New Journalism, Old Theories?
New Journalism, Old Theories? Current developments in journalism theory: The German speaking
Current developments in journalism theory: The German speaking
countries
countries
by Martin Loeffelholz and Thorsten Quandt
Abstract The current theoretical discourse on journalism theories in the German speaking countries is heterogeneous, multi-dimensional and full of competing ideas – some of them are
Contact Prof Dr Martin Löffelholz (full professor of media studies) Institute of Media and Communication Science Technische Universität Ilmenau Media Centre, Am Eichicht 1 D-98694 Ilmenau - Germany Tel. ++49 (0) 3677.69.4703 Fax ++49 (0) 3677.69.4695
[email protected] Dr Thorsten Quandt (research assistant) Institut für Kommunikationswissenschaft und Medienforschung Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München Oettingenstr. 67 D-80538 Munich - Germany Tel. + + 49 (0) 89.2180.9412
[email protected]
considerably elaborated. However, a lot of the ongoing theoretical debate has been neglected outside Austria, Germany and Switzerland, due to language problems, but also due to the lack of need to present findings outside a considerably large scientific community in the named countries. This article gives some insight into the theoretical works on journalism in the German speaking countries, in order to present this rich tradition of thinking to scholars in other parts of the world. The most significant perspectives are structured and described in a synopsis of theories. Simple normative approaches and theories of a middle range, constructivism and systems theories, integrative social theories, and cultural studies are some of the competing approaches. They all try to answer one central question: How can we describe journalism from a theoretical point of view?
Keywords journalism in Germany, synopsis of theories, empiricism, systems theory, social theories
1
1. Introduction: New challenges – new theories?
integrative social theories, and cultural studies, to name a few (cf. Loeffelholz, 2004).
Journalism is changing at a very fast pace: in an increasingly global media environment,
Unfortunately, many of these discussions have been neglected outside the European
company mergers are changing the institutional working background of many journalists.
scientific communities, which are still very much shaped along language lines.
And as computer-mediated communication spreads around the world, technological and
Paradoxically, German speaking researchers in the field of communication studies are very
cultural borderlines
much interested in globalisation and worldwide communication – while their own work is
are becoming
blurred.
This
development
offers numerous
opportunities, but also poses complicated problems. On the one hand, professional
not circulated outside the very traditional boundaries of their respective language areas.
communicators like online journalists now have the opportunity to publish their news
The theoretical discussion in Austria, Germany and Switzerland is especially interesting
worldwide, without being bound by the restrictions of large media companies or language
because the scientific community in these countries was big enough to provide a vital and
and regional barriers. On the other hand, the distinction between entertainment and news
stable environment for the development of various approaches, and to a certain extent, this
seems to be disappearing with the emergence of new communication forms on the internet,
discussion is also independent from the international debate on theories.2 It therefore has
as well as the formerly clear division between journalism, public relations, and business
not been reflected appropriately on an international level – arguably because it could exist
communication.
in its language ‘niche’ for so many years. Actually, this ‘niche’ forms the biggest non-
Journalism researches worldwide are realizing that they have to adapt their theories and
English speaking community in European communication studies.
approaches to a new situation: Without rethinking some older perspectives, the current
This article gives an overview of the current debate on journalism theories in the German
changes cannot be adequately described. The economic, political, technological, and cultural
speaking countries and it is meant to introduce the most interesting and promising
changes must be relocated within a theoretical framework that gives us a sense of where and
approaches to a larger, international audience. We hope that this will start a fruitful debate
why the changes are taking place, and how they affect journalism and society as a whole. In
on some of the theories and authors that are still unknown in other countries. And as a side
many countries, this theoretical ‘reorganization’ has lead to a fruitful discussion about the
effect, we hope that some of the insights into these ‘new’ theories open up opportunities for
basic definitions of journalism as well as to the development of more complex approaches
a theoretical identification of journalism – even in times of change.
to the field. New ideas of theorizing journalism are emerging from this discussion.
However, the ongoing theoretical debate cannot be fully understood without a short
However, not all of the ideas are discussed in the wider scientific community, in many cases
introduction to its very special history – therefore, the emergence of journalism theories in
due to language problems.
this part of the world is explained in Section 2. Based on the discussion of this (primarily)
For example, the recent theoretical discourse on theories in the German speaking countries
historical development, the most significant perspectives are identified and described in a
tackles the questions and implications that follow the above mentioned developments:
synopsis of theoretical perspectives in Section 3. Finally, a short outlook is given in Section
There is substantial theoretical work that might be appropriate for describing the
4; here we discuss how current theoretical approaches might meet the challenge of the
transformation of journalism. The theoretical perspectives range from simple normative
above mentioned developments, and where they might be heading in the future.
approaches and theories of a middle range, to constructivism and systems theories,
2
3
2. Development: Emerging journalism theories
Toennies (1855-1936), challenged the view of journalism as historical, but this critique
The beginnings of the theoretical description of journalism in Germany are linked to the
remained fruitless: most scientists in journalism studies viewed the field in an individualistic
works of Robert Eduard Prutz (1816-1872), who published a ‘History of German
and historical way. They analysed journalism through the individual journalist’s
Journalism’ (Prutz, 1971 [1845]) 150 years ago – long before journalism became an academic
personality. The journalist, in this view, had to be a special person with outstanding
subject. This is astonishing insofar as Prutz already focused on ‘journalism,’ and not on
character and talent.3
‘media,’ such as newspapers and magazines. Prutz also identified journalism as being a social
This normative perspective made it very easy for the Nazis to integrate the academic subject
area that operates in relation to other social areas, and didn’t reduce it to the work of
into their Fascist ideology (the journalist as a ‘leader of his people’) and made it an
individual journalists. In this respect, he was very much ahead of his time (and ahead of
‘academic instance of justification’ (Baum, 1994: 140). During the National-socialistic
many later approaches to journalism).
regime, the expanding discipline of newspaper studies served the function of educating
Another predecessor of the modern understanding of journalism was Max Weber, actually a
journalists. The new ‘practicism’ strengthened the discipline from an institutional point of
lawyer by training, but primarily an all-around academic interested in broad range of topics.
view, but also meant a Fascist politicisation of newspaper studies, and integration into the
Weber’s insights into media and journalism are based on a sociological concept of
Nazi propaganda machine.
journalism, including the necessity of theoretical and methodological pluralism, the
After WW II, not all of the premises of newspaper studies seemed to be dismissed, however.
relevance of empirical research, and the notion that that which is ‘social’ can only be
This is very obvious in an early post-war phase of journalism studies, especially in the
adequately described by the relationship between individual and society (cf. Weber, 1924).
works of the important newspaper studies scientist Emil Dovivat (1890-1969). He had been
Weber’s ‘Preliminary Report on a Suggested Survey of the Sociology of Newspapership’
living in Berlin since 1928 and endorsed the central propaganda during the Nazi regime.
implied in its core a theoretical and empirical overview of the German press, with special
After the war, he was one of the founders of the West German Publizistik (which is only
attention paid to journalistic production and work context. Unfortunately, the ideas of
roughly the same as journalism studies). And it is not surprising that his idea of ‘conviction
Weber didn’t produce a significant echo in the field of newspaper studies (cf. Kutsch, 1988:
journalism’ was based on an individualistic idea of journalism. The moralizing term
12).
