More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? A National Comparison of Role Perceptions and Ethical Stances among Finnish Political Journalists

51 Väliverronen, Jari (2018). More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? A National Comparison of Role Perceptions and Ethical Stances among Finnish Political Journalists in Nordicom Review 39 (2018) 1, pp. 51-66. doi:10.2478/nor-2018-0001. More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? A National Comparison of Role Perceptions and Ethical Stances among Finnish Political Journalists Jari Väliverronen Abstract To date, specialised sub-groups of journalists have received little attention in comparative studies of the professional values of journalists. To shed new light on the situation in Finland, this article explores the role perceptions and ethical stances of an elite group of reporters – political journalists – in comparison with other Finnish journalists. A statistical analysis of two surveys from the Worlds of Journalism Study (WJS) project is undertaken, indicating that political journalists stand out from others by endorsing the role of analytical independent watchdogs and by maintaining more distance to audiences and commercialism. Ethically, they are more cautious than other journalists in using controversial reporting practices. These attributes should stem from the demands of political journalism and the high status of this form of journalism in newsrooms. Political journalists are also more uniform in their values than other sub-groups, but their uniformity is likely to be challenged by current external and internal pressures. Keywords: Finland, journalists, professional values, statistical analysis, Worlds of Journalism Study Introduction Comparative journalism studies have become increasingly popular at a time when the news media is suffering from several intense and interrelated crises in audience, technology, economics and workforce – most acutely in the US, but also elsewhere in the Western world (Barnhurst 2011). One strand of such research has focused on journalistic roles, values, and ethics in different environments during this time of change. A prime example of such comparative work is the Worlds of Journalism Study (WJS) project, whose members have, since its inception in 2007, produced numerous analyses assessing the professional understandings of journalists at both international and national levels (for a list of publications, see WJS 2017a). In the Nordic countries, such studies have also increased in popularity. For example, national-level studies have been published in Sweden (Asp 2007, 2012), Denmark (Al- 52 Jari Väliverronen bæk et al. 2015), and Finland (Pöyhtäri, Väliverronen & Ahva 2014), and a recent comparative article (Ahva et al. 2017) highlighted the many similarities in self-understanding among Nordic news journalists. To date, however, specialised journalists have received less attention in the scholarly debate. Of particular interest in this article are political journalists, who are traditionally seen as the representatives of the “most ‘sacred part’ of journalism” (Neveu 2002: 23). 7KHLUSURPLQHQWSRVLWLRQVHHPVWREHUHÀHFWHGLQWKHVHOIXQGHUVWDQGLQJRIMRXUQDOLVWV in the Nordic countries as well, as examples from Denmark (Skovsgaard & van Dalen 2013) and Sweden (Odén 2007) indicate. Similar comparative work remains to be done in Finland. The practical ethos of political journalists has been the subject of a study by Kantola (2013), but their views have not been compared with other journalists. By investigating the professional role perceptions and ethics of Finnish political journalists vis-à-vis other Finnish journalists, WKLVDUWLFOHDLPVWR¿OOWKLVJDSLQWKHOLWHUDWXUH Historical and theoretical background This study is based on the WJS project, and thus adopts the WJS’s idea of both journalism and the news media as being discursively (re)created social