Current Edition 2025, Vol. 8 (2) November 2024

By Martina Thiele

By Jessica Kunert, Luka Simon and Volker Lilienthal | The journalistic cooperation in the investigative research network of the German public broadcasters NDR and WDR and the national daily Süddeutsche Zeitung has not yet been scientifically examined with regard to internal working processes (workflows and standards) and possible problems and conflicts (journalistic research, objectives and financing). In this article, we analyze the form of cooperation of the research network on the basis of its structures and degree of organization. We interviewed nine journalists in the network, using qualitative, guided interviews. The results of the internal working processes show that research teams within the network come together to work on specific topics and benefit from each other’s qualifications and approaches. In-depth discussions and firm agreements are essential. Problems and conflicts arise mainly from the different levels of human and financial resources required by the newsrooms, as well as from the high organizational effort involved. It is clear that the journalists value the network above all for the variety of topics and the high quality and quantity of the research results. As a form of cooperation, the investigative research network we examined is a success that is supported by a large number of implicit rules. In addition to the internal structures, the accusation of distortion of competition – raised due to the cooperation between two public and one private media – needs to be discussed.

By Sebastian Gall and Uwe Krüger | In the wake of digitalization and the economic media crisis, a new field of journalism has emerged aiming to compensate for the weaknesses of traditional news media: non-profit journalism. Instead of being financed by sales and advertising revenue (or broadcasting fees), it is primarily funded by small donations, membership fees or foundation money. However, the attempt to operate independent of market logics and to work solely in the public interest raises new questions, especially with regard to maintaining independence from donors. It also poses challenges for media organizations with regard to fundraising. This article uses ten guided interviews with employees of non-profit editorial offices to examine how their work differs from that of editorial offices financed by the private or public sector and what strategies they use to meet the above listed challenges. The results show 1) that the work differs positively from that of a traditional editorial office, especially relating to the choice of topics, research time and organizational structure; 2) that most of the organizations studied use only one type of funding; and 3) that the feared influence of large donors on content apparently does not take place, but that on the contrary, foundations supporting journalism are sometimes even more concerned about maintaining distance to the editorial offices than the other way around. At the same time, it should be noted that only few media organizations employ fundraisers, which means that this work falls onto the shoulders of management, editorial or layout staff.

By Jörg-Uwe Nieland and Hektor Haarkötter | Anyone who might be wondering why the discipline of communication studies receives little attention in media in the form of »public scholarship« must critically question the media’s function to set thematic agendas, by applying theories and methods inherent in science. For almost 30 years, the Initiative Nachrichtenaufklärung (INA) e.V. has been taking on the task to question the media’s function to set themes by confronting the influence of AI and disinformation as well as the power of platforms and the powerlessness of recipients and scholarship. In the spirit of transformative public scholarship, the initiative publishes an annual list of severely neglected news topics after joint research and discussion by scientists, journalists and experts. Educating the public about news is here understood and practiced by providing criticism of the lack of thematization and suppression of news and discourse. In this sense, neglected news is also a category of disinformation. This article presents the research findings on »negative news value theory«, »agenda cutting« and »junk news«.

By Eduard-Claudiu Gross and Tanjev Schultz | This article investigates the interplay between social media, mainstream media, and democratic processes in Romania’s 2024–2025 presidential election, highlighting the pivotal role of media freedom and professional journalism in an era dominated by digital platforms. While social media, particularly TikTok, emerged as a powerful force capable of influencing political discourse and amplifying fringe candidates through algorithmic bias and coordinated inauthentic behavior, the study also underscores the enduring importance of legacy media as a space for public debate, critical questioning, and accountability. The case of the finally winning presidential candidate Nicușor Dan illustrates how a combination of traditional media appearances and creative engagement on platforms like TikTok and Meta can overcome the asymmetries of algorithm-driven information flows. Consistent visibility in mainstream media, combined with adaptive strategies in the social media landscape, remains a winning formula. The Romanian experience offers lessons for democracies navigating the challenges of maintaining electoral integrity and media pluralism in the face of digital manipulation techniques and regulatory challenges.

By Ella Hackett, Teodora Tavares and Gregory Perreault | Obituaries, though seemingly straightforward, hold deep reflections for the role of women journalists. Through the lens of metajournalistic discourse, this study explores obituaries of women journalists (n=1064) from the United States. The analysis finds that the memorialization of women journalists reflect on their role as advocates in and outside of the newsroom. In doing so, they not only redefine their profession, but work to champion societal advancement and gender equality.

By Gabriele Hooffacker and Nicola Moser | Generative language models and AI tools have become essential tools in journalism – used in data analysis, research, translation, idea generation, and much more. How will the use of tools like ChatGPT impact the shape of journalism as a profession, and its academic teaching? Analysis of these expert interviews shows that ChatGPT and similar AI tools are already playing a role in academic journalism training. But while university teaching assumes that generative language models will not fundamentally change the shape of journalism, but merely expand it, the practicing expert interviewed sees a fundamental shift in the relationship between editorial offices and audiences. He also describes how the use of AI tools has long become common practice in editorial offices.

Reviewed by Gabriele Hooffacker

Reviewed by Tanjev Schultz

Reviewed by Hannah Wahl

Reviewed by Kristina Wied