‘conviction’ refers to various characteristics of the journalist, such as natural talent and
Besides these early theoreticians, only a few scientists showed any interest in theoretical
character, and was a huge step back from the modern ideas expressed by Max Weber much
work at this early stage of academic development. In contrast to the American approach,
earlier in the 20th century. Nevertheless, the idea of journalism as a gift or talent can be
which was very much interested in the practical side of journalism, newspaper studies in
found even today, in both journalistic practice and theoretical approaches to the field.
Germany were primarily a historical subject. Although an institutional basis existed with
But it didn’t take very long for things to change in journalism studies. The success of
the establishment of full professorships and university institutes in Leipzig (1916), Muenster
empiricism (which was based on (neo)positivism and analytical philosophy) in the United
(1919), Munich (1924), and Berlin (1928), scientists in this field didn’t use their resources for
States influenced the European discussion and led to a reorientation in journalism studies.
sociological research in journalism. Still, some critics, like the philosopher Ferdinand
Normative ideas were quickly losing their important role, and journalism scientists were
4
5
focusing more and more on empirical research. Their fields of interest included the journalist’s behaviour and decision-making processes – a research tradition introduced by David Manning White’s gatekeeper approach (1950). This early research did feature methodological individualism, but soon the scientists realized that news production is a complex process, relying not only on the work of individuals. This led to an inclusion of organizations and systematic influences in the theoretical frameworks, and an opening up of theories towards a pluralism of ideas and approaches. Empirical research was (and is) of central importance for journalism studies in Europe, and accordingly, most of the theoretical approaches since then can be seen as ‘theories of a middle range’ (Merton), based on and confirmed by empirical data.
4
(2) The institutionalisation phase: subjectivity and normativity as central concepts (1916 to 1945) (3) The early post-war period: continuity of normative approaches vs. a new theoretical orientation (1945 to the 1950s/60s) (4) The discovery of empiricism: emergence and expansion of empirical research, theories of a middle range (1950s/60s up to now) (5) The rediscovery of theory: intensified theoretical debate on journalism, metatheoretical efforts (late 1960s up to the late 1990s) (6) The growing pluralism of approaches: diversification of approaches to cope with radical changes of the field (late 1990s up to now, still ongoing process)
The first empirical study that focused on an ‘organized social system’ instead of journalistic
But there is no continuous or clearly arranged development of theoretical approaches – it is
individuals was published in 1969. Manfred Ruehl’s case study on the structures and
much more a discontinuous, multi-perspective emergence of theories. Although there was a
function of the newsroom (Ruehl, 1969) marked a radical change in perspective. The
theoretical re-orientation after Ruehl’s study, theories of a middle range have still
theoretical orientation towards a ‘systems’ perspective was paralleled by growing interest of
dominated the mass of publications in the years since then. And normative ideas can be
scientists in journalism (which meant that on the whole, more scientists were joining the
found even in contemporary works on media communication.
discussion, and the number of practicing journalists with individualistic ideology was
Thus, on a meta-theoretical level, it may be that the development follows neither the linear-
further reduced) and the further advance of empirical studies. So step-by-step, a modern
cumulative understanding of theoretical emergence introduced by the English philosopher
empirical-analytical understanding of journalism studies developed.
Francis Bacon (1561-1626), nor the regular sequence of normal and revolutionary phases
In the last few years, one could observe a further multiplication of concepts and ideas on
proposed by Thomas Kuhn. Journalism studies should rather be described as an
theorizing journalism. This is obviously due to the radical changes of the field itself, as
intermittent development of a multiple perspective. Progress is not based on the
described above. It might be another phase in the development of journalism theories;
substitution of ‘outdated’ theories, but on the gain in complexity through the emergence of
however, it is a still ongoing process.
new theories and modification of older ones (cf. Loeffelholz, 2004: 20, 35-6). Therefore, we
In summary, the development of journalism theory in the German speaking countries can
present the most significant theories in journalism studies in the following section.
be roughly described by the following phases: (1) The early approaches: predecessors of a modern identification of journalism (up to 1916)
3. Synopsis: An overview of theoretical perspectives Today, journalism studies in Western Europe are a pluralistic, differentiated, and dynamic field of research in the broader area of communication studies. The large number and
6
7
heterogeneity of the theoretical approaches that developed due to the growing relevance of
Table 1: A synopsis of theoretical perspectives in German speaking journalism studies
communicator research make it quite difficult to give a consistent overview of theories and
Perspective
Scientists
Context
Focus
Outlook/Potential
Normative individualism
Karl Buecher, Hermann Boventer, Emil Dovivat, Otto Groth, Walter Hagemann
Individualism, normative media studies, ‘newspaper studies’ (Zeitungswissenschaft)
Talent and character of journalism personalities
Outdated approach, has been replaced by modern action theory and integrative social theories
Materialistic media theory
Hermann Budzislawski, Horst Holzer, Wulf D. Hund, Emil Dusiska
Historic and dialectic materialism
Journalism as a class-based and capital-utilizing production of goods
Critical approach might be needed, esp. in times of economic pressure, but there is no revision of materialistic media theory in sight
Analytical empiricism
Klaus Esser, Klaus Schoenbach, Winfried Schulz
Empiricism, analytical philosophy, theories of a middle range
News selection, agenda-setting, gatekeepers, and journalistic actors
Still vibrant; most empirical studies are based on such theories of a middle range
Normative empiricism
Wolfgang Donsbach, HansMathias Kepplinger, Renate Koecher
Empiricism, media effects research, political standards
Standards of behaviour, reference to reality and truth, journalistic actors
Like analytical empiricism, it is still very much alive; however, the political undertones sometimes tend towards political bias
(Critical) theories of action
Achim Baum, Hans-Juergen Bucher, Maximilian Gottschlich
Basic concepts deriving from linguistics and sociology, critical theory
Journalism as social and communicative action, rules of action
Some recent efforts to revitalize theories of action; however, perspective remains underdeveloped in (German) journalism theory; integrative social theories adopt some of the concepts
Functional systems theory
Bernd Bloebaum, Matthias Kohring, Alexander Goerke, Manfred Ruehl
Logic of difference, theory of autopoietic social systems
Journalism as a social system in the world society
Large number of followers in Germany; underlying concepts will be refined and discussed in more detail; however, it has been criticized that its theoretical advances are slow and the practical output is limited
Integrative social theories
Martin Loeffelholz, Christoph Neuberger, Thorsten Quandt, Armin Scholl, Siegfried Weischenberg
Socio-cultural constructivism, actor structure dynamics, theory of structuration, network theory
Journalistic cognition and communication in relation to (larger) structures
Very dynamic, with interesting new ideas and combinations of approaches; still unclear where it will lead to, due to the heterogeneous nature of the various approaches
Cultural studies
Elisabeth Klaus, Rudi Renger
Critical theory, semiotics, linguistics, theory of action
Journalism as a part of popular culture, (re)production of meanings
Impact on journalism theory in Germany was not as big as in the international context; nevertheless, new question and topics are coming from this direction, broadening the scope of journalism research
perspectives. Nonetheless, a few scientists have tried to develop a systematic of this field of research. Back in the 1970s, Weiss (1977) identified three different research traditions in a large meta analysis of journalism studies: (1) the emergence of journalistic messages, (2) the professionalisation approach (influenced by the sociology of professions), and (3) gatekeeper research, which was ‘imported’ from American journalism studies. At the beginning of the 1980s, Manfred Ruehl noticed ‘difficulties in identifying journalism’ (Ruehl 1980: 11). More than ten years later, the same author observed ‘a pluralistic structure of very different efforts (...) which are only partly in touch with each other. Further work on research efforts that run parallel, cross over every once in a while, or lead to each other does not promise an integrated journalism theory” (Ruehl, 1992: 127). Ruehl’s position is shared by the researchers Scholl and Weischenberg, who observe ‘three barely connected directions in journalism studies, that are led by a different understanding of journalism: journalism as a summation of people, a summation of work roles, and the result of communication processes’ (Scholl and Weischenberg, 1998: 27). In contrast to these efforts, this article introduces a new frame of reference for theoretical perspectives on journalism studies. Besides classic concepts such as ‘normative individualism’ or ‘analytical empiricism,’ it includes new trends based on the sociological discussion of the integration of micro and macro approaches. We identify eight (major) theoretical perspectives: (1) Normative individualism, (2) Materialistic media theory, (3) Analytical empiricism, (4) Normative empiricism, (5) (Critical) theories of action; (6) Functional systems theory, (7) Integrative social theories, (8) Cultural studies.
