (Estienne, 2007). The first is a substantial acceleration of
the trends analyzed here. One of the effects of an expanding supply
of online news, and of the supply of free newspapers, has been a shift
of classified ads and advertising budget from the press to the Internet.
Simultaneously, young audiences are massively giving priority to the use
of online news sites, challenging the traditional process of generation
renewal in press readership. The results of these combined processes
are unambiguous. In the U.S., more and more newpapers are closing
their paper edition to keep only an online edition, which is not always
profitable! Ten U.S. dailies were for sale in 2009 without finding buyers,
19 out the 50 largest are losing money. In 2008, 5000 journalists’ jobs
were suppressed, and 2009 has not been much better (de Tarlé, 2009).
Yet, there is no need to say that a poorer press means fewer resources
for its downsized staff of journalists.
However, the impact of the Internet on news production goes much
beyond the simple amplification of already visible trends – it changes
the very job of a journalist. In a business world, with powerful media
groups, this change is called convergence. Journalists no longer work
for a newspaper or a specific kind of media, they feed all the media and
channels of their employers with news. The very process of convergence
can hardly be challenged in itself. Is it not logical and businesslike to
make the best use of journalists’ skills in different media, to target a
news report for the channel where it fits the best, considering variables
such as diffusion speed or reaching specific audiences? The available
research suggests that the experience of journalists in various countries
and companies covers a great variety of situations. Investigating four
multimedia news-desks in the southern U.S., Jane B Singer (2004) shows
that a good portion of journalists express satisfaction. They got the
feeling of richer tasks and gaining access to TV studios or positions
of anchormen was considered a promotion. Beyond the variety of
objective reorganizations and subjective experiences, the main trends
Erik Neveu
among journalists seem to be dissatisfaction and strain. Convergence

downgrades working conditions and challenges self-esteem, which is
one of the pillars of job satisfaction. Studying the U.S. multimedia group
Metro, Eric Klinemberg (2005) captures the increase of stress faced by
journalists in the world of convergence, where each hour is a deadline,
living under the constant pressure of feeding the right media with the
right contents. A journalist explains this pressure, describing his daily
routines as being caught in an “informational cyclone”. The strongest
strain, however, comes from feeling insufficiently trained to properly
work in different media, from the anxiety of being a juggler having to
produce for the web-site, the press, radio and television. The metaphor of
the duck-billed platypus, which highlights the feeling of being a clumsy
creature instead of having the grace of omni-competence, is sometimes
used in newsrooms to make sense out of the surprising combination of
skills required from journalists in the convergence era. Marc François
Bernier’s (2008) study, among French-Canadian journalists, is perfectly
clear regarding these problems. Journalists expressed feelings of
frustration and disqualification. They were critical of the compulsory
practice of convergence and felt unable to behave as good journalists
in several media. The result is a high turnover rate, a shrinking belief in
the founding myths of the profession. One of these journalists declared
that companies are more interested in recruiting “good employees than
good journalists”.
Still, the most important effect of the expanding supply of online
news is to produce a continuum of sites and contents which blurs the
amateur/professional and original/recycled news divides, challenging
the distinction between journalism, commentary and public relations
(Ruellan and Thierry, 1998). The web is also a huge mosaic of sites
managed by companies, NGO’s and passionate fans, prophets, or hidden
lobbies in quest of audiences. Many of these sites are user-friendly,
exciting, offering generous amounts of news too. The explosion of the
news supply also comes from blogs. Most of these only have family and
friends to claim as an audience, and the huge majority does not claim to
offer scoops or even comments on social issues. But among the millions
of blogs, even if only a small percentage produce varied kinds of para- or
meta-journalism, this means a galaxy of news supply. Very few among
them have access to fame and significant traffic flows (Huffington
Post or GregPalast in the U.S., Koztoujours or Journal d’un Avocat in
France). The new undecipherable map of news supply also comes
from the opportunity of posting and downloading videos, sometimes
shot from a mobile phone, on sites such as You Tube. It comes from
the growing connection between social networks (Twitter, Facebook)
and news circulation and production, or the invention of alternative
media, such as the Korean OhmyNews (Kim & Hamilton, 2006), where
ordinary citizens work with professional journalists. For the web users,
the result is an almost infinite supply of free news sites, with layouts of
code writing and narrative templates similar to those of the press and
“official” media. In this new “sea of narratives”, it is not always easy to
get the answer to very simple questions such as Who speaks (a media,
a company, a lobby?), Who writes (a journalist, a public relations expert,
a fan or an activist?) and What for (to inform, to plead, to criticize?). Can
one interpret these changes that we are witnessing as the triumph of
journalism? Using the journalistic order of discourse, its template and
its skills is definitely the necessary condition for speaking in the new
public sphere. All are journalists: here is the triumph of the profession!
Such an interpretation does not fit in with many facts. Many of the basic
principles and regulations of the profession are forgotten. The simple
rule of fact-checking is no longer central, the basic functioning of many
sites is based on cutting and pasting news produced by others, hijacking
the work of real journalists, or laundering as “news” the communication
of institutional sources or organized interests – these are a few examples.
To put it in a nutshell, the effect of internet can be summarized in
a paradox. Never in history has so much data been available to mass
audiences. Never has the production of accountable and analytical
news – journalism – been so strongly weakened by the crumbling of
its funding sources.
Here come the information workers!

