Fortifying boundaries
The “how and why” of the Finnish media and countermedia from 2014 to 2018
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/journalistica.v15i1.125038Keywords:
boundary work, countermedia, alternative media, fake news, journalismAbstract
This article examines how recent changes in the hybrid media environment have led media actors to define the “how and why” of their practices. We consider the discussion on the differences and similarities surrounding both the legacy media, and newcomers such as countermedia, to be part of journalism’s boundary work: the ongoing, yet temporally fickle, process of marking the boundaries between journalism and non-journalism. We demonstrate how both legacy and countermedia actors drew boundaries through vocabulary, institutional reflection, demarcation practices, and ethos. While the Finnish media underlined its institutional autonomy and dominance by defending the social good of journalism and dubbing countermedia as fake media, countermedia actor MV-lehti drew its own boundaries by ridiculing media professionals, media institutions, and journalists. Our findings illustrate how these actors consistently asserted the flawed ideological foundations of “the other”, with the consequence that boundaries have become fortified, rather than crossed or blurred.
References
Aral, S. (2020). The Hype Machine. How Social Media Disrupts Our Elections, Our Economy and Our Health – and How We Must Adapt. HarperCollins.
Beckett, C. (2017). Fake news: the best thing that has happened to journalism. London School of Economics and Political Science.
Bell, E. J., Owen, T., Brown, P. D., Hauka, C. & Rashidian, N. (2017). The Platform Press: How Silicon Valley Reengineered Journalism. Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia University. https://doi.org/10.7916/ D8R216ZZ
Boczkowski, P. J. & Papacharissi, Z. (2018). Introduction. In P. J. Boczkowski & Z. Papacharissi (eds.), Trump and the media (pp. 1–6). MIT Press.
Bradshaw, S. (2019). Disinformation optimised: gaming search engine algorithms to amplify junk news. Internet Policy Review, 8(4), 1–24. https:// doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1442
Brinkschulte, F. & Frischlich, L. (2018). Fake news? Disinformation in the age of digital media. WWU University of Münster Online. Retrieved from: https://www.uni-muenster.de/news/view.php?cmdid=9428
Carey, J. W. (1997). Afterword: The Culture in Question. In E. S. Munson and C. A. Warren (eds.), James Carey: A Critical Reader (pp. 308–340). University of Minnesota Press.
Carlson, M. (2016). Metajournalistic Discourse and the Meanings of Journalism: Definitional Control, Boundary Work, and Legitimation. Communication Theory, 26(4), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12088
Carlson, M. (2015). Introduction: The many boundaries of journalism. In M. Carlson & S. C. Lewis (eds.), Boundaries of Journalism. Professionalism and Participation (pp. 1–18). Routledge.
Chadwick, A. (2017). The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Second Edition. Oxford University Press.
Dahlgren, P. M. (2021). Media Echo Chambers: Selective Exposure and Confirmation Bias in Media Use, and its Consequences for Political Polarization. University of Gothenburg.
Deuze, M. (2019). What Journalism Is (Not). Social Media + Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119857202
Deuze, M. & Witschge, T. (2018). Beyond journalism: Theorizing the transformation of journalism. Journalism, 19(2), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916688550
Deuze, M. (2005). What Is Journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered. Journalism, 6, 442–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884905056815
Egelhofer, J. L. & Lecheler, S. (2019.) Fake news as a twodimensional phenomenon: a framework and research agenda. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43(2), 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/2380 8985.2019.1602782
Eldridge II, S. (2019). Where Do We Draw the Line? Interlopers, (Ant)agonists, and an Unbounded Journalistic Field. Media and Communication, 7(4), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v7i4.2295
Farkas, J. & Schou, J. (2020). Post-truth, Fake News and Democracy. Mapping the Politics of Falsehood. Routledge.
Figenschou, T. U., & Ihlebæk, K. A. (2019). Media Criticism from the Far- Right: Attacking from Many Angles. Journalism Practice, 13(8), 901–905. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2019.1647112
Gelfert, A. (2018). Fake News: A Definition. Informal Logic 38(1), 84–117. Gieryn T. F. (1999). Cultural Boundaries of Science. University of Chicago Press.
Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795.
Haller, A., Holt, K. & de La Brosse, R. (2019). The ‘other’ alternatives: Political right-wing alternative media. Journal of Alternative & Community Media,4(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1386/joacm_00039_2
Hallin, D. C. & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge University Press.
