Anything you can do, I can do better? Professional journalists on citizen journalism in six European countries

Henrik Örnebring

International Communication Gazette · 2013 · 143 citations · 47 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Existing literature identifies three domains of professional legitimacy—expertise, duty, and autonomy—used to distinguish journalists from amateurs. The study draws on 63 semi‑structured interviews with professional journalists across six European countries to explore how they differentiate their work from citizen journalism. Interview data reveal that journalists commonly invoke expertise and duty to demarcate themselves, but rarely cite individual autonomy; instead, they emphasize collective journalistic autonomy, contrasting with earlier individualistic conceptions of professionalism.

Abstract

This article is based on 63 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with professional journalists across career stages and across media in six European countries (UK, Estonia, Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden), and is concerned with how journalists answer the question: How is what you do different from what citizen journalists do? Based on existing literature on journalistic authority and the professional project, three areas where claims to professional legitimacy and distinction from amateurs are identified: expertise, duty and autonomy. The interview data show that while claims based on expertise and duty are common when professional journalists want to demarcate the boundary between them and citizen journalism, claims based on direct reference to autonomy are non-existent. However, claims based indirectly on reference to autonomy, but institutional or collective rather than individual autonomy, are common. Indeed the key result of this study is that legitimacy claims based on the collective nature of the journalistic endeavour are very common, in contrast to earlier constructions of journalistic professionalism, which emphasized individualism and individual autonomy.

References

47