institutions (WJS 2017b). As social institutions, journalism and the news media serve a variety of functions and have crucial social responsibilities (e.g. Kunelius 2000). To serve these diverse functions, journalists rely on various cues, ranging from explicit rules to conventions and practices, upon which they base their actions (Cook 1998). Journalists learn these cues through occupational socialisation during their studies and work, and adopt them in order to follow a “logic of appropriateness” (Cook 1998: 61). Deuze (2005) argues that, in the Western context, the cues have long been based on ideal professional values that are largely shared among journalists from different countries, such as objectivity, autonomy, public service, timeliness, and ethicality. These values were established mainly in the post-World War II period, when journalism, aided E\LWVUHODWLYHO\VHFXUH¿QDQFLDOSRVLWLRQDQGPRQRSRO\RQLQIRUPDWLRQGLVVHPLQDWLRQ embraced the ideas of social responsibility and provision of objective information (Waisbord 2013). In this climate, the ideal values offered journalists a viable common goal for developing professionalism (Deuze 2005), although they were never interpreted uniformly. As shown by Hallin and Mancini’s (2004) study of media systems in Western countries, differences in countries’ socio-political and (media)historical backgrounds inÀXHQFHMRXUQDOLVWV¶SUDFWLFDOLQWHUSUHWDWLRQV+DOOLQDQG0DQFLQLWKHUHIRUHGLVWLQJXLVKHG between countries characterised by liberal, democratic corporatist, and polarised pluralist media systems. The (media)historical background is important since it shows how the cues form a YDULHGGLVFRXUVHUDWKHUWKDQD¿[HGFRQVWUXFW&DUSHQWLHU+DQLW]VFK7KH battle over what is appropriate is waged between different actors – not just journalists, EXWDOVRMRXUQDOLVWLFVRXUFHVWDUJHWVDQGDXGLHQFHV±ZKRDOO¿JKWIRUDXWKRULW\LQWKH ¿HOGRIMRXUQDOLVPFI%RXUGLHX,QWKLV¿HOGKRZHYHUWKHSRZHUWRGHWHUPLQH the discourse is divided unequally. For instance, among journalists, discourses put forward by practitioners of the so-called “serious news” (Hovden 2016) have dominated the discussion of what constitutes good journalism and good journalistic practice. 53 More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? +RZHYHUWKHLGHRORJLFDODQGGLVFXUVLYHVWUXJJOHLQWKH¿HOGKDVDUJXDEO\LQWHQVL¿HG in the last few decades. Labelled, among other things, as liquid modernity (Bauman 2000), profound societal, cultural, political, and technological transformations have called the functions of journalism in contemporary societies into question (Preston 2009). For instance, the connection between democracy and journalism has been questioned (Zelizer 2013). Moreover, new Internet-based means of undertaking journalism and publishing content (Carlson 2015) have accelerated media competition, and thereby FDXVHG¿QDQFLDOWXUPRLOLQWKHLQGXVWU\DQGLQFUHDVHGWKHLPSRUWDQFHRIDXGLHQFHFRQnection. Consequently, the nature of the journalistic profession has become more unstable and unpredictable than before, with journalism facing a growing need to “reinvent professionalism” (Waisbord 2013). ,QWKLVVWDWHRIÀX[QHZYLVLRQVDQGLQWHUSUHWDWLRQVRIWKHFRQVWLWXHQWSDUWVRIMRXUQDOLVWLFSURIHVVLRQDOLVPKDYHHPHUJHG&DUSHQWLHU+DQLW]VFK7KH:-6SURMHFW is based on one such vision, also followed by this article: the idea of journalistic culture. Like other forms of culture, journalistic culture exists at the three levels of ideas, pracWLFHVDQGDUWHIDFWV,QWKHSURMHFWWKHIRFXVKDVEHHQRQWKH¿UVWWZRWKDWLVMRXUQDOLVWLF FXOWXUHV³EHFRPHGLVFHUQLEOHLQWKHZD\MRXUQDOLVWVWKLQNDQGDFWWKH\FDQEHGH¿QHGDV particular sets of ideas and practices by which journalists legitimate their role in society and render their work meaningful for themselves and others” (WJS 2017b). The project is, in other words, interested in journalists’ own discursive formations of journalism. In the WJS, the formation of the discourse of journalism is observed at two levels: intrinsic