CM ČASOPIS ZA UPRAVLJANJE KOMUNICIRANJEM COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT QUARTERLY Transparency or Bluff? An EJO Study Tina Bettels, Susanne Fengler, Andreas Sträter and Mariella Trilling Medijska reprezentacija grupnih identiteta Danka Ninković Slavnić Medijska slika žene u Srbiji Nada Torlak Medijska pismenost i deca u novom medijskom okruženju Marijana Matović Savremena TV reportaža kao „slika života” Zoran Jevtović, Dejan Radulović Jezik, mediji i politika: Tretman Srbije u nemačkoj štampi pre promene vlasti u Srbiji oktobra 2000. godine Ljiljana Glišović BROJ 19 GODINA VI LETO 2011. VI LETO BROJ 19 GODINA Međunarodno komuniciranje Novinske agencije Beta Milena Janković CM Međukulturna komunikacija islama Ranko Milosavljević Kolektivno ogledalo Anka Mihajlov Prokopović Istorija vavilonske kule Nevena Miletić BROJ 19 GODINA VI LETO 2011. CM ČASOPIS ZA UPRAVLJANJE KOMUNICIRANJEM COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT QUARTERLY Broj 19, godina VI Transparency or Bluff? An EJO Study 5–14 Tina Bettels, Susanne Fengler, Andreas Sträter and Mariella Trilling Medijska reprezentacija grupnih identiteta 15–38 Danka Ninković Slavnić Medijska slika žene u Srbiji 39–52 Nada Torlak Medijska pismenost i deca u novom medijskom okruženju 53–66 Marijana Matović Savremena TV reportaža kao „slika života” 67–86 Zoran Jevtović, Dejan Radulović Jezik, mediji i politika: Tretman Srbije u nemačkoj štampi pre promene vlasti u Srbiji oktobra 2000. godine 87–118 Ljiljana Glišović Međunarodno komuniciranje Novinske agencije Beta 119–134 Milena Janković Međukulturna komunikacija islama 135–138 Ranko Milosavljević Kolektivno ogledalo 139–144 Anka Mihajlov Prokopović Istorija vavilonske kule 145–150 Nevena Miletić Uputstvo autorima 151 CM ČASOPIS ZA UPRAVLJANJE KOMUNICIRANJEM COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT QUARTERLY Izdavači: CDC – Centar za usmeravanje komunikacija, Novi Sad (Prethodno: PROTOCOL) i Fakultet političkih nauka, Beograd Glavni i odgovorni urednik: Prof. dr Miroljub Radojković, redovni profesor Fakulteta političkih nauka u Beogradu Urednik izdanja: mr Boris Labudović Redakcija: prof. dr Branimir Stojković, redovni profesor Fakulteta političkih nauka u Beogradu prof. dr Neda Todorović, redovni profesor Fakulteta političkih nauka u Beogradu prof. dr Zoran Jevtović, vanredni profesor Filozofskog fakulteta u Nišu mr Ana Milojević, asistent Fakulteta političkih nauka u Beogradu mr Jelena Kleut, sekretar redakcije, asistent Filozofskog fakulteta u Novom Sadu Za izdavače: Dekan Fakulteta političkih nauka u Beogradu prof. dr Ilija Vujačić Direktor CDC Nataša Jovović Lektura: Dragana Prodanović Adresa redakcije: Maksima Gorkog 32, 21000 Novi Sad Telefoni/fax: 021 / 425 880, 425 881, 425 882; [email protected] Prepress: Blur Studio, Novi Sad Štampa: Štamparija Futura, Petrovaradin Tiraž: 1.000 Štampanje časopisa finansijski je pomoglo Ministarstvo za nauku i tehnološki razvoj Republike Srbije CIP – Каталогизација у публикацији Библиотека Матице Српске, Нови Сад 316.77(05) CM : časopis za upravljanje komuniciranjem = communication management quarterly / glavni i odgovorni urednik Miroljub Radojković. – God. 6, br. 19 (2011) – – Novi Sad : CDC–Centar za usmeravanje komunikacija ; Beograd : Fakultet političkih nauka, 2011–. – 24 cm Tromesečno. ISSN 1452-7405 COBISS.SR-ID 218473735 4 Transparency or Bluff? An EJO Study1 Tina Bettels, Susanne Fengler, Andreas Sträter and Mariella Trilling2 Technical University Dortmund UDC: 070.4::303.446.2“2010/2011“ : 004.774-026.12 : 316.775.4 Summary: This international comparative study examines whether and in which ways the editorial departments of 12 Western and Eastern European countries allow their readers, listeners and viewers to engage in editorial processes. Are sources revealed and errors corrected? Do editorial departments appoint ombudsmen to act as appeal boards and systematically trace mistakes? Are there blogs, Twitter feeds and social networks utilized by journalists and users to discuss editorial decisions? Moreover, can similarities be found between Western and Eastern European countries, or have vari- ances in journalism cultures led to the emergence of different forms of user involvement in journalistic processes? The results: At present, the editorial departments of many European countries have introduced transparency instruments. For the most part, however, instruments which can be applied with little effort and do not require a great deal of support tend to be utilized. Nearly all of the media reviewed offer commentary functions, links to social networks and photographs of staff. Yet instruments which are time consuming or require resources to engage in dialogue with the public are scarce. Media outlets in Europe rarely invest in ombudsmen and advisory councils, nor do they offer online tools like buttons enabling users to highlight errors in journalistic texts. A large number of European media outlets seem to use transparency instruments primarily for marketing reasons, which creates the illusion that the audience can partici- pate in journalistic processes, but falls short of offering genuine dialogue. Key words: journalism, audience, participation, editorial process, transparency 1 This study was first published at the website of the European Journalism Observatory on 12 June 2011 (http:// en.ejo.ch). Translated from German by Miryam Nadkarni. 