8
9
These perspectives are not to be confused with theoretical approaches or theories. They are
aspects, like the division of labour or the editorial work process, were recognized by a few
not integrated and clearly-defined ‘wholes’ but much broader views of journalism theory
scientists – such as Karl Buecher, economist and founder of the Leipzig institute of
that share similar origins and concepts, a certain point of view, the focus of research, the
newspaper studies – but in the end, these aspects were always reduced to the action of
complexity of theory architecture, and the amount of empirical output in the form of
individuals (cf. Buecher, 1926: 31). Overall, this can be seen as an outdated approach, which
research data (cf. Table 1).
has been replaced by far more elaborate and useful theories, like modern action theory and integrative social theories. However, some elements of ‘normative individualism’ survived
3.1 Normative individualism
in the public discourse on media and journalism – quite often, practitioners still refer to
The perspective of ‘normative individualism’ is based on ideas that can be traced back to the
‘talent and character’ when asked about what is needed to become a journalist.
very early roots of journalism research. Normative ideas (e.g. how journalists should work, what kind of personal characteristics are considered journalistic, etc.) were very common at th
3.2 Materialistic media theory
the beginning of the 20 century, and they still can be found in current discussions about
The ‘materialistic media theory’ is closely entwined with the history of the Leipzig institute
journalism.
of journalism studies. With the founding of the German Democratic Republic (GDR),
The founders of journalism research in Germany, such as Otto Groth, Karl Buecher, Karl
scientists like Hermann Budzislawski – who spent the time of Nazi rule in U.S. exile –
Jaeger, Hans Amandus Muenster, and others, held an individualistic view of the world –
started to develop ‘socialistic journalism studies’ at the Karl Marx University in Leipzig.
th
actually a perspective that began earlier, at the end of the 18 century, and was the basis for
These scientists focused on aspects derived from Marxism-Leninism and its view of social
the socio-philosophical teachings of utilitarianism (which says that usefulness is the category
studies; therefore, they developed theoretical ideas about journalism from the works of
and basis of moral behaviour). By virtue of this normative basis, a journalistic ideology of
Marx, Engels, and Lenin. In this perspective, journalism is defined as a
personal talent developed, according to which the journalist must be a ‘gifted’ person. This
‘markedly class-defined institution of the political superstructure of society, as well
ideology culminated in statements about the journalist being an intellectual ‘leader,’ as
as an intellectual and practical political profession of periodic and public
demonstrated in this quote:
distribution of current political information and reasoning. Journalism produces the
‘Surely, one must be born a journalist, in as much that one must have an inclination
mass communication needed by society or the social classes, to guide and organize
towards and love of, an inner urge and idealism for work as an editor. A journalist
under the circumstances of highly developed and universal social relationships, fast
cannot do justice to his task other than through the imperturbable love of truth,
development of society, and the inclusion of large masses in the class struggle or in
absolute loyalty, and great expertise. (…) Because this is the culmination of his
the shaping of the social relationship according to the prevailing class struggle’
profession: to be the leader of his people’ (Jaeger, 1926: 3f.).
(Dusiska, 1973: 133-4).
Due to its concentration on the character and talent of the individual journalist, ‘normative individualism’ features only a very low theoretical complexity. Social and organizational
10
11
In the context of this understanding, the ‘organizational basis of editorial work’ was dealt
3.3 Analytical Empiricism
with, a ‘genre theory of the proletarian press’ was developed, and systematics of ‘journalistic
In contrast to the previously mentioned approach, ‘analytical empiricism’ is the central
methodology’ were compiled, among other things (cf. Weischenberg, 1992: 27).
paradigm of contemporary journalism research. The success of this perspective is based on
In terms of occupational training, socialist journalism studies were quite successful, based on
the adoption of the premises of empiricism and analytical philosophy (e.g. inter-subjective
the Leipzig graduates’ share of the total number of journalists in East Germany.
crosscheck of data as a quality standard), as well as the intense development and critical
Responsible for this success were the orientation toward the requirements of professional
testing of middle range theories, such as the gatekeeper theory or the agenda-setting
practice and, above all, a quasi-monopoly on journalistic education in the GDR.
approach. Therefore, it doesn’t primarily aim toward the social classification of journalism.
In West Germany, however, materialistic journalism theory was a niche field. Researchers
Several conditions are central for a consistent theory, according to the empirical analytical
such as Horst Holzer (1973) or Wulf D. Hund and Baerbel Kirchhoff-Hund (1980) analysed
perspective. A theory should combine two or more variables, and the variables and
journalism as a production process of media messages. It was considered to be ‘class-based’
concepts must be defined. Analytical concepts must be linked to observation through
and subject to the conditions of the ‘utilization of capital’ and development of ‘productive
transformation rules – rules that connect variables and indexes to the meaning of analytical
forces’ (cf. Hund and Kirchhoff-Hund, 1980: 88-9). According to the media-sociological
concepts. Finally, restrictions on the application of the theory must be indicated (cf.
viewpoint of historic materialism, social communication in general – and therefore also
Loeffelholz, 2004: 21-3).
journalism – was assumed to be economically determined. In this perspective, media are
However, to speak of ‘the’ empirical analytical journalism research would be misleading.