Hansson, S. O. (2011). Science and Pseudo-Science. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford University. Retrieved from:plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/pseudo-science/
Harcup, T. (2005). ‘“I’m Doing This to Change the World”: Journalism in Alternative and Mainstream Media.’ Journalism Studies, 6(3): 361–374. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500132016
Harcup, T. (2013). Alternative Media, Alternative Voices. Routledge.
Heft, A., Mayerhöffer, E., Reinhardt, S. & Knüpfer, C. (2019). “Beyond Breitbart: Comparing Right-Wing Digital News Infrastructures in Six Western Democracies.” Policy and Internet, 12(1), 20–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.219.
Heikkilä, H. & Väliverronen, J. (2019). Media-accountability in the Era of Fake News: Journalistic boundary work and its problems in Finland. In T. Eberwein, S. Fengler & M. Karmasin (eds.), Media Accountability in the Era of Post-Truth Politics: European Challenges and Perspectives. Routledge.
Hermida, A. (2015) Nothing But the Truth: Redrafting the Journalistic Boundary of Verification. In M. Carlson and S. C. Lewis (eds.), Boundaries of Journalism (pp. 37–50). Routledge.
Hiltunen, I. (2017) Trouble in paradise? Self-censorship, outside interfe- rence and harassment of journalists in Finland. Media Asia, 44(1), 66–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/01296612.2017.1374632
Holt, K. (2020). Right-wing alternative media. Routledge.
Holt, K., Ustad Figenschou, T. & Frischlich, L. (2019). Key Dimensions of Alternative News Media. Digital Journalism, 7(7), 860–869. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2019.1625715
Holt, K. (2018). Alternative Media and the Notion of Anti-Systemness: Towards an Analytical Framework. Media and Communication, 6(4), 49–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1467
Hopp, T., Ferrucci, P. & Vargo, C. J. (2020). Why Do People Share Ideologically Extreme, False, and Misleading Content on Social Media? A Self-Report and Trace Data–Based Analysis of Countermedia Content Dissemination on Facebook and Twitter. Human Communication Research, 46(4), 357– 384. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqz022
Howard, P. N. (2020). Lie Machines. How to Save Democracy from Troll Armies, Deceitful Robots, Junk News Operations, and Political Operatives. Yale University Press.
Innola, E. & Pynnöniemi, K. (2016). Finland and Russia’s Metanarratives on the Conflict in Ukraine. In K. Pynnöniemi & A. Rácz (eds.), Fog of falsehood. Russian strategy of deception and the conflict in Ukraine. FIIA Report No. 45. The Finnish Institute of International Affairs.
Järvinen, P. (2011, August 18). Älä usko Twitteriä [Blog post]. Retrieved from: https://pjarvinen.blogspot.com/2011/08/ala-usko-twitteria.html
Kovach, B. & Rosenstiel, T. (2014). The Elements of Journalism: What New- speople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. 3rd edition. Crown. Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., . . . Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359, 1094–1096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998
Levendusky, M. S. (2013). Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers? American journal of political science, 57(3), 611–623. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12008
Lewis, S. C. (2012). The Tension Between Professional Control and Open Participation. Information, Communication & Society, 15(6), 836–866. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.674150
Mayerhöffer, E. (2021). How do Danish right-wing alternative media position themselves against the mainstream? Advancing the study of alternative media structure and content. Journalism Studies, 22(2), 119–136. https:// doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.181484
Mourão, R. R. & Robertson, C. T. (2019). Fake News as Discursive Integration: An Analysis of Sites That Publish False, Misleading, Hyperpartisan and Sensational Information. Journalism Studies, 20(14), 2077–2095. https:// doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2019.1566871
Mohr, M. (2019, July 26). Surprisingly old words that seem contemporary. The Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from: https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/In-a-Word/2019/0726/Surprisingly-old-words- that-seem-contemporary
Muirhead, R. & Rosenblum, N. L. (2019). A Lot of People Are Saying. The New Conspiracism and the Assault on Democracy. Princeton University Press.
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andı, S. & Kleis Nielsen, R. (2020). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
Norocel, O. C., Saresma, T., Lähdesmäki, T., & Ruotsalainen, M. (2020). Discursive Constructions of White Nordic Masculinities in Right-wing Populist Media. Men and Masculinities, 23(3–4), 425–446. https://doi. org/10.1177/1097184X18780459
Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2019). Cultural Backlash. Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press.