What is the impact, the “convergence”, of the three trends surveyed
here? One of the most important is the gradual shift of the workforce
from journalists to information workers. What is the profile of this
new cog of the news-making process? He/she is polyvalent, no longer
specialized. The information worker is not defined by a specialty (politics,
weather report) but by his/her ability to fill news-slots on varied topics,
for different kinds of media and press. The logic of convergence and
the management of a flexible workforce are combining here, and this
process of de-specialization can be identified in three trends at least.
The most visible, and often brutal, is the growing importance
of insecure jobs, of free-lance journalists condemned to cover a huge
variety of topics (Accardo, 1998) for low wages. Another trend is the
Erik Neveu
disappearance of the specialized journalists who are considered part of

the newsbeats which appear as the most costly or the less capable of
achieving a significant audience or readership. The number of foreign
correspondents is crumbling, even in the broadsheets. More than 520
journalists worked as correspondents for U.S. press and media in foreign
capitals in 2003; there were only 350 in 20093. TF1, the first French
network has not even kept a permanent correspondent in Berlin, one
of the country’s top business and diplomatic partners. In the U.S., the
“Military Reporters and Editors Association” has seen its membership
collapse from 600 in 2000 to less than 100 in 2008. The explanation
does not come, unfortunately, from the skyrocketing progress of peace
and disarmament during the Bush years, but rather from downsizing
and cost-killing strategies in the news business. De-specialization has
finally become a managerial strategy, targeting what was considered
as the excessive autonomy of “feudalities” among newsrooms. Many
empirical studies suggest that such feudalities exist or existed, behaving
sometimes like a newsroom in the newsroom. On the other hand, over-
amplifying the mobility of journalists between newsbeats means losing
skills, memory, or knowledge of the who-how-why, often modifying the
power balance in favor of sources. The case study offered by Eugénie Saitta
(2008) concerning the battle won by the editors of “Le Monde” against the
political service of the flagship of the French Press is illuminating.
The trend toward de-specialization can also be considered as the
birth of a brand new specialty, a shift in journalistic skills. The information
worker is a specialist of news reprocessing or recycling rather than a news
producer (Rébillard, 2006). To use Klinemberg’s funny metaphor, he/she
is stricken by a new virus from the web, the virus which mesmerizes
him/her in front of the computer. The information worker does not
do much legwork, but works with dispatches from press agencies,
statements from institutions, companies, and the officialdom. He fishes
on the web. His core know-how is reprocessing information produced by
someone else. One of the impacts of the convergence process among the
Metro group in the U.S. was a collapse of 48% in the number of stories
involving investigative reporting. But the shrinking of journalism is
also, as has already been emphasized, the reduction of the volume and
weight of international news at the very moment when “globalization”
is used in each and every report. Translated into Tunstall’s lexicon, the
global evolution suggests that information workers are closer to the
pole of processing than to the news-gathering origins of journalism. The
question faced is: where does the reprocessed news come from? From
press agencies – at least for the companies able to pay4 - more often from
institutional sources (companies, administrations and politicians, NGOs)
that are usually offering information which does not paint them black.
Speaking of recycling also leads to questioning the writing of templates.
Journalistic formats will not lose their peculiarity but they will be closer
to advertising ones, caught in the straightjacket of very short texts and
attractive layouts, no longer available for pyrotechnics à la Tom Wolfe,
as this is visible in the free Metro, from Stockholm to Madrid. To use
the linguistic categories of Jakobson, an information worker must be
obsessed by the ”phatic” and “conative” functions of language – checking
the contact, anticipating the audience reaction – much more than by
those coined as “referential” or “meta-lingual”, targeting the explanation
of the backgrounds or questioning the precise meaning and choice
of words. No more George Orwell, Joseph Liebling, or Albert Londres
among them; their articles were awfully long and impossible to read,
using more than a 400 word vocabulary! The growing focus on the quest
for the attention of audiences, caught in a whirlwind of messages and
media exposures, suggests the new trend. Modern journalism works
as the “chewing gum of the eyes”, to use Ramonet’s metaphor about
Television, rather than having to make sense of the world for oneself.
Theorizing what they describe as a new paradigm of “communication
journalism”, the Canadian researchers from Laval University in Quebec
(Brin, Charron, de Bonville, 2005) are offering an illuminating description
of the style and rhetoric of these new news-workers. The claims of such
journalists are no longer the analytical distance, the over-arching vision
of those located at the core of the panoptikon or any authority linked
to the old idea of Enlightenment. Communication journalists/workers
are claiming closeness and simplicity. They boast that they identify
with their readers’ visions and needs. They promise nothing more than
making things simple, offering useful advice to find one’s way in a world
structured by the consumption of goods, leisure, and services. This last
category includes even politics. It is also the symbolic capital, the driving
force coming from the belief – even if mythical – of belonging to an
extraordinary profession, of serving the public which vanishes here.
The information worker is a man or a woman bound by many
constraints. The size and format of his/her papers are defined by a
computer program; working in an open space, he/she does not even have
a private office space, most of the time he/she stays in the newsroom,
the telephone and the screen replacing the old legwork. Of course
getting a secure job would usually require years of short-term contracts
Erik Neveu
and free-lance experiences. When the practical conditions of the job

