Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Enduring elites in quoted sources: Institutional alignment in Finnish media, 1999–2018 Cover

Enduring elites in quoted sources: Institutional alignment in Finnish media, 1999–2018

Open Access
|Mar 2024

References

  1. Ala-Fossi, M. (2020). Finland: Media welfare state in the digital era? Journal of Digital Media & Policy, 11(2), 133–150. https://doi.org/10.1386/jdmp_00020_1
  2. Barzilai-Nahon, K. (2008). Toward a theory of network gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information control. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59, 1493–1512. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20857
  3. Bennett, W. L. (1990). Toward a theory of press-state relations in the United States. Journal of Communication, 40(2), 103–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1990.tb02265.x
  4. Bennett, W. L. (2014). Press–government relations in a changing media environment. In K. Kenski, & K. Hall Jamieson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political communication (pp. 249–262). Oxford Handbooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199793471.013.40
  5. Bennett, W. L. (2016). News: The politics of illusion (10th ed.). The University of Chicago Press.
  6. Bennett, W. L., & Pfetsch, B. (2018). Rethinking political communication in a time of disrupted public spheres. Journal of Communication, 68(2), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx017
  7. Berkowitz, D. (1987). TV news sources and news channels: A study in agenda-building. Journalism Quarterly, 64(2–3), 508–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908706400231
  8. Brown, J. D., Bybee, C. R., Wearden, S. T., & Straughn, D. M. (1987). Invisible power: Newspaper news sources and the limits of diversity. Journalism Quarterly, 64(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908706400106
  9. Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press.
  10. Cook, T. E. (1998). Governing with the news: The news media as a political institution. University of Chicago Press.
  11. DeIuliis, D. (2015). Gatekeeping theory from social fields to social networks. Communication Research Trends, 34(1), 1–23. http://cscc.scu.edu/trends/v34/CRT_v34_n1_March2015.pdf
  12. Dunwoody, S. (1999). Scientists, journalists, and the meaning of uncertainty. In S. M. Friedman, S. Dunwoody, & C. L. Rogers (Eds.). Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science (pp. 59–79). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  13. Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2450–2468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170
  14. Gandy, O. (1982). Beyond agenda setting: Information subsidies and public policy. Bloomsbury Academic.
  15. Gans, H. J. (1979). Deciding what’s news: A study of CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, Newsweek and Times. Vintage Books.
  16. Gibson, R., & Zillmann, D. (1993). The impact of quotation in news reports on issue perception. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 70(4), 793–800. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909307000405
  17. Goel, S., Anderson, A., Hofman, J., & Watts, D. J. (2016). The structural virality of online diffusion. Management Science, 62(1), 180–196. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2158
  18. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790867
  19. Herkman, J. (2009). The structural transformation of the democratic corporatist model: The Case of Finland. Javnost – The Public, 16(4), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2009.11009015
  20. Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues, 40(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00213624.2006.11506879
  21. Janicki, M., Kanner, A., & Mäkelä, E. (2023). Detection and attribution of quotes in Finnish news media: BERT vs. rule-based approach. In Proceedings of the 24th Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (NoDaLiDa) (pp. 52–59). NEALT Proceedings Series. University of Tartu Library.
  22. Johnston, J., & Forde, S. (2017). Churnalism. Digital Journalism, 5(8), 943–946. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1355026
  23. Kantola, A. (2013). From gardeners to revolutionaries: The rise of the liquid ethos in political journalism. Journalism, 14(5), 606–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884912454504
  24. Karlsson, M., Van Couvering, E., & Lindell, J. (2022). Publishing, sharing, and spreading online news: A case study of gatekeeping logics in the platform era. Nordicom Review, 43(2), 190–213. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2022-0012
  25. Koivunen, A., Kanner, A., Janicki, M., Harju, A., Hokkanen, J., & Mäkelä, E. (2021). Emotive, evaluative, epistemic: A linguistic analysis of affectivity in news journalism. Journalism, 22(5), 1190–1206. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884920985724
  26. Koivunen, A., & Vuorelma, J. (2022). Trust and authority in the age of mediatised politics. European Journal of Communication, 37(4), 393–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231211072653
  27. Koljonen, K. (2013). The shift from high to liquid ideals: Making sense of journalism and its change through a multidimensional model. Nordicom Review, 34(S1), 141–154. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2013-0110
  28. Kunelius, R., & Reunanen, E. (2012). Media in political power: A parsonian view on the differentiated mediatization of Finnish decision makers. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 17(1), 56–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161211424207
  29. Lecheler, S., & Kruikemeier, S. (2016). Re-evaluating journalistic routines in a digital age: A review of research on the use of online sources. New Media & Society, 18(1), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815600412
  30. Lehdonvirta, V. (2022). Cloud empires: How digital platforms are overtaking the state and how we can regain control. MIT Press.
  31. Maurer, P., & Beiler, M. (2018). Networking and political alignment as strategies to control the news. Journalism Studies, 19(14), 2024–2041. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1310627
  32. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C. T., Eddy, K., & Kleis Nielsen, R. (2022). Reuters Institute digital news report 2022. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. University of Oxford. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2022
  33. Parmelee, J. H. (2014). The agenda-building function of political tweets. New Media & Society, 16(3), 434–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487955