dimensions (journalistic roles, journalistic ethics and journalistic trust) and H[WULQVLFGLPHQVLRQVSHUFHLYHGLQÀXHQFHVDQGHGLWRULDODXWRQRP\7KHVHGLPHQVLRQV are then assessed in relation to different contextual forces – individual, organisational, and societal – to explore varieties of journalistic culture in different environments (WJS 2017b). This study concentrates on the intrinsic dimension – that is, on journalists’ selfunderstanding of their roles and ethics – in one national setting, Finland. It attempts to shed new light on the culture of journalism in Finland through a comparison between an elite group of political journalists (Kantola 2013) and others, in a time when Finnish journalism is undergoing several changes (Pöyhtäri, Väliverronen & Ahva 2016). Before moving on to the analysis, the article presents a brief historical contextualisation of developments in Finnish journalists’ role perceptions and ethics. The case of Finland Similar to the other Nordic countries, the self-understanding of journalists in Finland has formed in close connection with the national political system, which has given political journalists a privileged position in Finnish newsrooms (Kantola 2013). In the democratic corporatist tradition (Hallin & Mancini 2004), politicians and journalists shared an understanding of the development of the welfare state (Syvertsen et al. 2014) and political parties had a dominant position in journalism. 7KLVLQÀXHQFHGMRXUQDOLVWLF roles: until the 1960s, journalism was seen, initially, as a mouthpiece of the political parties, and then as an arena for parties to communicate their agenda freely (Ørsten et al. 2008). Indeed, journalistic ethics were still in their infancy, with some ethical rules – although of very limited scope – having been published in the late 1920s and late 1950s (Koljonen 2013). 54 Jari Väliverronen ,QOLQHZLWKGHYHORSPHQWVLQ6ZHGHQDQG'HQPDUNFI-RQVVRQ7KRPVHQ Søllinge 1991), journalistic professionalisation and differentiation from the political V\VWHPEHJDQLQWKHV$WWKLVWLPHIRUPDOHGXFDWLRQLQMRXUQDOLVPH[SDQGHGD new self-regulatory mechanism was introduced and newspapers increasingly began to cut their formal ties to political parties (Salminen 1988). However, unlike in Sweden and 'HQPDUN%RQGHEMHUJ'MHUI3LHUUH:HLEXOO-RQVVRQLQFUHDVLQJ professionalisation did not lead to notable changes in journalistic self-understanding in Finland, as the 1970s were marked by party politicisation and the “Finlandisation” debate (Forsberg & Pesu 2016).1 In this climate, the public service broadcaster YLE became “a prisoner of politics”, and even recruitment was based on the party alignment of journalists well into the 1980s (Salokangas 1996). The trend of “overpoliticization” (Hemánus 1988: 459) was also visible in the press. Although politically aligned newspapers lost ground more quickly in Finland than in Denmark and Sweden (Nord 2008), 60 to 80 per cent of the news material published in the press in the 1970s came from the political machinery, whether politicians, state administration, or related organisations (Salminen 1988). Under these conditions, journalists adopted the role of deferential reporters who focused on giving citizens information DERXWWKHHOLWHV6DOPLQHQ9lOLYHUURQHQ)URPDQHWKLFDOSHUVSHFWLYHVXFK an approach meant a strong focus on the publication of correct facts and/or quotations (Koljonen 2013). In the 1980s, changes in society began to alter the mood. In politics, President Urho Kekkonen’s resignation in 1981, after 25 years in power, ushered in a more parliamentary mode. A more competitive market economy (Alasuutari 2011), combined with technological developments, led to deregulation in broadcasting. This included, for instance, WKHLQWURGXFWLRQRIFRPPHUFLDOUDGLRVWDWLRQVLQ6XFKFKDQJHVGLYHUVL¿HGWKH media, boosted competition between outlets, and increased journalists’ autonomy from SROLWLFV$XOD6DOPLQHQ The formal growth of autonomy continued and between 1970 and 1995, the market share of politically aligned newspapers fell from over 50 per cent to under 15 per cent (Nord 2008). Along with increasing professionalism, this strengthened the idea of MRXUQDOLVWLFDQGHGLWRULDOLQGHSHQGHQFHZKLFKKDG¿UVWDSSHDUHGLQDFRGHRIHWKLFVIRU journalists in 1976 (Koljonen 2013). In sum, these changes led to an increasingly diverse and less news-oriented journalistic output, as well as new interpretations of journalistic roles (Hemánus 1988). 