are devalued, when even the opportunity to ennoble it into a vocation
becomes dubious, then the risk of becoming cynical or disenchanted is
strong. Another horror story? One out of four individuals who started
as journalists in France in 1990 has already left the profession, often
due to disappointment or weariness. Half of the German journalists
consider from now on as their first mission “to entertain and to relax”,
transforming into their subjective norm their objective experience. It is
indeed difficult for the new generations of information workers facing the
new definitions of their tasks to pretend to be muckrakers, frightening
the mightiest, or the white knights of democracy. They can merely claim
the minor public service mission of guiding consumption.
Averting the worst?

Before developing some suggestions concerning the opportunities
open to journalists, researchers and audiences to advert “horror stories”
in news-making, one must remember how “liquid” is the future, even the
immediate one. Recently invited to offer his contribution on the future
of the profession to a special issue of Journalism, Michael Schudson
(2009) wisely chose to look ten years back. He simply highlighted that
in 1999 the Blackberry, YouTube, and Wikipedia did not exist. Blogs were
confidential, the social networks of the web simple dreams or blueprints.
Anticipating tomorrow’s communication technologies, their uses or the
ability of audiences and groups to behave as technology-poachers is
impossible. Let us keep as an element of mystery the question “Where”,
the puzzle of tomorrow: the hierarchy of media and the question of the
future status of the press (luxury item, niche news for a happy few).
Exploring the How would be less foolhardy. I suggest five approaches for
helping tomorrow’s news producers remain closer to journalists and their
myths than to the dull bureaucracy of data producers.
The resources of public support

A first answer may be surprising, challenging, or seem typically
French. I mention it, however, with a high ranking, looking for the helping
hand of the state. One can start here from two preliminary observations
which are the frame of my argument. The first one comes from the
very logic of the news business. If the trends which have been depicted
here are confirmed, the current business model of news production
will crash. If on the one hand advertising revenues and audiences are
mainly attracted by websites and news supplies that usually add and
remove news produced by press and media which, on the other hand,
suffer from a growing hemorrhage of funding and audiences, the final
result could only be the disappearance of main news producers. How,
then, would it be possible to recycle or process news which would no
longer be produced? Such a self-cannibalizing system will require policy
action, or future access to accountable and rich information will be
the privilege of the well-to-do and well-educated. It will become news
production shifting towards institutional and corporate sources without
any journalistic control and critical processing.
A second starting point, and a more political one, would be to claim
that a democracy is something more that the rule of market applied to
politics. This does not mean that the market is evil, or that citizens never
behave as consumers. One can even reasonably claim that a selfish and
rational voting behavior, if such a thing exists other than in the dreams
of rational choice theoreticians, can boost critical abilities A democracy,
however, is a system which needs citizens reasonably well-informed on
public issues, and not only on sports results or sales, and such access to
the news requires press and media.
Public policies can in many different ways bring their contribution to
a news production based on strong standards of quality, respecting the
professional standards of journalists’ codes. The state can help institutions
and companies producing (and not just recycling) original and trustworthy
news. A small tax on the salaries of each public relations expert or
professional “communicator” could produce lots of money which could
be channeled into financial support for press agencies – those respecting
the requirement of “citizen contents”. For over two centuries, even in the
U.S. (Cook, 1998), peculiar and friendly fiscal regulations or postal rates
have been applied. Paid public communication has been channeled first
towards general information press and media. One can even imagine
a system of public certification of the quality of the news with a kind
of ISO label which could testify that most of the news are produced,
not merely cut and pasted. Such norms should also pay attention to the
relative weight of some newsbeats (politics, International information,
social problems) which would receive a fair percentage of the newspaper
pages or air time. More reactive repertoire policies could tax the websites
or news suppliers based on the simple reuse or hijacking of news that
they do not produce. A survey of the experiments carried out in different
countries would suggest many solutions and paths: offering tax shelters
for newspapers or media channels choosing to act as foundations or
non-profit organizations, or giving – as President Sarkozy did in France
Erik Neveu
– a free subscription to a daily newspaper to all new citizens in the year