production enterprises, and news is a good. This ‘economism,’ but also the ideological
An enormous theoretical, methodical, and thematic bandwidth has developed since the
shaping of the approach, reduced its theoretical complexity as well as empirical relevance. In
1970s. Fields of research include journalists’ professional attitudes and structures of
st
contrast to the 1970s and 80s, the academic debate at the beginning of the 21 century is no
consciousness, professionalisation and socialization in the media companies, editorial
longer oriented toward the materialistic perspective, although commentaries on
organization structures and working conditions, the consequences of the introduction of
commercialisation phenomena still belong to the standard repertoire of journalism research:
new technologies, and working conditions for women in journalism (cf. Boeckelmann,
Especially in the last years, journalism researcher witnessed a growing economic pressure on
1993). Furthermore, empirical analytical journalism studies cannot be identified as a single
journalism, due to technological and related production changes, and this lead to some
concept, because the methodological premises of the approach have been adopted by other
negative comments. However, there is no up-to-date revision of materialistic media theory
perspectives on journalism – especially the theory of action, the systems theory, and the
in sight – the critical voices were coming from various directions, and they do not form a
integrative social theories. Therefore, it is not surprising that many methods and empirical
coherent critical approach (which might be needed, though).
data of journalism studies are based on the premises of the empirical analytical perspective. ‘Analytical empiricism’ has a bright future, in the German speaking countries as much as elsewhere in the world. The integration of theorizing about limited phenomena with (quantitative, hypotheses testing) empirical work is so tight that a lot of researchers believe
12
13
this is the only way to do research. However, one has to note a lot of the respective studies
empirical journalism research. Statements about journalistic self-image, political preferences
operate very closely to (professional) market research – which may narrow the foci of
of journalists, and motives in reference to their profession are connected with statements
academic research. So, there has to be some healthy balance between analytical empiricism
about relations to colleagues, as well as the journalists’ understanding of the audience. An
and some of the broader approaches mentioned in the following sections.
analysis of these (personal) features and attitudes is judged important, because they are assumed to be central for the actions of journalists, and consequently, for the journalistic
3.4 Normative empiricism
products and audience as well. The central line of argumentation is that journalists are a
Representatives of ‘normative empiricism’ also define their journalism concept as empirical.
social power, a privileged occupational group with far greater chances of political
However, their starting point is normative – they begin with the assumption of a certain
participation than the remaining citizens, but with no appropriate social authentication.
political bias or ideology in journalism and try to reconstruct this ideological view through
Journalists are an unusually homogeneous occupational group with similar political
empirical research. Critics like Baum (1994) also use the term ‘legitimism’ to describe this
attitudes; by no means do they represent the population at large with their features,
approach, because the empirical research serves as a means to support a certain (political)
interests, and opinions. Journalists do not limit themselves to the mere role of mediators of
perspective. In sharp contrast to the functionalistic systems theory and politically ‘neutral’
information, but predominantly practice (politically) biased journalism, thereby gaining
empiricism, Baum identifies the ‘legitimism of the Mainz school” of journalism studies,
political influence (cf. Donsbach, 1982: 218).
particularly in connection with the works of Elizabeth Noelle-Neumann, Hans Mathias
Critics of this perspective note that it primarily focuses on the non-standard attitudes of
Kepplinger, and Wolfgang Donsbach, all of whom worked at the University of Mainz in
journalists, but ignores the structural conditions of media production, for instance the time-
Germany (cf. Baum, 1994: 208).
and source- dependency of journalistic work. Equating journalism with media can also be
Until the late 1970s, these researchers particularly dealt with the public (Noelle-Neumann)
criticized, as it does not take into account the dependency of journalistic work on
and media messages (Kepplinger). Donsbach, a former student of Noelle-Neumann,
economic, organizational, and technological structures. Besides, it is not proven, but only
connected theoretical ideas on the profession of journalism with the ideas of Noelle-
assumed, that the intentions of journalists and their attitudes are relevant for message
Neumann, who said that the large influence of mass media can only be adequately explained
production and journalistic output (cf. Altmeppen and Loeffelholz, 1998: 105).
if media effects research turns to the communicators themselves. Therefore, the question of
Nevertheless, the normative approach of the above mentioned scholars has been widely
how journalistic attitudes are legitimised is crucial for him, i.e. the question of ‘whether
discussed, even outside the German speaking countries. And like ‘analytical empiricism’, the
those who exert the largest influence on the contents of mass communication deal with this
normative approach is still vibrant: A lot of research is coming from this perspective, and it
power in such a way that no damage arises to the community as a result’ (Donsbach, 1982:
finds its way into international journals as well. One might even argue that – from the pool
10). According to this understanding, journalism research is a part of media effects research.
of theories that are emanating from the German speaking countries – the normative
To answer the main question of normative empiricism, standards of communication policy
approach received the most attention from an international audience.
(in particular, the constitutional position of the media) are confronted with findings from
14
15
3.5 (Critical) theories of action
micro- and macro-analysis. His main interest lies in the connections between journalistic
The basic concepts of action theory can be traced back to ideas developed by sociologists
actions (action networks), which are analysed as complex social events:
such as Max Weber, Alfred Schuetz, and Thomas Luckmann. The central concepts of this
‘It is characteristic for institutional action, like journalistic action, that the function
perspective are social actors, their actions, and the actions’ meaning. Furthermore, it is
and purpose of the institution form the framework for the intentions of individual
hypothesized that social action is formed by rules, which develop during the process of
actions. Or to put it more exactly: the functions and purpose of the institution are a
human interaction. Journalism research based on this perspective, such as the description
prerequisite for the possibility of intentional action within this institution.
and analysis of editorial decision-making processes, primarily focuses on a typology of
Conversely, the individual actions make possible the reconstruction of the functions
journalistic action forms, patterns, and rules.
and purposes of institutions, due to their indexical character’ (Bucher, 2000: 255).
However, one could argue that journalism research – in contrast to other areas of media
With its basic terms (the ‘rule’, the ‘communicative principle’, the ‘shared knowledge’, and
studies, such as media effects research – just uses some terms of action theory without fully
the ‘recursiveness of understanding’), this approach orients itself toward the specific
exploring the depth of this approach. Theoretically sophisticated approaches have been
dynamics of communication, and not the intentions of the individual actors. According to
developed by only a few scientists; these include the work of Gottschlich (1980) and Baum
Bucher, such a theory of action is complementary to systems theory.
(1994) (based on the ideas of Juergen Habermas), and Bucher’s linguistically justified
While the recent efforts by Bucher and others helped to revitalize theories of action in
approach (2000).
