in defense of autonomy: a critique of the public journalism critique

Critiquing Public Journalism

155

In Defense of Autonomy: A Critiqueof the Public Journalism Critique

By Michael McDevitt

This article argues that public journalism as a reform movement has failed toappreciate the complexity of professional autonomy and the occupational benefitsit affords to practitioners. The article describes how the dynamics of professionalsocialization predispose journalists to guardedly protect their independence. Whatmight appear to be a defensive orientation is, in fact, quite understandable, givennumerous threats to autonomy originating from inside and outside the newsroom.Would-be reformers should articulate how autonomy could be protected—but re-cast—as professional expertise directed at political activation. The author dis-cusses the implications of this argument for theory of press reform and forcollege instruction.

Journalists should acknowledge that they are public actors, holding a stake intheir communities and possessing a unique capacity to improve civic life, accord-ing to advocates of public journalism. The key stumbling point is practitioners’rigid view of autonomy:

Even within those organizations led by editors committed to the approach,public journalism is resisted in the name of traditional values—especially theimperative of distance and detachment. It is called a fad or gimmick by somewho see any attempt to “connect” with citizens as equivalent to a marketingapproach, pandering to readers, surrendering professional judgment. (Rosen,1995, p. 36)

Despite the intuitive appeal of this critique, there is something naïve about thenotion that journalists simply require an epiphany of sorts to appreciate the pos-sibilities for experimenting with their civic role. Journalistic autonomy, as it cur-rently exists, is far more complex and dynamic than imagined by many of itscritics. The premise of this article is that public (or civic) journalism will notpersuade reporters and editors, or critical theorists for that matter (Hardt, 1999),unless it acknowledges both the complexity of professional autonomy and the

Michael McDevitt (PhD, Stanford University) is an assistant professor at the University of Colorado atBoulder, where he teaches print journalism. His research interests include newsroom sociology andpolitical socialization.

Copyright © 2003 International Communication Association

Journal of Communication, March 2003

156

occupational benefits it affords. Academic critics are certainly correct in arguingthat the press is not adept at reflective contemplation about its civic contribution.However, a sociological phenomenon such as autonomy can be nuanced, adaptedto situational factors, and otherwise functional for a profession even if it is notclearly articulated as theory or as philosophy.

After explicating the traditional model of autonomy as public service, I willdescribe how the dynamics of professional socialization predispose journalists toguardedly protect their independence. As young journalists make the transitionfrom the classroom to the newsroom, autonomy becomes increasingly important;what might appear to be a defensive orientation is, in fact, quite understandablegiven numerous threats to autonomy originating from inside and outside the news-room. I will argue that would-be reformers should articulate how autonomy couldbe protected, but recast, as professional expertise directed at political activation.Finally, I will discuss the implications of this conceptualization of autonomy fortheory of press reform and for instruction.

Autonomy as Public Service

Sociologists typically define professional autonomy as wide latitude of judgmentin carrying out occupational duties (Beam, 1990; Morrow & Goetz, 1988). As acentral component of professionalism, autonomy entails self-direction in the ap-plication of occupational techniques. Reese (1999) argued that professions mustalso involve a tradition of critical philosophical reflection. In a theoretical sense,reflective judgment is an attribute of autonomy, but how professionals think aboutthemselves as autonomous actors occurs within a context of norms, routines, andtraditions that can involve habit as much as introspection.

Journalists traditionally espouse autonomy as a principle that allows the pressto fulfill its duty of informing the citizenry, free from partisan bias and othercorrupting influences. According to this conventional view, reporters serve thepublic by striving for, if not realizing in a strictly epistemological sense, balance,fairness, and objectivity. These goals require detachment as a professional normthat protects, or separates journalists from, various threats to autonomy. Noticethat autonomy is a broader concept than objectivity, an important distinction giventhe tendency to conflate autonomy with objectivity in many public journalismcritiques (e.g., Rosen, 1999). Objectivity is just one of many goals of autonomy, amultidimensional orientation with various psychological and social functions thatserve the profession. Autonomy, for example, fosters professional identity, boostsemployee morale during periods of structural change, and creates the possibilityfor critical reflection (Russo, 1998).