they attain legal adulthood.
The major objection to such suggestions is crystal clear; they will
open the door to a complete takeover by the state of the press and media.
Journalism would become a state institution, re-inventing the Soviet
System. It would be ridiculous to deny that such a temptation will exist,
that the state umbrella could become more a threat than an opportunity,
especially in countries with a frail tradition of democratic culture or
lacking in checks and balances. But it is absolutely wrong to conclude
that, practically speaking, state funding or regulations supporting a
quality news-making will automatically produce a state-controlled media
system. The history of many cultural institutions in the Western World
suggests the opposite lesson. Many areas of production of free speech,
creative thinking, and critical checks and balances have been both
institutionalized by the state and are working as limits to this power.
Such is the case not only of Universities and Academies in French history,
but also in many Foundations or think-tanks receiving public funding,
tax exemptions and freedom of organization which provide the basis
for their influence. If public institutions working as public services of
culture, information or education were really the slaves of governments,
these governments would not make such efforts to weaken or privatize
them! If someone wishes to hear on the French radio criticism of the
government and columnists lampooning the president or prime-minister,
the best advice would be to listen to public radios and not private ones.
The balance sheet of pro-active policies of state support to the press
in Sweden suggest that the result of these actions has been better
survival in the face of economic challenges, more diversity of the press,
and even more adversarial styles of reporting5. One of the safeguards
established by Swedish law was the allocation of financial resources on
the basis of clear and transparent rules, by professionals of the press
and media, not by state administrations. Establishing a monitoring and
regulating body, the majority of whose members should be journalists or
representatives of the audiences, not civil servants or politicians, would
be a wise precaution indeed. The mission of such a body should include
a follow-up of these policies and the ringing of an alarm-bell if they were
the Trojan Horse for political control of the press and media. The fact that
the Columbia Journalism Review, which is not a loudspeaker of socialist
ideas, is now publishing papers6 considering the pros and cons – with
more and more pros – of public support for the press is a good indicator
of the urgency of such reforms.
In a report which is must reading, Leonard Downie and Michael

Schudson (2009) recently considered “The reconstruction of American
Journalism”7. In a political and cultural context very different from the
French one, they were careful not to plead for direct state intervention,
but developed, however, suggestions which are parallel to those
mentioned here. Their first recommendation is a tax reform allowing
“any independent news organization substantially devoted to reporting
on public affairs to be created as or converted into a non-profit entity or
a low profit limited liability corporation serving the public interest” (p 45).
Their second recommendation was the following call: “philanthropists and
national and community foundations should substantially increase their
support for news organizations that have demonstrated a substantial
commitment to public affairs and accountability reporting”. The third
suggestion was an invitation for “increased congressional funding and
support for public media news reporting…”
Using the partners’ strength

A second approach for reflection could come from oriental fighting
sports such as judo or aikido that use the opponent’s strength together
with their fighting spirit to resist and to win.
The desire of many readers and viewers to play a more pro-active
role, the rise of a continuum of information supply between amateur and
professional journalism, and the growing number of adding websites
are not temporary crazes – they will last. Riding and taming the tiger is
thus a cleverer tactic than opposing a pointless resistance. The balance
sheet of the rich experiences of “civic” or “participant” journalism is
worth considering. Here again, the remarks of Alan Rudsbriger (2009b),
from the Guardian, are illuminating. He argues that on many issues and
topics, amateur websites mobilizing many Internet-users can do better
than understaffed journals or networks. TheyWorkForYou offers the most
complete resource for identifying and evaluating the activities of British
Members of Parliament and for making their speeches immediately
available. Fixmystreet allows any British inhabitant to post information
concerning the problems of streets and roads (potholes, graffiti, poor
street lighting), making them available by simply typing a zip code, and
producing a richer data bank that any local newspaper. The tactic of
The Guardian was to mobilize the knowledge and participation of the
audience. When a man, Ian Tomlinson, died during the demonstrations
against the G20 meeting in London in April 2009, The Guardian called on
all those who had shot photographs with cameras or telephones to send
Erik Neveu
their snapshots. It was thus able to produce the proof that he had been
hit by policemen. When the scandal of the private expenses of British
Members of Parliament covered by public money exploded, journalists
were facing an impossible challenge: investigating all the available bills
and documents would have meant checking nearly 500,000 documents.
The Guardian made 460,000 of these documents available online and
23,000 Internet-users started ferreting, opening 210,000 of these
files. They discovered more cases of corruption that a whole pack of
investigative reporters would ever have, and their discoveries hit the
headline of The Guardian, giving birth to critical and in-depth analysis by
the journalists. When The Guardian started to investigate the strategies
for tax evasion by big companies, some of the most interesting data
were sent to its website by employees and trade unionists from the
Barclays Bank. As it was already visible with the best or the “public/
civic” journalism, there is clearly room for innovation in professional/
amateur journalism, combining the best of the analytical and expressive
skills of journalists with the investigative and ubiquitous resources of the
audience. The Guardian’s innovations have also been indexing the link to
some of its papers and reports produced with the help of readers to their
networks on Twitter. The number of people connected to the technology
news section is now three times larger than the number of subscriptions,
generating more advertising revenues which allow funding for good
scientific journalists. Downie and Schudson (2009) highlight the fact that
the most recent Pulitzer Prize for “explanatory reporting”, given in 2009 to
two journalists of The Los Angeles Times for reporting on the causes and
prevention of wildfires8, rewarded papers making wide use of online data
but improving them by a “fresh and painstaking exploration”. Finally the
more directly “participative” experience of “Get Off the Bus”9, supported
by the Huffington Post and Jay Rosen during the 2008 presidential
election in the U.S., had thousands of citizens contributing to campaign
coverage going much beyond the small world of candidates and public
relations experts and political reporters. It produced scoops such as the
report of Obama’s desperate statement on rural working class voters:
“It’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns and religion
or antipathy for people who aren’t like them”. If the experience was
criticized, it is mainly for its lack of fine editing, a weakness which would
have been prevented precisely by more cooperation with professional
journalists (Michel, 2009).
Social Science and Journalism
A third suggestion would emphasize how much social sciences can

