Žurnalistika Lietuvoje: žurnalistų laisvė, saugumas ir įtakos

LTMonografijoje nagrinėjama Lietuvos žurnalistikos situacija politinių, ekonominių ir socialinių rizikų kontekstuose. Remdamiesi nacionalinės žurnalistų apklausos duomenimis, knygos autoriai išsamiai analizuoja žurnalistų suvokimus apie darbo sąlygas, įvairaus pobūdžio įtakas, redakcinę autonomiją, žurnalistinius vaidmenis, profesinę etiką ir veiklos saugumą. Įvertinus įvairialypes rizikas ir savicenzūros mastą žurnalistikos lauke, aptariamas žiniasklaidos, kaip socialinės institucijos, gyvybingumas. [Anotacija knygoje]

ENThe monograph examines Lithuanian journalists’ perceptions of professional activity, its conditions, and influences. The results of the research make it possible to form a comprehensive picture of the functioning of journalism in Lithuania and to see the bulk of the obtained data in the context of journalism research in other countries, especially due to the previous work carried out by the Worlds of Journalism Study network of researchers. The research aimed to determine the significance of various (external, internal organizational, personal) influences on the Lithuanian journalism and to understand how stable the media can be as a social institution, as it is constantly forced to protect its autonomy and prove the need for professional journalism in the era of global social networks and platforms. It should be noted that Lithuanian journalists perceive professional-procedural influences as the most intense impact they have been undergoing. Next, in the scale of intensity of influences perceived by journalists, social, organizational, personal, economic, and political influences are listed in descending order. All the influences experienced by journalists are fairly common, as even at the end of the scale, political influence was named by more than a third of journalists. On the other hand, the lower frequency of political and economic influences on journalists (compared to organizational or professional-procedural influences) found in other countries research is interpreted in such a way that managers transform many political and economic influences on journalists through organizational routines (Hanitzsch, 2019). Negative influences on journalists that pose professional risks can be neutralized by adhering to the professional standards and ethical principles, thus simultaneously supporting the vitality of the social institution of the media.However, almost three-quarters of Lithuanian journalists who declared the use ofself-censorship in their work showed that many influences that undermine the essence of journalism (both external and internal-organizational) can be quite effective, and, when the self-censorship mechanism is activated, these influences tend to limit the implementation of journalistic principles in practice. When assessing the freedom of Lithuanian journalists in their professional activities, we can state that the media system (along with the journalist community) could be divided into three fairly clear groups in terms of the personal freedom of journalists: two large and one smaller sections. One of these large groups of journalists, constituting roughly a half of the journalist population, can manage external and internal risks and enjoys complete freedom in their journalistic activities. This part of the journalist community clearly contributes to strengthening the media (journalism) social institution and strives to foster its independence. Another large group of journalists, specifically, slightly less than a half of the population, can often, but not always, do journalistic work freely (i. e., they feel they have enough freedom) while manoeuvring between various risks. In this case, the support of this part of the journalistic community to the social institution of the media may be conditional, as it depends on the degree of control of the risks of journalistic work. The third group of journalists, who make up a few per cent of the professional community, do not have enough freedom in their work, constantly experience risks that they are not necessarily able to control, which leads to the undermining of the professional principles of journalism and the social institution ofthe media (journalism) as such.The understanding of Lithuanian journalists of what professional behaviour (roles) is acceptable or most important in their professional activities according to the order of the role orientations is similar to the tendency manifested by journalists in Western countries to perceive their roles. As in Western countries, after the monitorial role, the accommodative role is the most prominently expressed (perceived) in the professional behaviour of journalists (Hanusch, Hanitzsch, 2019), but the perception of the interventionist role is slightly behind them in terms of importance. This shows that, for some Lithuanian journalists, it is important not only to inform the public properly, but also to try to influence its attitudes or even political and social behaviour. The obtained results are related to a previously conducted survey of the opinions of the elite of Lithuanian political journalists when some political journalists (editors) said that it is acceptable to demonstrate ideological beliefs in journalism and participate in civil movements (Donauskaitė, 2010). In addition, not only the content published in the media but also the expression of journalists’ opinions on the social media, where the behaviour of journalists is discussed in the ethical codes of some media organizations, can be used for intervention purposes. Finally, a clearer definition of interventionist roles (for example, offering political solutions) due to the demonstrated bias can lead to a justified mistrust in journalists and the media as a social institution on the part ofthe audience. [...]. [From the publication]

• Baltic democracies: re-configuring media environments and civic agency / Auksė Balčytienė and Kristina Juraitė. Journal of Baltic studies. 2022, vol. 53, no. 4, p. 565-585.
• Lietuvos žiniasklaidos industrijų gyvavimo ciklo stadijos / Deimantas Jastramskis. Informacijos mokslai. 2014, t. 68 p. 113-126.
• Lietuvos žiniasklaidos sistemos modelio bruožai / Deimantas Jastramskis. Informacijos mokslai. 2011, t. 55, p. 52-70.
• Media modernization and journalism cultures in the Baltic States and Norway / Auksė Balčytienė. Baltic media world. Riga, 2005. P. 169-183.
• Politikos žurnalistika. Lietuvos žiniasklaidos elito nuomonių analizė / Džina Donauskaitė. Žurnalistikos tyrimai. 2010, Nr. 3, p. 53-78.
• The Consequences of perceived (in)security and possible coping strategies of Lithuanian people in the context of external military threats / Ingrida Gečienė-Janulionė. Journal on Baltic security. 2018, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 5-14.