Journalists’ perceived autonomy has been assessed in three national surveys,beginning with Johnstone, Slawki, and Bowman’s sociological portrait of newswork in 1976 and followed by studies by Weaver and Wilhoit in 1986 and 1996that used many of the same measures to document changes in demographics,attitudes, and professional values. Johnstone et al. initially suggested that theincreasing specialization and hierarchy of media organizations threatened jour-


157

nalists’ sense of autonomy. Results from the studies seem to support this infer-ence. Sixty percent of respondents in the first two surveys indicated that theywere almost entirely free to select the material on which they worked; the per-centage fell to 51 in the third study. These findings reflect the insight of earlytheorizing on professionalism: Researchers anticipated that a professional out-look, including commitment to autonomy and ethical standards, was not compat-ible with a bureaucratic value system tied to management control and organiza-tional norms (e.g., Greene, 1978).

Reese (1999) asserted that the actual work of most journalists in media organi-zations is more subordinate than that of their counterparts in medical practices orlaw firms.

Those professionals are preeminent over their employers in their adherence toa transcendent code of conduct, and the organization or partnership exists tosupport the professional activity. Likewise, restricted access to the learnedprofessions by way of academic credentials means that education critics fromprofessional communities of law, medicine, engineering, and so forth, startfrom a common basis of shared university experience. No such expectationcan be made for the diverse practitioners of journalism, which requires nolicense. (p. 75)

Consider, then, the unenviable position of the contemporary journalist—thevery organizational setting in which she or he works imposes management im-peratives and reporting routines that restrict the exercise of professional discre-tion. As discussed in a subsequent section, the rationale of public journalism isfrequently articulated in a kind of sociological vacuum. Unless reformers proposea version of autonomy that fits with the actual working conditions of journalists,public journalism will continue to be perceived by many as a threat to the publicservice mission of the press.

Autonomy in Public Journalism

Public journalists view themselves as conveners of public talk rather than meretransmitters of information (Charity, 1995). Under this view, journalists should bemore assertive—in deliberate and self-conscious efforts—to set the communityagenda, to guide discussion on topics, and to encourage civic leaders to respondto the discussion with initiatives or policy proposals. Advocates have attempted toreconcile the legitimate need for institutional independence with the goals of civicactivation. Davis Merritt, an editor and proponent of public journalism, suggeststhat the press adopt the role of the “fair-minded participant,” which preserves acommitment to neutrality while acknowledging that journalists should contributeas public actors (1994). In this refined notion of autonomy, journalists must “de-clare an end to their neutrality on certain questions—for example: whether peopleparticipate, whether a genuine debate takes place when needed, whether a com-munity comes to grips with its problems, whether politics earns the attention itclaims” (Rosen, 1994, p. 11).


158

This model of the press, in which journalists actively help a community to solveits problems, draws on existing traditions within the profession, such as investiga-tive and advocacy journalism. The systemic and comprehensive reforms advo-cated, however, strike many practitioners as a blatant threat to professional au-tonomy.

The Lure of Detachment

Journalistic autonomy should be appreciated not as a fixed disposition but as adevelopmental process that begins with anticipatory socialization to the profes-sion, is reinforced via formal instruction and newsroom culture, and eventuallybecomes manifest in subtle and complex orientations toward news reporting. Anunderstanding of autonomy as a developmental and multidimensional conceptprovides insight as to why young and veteran journalists, with good reason, wouldreject public journalism.

Why Students Oppose Civic JournalismThis view of autonomy as a developmental process was derived from a case studythat examined support for public journalism among two groups: undergraduatestudents and professionals (McDevitt et al., 2002). The survey design was in-tended to document factors that predispose students and professionals to supportor oppose specific practices associated with public journalism. We found that thestudents were significantly more critical of conventional reporting compared withthe views of professional journalists, and they were also more supportive of pub-lic journalism. Furthermore, adoption of these values in college is not accompa-nied by a rejection of traditional press roles. However, in the transition fromstudent to professional, a deterioration of support for public journalism occurs asreporters and editors develop a stronger need for professional independence. Inparticular, the experience of working for a campus newspaper engenders a senseof autonomy that diminishes acceptance of public journalism. This professionalorientation resonates with the even more fundamental need of young people toacquire independence as a component of self-identity (Day et al., 1995).