become a resource for journalists, both to support a kind of back-to-
basic movement as well as to strengthen their professional identity.
Such a proposal may sound like a paradox when anti-intellectualism is
so strong in many journalism schools, at least in France (Ruffin, 2003).
Also, when any kind of knowledge or training lacking immediate,
practical or technical utility is considered a lost investment or pointless
resource. To be clear, the issue is not to transform journalists into
sociologists. Sociologists too will fight for their own territory, and
publishing sociological papers would probably give the final blow to a
sick press. But as it has been explained by Carlos Eduardo Franciscato
and Josenildo Luiz Guerra (2006), using or poaching social sciences can
permit the production of strong and innovative journalism. One can
mention here precision journalism, combining statistical data and reader-
friendly computer graphics to highlight social trends or complex issues.
Journalists can also use the skills of ethnographers, practicing immersion
or empathy journalism (Boynton, 2005). I would suggest reading the
books combining papers written by Leon Dash (1997) or Adrian Nicole
Le Blanc (2004) in their ethnographic explorations of the depths of the
ordinary lives and souls of the poorest and most marginal Afro-Americans.
One of the very few texts capable of transforming financial bubbles and
stock exchange crashes into something understandable are the papers
produced by Michael Lewis (1989), a journalist “embedded” at Salomon
brothers, as a bond salesman in Wall Street and London. The mix of
sociological perspective and detective inquiries giving birth to the books
by Jon Kracauer about the voluntary disappearance of a young student
“Into the Wild” (1985), or the violent behavior of Mormon fundamentalists
(2004) is also worth mentioning. Here is journalism capable of looking
at the backstage of power; paying attention, without populism and with
empathy, to the losers and the wretched of the social world. The fact
that such journalism has become so rare – especially in the daily press
– might be a reason for its crumbling sales. This journalism, supported
by social sciences, can offer a rich palette of feature papers, reports and
social investigations deep and human, pleasant to read and challenging.
No blogger or information worker will do it by a simple process of data-
mining in front of her/his screen.
Another major issue can be mentioned here. The transformation
of journalists into information workers also comes more than once in
the name of audiences. Some people in the Marketing or Research and
Development (R&D) Departments do know what the audience/readership
Erik Neveu
wants: shorter papers, less blah-blah, less boring international and

political news, funnier, more thrilling and more useful news. A recent
French PhD thesis by Marie Brandewinder (2009), was devoted to the
consultants who prepare new layouts and new templates for the press,
who explain to journalism how to write sexy and on which topics. One
of her discoveries was that the majority of these experts and pundits
speak in the name of the public without ever having made the smallest
practical investigation of its wishes (the impact of their prescriptions
is usually a bit more crumbling of sales). Conversely, the French press
groups which show the best resistance to the loss of readership are those
having strong R&D services, making traditional sociologically-oriented
inquiries, debating with academicians. These groups organize frequent
qualitative and quantitative investigations on the readership, its profiles
and habits, its feedback to newspapers’ contents. Here again, an applied
and serious use of sciences, combining the knowledge of academics
with that of companies´ R&D services would certainly not reveal that
viewers/readers are a mix of morons and fashion victims unable to read
more than 1,600 signs or to understand messages utilizing more than
500 different words.
Journalism Unbound
Winning back the value of creativity is another approach. For several
reasons, including: standardization of article sizes by computer software,
newsroom downsizing, convergence considered as a mere importation of
screen layouts on paper pages, the invention of new formats and original
templates has shifted from newsrooms to websites, from journalists
to talk show hosts. The obsessive focus on practical training in many
journalism schools should also be questioned. When the good journalist
is simply someone answering the five Ws in 400 words, using computer
software to put a video on line, or cutting and pasting press releases into
a paper, in-depth analysis and bright style vanish.
Journalists must explore and invent new genres, practice textual and
visual interbreeding to conquer new audiences. The New Journalism has
offered an example of an original and striking combination of ethnography,
soft news and experimental writing. It offered this kind of realistic
approach that Brecht defined as “making sense of the complexity of social
relationships”. To suggest examples borrowed from the French press and
media, narrative métissage could mean reinventing old genres. Legavre
(2004) shows how the portrait was reinvented, combining photographs,
interviews and mini-biographies, utilizing psychological and sociological
tool kits, seriousness and smile. Long considered as dull and boring,
the old genre of the obituary recently gained new youthfulness in “Le
Monde” with elegant black and white photos and long papers sometimes
used as alibis for looking back at commitments or moments of history
with or without capital H. Narrative interbreeding is also invention and
diversion. Due to the low cultural status of television, it is only during
the eighties that columns dedicated to TV criticism appeared in the
press. Journalists such as Serge Daney (1988), Daniel Schneiderman
and Pierre Marcelle transformed the commentary of TV programming
and shows into a witty and illuminating exploration of French politics
and society. Launched in 2003, So Foot offers a surprising redefinition
of a sport magazine. This monthly combines interviews and gossip. Its
readers can find in the same issue sexy pictures of players’ girlfriends,
reports on clubs or fans with a true sociological background and ironic
self-analysis. The initial bet was to produce a journal which would not
claim to get scoops from leading characters (coaches, star players). The
distance from these powerful sources will provide the freedom of a less
deferential style. The audience support was strong enough, less than ten
years later, to give So Foot enough weight to gain interview access with
the French coach Domenech, lampooned in each issue. The quest for new
patterns of journalism is also visible online with Mediapart. Access to this
online news site is only possible with a paid subscription. The editorial
contents combine the contribution of journalists and a “club”, fed by the
blogs of subscribers, including a significant number of academicians,
offering in-depth analysis of major policy issues or events. As websites
exist for every kind of passion and interest, journalism would have to
explore and invent niches. In a French media landscape where tradition of
magazines such as the US New Yorker or Esquire never existed, a handful
of journalists, fed up with shorter formats and curtailed travel budgets,
decided to launch a quarterly, XXI, dedicated to long reports, investigation
of ordinary lives (fruit-pickers in Provence, postman in the remote French
countryside). The bet looked like suicide, but after a difficult start, XXI
rose from 23,000 issues sold to 45,000 eighteen months later, with
subscriptions skyrocketing from 500 to 5,000 in two years.
Giving back to journalists and journalism their ability to attract
audiences also rehabilitates critical speech. Critical is not a synonym for
partial or politically committed, it simply means questioning authorities
and institutional discourses, challenging the routines of common sense
which is often the mask for power and interest. Why should audiences
spend money and demonstrate their trust to support business journalism
Erik Neveu
when it is hypnotized by the neo-liberal doxa and the spokespersons of