6XFKGHYHORSPHQWVKDYHVLQFHJDWKHUHGSDFH3URIHVVLRQDOLVDWLRQZDVVROLGL¿HGDV the number of active journalists in Finland almost doubled from 1983 to 2011 (Hemánus 7KH8QLRQRI-RXUQDOLVWVLQ)LQODQG3ROLWLFDOO\DOLJQHGQHZSDSHUVGHFOLQHG to a negligible market position by the turn of the century (Nord 2008), and advancing deregulation in broadcast media since the late 1980s (Koljonen 2013) has contributed to an increasingly commercial orientation in journalism. Lately, technological developments – mainly pertaining to the arrival of online journalism – have increased the competition IRUDXGLHQFHDWWHQWLRQDQGJHQHUDWHG¿QDQFLDOGLI¿FXOWLHVLQMRXUQDOLVP:LWKGHFOLQLQJ HPSOR\PHQW¿JXUHVWKHQXPEHURIVDODULHGPHPEHUVLQWKH8QLRQRI-RXUQDOLVWVIHOOE\ 15 per cent between 2011 and 2015 (The Union of Journalists in Finland 2017). $PLGVWDOOWKHVHFKDQJHVWKHMRXUQDOLVWLFHWKRVKDVIXUWKHUGLYHUVL¿HG$OWKRXJK traditional reporting-based roles still form the backbone of Finnish journalists’ role 55 More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? perceptions, roles related to commercialism and serving audiences have gained ground (Pöyhtäri, Väliverronen & Ahva 2014). Journalists’ understandings of ethical practices have also become more diverse (Koljonen 2013). In political journalism, however, the contextual changes have taken more time to appear, compared with other journalistic genres. Despite increasing differentiation from the political system in the 1980s, political journalists still found the Soviet UnLRQDGLI¿FXOWWRSLFIROORZLQJGHFDGHVRIWKH.UHPOLQ¶VLQÀXHQFHRQ)LQQLVKSROLWLFV (Lounasmeri 2013). Thus, the ‘opening up’ of political journalism had to wait until the 1990s, following the fall of the USSR in 1991 and Finland’s EU membership in 1995, ZKHQPRUHDVVHUWLYHDQGGLYHUVHSROLWLFDOUHSRUWLQJHPHUJHG,VRWDOXV.XQHOLXV 9lOLYHUURQHQ:LWKWKHWXUQRIWKHWZHQW\¿UVWFHQWXU\SROLWLFDOMRXUQDOLVWVKDYH further increased the “liberalisation” of journalism (Herkman 2009: 81) by increasing DGYHUVDULDOLVPDQGHIIRUWVWRLQÀXHQFHWKHSROLWLFDODJHQGD.DQWROD Three generations of Finnish political journalists: high moderns, liquefying moderns and liquid moderns According to Kantola (2013), the historical development has formed three generations of Finnish political journalists. In her Bauman-inspired terminology, the oldest group – the ‘high moderns’ (born 1939-1955) – keep close ties with politicians, support objective reporting, and regard the national interest as the most important thing. The second group – the ‘liquefying moderns’ (born 1956-1969) – focus on issue politics and their own careers by increasing distance to politicians, in a wave of professionalisation. Finally, the ‘liquid moderns’ (born 1970 onwards) are increasingly individual in both WKHLUFDUHHUFKRLFHVDQGZD\VRIZRUNLQJ7KH\DUHÀH[LEOHWHDPZRUNHUVZKRFULWLFLVH the consensus politics of the Cold War era, and set the political agenda by favouring ad hoc sources and reporting about the private lives of those in power. In practice, more traditional interpretations of journalistic roles and ethics still enjoy widespread support. Despite journalists’ increasing presence as authorial voices in stories, neutral and detached reporting about political elites was still the primary tone of SROLWLFDOMRXUQDOLVPLQWKHHDUO\WZHQW\¿UVWFHQWXU\.XQHOLXV9lOLYHUURQHQ Moreover, many (older) political journalists viewed the emerging adversarial forms of reporting with suspicion (Kantola 2013). However, the detached, neutral way