“Antigos” e “Novos” no jornalismo brasileiro dos anos de 1980 e 1990: Uma identidade profissional em disputa

IF 4.1 2区社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Politics & Society Pub Date : 2020-11-19 DOI:10.5007/175-7984.2020v19n45p337

Alexandre Bergamo

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper discusses how, in the 1980s and the 1990s, important forms of domination andsymbolic strategies were underlined in Brazilian journalism. For this, it discusses the changes inthe journalists’ labor market, the impact of the demand of Bachelor’s degree for the exercise of theprofession, the increase in number of schools and the importance of the adoption of specific rulesfor journalistic writing seeking the consolidation of a professional work and writing model. Itshows how in the conflict between the “old” and the “young” journalists, which marked thetwo decades studied, the following topics were at play: modifications in the way of work andthe profession’s perception, in the hierarchy organization and social recruitment, as well as in theprofessional identity.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

20世纪80年代和90年代巴西新闻业的“旧”和“新”:有争议的职业身份

本文讨论了在20世纪80年代和90年代，巴西新闻业中重要的统治形式和象征性策略是如何被强调的。为此，本文讨论了新闻工作者劳动力市场的变化、学士学位需求对职业行使的影响、学校数量的增加以及采用特定规则寻求专业工作和写作模式的重要性。它展示了在“老”记者和“年轻”记者之间的冲突中，这标志着二十年的研究，以下主题是如何发挥作用的:工作方式和职业观念的改变，等级组织和社会招聘，以及职业认同。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Politics & Society Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

4.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics & Society is a peer-reviewed journal. All submitted papers are read by a rotating editorial board member. If a paper is deemed potentially publishable, it is sent to another board member, who, if agreeing that it is potentially publishable, sends it to a third board member. If and only if all three agree, the paper is sent to the entire editorial board for consideration at board meetings. The editorial board meets three times a year, and the board members who are present (usually between 9 and 14) make decisions through a deliberative process that also considers written reports from absent members. Unlike many journals which rely on 1–3 individual blind referee reports and a single editor with final say, the peers who decide whether to accept submitted work are thus the full editorial board of the journal, comprised of scholars from various disciplines, who discuss papers openly, with author names known, at meetings. Editors are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest when evaluating manuscripts and to recuse themselves from voting if such a potential exists.

期刊最新文献

Bringing Household Finance Back In: House Prices and the Missing Macroeconomics of Comparative Political Economy Who Pays for Environmental Policy? Business Power and the Design of State-Level Climate Policies* Supervising Local Cadres in China: The Quest for Authoritarian Accountability Rethinking Antitrust for the Cloud Era Antitrust and Equal Liberty