big companies, which revealed an extraordinary blindness in anticipating
the stock exchange crisis of 2008? Why should working class audiences
behave as addicts of media and journals which describe them with visible
disgust as the “populist” threat to democracy, or as responsible for the
illegitimate burden of welfare expense?
After criticizing the devastating impact of business rationality,
considering too often media and journals as cash-cows, and as a
business whose only peculiarity was its high profit rate, one may suggest
another look at the business of journalism. Economic theory emphasizes
the competitive importance of “comparative advantages”. Which are
those of journalists in the new media landscape of online news? They
will not come from their ability to produce more news on more topics
than the army of amateurs and semi-professionals feeding the net, nor
from mobilizing power where they will always be defeated when a social
network or social movement launches a call for data from Internet users.
Basically, the comparative advantages of journalists remain fourfold, and
perfectly identified, even by those in charge of recruiting for multimedia
companies (Fahmy, 2008):
1) A know-how for checking facts quickly, for “sourcing” and tracking
the producer of information. Without such processing, it is impossible
to make any efficient distinction between public relations, hoaxes and
reasonably believable facts.
2) A speed/accuracy balance which remains the best way of
giving background and in-depth interpretations to the news, as well as
to produce something as accountability of the statements of primary
definers. This difference comes mainly from the very organization
and potential for coordination of a news-desk: specialized news-beats,
trained professional, and access to archives and networks of sources.
3) The command of an “order of discourse” which, often more than
amateur bloggers´ or webmasters’ speeches that tend to lack good
editing (Russial, 2009), can combine clear expression, correct use of the
language and expressive or emotional strength.
4) The power of professional myths; they are always bigger and
better than professional reality which is also made up of compromises,
cynicism and constraints. As long as they live, they inject, however, in
journalists’ subjectivities the feeling that they serve truth, democracy,
or the community, but always something greater than routines. Myths
can boost what Bourdieu describes as Illusio: a self-propelling faith and
energy, larger and more powerful that those of the mercenary public
relations expert or the part-time blogger.

Moving beyond and above the realm of economics and the issues
of business, the truth is self-evident. A society is not simply a system of
markets worth being envisioned with some solemnity, human societies
are also puzzles to be understood, with different experiences to be
made visible, injustices to be challenged, shared goals to be identified.
Journalism cannot manage all these issues and journalists have not
always deserved praise for their ability or determination to face them.
But even labeled as “information society”, a world without journalists
would be more impenetrable, more difficult to understand, more open
to manipulation.
Notes
1 If a French professor writes in the margin of a student’s essay «

journalistique »… it means not deep enough, full of clichés. There is no
need to say that “très universitaire” (very academic) is not a compliment
when used in a newsroom.
2 Cf Yves Eudes, L’ère des Robots-Journalistes, Le Monde, March 10, 2010,

p 15.
3 After reaching a peak of 60,000 in the early nineties, the number of

journalists in the USA has been rolled back to its level of 1970 (40,000).
4 A way of cutting the cost of the subscriptions is also to reduce them to