Why Professionals Oppose Civic JournalismFindings from the case study of students and professionals suggest that the needfor autonomy will only increase as students acquire jobs in the field (McDevitt etal., 2002). Unless it is presented in a less threatening fashion, public journalism islikely to be rejected because of a series of interrelated factors associated with thesociology of news work. These factors include multiple threats to autonomy, bothinside and outside the newsroom, and adaptive responses to these threats, whichbecome manifest in attitudes and reporting norms that are not necessarily compat-ible with public journalism.

Threats inside the newsroom. Perhaps the most pressing threat to professionalautonomy in recent decades has been the profit imperative of ownership and thecrumbling of the metaphorical wall between business and editorial. Structural


159

changes in the newspaper business in recent decades have included heightenedcompetition from new media and alternatives for information delivery, the closingof more than 150 newspapers since 1970, the increasing presence of chain owner-ship, and a steady decline of readership (Denton & Kurtz, 1993; Stamm &Underwood, 1993).

There is evidence, however, that autonomy is alive and well, at least within therealm of attitudes and beliefs, if not in practice, given constraints of deadlines,staffing, and ownership priorities. In her case study of a metropolitan newspaperin the Midwest, Russo (1998) reported that her subjects expressed higher identifi-cation with the profession of journalism than with their employing newspaper.This finding is consistent with how theorists describe the long-term progres-sion of socialization to various professions—individuals typically identify them-selves as members of a profession long before they join a specific organiza-tion (McQuarrie, 1999).

This anticipatory socialization provides a backdrop for what Cherniss (1980)calls the “professional mystique”—expectations built up through the early con-templation of a career and the initial stages of on-the-job training. When the actualwork conditions do not meet expectations, the result is stress, burnout, and thechanging of careers. Survey research has confirmed that many journalists believethat their newspapers have sold out to profits, and the result has been diminishedmorale (Peck, 1991). A journalist can feel loyalty to professional principles even ifshe or he possesses little power to change an organization’s priorities. The re-sponse, if only manifest in psychological resistance, reflects autonomy and a de-sire to preserve it.

A responsible journalist would strive for independence not only from owner-ship but from competing journalists as well, particularly when impulsive newscoverage reflects “pack journalism” or its more sinister cousin, the “feeding frenzy”of scandal coverage (Sabato, 1991). This herd mentality is not likely to disappearany time soon, but criticism of it is common, and responsible editors would dis-courage or downplay such coverage as a reflection of their autonomy in relation-ship to competing media. Professional independence is evident in a narrativetechnique used on occasion by reporters to distance themselves from tabloidcoverage and other tainted stories such as those arising from pseudo events (Levy,1981). “Newsworkers’ attempts to resolve the dilemma created by a personal de-sire to not report—coinciding with the competition-induced need to report—taintedphenomena often results in ‘disdained news’” (p. 27). This is a clear example ofhow journalists, in deliberate and self-conscious fashion, break from the routinesof “objective” reporting to protect something more important to them as profes-sionals: their autonomy. Like many other manifestations of autonomy, though,disdaining the news is not proactive in service to civic activation. Instead, it isessentially a defensive reaction that protects professional reputations.

Threats outside the newsroom. Journalists’ dependency on elite sources hasbeen an enduring theme of sociology-of-newsmaking studies (Tuchman, 1978).The basic critique of source dependence is by now well known by editors, par-ticularly at elite newspapers and news magazines, which regularly provide analy-sis and interpretation in news coverage so that source comments are subordinate


160

to the reporter’s narrative. This represents a kind of narrative autonomy, whichallows journalists to produce highly coherent, thematic, and structured stories.

Glasser and Ettema (1993) identified one of the more intriguing methods bywhich reporters circumvent objectivity even as they use objective style to invest astory with moral significance. In the “peculiar language game known as journal-ism” (Ettema & Glasser, 1994, p. 5), journalists transfigure objective language intoa moralistic vocabulary for condemnation of officials who betray the public’s trust.“Irony and objectivity do not merely coexist; irony exploits objectivity to work itseffect” (p. 8). As with “disdaining the news,” irony is only possible given the moralauthority that originates from a strong sense of professional autonomy.