German speaking journalism studies, the future of this family of approaches remains
Baum tries to demonstrate that, due to its inherently social quality, mass communication is
unclear. The perspective is still underdeveloped in German speaking journalism research,
embedded in everyday contexts. Therefore, he argues that the ‘original mode of journalistic
which is partially due to the importance of competing approaches, like systems theory.
action is communication-oriented’ (Baum, 1994: 395). Nevertheless, he uses Habermas’
However, some ideas of action theory resurface in other perspective, especially in the
theory of communicative action primarily as a justification for his criticism of
eclectic family of ‘integrative theories’ – therefore, action theory (or some of its basic ideas)
communicator research, without operationalising the approach in detail with regard to
might become more important in the future.
journalism. Gottschlich (1980) analyses, likewise with reference to the works of Habermas, the role of
3.6 Functional systems theory
journalism in social discourse, and the legitimacy of journalists’ influence on society. On
The elaboration of functional systems theories as a perspective for describing journalism in
this basis, he develops a normative framework for the analysis of journalism. His aim is to
Germany began with a study of the newspaper’s editorial department as an organized social
overcome the journalistic ‘loss of orientation’ that he identifies as an outcome of the
system (Ruehl 1969). It initiated a paradigm shift:
discrepancy between subjective conceptions of work and objective reality in the profession.
‘Editorial action, in the form of producing newspapers in a highly industrially
Finally, Bucher (2000) strives for a non-reductionist theory of action, in the sense that it
developed society system, is not only carried out by some editors collecting
relies not only on the actors. In doing this, he tries to overcome the dichotomy between
16
17
messages, correcting, and writing, but is rather a fully rationalized production
necessary (cf. for example Dygutsch-Lorenz, 1971). Besides this, several approaches can be
process in an equally rationalized and differentiated organization’ (Ruehl, 1969: 13).
observed that operate with the term ‘system,’ but show the legacy of the individualistic
Thus, Ruehl turned against the normative and individualistic tradition of German
tradition. For example, Kepplinger (2000: 86-7) conceptualises journalism as a system of
journalism research and outlined an alternative: ‘The person as a paradigm is a much too
actors or rules that can be understood as a heterogeneous bundle of persons, organizations,
complex and inelastic term to serve as a unit of analysis for journalism. In response to this,
and institutions. According to him, the term ‘journalism’ defines the conditions, types, and
the term ‘social system’ is suggested, which permits differentiation between journalism and
effects of the journalists’ professional activities, and is a subsystem of mass communication.
its environments.’ (Ruehl, 1980: 435-9) He extended and refined his ideas of the editorial
Different approaches are also pursued within functional systems theories. A central
department as a social system in a series of publications, particularly ‘Journalism and
question revolves around systemic integration: is journalism a functional system within
Society’ (Ruehl, 1980).
society, as Ruehl (1980) or Scholl and Weischenberg (1998) assume, or does it operate as a the
constituent, a subsystem (a ‘performance system”) within a larger functional system such as
system/environment paradigm as an ‘order principle of a general theory of journalism’
‘public’ or ‘mass media’? Diverging views also exist regarding the structures that constitute
(Ruehl, 1992: 127) and the identification of a journalism-specific function. According to
the internal order of the system, and the (primary) function of journalism. Ruehl himself
Ruehl’s early ideas, this function lies in the production and supply of topics for public
modified his concepts several times (cf. Ruehl, 1992: 129 and Ruehl 2000: 73).
communication (Ruehl, 1980: 323). Further theoretical building blocks are the development
Criticism of functional systems theories comes from different sources. For example, critics
and differentiation of decision structures in journalism (cf. Ruehl, 1980: 251), as well as its
note that the approaches underestimate the relevance of journalistic subjects for the
social embedding. In this perspective, journalism is ‘always dependent on a society system
execution of journalistic actions. They charge that the approaches ignore the extensive
which can be socio-historically identified’ (Ruehl, 1992: 131).
interrelationships between media-specific (especially economic) and journalistic procedures.
In the course of the past decades, many have adapted Ruehl’s basic notions, criticized them,
They also criticize the dichotomy of system and subject, in which the perspective of action
and tried to develop them further (cf. as an overview: Loeffelholz, 2004: 54-9). The
theory is shortened to one of a micro-structural actor, although theories of action concern
separation of journalists as persons from journalism as a social system promised to
themselves expressly with dynamic social structures (cf. in summary: Loeffelholz, 2004:
overcome the oversimplifying concepts of the early period of journalism research, as well as
59f.).
being the link to the sociological debate, without having to give up the requirement of an
Nevertheless, functional systems theory still has a large number of followers in Germany as
empirical check of theory.
well as in other German speaking countries, so we can expect some more work that
The term ‘system’ is by no means uniformly used in communicator studies. While Ruehl
discusses and refines its concepts – arguably making it the most expansive perspective in
consistently distinguishes between the editorial department as a social system and the
German journalism theory. This does not necessarily guarantee a success in other countries
publishing house, audience, editorial archives, and technology or actors, others criticize this
as well: it has been criticized that the perspective’s theoretical advances are considerably
approach. In order to operate in closer accord with reality, open system concepts seem to be
slow and that the practical output is fairly limited, and that the approach is deeply
18
19
The
substantial
building
blocks
of
functional
systems
theories
include
embedded in a very general sociological debate. Especially the latter point might be a
elements that form the structure, and more closely analyzes the underlying process logics.
hindrance to an export of this perspective, because a broad sociological approach does not
First of all, Quandt identifies some elements that form the basis of human action: the action
fit the current international discussion in journalism studies, which is very much focused on
type, the space and time frame, the context, the resources and the subject relations.
theorizing ‘current’ developments with ‘practical relevance’ (like online journalism, public
Through everyday action, specific constellations of elements are reproduced by the actors
journalism, war reporting etc.). On the other hand, an alternative to short term theorizing
themselves; the constellations are remembered by the actors as relations between the
might be well overdue – and systems theory could offer some interesting new ways of
elements (in the form of element associations and time based action sequences). These
thinking about journalism.
relations then form patterns that are the basis for rules of actions, which are used as a kind of ‘grammar’ for the planning of further actions. Quandt (2005: chapter 7-9) could
3.7 Integrative social theories
empirically show – through observation studies in online journalism – that the patterns of
Given the above mentioned criticism, it is not surprising that in journalism research in the
element relations form larger networks, which are not bound to individuals. He found that
1990s, not only was the systems theoretical approach refined, but also the search for
the rules of action are shared by most journalists (even if they do not know each other and
‘integration’ theories begun – theories that could overcome the dichotomy of system and
work in totally different environments). According to Quandt, the action networks
subject, and of structure and action. So far, none of these approaches seems to be a complete
therefore serve as an orientation horizon for the journalists, defining the boundaries and the
and consistent theory for the description of journalism. Nevertheless, integrative social
substance of everyday work, thus (partially) defining journalism itself. With this approach,
theories are mostly sophisticated theory architectures, essentially connected to certain
Quandt tries to integrate micro (action elements), meso (patterns, rules) and macro
sociological re-orientations.
perspective (networks, orientation horizons). However, it has to be noted that this
Christoph Neuberger (2000) transfers the concept of actor-structure-dynamics, introduced
approach is still work in progress, leaving some questions open for further theorizing (for
by the sociologist Uwe Schimank, to journalism studies. In this perspective, institutional
example, the role of cognition in the reproduction of action rules needs some attention, as
theory and systems theory are connected. Journalistic organizations, for example editorial
well as the social processes of pattern reproduction and the relation between
departments, can be analysed as both institutional complexes and collective actors. The
communication and action).