of reporting is by no means secure. With the advancing professionalisation of political communication (Herkman 2009), the increasing importance of the EU, and the rise of populism, seen in the success of the Finns Party, politics has changed. In journalism, increasing redundancies and the merging of news desks have also affected political journalism in recent years, with the growth of online political journalism adding to stress among practitioners. Against the background of these changes, the status of political journalists as the “crown jewels” of journalism is under increasing pressure (Väliverronen 2017). Even the connection between journalism and democracy – itself crucial for political journalism as we know it – has been questioned by media executives (Grönvall 2015). 56 Jari Väliverronen Methods, research questions, samples and hypotheses The self-understanding of other Finnish journalists is undergoing change in these uncertain times. However, how can we understand the self-perception of political journalists? This issue has so far received scant scholarly attention. Kantola’s (2013) study is the only one available and, for that work, data were collected in 2010-2011. Since then, several changes have occurred which make the undertaking of a new study necessary. Moreover, in her study, Kantola looks at the practical ethos of political journalists, based on 25 interviews. This study examines the issue from a different angle, using a quantitative survey methodology to statistically explore Finnish political journalists’ role perceptions and ethical values, while adding a comparative element, regarding other Finnish journalists, into the investigation. The study has two targeted research questions: RQ1. What are Finnish political journalists’ role perceptions and ethical values? RQ2. How do their perceptions differ from other Finnish journalists, and why? These questions are investigated using data from the WJS project. In the case of role perceptions, respondents were presented with 21 different functions for journalism and DVNHGWRHYDOXDWHWKHLULPSRUWDQFHRQD¿YHVWHS/LNHUWVFDOHIRUWKHOLVWVHH&LQ :-6F(WKLFDOREVHUYDWLRQVZHUHGLYLGHGLQWRWZRSDUWV,QWKH¿UVWSDUWMRXUQDOists’ general ethical considerations were gauged with four different statements, based on Forsyth’s (1980) distinction between absolutists, relativists, situationists, and exceptionLVWV5HVSRQVHVZHUHDOVRJLYHQRQD¿YHVWHS/LNHUWVFDOHVHH&LQ:-6F,Q the second part, journalists’ practical ethical stances, in the case of an important story, were measured on a three-step Likert scale (C14 in WJS 2017c), using their evaluations of 12 controversial ethical practices. The analysis is based on two samples: a nationally representative survey of all journalists in Finland, and a representative survey conducted among the members of the Association of Political Journalists in Finland (APJF). The APJF is the only national organisation for journalists who specialise in politics. It does not represent the whole spectrum of political journalism in Finland, but it was deemed suitable for comparative purposes because its membership data are up-to-date, while membership criteria are directly comparable with the WJS survey requirements. Table 1 describes the samples LQDPRUHGHWDLOHGIDVKLRQIRUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQRQWKHQDWLRQDOVDPSOHVHH3|\KWlUL Väliverronen & Ahva (2014). Table 1. Sampling information Political journalists Other journalists Number of respondents 80 345 Data collection period Dec. 2013 – Oct. 2014 Mar. 2013 – Aug. 2013 Data collection method Online Phone/email Response rate (%) 61 50–55* Average age of respondents (years) 51 43 Gender distribution in sample (W/M; %) 36/64 55/45 Comments: * Due to the data collection method, the exact response rate could not be determined. 