MediaAcT

What we see is that although there is a quite evident and positive
attitude among journalists in all countries favouring (supporting)
traditional MAIs (scores between .6 and .8) they differentiate significantly
from country to country in the extent of how they perceive
the possible impact (of MAIs) on their professional conduct. Some of
the countries rank particularly low: Italy is the lowest, followed by
Austria, Spain and Poland. We can envisage a broad “lip service” by
Europe’s journalists to the value of accountability; but when they
assess what principles of accountability guide their daily work, they
are split according to national idiosyncrasies found in the dominating
journalistic cultures.
Low enthusiasm for online instruments
Beside looking at the way journalists evaluate traditional MAIs,
the project revealed it was worthwhile investigating how journalists
considered the instruments that online technologies provide to increase
the accountability of the news profession. These instruments
are providing links to the original sources of a journalistic piece,
allowing users opportunities to participate in the production of news
stories, responding to users’ comments/suggestions or providing online
opportunities to communicate directly with journalists, for example
via Facebook and Twitter. The overall result from the data is
that the journalists don’t show much enthusiasm (perceived impact
or support) for these additional instruments (Figure 2), compared to
the amount of enthusiasm for the traditional instruments. Yet, if we
look more closely at the Figures we notice a “reverse behaviour” in a
group of countries: the lower the perceived impact the higher is the
support in Italy, Romania, Poland and France.
Figure 2. Perceived impact of and support for online MAIs
How to explain this? In some cases journalists were asked to assess
instruments that did not exist in their countries. For example, unsuccessful
or non-existent experiences with traditional instruments,
like that of the ombudsman, tend to negatively affect the attitudes
of the journalists towards these new opportunities to display more
accountable news production routines.
Even though the actual support for these accountability principles
and instruments varies from country to country, journalists
appear to acknowledge and share the recommendations to achieve
them. We went further in exploring our findings. Our assumption
was that the ways journalists react are rooted in the cultural environment
that surrounds them. To measure cultural factors with
statistical methods is still mostly wishful thinking. Here we do not
offer a conclusive cause-effect explanation, but simply suggest which
journalistic cultural aspects may partially explain our findings.
From the organisational (i.e. relationships with colleagues and
more senior staff) and professional perspectives, the survey provided
interesting evidence concerning the dimensions of the accountability
culture in different countries and the degree to which ethical
standards of the profession are influential.
Figure 3. Orientation toward professional values vs. orientation
toward the organisation
Figure 3 shows that journalists in Italy, Austria, Romania and
Po-land appear to be more affected by their organisational environment
than by professional values. This remarkable evidence shows
that these countries share a weaker connection to the principles (and
practice) of accountability culture and display lower levels of professionalisation.
In conclusion, in an ideal world accountability is a standard well
anchored in the value system that enlightens the journalistic profession
in democracies. However, our analysis indicates that, in many
cases, the cultural environment and the nature of the relationships
within organisational contexts can curtail the attainment of the accountability
that journalists say they aspire to.
Thus we can see the differences in journalistic accountability cultures.
Italy, Spain, Austria, Poland and Romania are countries where
this culture appears to be less well founded. Journalists who work
in these countries are more committed to their organisational employers
(i.e. loyalty and responsibility toward fellow journalists and
editors) than to issues of transparency.
Our glimpse of journalism relies on first-hand personal views of
hundreds of journalists, so some caution is needed. However, we
hold to the conviction that the idea of accountability is a culturally
charged concept and its use and implementation can be seen as
functions of a particular professional outlook enmeshed with the
dominating national culture. For example, it is hardly a coincidence
that the accountability of public officials, politicians and institutions
offering public services is written into the laws regulating these domains
in countries with a protestant socio-political historical background,
while it is only loosely present in the legislations of catholic
countries. Italy, Austria, Poland, Spain and Romania happen to be
countries with strong catholic or orthodox influence on their social
institutions.
We cannot pursue this interpretive line further as we do not
have appropriate survey data to establish clear correlations. Nevertheless,
we believe that to implement a “culturalist” approach,
that draws on historical, religious and anthropological determinants
of social behaviour – like that of journalists – can advance
the understanding of similarities and differences, proximities and
distances, in the journalism profession in our European countries
and beyond.
Index | Editorial | Birds-eye view | Opening the toolbox | Zoom-in on the newsroom | Media landscapes