different levels of journalistic functions, institutions, and actions refer to each other in this
An integrative perspective is also pursued by Siegfried Weischenberg. According to this
approach, but are not directly linked. Thus, interactions are not solely derived from
Hamburg based communication researcher, the topics of journalism are related to four
structural imperatives, but can lead to their own generation of structure. A similar
levels (beginning with the most global level): the media system (standards context), the
argumentation can be found in the works of Klaus-Dieter Altmeppen (2000) and Thorsten
media institutions (structures context), the media messages (functions context), and the
Quandt (2001), who use Anthony Giddens’ theory of structuration as their starting point.
actors (role context). ‘Standards, structures, functions, and roles in a media system
Just recently, Quandt proposed a refined version of his theoretical approach (2005). While
determine what journalism is, which then supplies reality with designs according to these
his theory of action networks is still focusing on structure building, it further defines the
conditions and rules’ (Weischenberg, 1992: 67). This ‘onion model’5 began as a scheme for
20
21
categorizing journalism-related research objects. Later it was promoted as a ‘model for the
suggestions. However, some initiatives started their work lately, like a network of young
systematic identification of factors that constitute a journalism system’ (Scholl and
scholars working on integrative theories – they try to focus their work in order to
Weischenberg, 1998: 21-2).
overcome the boundaries of the traditional approaches, and to bridge the gap between the
Scholl and Weischenberg point out that their basis is the constructivist systems theory, an
different ‘schools’ in German journalism theory.6 Other groups of researchers are also
approach that uses the term ‘systems’ as well as the term ‘actors.’ As useful as the onion
looking into new solutions, and overall, there is some kind of movement towards new ways
model is for categorizing the field of journalism research, its theoretical gaps with respect to
of theorizing – which can be considered as a revitalization of journalism and media theory
constructivist systems theory are also obvious. It is not very clear how a model explicitly
on the whole.
based on the premises of ‘influence’ is compatible with systems theory, which focuses on ‘communication’ as the basic element (cf. Scholl and Weischenberg, 1998: 47). For example,
3.8 Cultural studies
this concerns the allocation of the different layers of the ‘onion’: why should the outside
In contrast to socio-cultural constructivism, the system paradigm is neglected in other
factors influence the actors and their attitudes, whereas the actors themselves cannot
‘cultural’ approaches to journalism. The starting point is Anglo-American ‘cultural studies’:
influence the other layers (feedback from the inner layer to the other layers is not provided
on the basis of concepts derived from such diverse approaches as Marxism, critical theory,
for)? Whether such a catalogue of research objects can serve as a theoretical model for
semiotics, linguistics, and theories of action, they focus on contextual research in and
journalism’s relationships to its environments, without further adjustment, is somewhat
modification of the relationship between culture, media, and power. In light of the
doubtful. Nevertheless, the ‘onion model’ has been quite successful, because it offers a
concept’s various origins and open-endedness, it is not surprising that cultural studies do not
simple and intuitive way to categorize topics in journalism research.
represent a closed theoretical architecture; even the definition of the term ‘culture’ varies
In this section, it should have become obvious that we have just started on the long path
greatly amongst works of cultural studies researchers. In numerous research projects,
towards an integration theory in which the links between macro-, meso-, and micro-levels
cultural studies have concentrated on the reception and appropriation of media, especially
of journalism are consistently explained. In the future, substantial integration potential
TV entertainment programs (cf. Hepp, 1999).
might come from several approaches, such as socio-cultural constructivism, which focuses
With the works of the Austrian researcher Rudi Renger (1999), the first attempts to transfer
on the connections between cognition, communication, media, and culture (cf. Schmidt,
the core thoughts of Anglo-American cultural studies to journalism research in the German
2000).
speaking countries were undertaken. According to Renger, journalism is a ‘cultural
It nonetheless remains unclear how integrative social perspectives will develop: While this
discourse,’ and a part of popular culture. Journalism as an area of everyday culture serves as
might be the most dynamic part of German journalism theory, with surprising new ideas
a sphere for the (re)production of meaning, sense, and consciousness. For cultural studies
and combinations of other approaches, it is also a very heterogeneous field of ideas. The
scientists, it is not so important how journalistic messages are produced in detail. Journalism
success is sometimes bound to a few scholars and their publications, so there remains some
is rather seen from the recipient’s perspective, as an everyday life resource, which serves the
doubt whether a new ‘school of thoughts’ might develop from these approaches and
social circulation of meaning and pleasure. Media like the daily newspapers are interpreted
22
23
as a ‘structure of meaning,’ as ‘literary and visual constructs that apply symbolic ways and
and media enterprises. The debate on convergence, however, reduces the complex
means and are shaped by certain rules, standards, conventions, and traditions’ (Renger,
developments to a very limited view of ‘media merging.’ It is much more likely that the
2000: 475).
emergence of internet-based communication forms like the world wide web is deeply
It remains to be seen whether the approach of cultural studies will be largely accepted in
embedded in social developments, and cannot be separated from these developments. For
journalism research and whether it will produce new insights. Nevertheless, cultural studies
journalism, it is obvious that the internet will bring massive changes. First of all,
offer a multitude of theoretical concepts. In the course of the globalisation of economic
journalists in traditional media use the internet themselves as a communication medium
systems, ‘transnational cultures’ are developing, which increasingly shape the production
and research tool. But there are also new forms of actual ‘online journalism,’ and
contexts in media companies. The concept of culture is gaining further significance, because
journalism faces many challenges here. The internet allows the distribution of
in a globalised world, what separates people also connects them: the possibility of
information to large masses without itself being a mass medium, in the traditional sense
perceiving oneself as culturally distinct (cf. Hepp and Loeffelholz, 2002).
of the word. It combines aspects of interpersonal and mass communication (cf. Morris
Overall, unlike in the Anglo-American discourse on journalism, cultural studies have not
and Ogan, 1996), with unknown consequences for both traditional and new media.
been embraced by the ‘mainstream’ of journalism research in Germany so far. Nevertheless,
While on a technological level, the internet can be seen as a democratic tool for
new questions and topics are coming from this direction, thus broadening the scope of
information distribution, this does not mean that there are equal chances for every
German journalism research.
communicator. Large companies with a brand name in traditional media definitely have an advantage over smaller start-up ventures. And although the internet makes a conscious selection of information possible, it also presupposes this selection. Taking all
4. The future: Meeting the challenge
these points into account, it is not plausible that one can simply transfer journalism
Journalism studies are neither a homogeneous field, nor are there any ‘main’ trends in
theories from the traditional media to the internet. At the very least, a rethinking of the
theoretical work (although some claim that the functional systems theory is now the
term ‘mass medium’ is necessary, but also a re-evaluation of established theories.
mainstream of theoretical reasoning in the German speaking countries). The multi-
y With the advent of the internet and especially the world wide web, communication
perspective of approaches may be (negatively) seen as a lack of focus – as it is criticized by
structures and economic environments have been changing worldwide. The still ongoing
some scientists who say there is no academic discipline without a clear core of ideas – or on
development called globalisation also has an impact on media companies and audiences.
