Suchergebnisse

Today social media provides citizens with the opportunity to receive news from the first source of information. It is the responsibility of the journalist to become the one who does not allow himself to get lost in the flow of information and content. However, it is noticeable that journalists are increasingly expressing personal opinions on political processes, speaking on various political issues in the public sphere. Thus, the problem of this work is the gap between the ethical standards of journalism and the practical activities of journalists in social networks. This raises the main question of this work – if the activities of journalists are clearly defined in the code of ethics, legal acts, and one of the main values of journalism is considered to be objectivity, impartiality, how the activities of journalists in social networks expand or even change those boundaries. This paper examines the peculiarities of journalists' behaviour on the social network Facebook before the Seimas elections, paying special attention to the cases that may have a political charge. The main goal of the work is to find out how social media expands/changes the professional opportunities and ethical standards of journalists. The entire field of media, from editors to reporters, is analysed in detail, taking into account positions held, seniority, experience, gender and media diversity. In order to see possible trends, two pre-election periods in 2016 and 2020 are compared, when the amount of political content is most likely. The study found that modern media is becoming increasingly relevant and important to media players. Facebook is becoming more of a work tool than a personal space. This master's thesis has revealed that adhering to ethical standards in the age of modern media is becoming a serious challenge for all players in the media field. While social networks expand the opportunities for journalists, the principles of informing the public and the values of journalism should also apply to journalists after work.

Today social media provides citizens with the opportunity to receive news from the first source of information. It is the responsibility of the journalist to become the one who does not allow himself to get lost in the flow of information and content. However, it is noticeable that journalists are increasingly expressing personal opinions on political processes, speaking on various political issues in the public sphere. Thus, the problem of this work is the gap between the ethical standards of journalism and the practical activities of journalists in social networks. This raises the main question of this work – if the activities of journalists are clearly defined in the code of ethics, legal acts, and one of the main values of journalism is considered to be objectivity, impartiality, how the activities of journalists in social networks expand or even change those boundaries. This paper examines the peculiarities of journalists' behaviour on the social network Facebook before the Seimas elections, paying special attention to the cases that may have a political charge. The main goal of the work is to find out how social media expands/changes the professional opportunities and ethical standards of journalists. The entire field of media, from editors to reporters, is analysed in detail, taking into account positions held, seniority, experience, gender and media diversity. In order to see possible trends, two pre-election periods in 2016 and 2020 are compared, when the amount of political content is most likely. The study found that modern media is becoming increasingly relevant and important to media players. Facebook is becoming more of a work tool than a personal space. This master's thesis has revealed that adhering to ethical standards in the age of modern media is becoming a serious challenge for all players in the media field. While social networks expand the opportunities for journalists, the principles of informing the public and the values of journalism should also apply to journalists after work.

Today social media provides citizens with the opportunity to receive news from the first source of information. It is the responsibility of the journalist to become the one who does not allow himself to get lost in the flow of information and content. However, it is noticeable that journalists are increasingly expressing personal opinions on political processes, speaking on various political issues in the public sphere. Thus, the problem of this work is the gap between the ethical standards of journalism and the practical activities of journalists in social networks. This raises the main question of this work – if the activities of journalists are clearly defined in the code of ethics, legal acts, and one of the main values of journalism is considered to be objectivity, impartiality, how the activities of journalists in social networks expand or even change those boundaries. This paper examines the peculiarities of journalists' behaviour on the social network Facebook before the Seimas elections, paying special attention to the cases that may have a political charge. The main goal of the work is to find out how social media expands/changes the professional opportunities and ethical standards of journalists. The entire field of media, from editors to reporters, is analysed in detail, taking into account positions held, seniority, experience, gender and media diversity. In order to see possible trends, two pre-election periods in 2016 and 2020 are compared, when the amount of political content is most likely. The study found that modern media is becoming increasingly relevant and important to media players. Facebook is becoming more of a work tool than a personal space. This master's thesis has revealed that adhering to ethical standards in the age of modern media is becoming a serious challenge for all players in the media field. While social networks expand the opportunities for journalists, the principles of informing the public and the values of journalism should also apply to journalists after work.