Although disdaining the news is perhaps neutral toward civic activation, ironyis potentially destruction. “When irony can summon no indignation but only deri-sion, reversal, and parody, then the masses will have fallen fully silent and, in therole of the citizen, will have completely disappeared” (Ettema & Glasser, p. 22). Apopular critique of the press these days is the description of a tenacious andunwarranted cynicism in political coverage (Cappella & Jamieson, 1997; Patterson,1994). Critics contend that the extent of cynicism represents an overreaction to themaneuverings of politicians and their operatives. My purpose here is not to takesides in a debate about the legitimacy of journalistic cynicism, but I do want tosuggest that the framing of politics as a deceitful game is very much linked to theprofessional need for autonomy in relationship to sources.

The perceived need for professional independence extends to a separationfrom the public itself. In a blunt formulation, the citizenry is best served when it isexcluded from decision-making processes in the newsroom. The question thatarises, then, is how to make the press more accountable, inclusive, and demo-cratic while preserving professional autonomy. This is the dilemma implicit in thedebate between liberal and communitarian visions of the press’s democratic role.Communitarianism is closely linked with public journalism in its advocacy ofstrengthened community ties that create conditions for dialogic inquiry (Lambeth,1992). According to communitarian advocates, liberalism does not acknowledgethe importance of community for the realization of individual identity and civicengagement.

As Craig observed (1996), journalists will balk at this philosophical approach tothe extent that the goal of civic transformation increases the likelihood of co-option. This is hardly an abstract concern in light of real threats to professionalautonomy, including, for example, the promotion of community identity as amarketing ploy, dressed up in the rhetorical garb of public journalism. The dete-rioration of professional autonomy, furthermore, can be more subtle than con-flicts of interest involving the publisher or the marketing department. “The moredeeply a newsroom becomes involved in civic activism, the more likely it is tolose its critical stance” (Craig, p. 116). A journalist’s independence within a com-munity helps to legitimize him or her as an autonomous moral actor, one investedwith a unique role in society. Engagement in civic activation, including the pro-motion of a common good, potentially diminishes a journalist’s ability to questionthe very consensus about what constitutes the common good.


161

Discussion

As a conglomerate of attitudes, autonomy is reflected in resistance to publishers,revulsion toward “pack journalism,” cynicism toward politicians, defensivenesstoward critics in the academy, and rejection of public journalism. In practice,autonomy has produced subtle narrative techniques, such as “disdaining the news”and the use of irony, that reflect a desire to transcend restrictive conventions.Autonomy is thus a powerful, adaptive, and creative phenomenon within theprofession, and its importance to practicing journalists will endure regardless ofpublic journalism critiques.

In fact, journalistic autonomy is a natural, inevitable, and desirable consequenceof professional socialization as students prepare for careers. This understandingof autonomy has important implications for theory of press reform and for col-lege instruction.

Theory of Press ReformThe multiple dimensions of autonomy reflect the adaptability of journalists inpreserving this professional stance given their complex roles in relationships withownership, fellow journalists, sources, and the general public. This complexitycreates an incoherence that is not easily amenable to reform. There is good newsfor public journalism, however: The dynamic and adaptive nature of journalisticautonomy creates opportunities for innovation. That is, practitioners clearly wantto preserve their autonomy, but the form and consequences of this professionalorientation are not fixed.

In dialogue with practitioners (through mediums such as public journalism),theorists could provide insight as to why autonomy should be directed towardcivic activation, but reform should be grounded in an understanding of the actualworking conditions and belief systems of journalists. The theoretical basis forreform can be strengthened by contemplating three interrelated distinctions aboutnews production: journalism and the news media industry; autonomy versus ob-jectivity; and autonomy as a resource for, or a barrier to, civic activation.

Journalism and news media. In an analysis of public journalism assumptions,Hardt (1999, p. 203) wrote that, “To blame journalism for the demise of civic lifeand the failure of the great community or the good society is simplistic at best andcynical at worst, when solutions to the dilemma of journalism must address thesocial, political, and economic dimensions of journalists and their publics.” Hardtargues that commercial interests of the media have undermined the authority ofthe work force, preventing it from conducting civic-minded journalism. This iswhere the public journalism argument, when aimed at rank-and-file reporters andeditors, becomes naïve, and on occasion, patronizing. Instead of questioning thepractices of those with control of human and capital resources, public journalismtends to appeal to the conscience or imagination of individual journalists.

