Journalist as the organizer of social interaction...

Journalist as the organizer of social interaction

In this chapter, journalistic activity is represented in the professional-organizational and socio-organizational aspects. The student gets knowledge about typical forms and ways of establishing a business partnership of the journalist with the social environment.

As a result of the study of Chapter 5, the student must:


• types of journalistic activity (author's, editorial, organizing, etc.);

be able to

• plan and organize their professional activities in its various forms;


• methods of organizing and conducting public discussions, interactive communication with the audience, editorial social actions.

Social interaction in journalism

By now, the world for a variety of reasons has developed a new one, little similar to the previous information reality, when the media acquired an unprecedented importance for the entire human community. Therefore, journalists, and even journalism theorists, often begin to see the world of the media as a decisively isolated object from society. Separated so much that one can involuntarily feel that it was not the press that was created for a person, but a person for the press. Or, to put it differently, the concepts of independence and press autonomy are mixed. The independence of the media is a speculative concept, which can sometimes be used in publicistic or ordinary speech, if there is no need for rigorous judgments. This vague notion is opposed to the scientific idea of ​​the autonomy of the press: it contains the same idea of ​​independence, but only limited by certain social circumstances, without regard to which there can not be effective journalistic activity. As we see, the independence and autonomy of the press are related concepts, though they carry fundamentally different meanings.

This is important for further judgments. The idea of ​​independence leads to a misunderstanding of the interaction of journalism and society as equivalent, equal partners. On the contrary, the idea of ​​the autonomy of the press makes it possible to realize that journalism, the media in general, is part of an integral social organism, that the relationship between society and journalism is the interaction of the whole and its part, in which, however, the laws peculiar to it operate, and their violation is detrimental journalism.

The emerging new information reality - an indisputable fact of our time - has exacerbated the long-established tendency to hyperbolize the media's self. Naturally, in this categorically expressed form this thesis is not made very often, perhaps because of its obvious insolvency . But if you take a closer look at the journalism theorists written over the past few years, it becomes clear that a considerable number of statements are based on this thesis. It is possible that it is involuntary, because this side of the question is not always given due importance.

For example, it will be useful to look at the argument chosen by the German researcher Norbert Wolz for some or other provisions of his work, in which he made an attempt to introduce the usual media, inherited by contemporary media, into an entirely new world of network space. It is worth paying attention to the author's approach: he does not include innovations in the information world in the system of elements known to us for a long time, but elements of the old reality introduce into the structure of the update. Thus, it is recognized that the media system has changed so much that it has become qualitatively different. In this context, Boltz's reliance on the notion of the media's self is particularly noteworthy. This idea as a self-evident truth is embedded in the general ideology of its manual for students studying media specialties.

The essence of the given device reveals the thesis of the researcher about the nature of the new information reality, in which the amateur parental ideals and professional post-journalism are supposedly triumphant. But the analogy recalls the alarm of the Italian philosopher Gianni Vattimo, who is excited by the fact that "now, minorities of all kinds have broken through to the microphone" and with the help of easily accessible media, they began to spread such a diversity of views that inevitably should lead to the collapse of the unified for all "truth."

Analysts' concerns are quite understandable: today you can see with the naked eye the most obvious diseases of growth of the new media reality. Among them is the increase in the number of media components, which coincided with a sharp increase in the level of their technical equipment, the explosive expansion of the blogosphere, postmodernist exercises of professional journalists, in particular the devaluation of serious and responsible conclusions in their works, etc. Unlike our colleague from Germany, that these are the consequences of qualitative changes in the society itself, the institution of which is journalism. If you adhere to this position, ie. understand journalism as a social institution, there can not be a crowd of profane, which, according to Wolts, generates a dilettante's paralegalism. There is no crowd, but there is an audience that has not yet mastered the media language because of a number of social reasons. Among them, the underdevelopment of the democratic principles of public life, the general ideological crisis (crisis of ideologies), low political activity of citizens, the apparent inadequacy of the level of their media education. Many critics note the artificial delimitation of the press and the reader, which became an objective fact. Meanwhile, Norbert Wolz even considers this process from the point of view of the relations of its participants. So, referring to the fashionable theme of interactivity, he argues that mass media in principle can not be interactive and only under the pressure of the audience still creates its stable visibility . In fact, the reasons for creating the appearance of a public dialogue in the media, when it is actually absent at all or in its infancy, are rooted in the socio-political structure of society.

