Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113662
Mette Bengtsson
Artiklen argumenterer for en læsning af faktatjekgenren i et retorisk perspektiv. Efter en kort gennemgang af faktatjekgenrens udvikling introduceres den journalistiske objektivitetsnorm med henblik på at diskutere, hvordan faktatjekgenren er funderet heri. Herefter fremsættes forslag til, hvordan man med afsæt i retorisk argumentationsteori kan nyfortolke objektivitetsnormen, hvilket indbefatter at gå fra at betragte fakta som faste, objektive sandheder, der kan dokumenteres, til i stedet hovedsageligt at forstå fakta som domæneafhængige sandsynligheder, som man gennem praktisk argumentation forsøger at opnå tilslutning til. Afslutningsvis operationaliseres det retoriske syn på fakta i forhold til faktatjekgenrens arbejdsmetode, produkt og modtagelse.
{"title":"Et retorisk perspektiv på faktatjek","authors":"Mette Bengtsson","doi":"10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113662","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113662","url":null,"abstract":"Artiklen argumenterer for en læsning af faktatjekgenren i et retorisk perspektiv. Efter en kort gennemgang af faktatjekgenrens udvikling introduceres den journalistiske objektivitetsnorm med henblik på at diskutere, hvordan faktatjekgenren er funderet heri. Herefter fremsættes forslag til, hvordan man med afsæt i retorisk argumentationsteori kan nyfortolke objektivitetsnormen, hvilket indbefatter at gå fra at betragte fakta som faste, objektive sandheder, der kan dokumenteres, til i stedet hovedsageligt at forstå fakta som domæneafhængige sandsynligheder, som man gennem praktisk argumentation forsøger at opnå tilslutning til. Afslutningsvis operationaliseres det retoriske syn på fakta i forhold til faktatjekgenrens arbejdsmetode, produkt og modtagelse.","PeriodicalId":326437,"journal":{"name":"Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121203756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.7146/journalistica.v13i1.113664
Maria Bendix Wittchen
Da den såkaldte ubådssag startede, begyndte en sideløbende omfattende politiefterforskning og mediedækning af den drabssigtede Peter Madsen og den forsvundne/døde journalist Kim Wall. Denne artikel har et presseetisk perspektiv på dækningen, og gennem analyse af Ekstra Bladets journalistik diskuteres de presseetiske grænser og gråzoner, der opstår, når tabloidjournalisterne træder ind i en detektivrolle og efterligner politiets arbejdspraksis, samtidig med at de både skal levere fascinerende fortællinger med følelsesappel og er underlagt presseetiske regler. Studiet dokumenterer og diskuterer presseetiske dilemmaer, der opstår i relation til især motivspekulation, kildebrug, og når den hovedmistænkte er kendt i offentligheden.
{"title":"I sandhedens grænseland","authors":"Maria Bendix Wittchen","doi":"10.7146/journalistica.v13i1.113664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/journalistica.v13i1.113664","url":null,"abstract":"Da den såkaldte ubådssag startede, begyndte en sideløbende omfattende politiefterforskning og mediedækning af den drabssigtede Peter Madsen og den forsvundne/døde journalist Kim Wall. Denne artikel har et presseetisk perspektiv på dækningen, og gennem analyse af Ekstra Bladets journalistik diskuteres de presseetiske grænser og gråzoner, der opstår, når tabloidjournalisterne træder ind i en detektivrolle og efterligner politiets arbejdspraksis, samtidig med at de både skal levere fascinerende fortællinger med følelsesappel og er underlagt presseetiske regler. Studiet dokumenterer og diskuterer presseetiske dilemmaer, der opstår i relation til især motivspekulation, kildebrug, og når den hovedmistænkte er kendt i offentligheden.","PeriodicalId":326437,"journal":{"name":"Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik","volume":"33 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131401709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113665
Hanne Jørndrup
Donald Trump er godt nyhedsstof. Danske aviser skriver meget og ofte om den 45. amerikanske præsident, hans besynderlige adfærd, lemfældige omgang med sandheden og gentagne kontroverser med pressen. Trumps fremkomst har også fået medieforskningen til tasterne i et utal af publikationer. Mindre fokus er der på journalistikkens eget normative blik på Trump, og hvordan det farver billedet af ham. Artiklen vil gennem en komparativ analyse af danske avisers dækning af henholdsvis Obamas og Trumps indsættelse som præsident i 2009 og 2017 blotlægge, hvordan en eksplicit normativ indstilling til de to præsidenter var til stede ved begge begivenheder.