the other hand, as the necessary answer to the many challenges of a social scientific
The larger companies are now competing in a global media market, and company
description of journalism. And indeed, there are considerable challenges in the
mergers affect markets that were formerly divided – by nation, medium, audience
contemporary media environment:
structure, etc. globalisation means that borderlines are dissolving, in both a positive and
y The technological emergence of new, computer-based media and communication forms
negative sense. Borders signify not only an artificial line delimiting freedom, but in many
has led to a discussion of the convergence of media, communication forms, audiences,
cases a necessary and meaningful distinction. With the disappearance of language barriers
24
25
(primarily) based on traditional national borders, new differences will develop - of
technology, for example. But if the change in technology corresponds to a change in the
(sub)cultures and companies, in general: new group differences. Journalism must cope
social embedding of communication, the theory must take this into account.
with structural changes (i.e. in the organizational background) as well as audience
Quite a few of the above-mentioned theories in the German speaking countries are not up
changes, and there is no easy solution or simple answer. The democratic and open
to the task of modelling change adequately, nor are they interested in this. Especially
‘global village’ seems to be a myth, but the ‘dissolution’ panic spread by some cultural
normative ideas and the materialistic media theory seem to be not flexible enough to cope
critics is an equally one-sided concept. It is quite plausible that the new internet
with the new media and communication world. Their political undertone reflects a different
neighbourhoods are still centred very much on interest and proximity (and therefore, on
historical situation, therefore the normative basis of these approaches has an – arguably –
meaningful information that is, for example, reflected in news values), although they are
shrinking relevance nowadays; at least if one judges these approaches by the output of
located in a worldwide communication network (cf. Hepp, 2001).
studies with the respective background. In contrast to this, analytical empiricism will
y While some large media companies aim at a global market, most of the other ‘medium’
definitely generate new ideas of how to model communication; although limited in range, it
and ‘small’ companies act within a smaller environment. Nevertheless, there are some
is very flexible and always follows empirical development. Nevertheless, research patterns
other borderlines that may also be crossed, namely the ones between journalism and PR,
visible in current internet research show that there are theoretical gaps and areas uncovered
and between journalism and entertainment. Although one can argue that these
(cf. Kim and Weaver, 2001); it is unclear whether this is due to ‘normal’ development visible
differences were just a projection of a certain ‘purist’ understanding of journalism (cf.
in every field of studies or to the special conditions of internet communication.
Altmeppen and Quandt, 2002), it is very certain that at least this understanding is at
The other perspectives (theories of action, functional systems theory, integrative social
stake: does journalism still provide the audience with current, factual information, or
theories, cultural studies), which can be seen as ‘larger’ sociological approaches, have
does it have a stronger orientation toward entertainment and ‘self-centred’ communica-
considerable room for new ideas and the improvement of concepts; they are in no way
tion (like public relations) today? Surely, a certain amount of criticism that journalism is
finished business. They offer some interesting ideas and insights not covered by analytical
becoming entertainment is exaggerated, but there are still some changes in company
empiricism, especially due to their more global approach.
structures that foster such development. If media companies merge with other large
Whether they will promote more research in the future is still in question. The
companies, and if the trend toward (diagonal) concentration continues, the idea of
international success of the above mentioned approaches is very much depending on the
journalism as a ‘correspondent,’ with no interest except the production of news, might
continuing work of the scholars in this field, their commitment to international work and
no longer be valid.
publications, and a better understanding of international problems – which might be
Given these challenges, journalism will have to adapt to the new situation. This means that
different from the questions that are asked in the national contexts of the German speaking
theoretical work in journalism may also change, although this is not necessarily the case. A
countries. While German speaking scholars could remain in their ‘splendid isolation’ for
social theory of communication might not be directly influenced by a change in
many years, due to the sufficient size of the German publication market, there seems to be a move towards a more global perspective recently. This is visible through a growing number
26
27
of participants in international conventions (the Germans form one of the largest nonAmerican groups in the ICA) and the contributions to initiatives like the ‘Journalism
Notes 1
Studies Interest Group’ of the ICA. It is a very good sign that a considerable number of younger scholars take this route and contribute to the larger international discussion. While
All German text portions were translated by the authors. Please refer to the bibliography for the German titles.
2
Many theoretical works of German speaking researchers have only been published
this might be more challenging, it also offers new insights and ideas. This is very much a
in German, aimed at the scientific communities in Austria, Germany, Switzerland
two way process: Some ideas from the German speaking countries might be noticed by an
and, to a certain extent, the Netherlands.
international audience for the first time, while the international discussion might open the
3
discussion in the national contexts and offer several starting points for new, creative ways of thinking about journalism. And this may be the greatest challenge for journalism studies
Actually, this is very similar to the ‘great man’ histories in early US-American journalism studies.
4
It must be noted that these ‘theories of a middle range’ were mostly introduced by
today: to think not in old ways about (new) media, but in different and intellectually
American scientists and then ‘imported” into the European debate. The German
stimulating ways about journalism as a whole.
speaking scientists remained very much excluded from the international discussion, at least to that extent that they didn’t give very much input to the discussion (except a few, like Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann). This might be due to the fact that the German speaking countries represented a large enough scientific community to promote dynamic internal discussion, making it unnecessary for German researchers to publish in English. 5
Weischenberg himself proposed this term; he noted that the four levels are arranged like layers of an onion.
6
The network “integrative theories in media and communication studies” (in short: “Network micro macro link”) is funded by the German Science Foundation over a period of at least 2 to 3 years. It brings together a considerable number of young scholars from several German Universities who are working on solutions to the problem of the micro macro link. Contact
[email protected] or
[email protected] for more information.
28
29
Dygutsch-Lorenz, I. (1971) Die Rundfunkanstalt als Organisationsproblem (The broadcasting corporation as an
Bibliography Altmeppen, K.-D. (2000) ‘Entscheidungen und Koordinationen. Dimensionen journalistischen
organization problem). Duesseldorf: Bertelsmann Universitaetsverlag.
Handelns’ (‘Decisions and coordinations. Dimensions of journalistic action’), pp. 293-310 in
Gottschlich, M. (1980) Journalismus und Orientierungsverlust. Grundprobleme oeffentlich-kommunikativen Handelns
M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of journalism). Opladen, Wiesbaden:
(Journalism and orientation loss. Basic problems of public communicative action). Vienna, Cologne, Graz:
Westdeutscher Verlag.
Boehlau.
Altmeppen, K.-D. and Loeffelholz, M. (1998) ‘Zwischen Verlautbarungsorgan und ,vierter Gewalt’.
Jaeger, K. (1926) Zeitungswissenschaft (Journalistik) (Newspaper science. (Journalism studies)). Dessau: Duennhaupt.
Strukturen, Abhaengigkeiten und Perspektiven des politischen Journalismus’ (‘Between
Hartley, J. (1996) Popular Reality. Journalism, Modernity, Popular Culture. London et al.: Arnold.
announcement organ and ,fourth power’. Structures, dependencies and perspectives of
Hepp, A. (1999) Cultural Studies und Medienanalyse. Eine Einfuehrung (Cultural studies and media analysis. An
political journalism’), pp. 97-123 in U. Sarcinelli (ed.) Politikvermittlung und Demokratie in der Mediengesellschaft (Mediating politics and democracy in the media society). Opladen, Wiesbaden:
introduction). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Hepp, A. and Loeffelholz, M. (eds.) (2002) Grundlagentexte zur transkulturellen Kommunikation (Basic texts of transcultural communication, Konstanz: UVK.