the minimum level. In November 2009 the U.S. Group Tribune decided to
reduce its uses of the Associated Press. In France the regional newspapers
“Paris-Normandie” and “La Provence” ended their subscription to the
Agence France Presse, to buy only the “France” dispatches service of
Reuters at the cost of 60,000 euros a year, against the 550,000 of the
full subscription to AFP. One of the unanticipated consequences of this
cost-killing choice was a loss of information for the popular newsbeat
concerning crime stories.
5 See Karl Eric Gustafsson’s report: http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/

d/3011/a/19032
6 Bree Nordenson, “The Uncle Sam Solution: Can the government help
the Press? Should it?” CJR September-October 2007, pp 37-45, and more
recently a complete editorial “A Helping hand”, November-December
2009, p 4.
Erik Neveu
7 h t t p : / / w w w. j o u r n a l i s m . c o l u m b i a . e d u / c s / C o n t e n t S e r v e r /
jrn/1212611716674/page/1212611716651/JRNSimplePage2.htm
8 http://www.pulitzer.org/citation/2009-Explanatory-Reporting
9 The name is a reference to Timothy Crouse’s book “ The boys in the bus”.
Crouse showed how the permanent closeness of journalists, politicians
and their advisors, spending weeks in the same buses, hotels and planes
was producing both dependence on the official sources and a shared
vision of what mattered and was newsworthy.
Bibliography
ACCARDO Alain, 1998, Journalistes précaires, Bordeaux, Le Mascaret.

ALBUQUERQUE Afonso de, 2005, Another ‘Fourth Branch’. Press and
political culture in Brazil, Journalism, Vol 6 (4), pp 486-604.
BERNIER Marc-François, 2008, Journalistes au pays de la convergenc,
Quebec, Presses de l’Université Laval,
BRIN Colette, CHARRO Jean & BONVILLE Jean de, 2005, Nature et
transformation du journalisme : Théorie et recherches empiriques,
Quebec, Presses de l’Universite Laval.
BIRD Elisabeth, 2009, The future of journalism in the digital environment,
Journalism, Vol 10 (3), pp 293-5.
BOYNTON Robert, 2005, The New New Journalism, New York, Vintage.
BRANDEWINDER Marie, 2009, Le journalisme et les consultants : Le conseil
médias dans les entreprises de presse, PhD Political Science, University
Rennes 1
CHALABY Jean, 1998, The Invention of Journalism, London, St Martin
Press, London
COOK Timothy, 1998, Governing with the News, The News Media as a
Political Institution, Chicago, Univestity of Chicago Press.
DANEY Serge, 1988, Le Salaire du Zappeur, Paris, Ramsay.
DASH Leon, 1997, Rosa Lee, New-York, Plume.
DAVIS Aeron, 2002, Public Relations Democracy, Manchester, Manchester
University Press.
DEUZE Mark, 2005, What is Journalism? Profesional Identity and ideology
of journalists reconsidered, Journalism, Vol 6 (4), 2005, pp 442-464
DOWNIE Leonard & SCHUDSON Michael, 2009, The reconstruction of
American Journalism, Columbia Journalism Review, Nov-Dec, pp
28-51.
ENGEL Matthew, 2009, Local papers: an obituary. British Journalism

Review, Vol 20 (2) June,
ESTIENNE Yannick, 2007, Le journalisme aprés Internet, Paris, L’Harmattan.
EUDES, Yves. L´êre dês Robots-Journalistes. Le Monde. 10 mar. 2010, p. 15.
FAHMY Shahira, 2008, How Online journalists rank Importance of news
Skills., Newspaper Research Journal, Vol 29 (2), pp 23-39
FRANCISCATO Carlos Eduardo & GUERRA Josenildo Luiz, 2006,
Contributions of Qualitative Research to Journalistic Reporting,
Brazilian Journalism Review, Vol 2 (2), pp 83-97.
HALLIN Dan & MANCINI Paolo, 2004, Comparing Media Systems,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
HAMILTON James, 2006, All the News That’s Fit To Sell. How the Market
Transforms Information Into News, Princeton, Princeton University
Press.
KIM Eun-Gyoo & HAMILTON James W, 2006, Capitulation to Capital?
OhmyNews as alternative media, Media, Culture and Society, Vol
28(4), pp 541-60.
KLINEMBERG Erik, 2005, Convergence : News Production in a digital age,
Annals, AAPSS, n° 597, pp 48-64.
KRACAUER Jon, 1995, Into the Wild, New York , Anchor Books.
KRACAUER Jon, 2004, Under the banner of Heaven, New York, Anchor
Books.
LE BOHEC Jacques, 2000, Les mythes professionnels des journalistes, Paris,
L’Harmattan.
LEGAVRE Jean-Baptiste, 2004, La presse écrite : objets délaissés, Paris,
L’Harmattan.
LEWIS Michael, 1989, Liar’s Poker. Rising through the wreckage no Wall
street, New York, Norton
MARQUES de MELO (José), 2009, Journalistic Thinking. Brasil’s Modern
Tradition, Journalism Vol 10(1), pp 9-27.
McMANUS John, 1995, Market-driven journalism. Let the Citizens Beware,
London, Sage.
MICHEL Amanda, 2009, Get Off the Bus. The future of Pro-Am journalism,
Columbia Journalism Review, March-April, pp 42-45
NEVEU (Erik), 2009, Sociologie du journalisme, Paris, La découverte.
Le BLANC Adrian-Nicole, 2004, Random Family, New-York, Scribner.
NORDENSON, Bree. The Uncle Sam Solution: Can the government help the
Press? Should it? CJR set.-out. 2007, pp. 37-45.
POULET (Bernard), 2009, La fin des journaux, Paris, Gallimard.
REBILLARD (Franck), 2006, Du traitement de l’information à son
Erik Neveu
retraitement. La publication de l’information journalistique sur