{"title":"Trump versus Obama","authors":"Hanne Jørndrup","doi":"10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113665","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113665","url":null,"abstract":"Donald Trump er godt nyhedsstof. Danske aviser skriver meget og ofte om den 45. amerikanske præsident, hans besynderlige adfærd, lemfældige omgang med sandheden og gentagne kontroverser med pressen. Trumps fremkomst har også fået medieforskningen til tasterne i et utal af publikationer. Mindre fokus er der på journalistikkens eget normative blik på Trump, og hvordan det farver billedet af ham. Artiklen vil gennem en komparativ analyse af danske avisers dækning af henholdsvis Obamas og Trumps indsættelse som præsident i 2009 og 2017 blotlægge, hvordan en eksplicit normativ indstilling til de to præsidenter var til stede ved begge begivenheder.","PeriodicalId":326437,"journal":{"name":"Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115195208","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113667
J. Jensen
The supply of news is larger than ever. However, traditional mass media are no longer in a privileged position as the exclusive gatekeepers of news; they face competition from alternative media, organizations and citizens who can produce and distribute news instantly through websites, blogs and social media. Furthermore, a significant share of news consumption is now based on links and stories appearing in users’ social media newsfeed. Every week, 56 percent of Danish citizens get news through social media that have become a major battleground for attention, clicks, viewers and readers (Schrøder et al. 2018). If traditional media are to retain attention and audience they have to play by social media logics.This article identifies and compares news criteria of social media posts shared on 25 Danish Twitter accounts and 25 Danish Facebook pages, representing exactly the same 25 news media actors. Hereby I investigate the criteria by which media frame their stories shared through social media and compare different uses and strategies on Facebook and Twitter.
新闻的供应比以往任何时候都要多。然而，传统的大众媒体不再处于新闻独家守门人的特权地位;他们面临着来自其他媒体、组织和公民的竞争，后者可以通过网站、博客和社交媒体即时制作和传播新闻。此外，新闻消费的很大一部分现在是基于用户社交媒体新闻提要中的链接和故事。每周，56%的丹麦公民通过社交媒体获取新闻，社交媒体已成为吸引注意力、点击量、观众和读者的主要战场(Schrøder et al. 2018)。如果传统媒体想要留住注意力和受众，他们就必须按照社交媒体的逻辑行事。本文确定并比较了25个丹麦Twitter账户和25个丹麦Facebook页面上分享的社交媒体帖子的新闻标准，代表了完全相同的25个新闻媒体演员。在此，我研究了媒体通过社交媒体分享故事的标准，并比较了Facebook和Twitter的不同用途和策略。
{"title":"News criteria on social media Comparing news media use of Facebook and Twitter","authors":"J. Jensen","doi":"10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113667","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113667","url":null,"abstract":"The supply of news is larger than ever. However, traditional mass media are no longer in a privileged position as the exclusive gatekeepers of news; they face competition from alternative media, organizations and citizens who can produce and distribute news instantly through websites, blogs and social media. Furthermore, a significant share of news consumption is now based on links and stories appearing in users’ social media newsfeed. Every week, 56 percent of Danish citizens get news through social media that have become a major battleground for attention, clicks, viewers and readers (Schrøder et al. 2018). If traditional media are to retain attention and audience they have to play by social media logics.This article identifies and compares news criteria of social media posts shared on 25 Danish Twitter accounts and 25 Danish Facebook pages, representing exactly the same 25 news media actors. Hereby I investigate the criteria by which media frame their stories shared through social media and compare different uses and strategies on Facebook and Twitter.","PeriodicalId":326437,"journal":{"name":"Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik","volume":"191 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131388466","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-05-02DOI: 10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113666
Birgitte Kjos Fonn
Well over a hundred years after the first journalism programmes were established at university level, the so-called academisation of journalism education is still subject to dispute. However, academisation is not one thing but many, and this article is an attempt to distinguish between several features making up the academisation of journalism. The approach is historical, primarily based on documentation from the history of Norway’s journalism education, as an understanding of when and how various traits of academisation that today seem to constitute one whole were introduced, can help us distinguish between the different forms. I distinguish between academisation from ‘above’ and academisation from ‘within’, and identify two kinds of academisation from above and six kinds of academisation from within. This is leading to a typology of eight different types of academisation of journalism.
{"title":"What do we talk about when we talk about the academisation of journalism?","authors":"Birgitte Kjos Fonn","doi":"10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113666","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7146/JOURNALISTICA.V13I1.113666","url":null,"abstract":"Well over a hundred years after the first journalism programmes were established at university level, the so-called academisation of journalism education is still subject to dispute. However, academisation is not one thing but many, and this article is an attempt to distinguish between several features making up the academisation of journalism. The approach is historical, primarily based on documentation from the history of Norway’s journalism education, as an understanding of when and how various traits of academisation that today seem to constitute one whole were introduced, can help us distinguish between the different forms. I distinguish between academisation from ‘above’ and academisation from ‘within’, and identify two kinds of academisation from above and six kinds of academisation from within. This is leading to a typology of eight different types of academisation of journalism.","PeriodicalId":326437,"journal":{"name":"Journalistica - Tidsskrift for forskning i journalistik","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124958540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：