Westdeutscher Verlag. Baum, A. (1994) Journalistisches Handeln. Eine kommunikationstheoretisch begruendete Kritik der Journalismusforschung
Hund, W. D. and Kirchhoff-Hund, B. (1980) Soziologie der Kommunikation. Arbeitsbuch zu Struktur und
(Journalistic Action. A critique of journalism research based on communication theory., Opladen: Westdeutscher
Funktion der Medien (Sociology of communication. Workbook to the structure and function of media). Reinbek:
Verlag.
Rowohlt.
Boeckelmann, F. (1993) Journalismus als Beruf. Bilanz der Kommunikatorforschung im deutschsprachigen Raum von
Kepplinger, H. M. (2000) ‘Problemdimensionen des Journalismus. Theoretischer Anspruch und
1945 bis 1990 (Journalism as an occupation. An assessment of communicator studies in the German speaking
empirischer Ertrag’ (‘Problem dimensions of journalism. Theoretical claims and empirical out-
countries from 1945 to 1990., Konstanz: UVK.
put’), pp. 81-99 in M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of journalism). Opladen,
Bucher, H.-J. (2000) ‘Journalismus als kommunikatives Handeln. Grundlagen einer handlungstheoretischen Journalismustheorie’ (‘Journalism as communicative action. Foundations of an actiontheoretical journalism theory’), pp. 245-273 in M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of journalism). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Kim, S. T. and Weaver, D. (2001) Communication research about the Internet: A thematic meta analysis (manuscript). Kutsch, A. (1988) ‘Max Webers Anregung zur empirischen Journalismusforschung. Die ‚Zeitungs-
Buecher, K. (1926 [1917]) Gesammelte Aufsaetze zur Zeitungskunde (Collected essays on newspaper studies). Tuebingen: Laupp.
Enquête’ und eine Redakteurs-Umfrage’ (‘Max Weber’s suggestion for empirical journalism research. The ‘newspaper enquête’ and a survey on editors’), Publizistik 33(1): 5-31.
Donsbach, W. (1982) Legitimationsprobleme des Journalismus: gesellschaftliche Rolle der Massenmedien und berufliche
Loeffelholz, M. (2004) ‘Theorien des Journalismus. Eine historische, metatheoretische und
Einstellungen von Journalisten (Authentication problems of journalism: the social role of the mass media and
synoptische Einführung (‘Theories of journalism. A historical, metatheoretical, and
vocational attitudes of journalists). Freiburg, Munich: Albers.
synoptically introduction), pp. 15-60 in M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of
Dovifat, E. (1962) Zeitungslehre. Band 1 (Newspaper studies, volume 1). Berlin: de Gruyter.
journalism). 2nd edition, Opladen, Wiesbaden: Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften.
Dusiska, E. (ed.) (1973) Woerterbuch der sozialistischen Journalistik (Dictionary of socialist journalism studies).
Morris, M. and Ogan, C. (1996) ‘The internet as mass medium’, Journal of Communication 46(1): 39-50.
Leipzig: Universitaetsverlag.
30
31
Neuberger, C. (2000) ‘Journalismus als systembezogene Akteurkonstellation. Vorschlaege fuer die Verbindung von Akteur-, Institutionen und Systemtheorie’ (‘Journalism as a systems related actor constellation. Suggestions for the combination of actor, institutions and systems theory’), pp. 275-291 in M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of journalism). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Ruehl, M. (1969) Die Zeitungsredaktion als organisiertes soziales System (The newspaper’s editorial department as an organized social system). Bielefeld: Bertelsmann Universitaetsverlag. Schmidt, S. J. (2000) Kalte Faszination. Medien Kultur Wissenschaft in den Mediengesellschaft (Cold fascination. Media culture science in the media society). Weilerswist: Velbrueck Wissenschaft. Scholl, A. and Weischenberg, S. (1998) Journalismus in der Gesellschaft. Theorie, Methodologie und Empirie (Jour-
Prutz, R. E. (1971 [1845]) Geschichte des deutschen Journalismus (History of German journalism), Goettingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht.
nalism in the society. Theory, methodology and empirical experience). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Quandt, T. (2005) Journalisten im Netz (Journalists in the net). Wiesbaden: Verlag fuer Sozialwissenschaften. Quandt, T. (2001) ‘Virtueller Journalismus im Netz? Eine strukturationstheoretische Annaeherung an das Handeln in Online-Redaktionen’ (‘Virtual journalism in the net? Journalistic action in online media – an approach based on the theory of structuration’), pp. 233-253 in A. Baum and S. J. Schmidt (eds) Fakten und Fiktionen. Ueber den Umgang mit Medienwirklichkeiten (Facts and fictions. On dealing with media realities). Konstanz: UVK.
Schwarzkopf, J. von (1795) Ueber Zeitungen (On newspapers) (Reprint: Munich 1993). Frankfurt a. M.: Fischer. Weber, M. (1924) Gesammelte Aufsaetze zur Soziologie und Sozialpolitik (Collected essays on sociology and social politics). Tuebingen: Mohr. Weischenberg, S. (1992) Journalistik. Theorie und Praxis aktueller Medienkommunikation. Band 1: Mediensysteme, Medienethik, Medieninstitutionen (Journalism studies. Theory and practice of current media communication. Volume
Renger, R. (2000) ‘Journalismus als kultureller Diskurs. Cultural Studies als Herausforderung fuer die
1: Media systems, media ethics, media institutions). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Journalismustheorie’ (‘Journalism as cultural discourse. Cultural Studies as a challenge for journalism theory’), pp. 467-481 in M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of journalism). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Renger, R. (1999) ‘Populaerer Journalismus. Bedeutungsproduktion und -rezeption zwischen Information und Unterhaltung Popular journalism’ (Meaning production and reception between information and entertainment), habilitation, Universitaet Salzburg. Ruehl, M. (2000) ‘Des Journalismus vergangene Zukunft. Zur Theoriegeschichte einer kuenftigen Journalismusforschung’ (‘Journalism’s past future. On the theory history of a future journalism research’), pp. 65-79 in M. Loeffelholz (ed.) Theorien des Journalismus (Theories of journalism). Opladen, Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag. Ruehl, M. (1992) ‘Theorie des Journalismus’ (‘Theory of journalism’), pp. 117-133 in R. Burkart and W. Hoemberg (eds.) Kommunikationstheorien. Ein Textbuch zur Einfuehrung (Communcation theories. An introductory reader). Vienna: Braumueller. Ruehl, M. (1980) Journalismus und Gesellschaft. Bestandsaufnahme und Theorieentwurf (Journalism and society. Status Quo and theory design). Mainz: Hase and Koehler.
32
33