Now let us dwell on another statement of the German analyst, the statement of which must be accepted. In media practice, Norbert Boltz writes, the appeal to values ​​disguises truly insoluble problems. Common values ​​should only fit into negative messages. Here it is, a real dilemma in journalism: on what values ​​and in what contextual framework to form a picture of the world for the audience; on what social request to respond; in which format to build their relations with the audience, i.e. whether to play the roles of the seller and the buyer or the role of equal participants in public dialogue?

So it is not without justification to reassert itself again and again in the long-known: only social life gives a true meaning to the existence of the mass media. Without the public request articulated by journalism, the content of the media is a technical artifact. No more. In this case, we do not speak the language of abstract categories, but the language of journalistic practice. It is the language of thousands and thousands of famous and not very famous reporters, commentators, essayists. They day after day, snatching facts from the thick of life as the quintessence of time, reveal to the audience a real multi-color picture of the world. In the words of a well-known English TV journalist in the past, "they formulate ideas and problems before, perhaps, the audience could do it themselves, and help guide people on the path that they may have chosen unconsciously ... people are ready for any truth, are ready to engage in the analysis of any facts, and the only thing that can not be done is to make them believe you on the floor without proof. "

Folded with such journalists, the world is opposed by another, in which you can find everything you want, except just an hour ago, the correspondent found fact - vital, relevant, meaningful for his audience and society as a whole. Therefore, such a picture of the world can only be synthetic, although it is also created by the press, and this press is also part of media reality, many of whose creators sincerely consider themselves journalists. Although in fact for journalism, the facts of life are fundamentally important, in particular, the well-known TV talk show host Vladimir Soloviev is absolutely sure. For a professional journalist, he believes, the main task is to hear the interlocutor, to hear the person. For this reason, Soloviev himself is always ready for the upcoming conversation, trying to maximize pull out from the interviewees, what kind of information is possible.

Media reality does not in any way mean something detached from the world of this or some insurmountable inflammation of the media spirit over reality. By no means, the media reality is formed in the process of communication, i.e. communicative reality must be perceived as a special dimension of the reality of society.

There is no monotonous social space, there is no uniform journalism. Social space is an orderly continuum of social classes, communities, groups, institutions, in which dramas of an economic, political and cultural nature unfold, in other words, people's interactions. The reasons for their interaction are many, and the main channel of interaction is informational. And although the information interaction in the society occurs through a multitude of different channels and directions, interaction through mass media inevitably dominates. The farther away from us is the day when the first newspaper appeared in Europe, the clearer becomes the growing importance of media for the permanently solved problem in society - ensuring dialogue within the society both horizontally and vertically. Consequently, the emerging media picture of information interaction is a certain reality, changing and highly dynamic, this is a media reflection of the large and small changes that are taking place in society. In one way or another, comprehending the media reality, we know society and ourselves. And this is the root of the unfading interest in journalism and the media in general on the part of analysts from philosophy, history, political science, sociology, etc.

There is no monotony in the society, therefore, it can not be in the media reality either - there are no unified journalists, but there are citizens expressing their interests and needs in the media environment.

We emphasize that it is inadmissible to reduce the practice of media interaction exclusively to proper behavior, i.e. socially approved both in content and in form of expression. On the contrary, one must realize that media reality includes everything from philosophical essays and subtle lyrics to hate theories and savoring the lowest. In general, as in the Internet, which has concentrated all the virtues and all vices of the media.

The basis of social interaction is the actions of the parties - social, i.e. aimed at the Other. American sociologist T. Parsons talked about social action as a process in the system "subject-action-situation", which is significant from the point of view of motivation of the acting individual (individuals). Parsons talked about social relations, and we, talking about media reality, mainly mean those social ties that reflect this media reality in the fullness of its social and cultural content. Social ties act as social action.