By contrast, theorists should incorporate literature on the sociology of newsproduction to suggest how journalists might produce narratives of civic empow-erment despite models of news work that describe restrictive and even hostileworking conditions (McManus, 1994). At least part of the answer, it seems, is the


162

preservation of professional autonomy and its realignment with the goals of par-ticipatory democracy.

Autonomy versus objectivity. Journalists are not uniformly committed to con-ventional notions of objectivity and neutrality, as reflected in national surveys thathave documented distinct value orientations (Weaver & Wilhoit, 1991, 1996). AsZelizer (1999) has argued, public journalism has overstated the resonance of ob-jectivity as a professional norm. Public journalists tend to take aim at the easytarget of objectivity, often equating it with detachment as a kind of professionalisolation. The journalist in “civic exile” hinders news media as a catalyst for delib-erative democracy, according to this view (Rosen, 1995).

Journalistic autonomy, however, is not reducible to “objectivity,” nor is it equiva-lent to “detachment,” as these terms are typically used in the public journalismliterature. In fact, narrative expressions of autonomy circumvent objectivity. Whereasreporting techniques that create the appearance of objectivity are a product ofconvention and deadline impulses (Tuchman, 1978), autonomy provides at leastthe possibility for reflective judgment and thus reform.

Autonomy as a resource or a barrier. A fashionable critique of the press thesedays is to question the authority of journalism in a democratic society. For ex-ample, Schudson (1999) argued that “public journalism as a reform movement isconservative. It does not provide new media accountability systems” (p. 122).Similarly, Hallin (1994) asserted that “it might be time for journalists to rejoin civicsociety, and to start talking to their readers and viewers as one citizen to another,rather than as experts claiming to be above politics” (p. 176).

Valid criticism of conventional detachment, including the lack of accountabilityto the public, does not, though, constitute a rationale for questioning the basis ofjournalistic authority itself. Professional expertise, although in need of reform withrespect to implementation, must be protected if journalists are to make a greatercontribution to civic empowerment. The instinct of press critics is to call for di-minished journalistic authority in relationship to the citizenry, as if a public spherewould somehow emerge in the wake of a journalistic retreat.

A more promising strategy would enlist autonomy as a tool for civic activation.Decades of research suggests modest expectations for public information cam-paigns (Hyman & Sheatsley, 1947; McDevitt & Chaffee, 2000), but journalists areuniquely equipped to promote civic discussion and interest in processes such asagenda setting (Golan & Wanta, 2001) and policy formation (Protess et al., 1991).Techniques such as the purposeful framing of news stories might illustrate howreflective practice and professional expertise, rather than merely the inherent dy-namics of mass media influence, can contribute to civic engagement.

InstructionCollege instruction represents an opportunity to make this capacity for civic en-gagement more evident to the practitioners themselves. Educators must first con-sider how they might break an unfortunate cycle of professional socialization, inwhich the transition from student to professional generates a defensive autonomy,one that is functional for journalists themselves but not as useful as it could be inservice to the public.


163

Sociologists observe that values adopted early in professional developmenttend to endure (Cherniss, 1980), and thus, without early instruction in civic-ori-ented autonomy, a journalist might maintain an uncompromising view of profes-sional detachment. To contribute to curriculum reform, however, public journal-ists must first reformulate their critique to acknowledge the importance of au-tonomy. Reform advocates would gain credibility in journalism schools by recog-nizing the rich history of professional autonomy and the diversity with which itbecomes manifest in attitudes, relationships, and covert writing techniques. Asinstructors, public journalists should encourage students to reflect upon what au-tonomy means to them as they develop a professional identity, how autonomycan be preserved in their work, and how it might allow them to contribute to civicactivation.

References

Beam, R. A. (1990). Journalism professionalism as an organizational-level concept. Journalism Mono-graphs, 121, 1–43.

Cappella, J. N., & Jamieson, K. H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York:Oxford University Press.

Charity, A. (1995). Doing public journalism. New York: Guilford Press.

Cherniss, C. (1980). Staff burnout: Job stress in the human services. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Craig, D. A. (1996). Communitarian journalism(s): Clearing conceptual landscapes. Journal of MassMedia Ethics, 11, 107–118.

Day, R. D., Gilbert, K. R., Settles, B. H., & Burr, W. R. (1995). Research and theory in family science.Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Denton, E., & Kurtz, H. (1993). Reinventing the newspaper. New York: 20th Century Fund Press.