Nygaard, S. (2020). Boundary Work: Intermedia Agenda-Setting Between Right-Wing Alternative Media and Professional Journalism. Journalism Studies, 21(6), 766–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1722731
Nygaard, S. (2019). The Appearance of Objectivity: How Immigration-Critical Alternative Media Report the News. Journalism Practice, 13(10), 1147–1163. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2019.1577697
Pyrhönen, N., & Bauvois, G. (2020). Conspiracies beyond Fake News. Produsing Reinformation on Presidential Elections in the Transnational Hybrid Media System. Sociological Inquiry, 90, 705–731. https://doi.org/10.1111/ soin.12339
Rae, M. (2020). Hyperpartisan news: Rethinking the media for populist politics. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820910416
Rauch, J. (2016). Are There Still Alternatives? Relationships Between Alternative Media and Mainstream Media in a Converged Environment. Sociology Compass, 10(9), 756–767, https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12403
Schudson, M. (2020). Journalism. Why it matters. Polity.
Schudson, M. (2003). The Sociology of News. W. W. Norton & Company. Schulze, H. (2020). Who Uses Right-Wing Alternative Online Media? An Exploration of Audience Characteristics. Politics and Governance, 8(3), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v8i3.2925
Singer, J. B. (2015) Out of bounds. Professional norms as boundary markers. In M. Carlson and S. C. Lewis (eds.), Boundaries of Journalism (pp. 21–36). Routledge.
Tandoc, E. C.; Jenkins, J. & Craft, S. (2019). Fake News as a Critical Incident in Journalism. Journalism Practice, 13(6), 673–689, DOI:10.1080/17512786.2018.1562958
Tandoc, E. C & Jenkins, J. (2018). Out of Bounds? How Gawker’s Outing a Married Man Fits into the Boundaries of Journalism. New Media & Society, 20(2), 581–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816665381.
Tandoc E. C; Lim, Z. W. & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “Fake News”. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143
Tandoc, E. C. (2018). Five ways BuzzFeed is preserving (or transfor- ming) the journalistic field. Journalism, 19(2), 200–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884917691785
Toivanen, P., Nelimarkka, M. & Valaskivi, K. (2021). Remediation in the hybrid media environment: Understanding counter-media in context. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444821992701
Tuomola, S. (2021). Who are you, the people? Nordicom Review, 42(S1), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-0006
Välimäki, R., Seuri, O. & Ristilä, A. (2021). Pseudohistoriaa Suomen muinaisista kuningaskunnista – Ongelmallisen tiedon kierto laitaoikeiston mediaekosysteemissä. Niin & näin, 1/2021, 118–135.
Ylä-Anttila, T., Bauvois, G. & Pyrhönen, N. (2019). Politicization of migration in the countermedia style: A computational and qualitative analysis of populist discourse. Discourse, Context and Media, 32, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2019.100326
Ylä-Anttila, T. (2018) Populist knowledge: ‘Post-truth’ repertoires of contesting epistemic authorities. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 5(4), 356-388. https://doi.org/10.1080/23254823.2017.1414620
Ylä-Anttila, T. (2017). The Populist Toolkit. Finnish Populism in Action 2007– 2016. University of Helsinki. Publications of the Faculty of Social Sciences 59/2017.
Zelizer, B. (1992). CNN, the Gulf War, and Journalistic Practice. Journal of Communication. 42(1), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992. tb00769.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Olli Seuri, Toivanen Pihla
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Forfattere, der publicerer deres værker via dette tidsskrift, accepterer følgende vilkår:
- Forfattere bevarer deres ophavsret og giver tidsskriftet ret til første publicering, samtidigt med at værket er omfattet af en Creative Commons Attribution-licens, der giver andre ret til at dele værket med en anerkendelse af værkets forfatter og første publicering i nærværende tidsskrift.
- Forfattere kan indgå flere separate kontraktlige aftaler om ikke-eksklusiv distribution af tidsskriftets publicerede version af værket (f.eks. sende det til et institutionslager eller udgive det i en bog), med en anerkendelse af værkets første publicering i nærværende tidsskrift.
- Forfattere har ret til og opfordres til at publicere deres værker online (f.eks. i institutionslagre eller på deres websted) forud for og under manuskriptprocessen, da dette kan føre til produktive udvekslinger, samt tidligere og større citater fra publicerede værker (se The Effect of Open Access).