Social communication in sociology is understood as an organized system of relations, institutions and means of social control, rallying individuals and social groups into a functional whole, capable of preservation and development. The precondition for the emergence of social ties is the social dependence of people, on the basis of which all social life is built. This kind of communication can be carried out both in the form of social contact, and in the form of social action and interaction. In the public system, communicative relations can be viewed through the category "social ties". in the system of actions. The system of actions, according to Parsons, arises as an addition of three components: the social system, the system of actors (in our context these are journalists and their counterparts at all levels of professional activity) and cultural system, on the basis of which their actions are built. None of the components can not be ruled out of journalism, which itself can be called a system of actions with good reason.

Journalism is permeated with large and small social connections at all levels of its functioning. First, at the level of journalistic creativity, which generates, in accordance with the current social order, the variety of contacts of the creative worker of the press, and through them a figurative reflection of the life activity of society in journalistic works disseminated through the channels of mass communication arises. Secondly, in the place of work at the level of service relations journalist (s) inside the editorial office (publishing house, media holding). Thirdly, is outside the editorial office (with authorities - its representatives and departments, political and cultural institutions, the corporate community). Such social ties as peculiar indicators, indicating the subjects of interaction in journalism, a journalist acting as a carrier of social ties.

Media reality as a special dimension of society can be analyzed in the categories of philosophy, sociology, political science and psychology. At the same time, the well-known approaches of sociologists or political scientists to the study of mass communications differ in certain incompleteness. In them, the bearers of social ties in the media are, for one reason or another, only affected to a very small extent or not at all. Mainly analyzed texts, the conditions for their passage in communication channels, obstacles in the way of messages and the resulting distortions, generalized information pictures of the world, social effects. However, those who peer into life and react to changes in it, translating meaningful into words and images, create media (journalistic) texts, remain outside the field of view of mass communication analysts. Whereas, in the words of a Moscow researcher, it is in our time that the profession of a journalist is looking for his face in a new media reality. In it, journalism has been the pivot of modern media: it drives them into action, informs them of dynamics, reveals and articulates public interest, provides feedback. Thus, journalism is a socially significant act, the creative element necessary for society in the information interaction of social groups, institutions, individuals.

The social institutions with which journalism interacts are different and not necessarily adults & quot ;. Let's take, say, the institution of childhood and give an example that is especially noteworthy for the history of United States journalism. Throughout the XX century. not for fear, but for the conscience the domestic media worked for the children: newspapers and magazines were produced, radio programs and television programs were created ... Children's voices were heard on the air, the moods and thoughts of schoolchildren were reflected in the printed press, the main reader of which, of course, was " boys and girls, as well as their parents. " So, from September 1, 1964 began the biography of one of the most famous programs - "Good night, kids!". The usefulness of this program has always been especially felt by the parents, they also carefully guarded it. Parents not only attacked the television management, it was determined to find another time to broadcast for broadcast, but also asked to return to the screen all the beloved plasticine the screensaver that A. Tatarsky made in 1982. We gave just one example, but behind him there are a considerable number of others, and all this is the facts of civil society interaction with the press.

The facts of civil interaction between the audience and journalists are refuted by the media's intention to see in the media the same "dollar or euro as the most universal message". Indeed, once K. Marx spoke of money as the universal equivalent of the costs of human labor, thereby emphasizing their universality for circulation in the market. But it does not follow from this that the ruble or the dollar are able to act on a par with journalistic works filling the information space. A century ago, the great German sociologist Max Weber said that a really good result of journalistic work requires at least as much "spirit" as any result of the scientist's work. However, it is almost never said that the responsibility here is much greater and that every honest journalist has an average sense of responsibility not lower than that of a scientist, but even higher ... No one believes that in general the ability to restrain oneself from journalists in the average is higher than that of other people. Understanding the responsibility of a journalist for the results of his work is the responsibility for the social interaction that arises objectively in the course of his professional activity.

Thus, we will consider it as established:

1) social interaction in journalism is an orderly system: journalism permeates various kinds of interaction with representatives of society at all levels of its structure and in all social strata, as well as social interaction within the professional community (in the editorial office, media holding, creative union and pr.);

2) social interaction in journalism has a socially significant and socially responsible character;

3) Journalism is an autonomous part of an integral social system and simultaneously interacts with this system, which in many ways predetermines the results of journalistic creativity.

thematic pictures

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)