57 More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? There are some limitations to the data, regarding different collection times and methods, as well as an over-representation of midand upper-level management in the Finnish national sample (cf. Pöyhtäri, Väliverronen & Ahva 2014). However, as employment position generally has a negligible effect on Finnish journalists’ values (Lauk, Harro-Loit & Väliverronen 2014), and the problems with online surveys concern mainly large-scale national samples (Chang & Krosnick 2009), comparisons were considered meaningful for this study. The surveys were analysed using the software package SPSS. In the following, the ¿QGLQJVDUHSUHVHQWHGLQWZRSDUWV7KH¿UVWSDUWIRFXVHVRQMRXUQDOLVWV¶UROHSHUFHStions (RQ1), and the second one looks at their ethical considerations (RQ2). Based on previous studies, the following hypotheses were made for the analysis: H1a. In Finnish political journalists’ role perceptions, the focus is on reporting, analysing, and monitoring political elites from a neutral and detached perspective. Other roles receive less support. Ethically, their stances are strongly guided by the professional code of ethics. H1b. Following Kantola’s (2013) study there should be generational differences: deviance from the values in H1a should increase in younger journalists, who favour a more opinionated and commercial approach to politics. H2. Overall, political journalists’ role perceptions and ethical stances are more traditional and uniform than those of other journalists. This is due to the higher average age of political journalists, the prestige of politics in journalism, and the specialised nature and demands of political journalism (e.g. parliamentary reporting). Results Role perceptions The answers paint a picture of political journalists as independent, detached, and neutral professionals (Table 2). They regard the main functions of journalism as analysing current events, watchdog journalism, and factually correct and objective reporting. Supporting government policy, conveying a positive image of the political leadership, and being an adversary of the government enjoy the least support. Such views are central to the role of a detached watchdog (Hanitzsch 2011), an ideal that is widely shared by Finnish journalists (Pöyhtäri, Väliverronen & Ahva 2014), mainly for historical reasons. The detached watchdog role combines the long-appreciated tenets of objective reporting and dissemination of correct information, with the later quest for independence from the party-political system. ,QLWLDOO\WKH¿QGLQJVDSSHDUWRHFKRDQHDUOLHUYLHZRIWKHVKDUHGLGHQWLW\RI)LQQLVK MRXUQDOLVWVGH¿QHGDVDFRPPLWPHQWWRSROLWLFVDVDUDWLRQDOXQGHUWDNLQJWRWDNLQJD non-partisan stand on issues, and active and conscious detachment from political parties and groups (Reunanen 2014). However, a principal component analysis (not shown here) indicates only some supSRUWIRUWKHWKHVLV'HWDFKPHQWDQGREMHFWLYHUHSRUWLQJIRUPDOHVVLQÀXHQWLDOFRPSRQHQW and the analytical approach is combined with elements from the critical change agent role (Hanitzsch 2011). However, this notion should be treated with caution since there is some cross-loading, with the three main components only accounting for 42 per cent of the variance in the sample. Furthermore, Cronbach’s alpha is slightly below that which LVFRQVLGHUHGDFFHSWDEOHĮ  58 Jari Väliverronen Table 2. Role perceptions of journalists Political All other General News journalists journalists reporters specialists Role (Nmin=73) (Nmin=326) (Nmin=183) (Nmin=37) Provide analysis of current affairs 4.64 (.56) 4.28 (.80) 4.26 (.80) 4.39 (.74) Monitor and scrutinise political leaders 4.61 (.61) 3.69 (1.31) 3.88 (1.16) 4.39 (.80) Provide information people need to make political decisions 4.51 (.78) 3.57 (1.26) 3.80 (1.09) 4.17 (.74) Report things as they are 4.41 (.71) 4.56 (.73) 4.57 (.74) 4.68 (.52) Be a detached observer 4.23 (.77) 4.51 (.74) 4.54 (.76) 4.56 (.63) Monitor and scrutinise business 3.79 (1.12) 3.53 (1.25) 3.65 (1.15) 3.98 (.99) Promote tolerance