Ettema, J. S., & Glasser, T. L. (1994). The irony in—and of—journalism: A case study in the morallanguage of liberal democracy. Journal of Communication, 44(2), 5–28.

Glasser, T. L., & Ettema, J. S. (1993). When the facts don’t speak for themselves: A study of the use ofirony in daily journalism. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 10, 322–338.

Golan, G., & Wanta, W. (2001). Second-level agenda setting in the New Hampshire primary: A com-parison of coverage in three newspapers and public perceptions of candidates. Journalism & MassCommunication Quarterly, 78, 247–259.

Greene, C. N. (1978). Identification models of professionals: Relationship with formalization, rolestrain, and alienation. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 486–492.

Hallin, D. (1994). We keep America on top of the world. New York: Routledge.

Hardt, H. (1999). Reinventing the press for the age of commercial appeals: Writings on and aboutpublic journalism. In T. L. Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 197–209). New York:Guilford Press.

Hyman, H. H., & Sheatsley, P. B. (1947). Some reasons why information campaigns fail. In D. Katz, D.Cartwright, S. Eldersveld, & A. McClung Lee (Eds.), Public opinion and propaganda (pp. 522–531).New York: Henry Holt.

Johnstone, J. W. C., Slawski, E. J., & Bowman, W. W. (1976). The news people: A sociological portrait ofAmerican journalists and their work. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.


164

Lambeth, E. B. (1992). Committed journalism: An ethic for the profession (2nd ed.). Bloomington:Indiana University Press.

Levy, M. R. (1981). Disdaining the news. Journal of Communication, 31(3), 24–31.

McDevitt, M., & Chaffee, S. H. (2002). Closing gaps in political communication and knowledge: Effectsof a school intervention. Communication Research, 27, 259–292.

McDevitt, M., Gassaway, B., & Pérez, F. G. (2000). The making and unmaking of civic journalists:Influences of professional socialization. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 79,87–100.

McManus, M. (1994). Market driven journalism: Let the citizen beware? Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

McQuarrie, F. (1999). Professional mystique and journalists’ dissatisfaction. Newspaper Research Jour-nal, 20, 20–28.

Merritt, D. (1994). Public journalism: What it means, how it works. In J. Rosen & D. Merritt, Jr. (Eds.),Public journalism: Theory and practice (pp. 19–28). Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation.

Morrow, P. C., & Goetz, J. E., Jr. (1988). Professionalism as a form of work commitment. Journal ofVocational Behavior, 32, 92–111.

Patterson, T. E. (1994). Out of order. New York: Vintage Books.

Peck, L. (1991). Anger in the newsroom. Washington Journalism Review, 13, 22–28.

Protess, D. L., Cook, F. L., Doppelt, J. C., Ettema, J. S., Gordon, M. T., Leff, D. R., et al. (1991). Thejournalism of outrage: Investigative reporting and agenda building in America. New York: GuilfordPress.

Reese, S. D. (1999). The progressive potential of journalism education: Recasting the academic versusprofessional debate. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 4, 70–94.

Rosen, J. (1994). Public journalism: First principles. In J. Rosen & D. Merritt, Jr. (Eds.), Public journal-ism: Theory and practice (pp. 6–18). Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation.

Rosen, J. (1995). Public journalism: A case for public scholarship. Change, 27, 34–38.

Rosen, J. (1999). What are journalists for? New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Russo, T. C. (1998). Organizational and professional identification. Management Communication Quar-terly, 12, 72–111.

Sabato, L. (1991). Feeding frenzy: How attack journalism has transformed American politics. NewYork: Free Press.

Schudson, M. (1999). What public journalism knows about journalism but doesn’t know about “pub-lic.” In T. L. Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 118–133). New York: Guilford Press.

Stamm, K., & Underwood, D. (1993). The relationship of job satisfaction to newsroom policy changes.Journalism Quarterly, 70, 528–541.

Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. New York: Free Press.

Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1991). The American journalist: A portrait of U.S. news people andtheir work. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Weaver, D. H., & Wilhoit, G. C. (1996). The American journalist in the 1990s: U.S. news people at theend of an era. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Zelizer, B. (1999). Making the neighborhood work: The improbabilities of public journalism. In T. L.Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 152–174). New York: Guilford Press.

in defense of autonomy: a critique of the public journalism critique

Documents