Today social media provides citizens with the opportunity to receive news from the first source of information. It is the responsibility of the journalist to become the one who does not allow himself to get lost in the flow of information and content. However, it is noticeable that journalists are increasingly expressing personal opinions on political processes, speaking on various political issues in the public sphere. Thus, the problem of this work is the gap between the ethical standards of journalism and the practical activities of journalists in social networks. This raises the main question of this work – if the activities of journalists are clearly defined in the code of ethics, legal acts, and one of the main values of journalism is considered to be objectivity, impartiality, how the activities of journalists in social networks expand or even change those boundaries. This paper examines the peculiarities of journalists' behaviour on the social network Facebook before the Seimas elections, paying special attention to the cases that may have a political charge. The main goal of the work is to find out how social media expands/changes the professional opportunities and ethical standards of journalists. The entire field of media, from editors to reporters, is analysed in detail, taking into account positions held, seniority, experience, gender and media diversity. In order to see possible trends, two pre-election periods in 2016 and 2020 are compared, when the amount of political content is most likely. The study found that modern media is becoming increasingly relevant and important to media players. Facebook is becoming more of a work tool than a personal space. This master's thesis has revealed that adhering to ethical standards in the age of modern media is becoming a serious challenge for all players in the media field. While social networks expand the opportunities for journalists, the principles of informing the public and the values of journalism should also apply to journalists after work.

Ideological restraints are dysfunction of journalistic work. This phenomenon is often detected in "not free" countries. In this article the Russian case is analysed (140th place in "Press Freedom Index 2010" by Reporters Without Borders and "not free" country in "Map of Press Freedom 2011" by Freedom House). Journalists in Russia often fall under pressure of central government and local politics in the regions. Internet is an area of free information circulation. It's main point of internet effect. Information makes imprint in the World Wide Web. In terms of copy/ paste and share traditions information there is quite safe, because it's hard to block or remove "undesirable" content from Internet. World Wide Web becomes an alternative political space without possibility of direct influence by single political power. Journalists can use Internet to turn ideological restraints. When there is no possibility to publish information in official mass-media, this information could be leak in private Internet sphere: blogs, social networks, private web pages etc. But "Internet diffusion cannot be considered a democratic panacea" (how it is noted by Jacob Groshek). Internet effect is more powerful in democratic countries and less powerful in countries, which are "not free". Therefore the author of this article concludes that: 1) Internet could be a tool to turn ideological restraints; 2) Democratic effect of Internet becomes significant in terms of general democratic changes; 3) In Russia Internet sphere becomes an important alternative to public sphere, which is under political control. The role of Internet in Russia could grow up if evolution of politic system of the country would move towards democracy.

Ideological restraints are dysfunction of journalistic work. This phenomenon is often detected in "not free" countries. In this article the Russian case is analysed (140th place in "Press Freedom Index 2010" by Reporters Without Borders and "not free" country in "Map of Press Freedom 2011" by Freedom House). Journalists in Russia often fall under pressure of central government and local politics in the regions. Internet is an area of free information circulation. It's main point of internet effect. Information makes imprint in the World Wide Web. In terms of copy/ paste and share traditions information there is quite safe, because it's hard to block or remove "undesirable" content from Internet. World Wide Web becomes an alternative political space without possibility of direct influence by single political power. Journalists can use Internet to turn ideological restraints. When there is no possibility to publish information in official mass-media, this information could be leak in private Internet sphere: blogs, social networks, private web pages etc. But "Internet diffusion cannot be considered a democratic panacea" (how it is noted by Jacob Groshek). Internet effect is more powerful in democratic countries and less powerful in countries, which are "not free". Therefore the author of this article concludes that: 1) Internet could be a tool to turn ideological restraints; 2) Democratic effect of Internet becomes significant in terms of general democratic changes; 3) In Russia Internet sphere becomes an important alternative to public sphere, which is under political control. The role of Internet in Russia could grow up if evolution of politic system of the country would move towards democracy.

Ideological restraints are dysfunction of journalistic work. This phenomenon is often detected in "not free" countries. In this article the Russian case is analysed (140th place in "Press Freedom Index 2010" by Reporters Without Borders and "not free" country in "Map of Press Freedom 2011" by Freedom House). Journalists in Russia often fall under pressure of central government and local politics in the regions. Internet is an area of free information circulation. It's main point of internet effect. Information makes imprint in the World Wide Web. In terms of copy/ paste and share traditions information there is quite safe, because it's hard to block or remove "undesirable" content from Internet. World Wide Web becomes an alternative political space without possibility of direct influence by single political power. Journalists can use Internet to turn ideological restraints. When there is no possibility to publish information in official mass-media, this information could be leak in private Internet sphere: blogs, social networks, private web pages etc. But "Internet diffusion cannot be considered a democratic panacea" (how it is noted by Jacob Groshek). Internet effect is more powerful in democratic countries and less powerful in countries, which are "not free". Therefore the author of this article concludes that: 1) Internet could be a tool to turn ideological restraints; 2) Democratic effect of Internet becomes significant in terms of general democratic changes; 3) In Russia Internet sphere becomes an important alternative to public sphere, which is under political control. The role of Internet in Russia could grow up if evolution of politic system of the country would move towards democracy.