Internet, Réseaux, n°137, pp29-69.
RINGOOT Roselyne & UTARD Jean-Michel, 2005, Le journalisme en
invention, Rennes, Presses Universitaires de Rennes ;
RUELLAN Denis, 1993, Le professionnalisme du flou, Grenoble, PUG.
RUELLAN Denis & THIERRY Daniel, 1998, Nouvelles Technologies de
Communication, L’Harmattan, Paris.
RUFFIN (François), 2003, Les petits soldats du journalisme, Paris, Editions
des arènes.
RUSBRIDGER Alan, 2009a, A Chill on ‘The Guardian’, New York Review of
Books, Vol 56 (1).
RUSBRIDGER Alan, 2009b, I’ve seen the future and it’s mutual, British
Journalism Review, Vol 20 (3), pp 19-26.
RUSSIAL John, 2009, Copy editing Not Great priority for Online Stories,
Newspaper Research Journal, Vol 30 (2), pp 6-15
SAÏTTA Eugéni), 2006, Les transformations du journalisme politique depuis
les années 1980. Une comparaison France-Italie, PhD Political Science,
University Rennes 1.
SCHLESINGER Philip,1987, Putting ‘Realitye Together, London, Methuen.
SCHUDSON Michael, 2009, Ten years backwards and forwards, Journalism,
Vol 10(3), pp 368-70.
SCHULMAN Daniel, 2006, The magician, Columbia Journalism Review,
July-August, pp 33-37
SINGER Jane B, 2004, More than ink-stained wretches: The re-socialization
of print journalists in converged newsrooms, Journalism and Mass
Communication Quartelrly, Vol 81(4), pp 838-856.
TARLE Antoine de, 2009, La presse écrite face à Internet, Etudes, n° 4, pp
29-39.
TUNSTALL Jeremy,1971 , Journalists at Work, London, Constable.
UNDERWOOD (Doug), 1993, When MBAs Rule the Newsroom, New York,
Columbia University Press.
Erik Neveu is a Professor of political science.

Centre de Recherches sur l’Action Poliique en Europe/ CNRS
Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Rennes (France)
E-mail: erik.neveu@sciencespo-rennes.fr or erik.leteure@wanadoo.fr

94 BJR GB News Without Journalists

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

94 BJR GB News Without Journalists

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

94 BJR GB News Without Journalists

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are some of the major trends challenging journalism according to the text?

What are some of the major trends challenging journalism according to the text?

How does the text describe the changing role of journalists?

How does the text describe the changing role of journalists?

D o ssie r

ABST R ACT Journalism as a profession and know-how is caught up in a

develop a three-fold analysis. I will come back to an over-debated

The inescapable preliminary definition: Journalist/Journalism

The demands of social science (the rule of the preliminary definition

the more efficient its “border patrol”. Being considered as a journalist

general information or comments on very varied topics (columnists).

Journalists: endangered species?

From sources to communication floods

“source professionalization”. Administrations, companies, and NGO’s are

to have higher budgets and more time.

Rising business pressures

they are also weaker in regard to sources. These evolutions redefine

The rise of the Internet is central here, even if it cannot be considered

The impact of the Internet

among journalists seem to be dissatisfaction and strain. Convergence

Here come the information workers!

disappearance of the specialized journalists who are considered part of

and free-lance experiences. When the practical conditions of the job

Averting the worst?

The resources of public support

– a free subscription to a daily newspaper to all new citizens in the year

In a report which is must reading, Leonard Downie and Michael

Using the partners’ strength

Social Science and Journalism

A third suggestion would emphasize how much social sciences can

wants: shorter papers, less blah-blah, less boring international and

when it is hypnotized by the neo-liberal doxa and the spokespersons of

relations expert or the part-time blogger.

1 If a French professor writes in the margin of a student’s essay «

2 Cf Yves Eudes, L’ère des Robots-Journalistes, Le Monde, March 10, 2010,

3 After reaching a peak of 60,000 in the early nineties, the number of

4 A way of cutting the cost of the subscriptions is also to reduce them to

5 See Karl Eric Gustafsson’s report: http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/

ACCARDO Alain, 1998, Journalistes précaires, Bordeaux, Le Mascaret.

ENGEL Matthew, 2009, Local papers: an obituary. British Journalism

retraitement. La publication de l’information journalistique sur

Erik Neveu is a Professor of political science.

You might also like