and cultural diversity 3.64 (.99) 3.92 (1.02) 4.06 (.95) 3.98 (.85) Let people express their views 3.55 (1.03) 3.84 (1.02) 3.99 (.94) 4.12 (.75) Educate the audience 3.48 (.95) 3.45 (.99) 3.36 (.98) 3.43 (.98) Tell stories about the world 3.45 (.99) 4.13 (.85) 4.10 (.83) 4.07 (.66) Motivate people to participate in political activity 3.33 (1.08) 2.53 (1.13) 2.66 (1.12) 3.00 (.98) Provide the kind of news that attracts the largest audience 2.96 (1.05) 3.34 (1.01) 3.39 (.95) 3.56 (1.00) Set the political agenda 2.69 (1.09) 2.34 (1.04) 2.44 (1.03) 2.45 (.93) Influence public opinion 2.59 (.96) 3.09 (.98) 3.05 (1.00) 3.03 (.96) Support national development 2.56 (1.07) 2.93 (1.02) 2.95 (.98) 3.05 (1.19) Provide advice, orientation and direction for daily life 2.46 (.93) 3.26 (1.01) 3.28 (.87) 3.32 (.99) Advocate for social change 2.37 (1.01) 2.95 (1.03) 2.97 (1.09) 3.00 (.93) Provide entertainment and relaxation 2.27 (.96) 3.02 (1.08) 3.00 (1.01) 2.98 (.97) Be an adversary of the government 2.25 (1.10) 2.05 (1.06) 2.11 (1.08) 2.27 (.99) Convey a positive image of political leadership 1.35 (.64) 1.23 (.53) 1.26 (.57) 1.22 (.42) Support government policy 1.13 (.41) 1.20 (.45) 1.22 (.47) 1.23 (.53) Mean of all answers 3.17 3.22 3.27 3.38 Comments: The question was posed: “Please tell me how important each of these things is in your work. 5 means you find them extremely important, 4 means very important, 3 means somewhat important, 2 means little importance and 1 means unimportant.” The result indicates variation between different groups, with political journalists standing out in a cross-group comparison (Table 3). For them, the detached watchdog role has a strong analytical focus. This appears to combine neatly with Reunanen’s (2014) description of the rational approach to politics, with the need to remain nonSDUWLVDQDQGGHWDFKHGIURPSROLWLFDOJURXSV6XSSRUWIRUWKLVUROHZDVFRQ¿UPHGE\WKH apparent deviations from it. In their role perception, political journalists are more likely than others to set the political agenda and to motivate people to participate in political activity. However, they added in their open-ended commentaries that such behaviour must remain non-partisan. By this logic, setting the political agenda is interpreted as taking a critical and analytical stance on all political actors, and motivating people is regarded as a general encouragement to vote and to uphold the political system. Thus, political journalists clearly position themselves as independent analysts. From this orientation it follows that, in comparison to others, they maintain more distance to citizens and commercial interests. For other journalists, role perceptions are more diverse. Although the objective and analytical functions are most strongly supported, working as a critical change agent (Hanitzsch 2011) or an engaging storyteller are also possible options. In this vein, other journalists have a closer relationship to audiences 59 More of the Same or a Different Breed Altogether? DQGFRPPHUFLDOLVPWKDQSROLWLFDOMRXUQDOLVWVZKLFKLVIXUWKHUUHÀHFWHGLQWKHJUHDWHU LQÀXHQFHWKH\GUDZIURPPDUNHWFRQVLGHUDWLRQVWKDQSROLWLFDOMRXUQDOLVWV Internally, political journalists’ opinions largely echo the values of the high moderns in Kantola’s (2013) division. One explanation for this is the high average age of the respondents. However, younger political journalists’ role perceptions are very similar, which indicates a ‘pack mentality’ often found in journalists covering the same beat (van Dalen, de Vreese & Albæk 2012). Between the age groups mentioned in Kantola’s VWXG\RQO\RQHVWDWLVWLFDOO\VLJQL¿FDQWGLIIHUHQFHZDVIRXQGWKHOLTXHI\LQJPRGHUQV DUHPRUHHDJHUWRLQÀXHQFHSXEOLFRSLQLRQWKDQWKHOLTXLGPRGHUQV&RPSDULVRQVEDVHG on gender, level of education, employment in public service or commercial media, and MRXUQDOLVWV¶SRVLWLRQLQWKHQHZVURRP\LHOGHGIHZVLJQL¿FDQWGLIIHUHQFHV0RUHRYHUWKH differences observed did not form clear patterns. Another