2 Contact with the authors: [email protected]. CM 19 (2011) © Centar za usmeravanje komunikacija 5 Transparency or Bluff? Tina Bettels, Susanne Fengler, An EJO Study Andreas Sträter and Mariella Trilling Transparency – An answer to journalism’s imminent loss of relevance in Web 2.0? Journalism scholars claim that editorial departments and journalists must be transparent about editorial decisions in order to increase the credibility of a publication and to legitimate the media’s existence within society. This claim surfaces against a backdrop of cumulative media scandals, for example the pho- ney interviews conducted by Swiss journalist Tom Kummer which appeared in the Süddeutsche Zeitung’s magazine, or the magazine Bunte’s recent spying affair, in addition to a more general disenchantment with politics, for which the media are partly held responsible. On one hand, scientists ask whether the media assume enough responsibility for self-monitoring. On the other hand, they want to know whether the media provide audiences with sufficient par- ticipation in editorial processes. To enable users to estimate journalistic quality more adequately, an editorial department should, according to Klaus Meier (University of Eichstätt), shed light on its structures and processes, unveil the conditions of reporting, name sources, discuss motivations including any self- interest, and, finally, admit mistakes and openly correct them. In a time where journalists must compete for audience attention with non-journalistic provid- ers like aggregators, wikis and lay journalists, transparency has the potential to enhance confidence in professional journalism. The use of ombudsmen, correcting of journalistic mistakes and disclosure of sources are all classic transparency functions that originally stem from print media. The digital era, however, creates new options for involving users in edi- torial decisions. These can include webcasts of editorial conferences, editorial blogs, Twitter feeds and social networks where journalists can discuss editorial decisions and thus justify their work. Transparency in Journalism: A system Transparency instruments can be divided roughly into the following cat- egories: • Information on the editorial department and its general framework (stakeholders, institutions and their norms, publishing the author’s name/ acronym; introducing the editorial department/journalists; contact form; indication of the authors’ email address and telephone numbers; present- ing the editorial policy and the media company/statement of ownerships and involvements; the publishing of a code of ethics for the website/edito- 6 CM 19 (2011) © Centar za usmeravanje komunikacija Tina Bettels, Susanne Fengler, Transparency or Bluff? Andreas Sträter and Mariella Trilling An EJO Study rial department and the publication of guidelines on how journalists are to deal with sources from social media) • Information on journalistic work processes and sources (deep links: links to external sources/websites, registration of news agencies’ material and sources, crowd sourcing, users’ participation in research) • Information on editorial decision processes (webcasts of editorial con- ferences; editorial blogs, department “media journalism”) • Instruments for the correction of errors (error category/error button; ombudsman/readers’ lawyer; category for letters to the editor/criticism; advisory council) • Instruments for the promotion of discussion with and between users (commentary functions; discussion panel for users, category “most read article”, “most commented article”; connection to social networks, for example Twitter, Facebook, etc.) Methodology This study examines the degree of transparency demonstrated by the lead- ing media websites in Germany, England, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland, and Hungary. Additionally Russian media were analysed. The existence of transparency instruments in each of these countries was examined for • the website of the newspaper with the highest circulation released by each of the three largest publishing houses, including at least one broadsheet and one tabloid, • one weekly paper’s website, • the websites of the three