  34. Reese, S. D. (2021). The crisis of the institutional press. Polity.
  35. Reich, Z. (2006). The process model of news initiative: Sources lead first, reporters thereafter. Journalism Studies, 7(4), 497–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700600757928
  36. Reunanen, E., Kunelius, R., & Noppari, E. (2010). Mediatization in context: Consensus culture, media and decision making in the 21st century, the case of Finland. Communications, 35(3), 287–307. https://doi.org/10.1515/comm.2010.016
  37. Richardson, J. (2006). Who gets to speak? A study of sources in the broadsheet press. In E. Poole, & J. Richardson (Eds.). Muslims and the news media (pp. 103–115). I. B. Tauris.
  38. Rosen, J. (2012). The people formerly known as the audience. In M. Mandiberg (Ed.), The social media reader (pp. 13–16). NYU Press.
  39. Schudson, M. (2003). The sociology of news. W. W. Norton.
  40. Seuri, O., Era, R., Koivunen, A., Janicki, M., Toivanen, P., Hokkanen, J., & Mäkelä, E. (2021). Uutisvuon hallitsija: Uutismedia kiky-kamppailussa 2015–2016 [Ruler of the news flow: Traditional media in the competitiveness pact negotiations 2015–2016]. Politiikka, 63(3). https://doi.org/10.37452/politiikka.99432
  41. Seuri, O., & Ikäheimo, H.-P. (2022, November 25). Gatekeeping in the digital age [Sitra Working Paper]. Sitra.
  42. Shoemaker, P. (1991). Gatekeeping. Sage.
  43. Shoemaker, P., & Vos, T. P. (2009). Gatekeeping theory. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203931653
  44. Sigal, L. V. (1973). Reporters & officials: The organisation & politics of newsmaking. D. C. Heath.
  45. Skogerbø, E., Bruns, A., Quodling, A., & Ingebretsen, T. (2016). Agenda-setting revisited: Social media in mainstream journalism. In G. Enli, A. Bruns, A. O. Larsson, E. Skogerbo, & C. Christensen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to social media and politics (pp. 104–120). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315716299
  46. Sundar, S. S., & Nass, C. (2001). Conceptualizing sources in online news. Journal of Communication, 51, 52–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2001.tb02872.x
  47. Syvertsen, T., Gunn, E., Mjøs, O., & Moe, H. (2014). The media welfare state: Nordic media in the digital era. The University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/nmw.12367206.0001.001
  48. Thorsen, E., & Jackson, D. (2018). Seven characteristics defining online news formats. Digital Journalism, 6(7), 847–868. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1468722
  49. Thorson K., & Wells, C. (2015). How gatekeeping still matters: Understanding media effects in an era of curated flows. In T. P. Vos, & F. Heinderyckx (Eds.), Gatekeeping in Transition (pp. 25–44). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315849652
  50. Tiffen, R., Jones, P. K., Rowe, D., Aalberg, T., Coen, S., Curran, J., Hayashi, K., Iyengar, S., Mazzoleni, G., Papathanassopoulos, S., Rojas, H., & Soroka, S. (2014). Sources in the news: A comparative study. Journalism studies, 15(4), 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2013.831239
  51. Tuchman, G. (1978). Making news: A study in the construction of reality. The Free Press.
  52. Van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., de Vreese, C., Matthes, J., Hopmann, D., Salgado, S., Hubé, N., Stępińska, A., Papathanassopoulos, S., Berganza, R., Legnante, G., Reinemann, C., Sheafer, T., & Stanyer, J. (2017) Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy? Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1288551
  53. Van Leuven, S., Kruikemeier, S., Lecheler, S., & Hermans, L. (2018). Online and newsworthy. Digital Journalism, 6(7), 798–806. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1498747
  54. Vesa, J., & Kantola, A. (2016). Kuka pääsee mukaan? Miten järjestöjen ääni kuuluu lakien valmistelussa [Who can join? How the voice of organisations is heard in the preparation of laws]. Valtioneuvoston selvitys- ja tutkimustoiminnan julkaisusarja 59/2016 [Government investigation and research publication series 59/2016.]. Prime Minister’s Office Finland.
  55. Vesa, J., Kantola, A., & Binderkrantz, A. (2018). A stronghold of routine corporatism? The involvement of interest groups in policy making in Finland. Scandinavian Political Studies, 41(4), 239–262. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12128
  56. Vliegenthart, R., & Boukes, M. (2018) On the street and/or on Twitter? Digital Journalism, 6(7), 829–846. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1497449
  57. Vos, T. P. (2015). Revisiting gatekeeping theory during a time of transition. In T. P. Vos, & F. Heinderyckx (Eds.), Gatekeeping in transition (pp. 3–25). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315849652
  58. Väliverronen, J. (2022a). Boundaries in motion? Finnish political journalists’ external and internal boundary work in a time of change. Journalism Studies, 23(9), 1037–1055. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2022.2065340
  59. Väliverronen, J. (2022b). Political journalism content in a new era: The case of Finnish newspapers, 1995–2015. European Journal of Communication, 37(4), 373–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231211072662
  60. Wallace, J. (2018). Modelling contemporary gatekeeping. Digital Journalism, 6(3), 274–293, https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1343648
  61. Weaver, D., & Elliott, S. N. (1985). Who sets the agenda for the media? A study of local agenda-building. Journalism Quarterly, 62(1), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769908506200113
  62. White, D. M. (1950). The “gate keeper”: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27(4), 383–390. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769905002700403
  63. Wihbey, J. P. (2019). The social fact: News and knowledge in a networked world. MIT Press.
  64. Williams, B. A., & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2004). Monica and Bill all the time and everywhere: The collapse of gatekeeping and agenda setting in the new media environment. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(9), 1208–1230. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642032623
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2024-0013 | Journal eISSN: 2001-5119 | Journal ISSN: 1403-1108
Language: English
Page range: 193 - 215
Published on: Mar 12, 2024
Published by: University of Gothenburg Nordicom
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2024 Olli Seuri, Anu Koivunen, Henna Levola, Eetu Mäkelä, published by University of Gothenburg Nordicom
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.