reason for such a uniform role perception can be found in the high status of politics in newsrooms. In political journalism, the general discussion about increasing multi-skilling and job rotation (cf. Nikunen 2014) is yet to materialise. Two-thirds of political journalists said they were senior reporters or in a leading position in their newsrooms2, and nearly 95 per cent said they did stories about politics only. Moreover, Table 3. Comparisons of political journalists’ role perceptions against other groups, statistically significant differences All other General News Role journalists reporters specialists Provide analysis of current affairs POLJOUR *** POLJOUR *** Monitor and scrutinise political leaders POLJOUR *** POLJOUR *** Provide information people need to make political decisions POLJOUR *** POLJOUR *** POLJOUR ** Report things as they are OTHERS * GENREP * NEWSSPEC * Be a detached observer OTHERS *** GENREP *** NEWSSPEC * Monitor and scrutinise business Promote tolerance and cultural diversity OTHERS * GENREP ** Let people express their views OTHERS * GENREP ** NEWSSPEC ** Educate the audience Tell stories about the world OTHERS *** GENREP *** NEWSSPEC ** Motivate people to participate in political activity POLJOUR *** POLJOUR *** Provide the kind of news that attracts the largest audience OTHERS ** GENREP ** NEWSSPEC ** Set the political agenda POLJOUR ** Influence public opinion OTHERS *** GENREP ** NEWSSPEC * Support national development OTHERS ** GENREP ** NEWSSPEC * Provide advice, orientation and direction for daily life OTHERS *** GENREP *** NEWSSPEC *** Advocate for social change OTHERS *** GENREP *** NEWSSPEC ** Provide entertainment and relaxation OTHERS *** GENREP *** NEWSSPEC *** Be an adversary of the government Convey a positive image of political leadership Support government policy Comments: Method: Mann-Whitney (all other journalists) and Kruskal-Wallis & Dunn-Bonferroni (other groups) comparisons. ***: p<0.001, **: p<0.01, *: p<0.05. 66 Jari Väliverronen toimittajia tarvitaan 2020-luvulla [Back to the future of journalism – what political journalists will be needed for in the 2020s]. Helsinki: Politiikan toimittajat. Väliverronen, Jari (forthcoming). Elements and limits of mediatization of politics: The case of Finland, 19652015. Paper submitted to the 68th Annual ICA Conference, 24-28 May, Prague. 9DQ'DOHQ$UMHQGH9UHHVH&ODHV$OEN(ULNDifferent roles, different content? A four-country comparison of the role conceptions and reporting style of political journalists. Journalism, 13(7): 903922. Waisbord, Silvio (2013). Reinventing professionalism: Journalism and news in global perspective. Cambridge: Polity. Wiik, Jenny (2009). Identities under construction: Professional journalism in a phase of destabilization. International Review of Sociology, 19(2): 351-365. WJS (2017a). The worlds of journalism study: Publications [online]. Available at: http://www.worldsofjournalism.org/publications/. [Accessed 23 November, 2017]. WJS (2017b). The WJS 2012-2015 study: Conceptual framework [online]. Available at: http://www.worldsofjournalism.org/research/2012-2016-study/conceptual-framework/. [Accessed 23 November, 2017]. WJS (2017c). Worlds of journalism study: Master questionnaire, 2012-2014, version 2.5.1 consolidated [online]. Available at: KWWSZZZZRUOGVRIMRXUQDOLVPRUJ¿OHDGPLQ'DWDBWDEOHVBGRFXPHQWDWLRQ'RFXPHQWDWLRQ:-6BFRUHBTXHVWLRQQDLUHBBFRQVROLGDWHGSGI. [Accessed 23 November, 2017]. Zelizer, Barbie (2013). On the shelf life of democracy in journalism scholarship. Journalism, 14(4): 459-473. UVWHQ0DUN$DOEHUJ7RULO6WU|PElFN-HVSHU&RQFOXVLRQV6LPLODULWLHVDQGGLIIHUHQFHVEHWZHHQ the Nordic countries, pp. 267LQ6WU|PElFN-HVSHUUVWHQ0DUN$DOEHUJ7RULOHGVCommunicating politics: Political communication in the Nordic countries. Gothenburg: Nordicom. JARI VÄLIVERRONEN, Doctoral Student, Faculty of Communication Sciences, University of TamSHUHMDULYDOLYHUURQHQ#XWD¿