Ideological restraints are dysfunction of journalistic work. This phenomenon is often detected in "not free" countries. In this article the Russian case is analysed (140th place in "Press Freedom Index 2010" by Reporters Without Borders and "not free" country in "Map of Press Freedom 2011" by Freedom House). Journalists in Russia often fall under pressure of central government and local politics in the regions. Internet is an area of free information circulation. It's main point of internet effect. Information makes imprint in the World Wide Web. In terms of copy/ paste and share traditions information there is quite safe, because it's hard to block or remove "undesirable" content from Internet. World Wide Web becomes an alternative political space without possibility of direct influence by single political power. Journalists can use Internet to turn ideological restraints. When there is no possibility to publish information in official mass-media, this information could be leak in private Internet sphere: blogs, social networks, private web pages etc. But "Internet diffusion cannot be considered a democratic panacea" (how it is noted by Jacob Groshek). Internet effect is more powerful in democratic countries and less powerful in countries, which are "not free". Therefore the author of this article concludes that: 1) Internet could be a tool to turn ideological restraints; 2) Democratic effect of Internet becomes significant in terms of general democratic changes; 3) In Russia Internet sphere becomes an important alternative to public sphere, which is under political control. The role of Internet in Russia could grow up if evolution of politic system of the country would move towards democracy.

This article presents a survery of the competence of the institutional system that regulates the provision of public information in Lithuania as well as ascertains the functional aspects of self-regulation institutions in the area of the provision of public information. Those factors are regulated by the Law on the Provision of Public Information. Three aspects of functional competencies of institutions – political, juridical and ethical are abstracted. The basic principles of professional ethical codes and requirements for the contents and form of such documents are also considered being important. The aim of the article is to analyse the quality of the content of Law on the Provision of Public Information and to compare its rules with the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. A detailed analysis of the content of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers leads to a conclusion that the content and form of this document setting down regulations on which journalists' ethics in the area of public information is based, only partially covers the common principles of codes of professional ethics. A significant factor for making such conclusion is that the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers is not a code intended for one professional group only. Although journalists, as well as organisers of public information, participate in the same field of the provision of information, there are differences in their juridical status. Investigation has revealed that a document regulating the professional ethics of two different groups in the area of the provision of public information does not involve the whole cohesive purposes as is recommended for such documents. This is caused by a factor that articles in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers often use the rules of law, and their basic content elements repeat the rules of laws in the same way as they are defined by the Law on the Provision of Public Information, Law on the Protection of Minors Against Detrimental Effect of Public Information, Law on Protection of Personal Information, Law of Authors' rights, Law on Copyright and Related Rights. In this research paper, a comparative analysis of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers and the Law on the Provision of Public Information is based on the use of rules of law and estimates that 47 articles in the Law on the Provision of Public Information (out of 75) have the same essence as in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. Three articles of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers have the duplicate formulation like the Law on the Provision of Public Information. However, transfer of legal rules from the Law on the Provision of Public Information into the code of professional ethics in such clichéd manner demonstrates low standards of juridical behaviour and juridical ignorance of the participants in the field of public communication, both organisers of public information and journalists. Evaluating the proportion of the rules of law, which are being used by the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers, it is possible to propose that this Code is a set of legal rules, but not a document intended for a professional society to declare their principles and moral values.

This article presents a survery of the competence of the institutional system that regulates the provision of public information in Lithuania as well as ascertains the functional aspects of self-regulation institutions in the area of the provision of public information. Those factors are regulated by the Law on the Provision of Public Information. Three aspects of functional competencies of institutions – political, juridical and ethical are abstracted. The basic principles of professional ethical codes and requirements for the contents and form of such documents are also considered being important. The aim of the article is to analyse the quality of the content of Law on the Provision of Public Information and to compare its rules with the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. A detailed analysis of the content of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers leads to a conclusion that the content and form of this document setting down regulations on which journalists' ethics in the area of public information is based, only partially covers the common principles of codes of professional ethics. A significant factor for making such conclusion is that the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers is not a code intended for one professional group only. Although journalists, as well as organisers of public information, participate in the same field of the provision of information, there are differences in their juridical status. Investigation has revealed that a document regulating the professional ethics of two different groups in the area of the provision of public information does not involve the whole cohesive purposes as is recommended for such documents. This is caused by a factor that articles in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers often use the rules of law, and their basic content elements repeat the rules of laws in the same way as they are defined by the Law on the Provision of Public Information, Law on the Protection of Minors Against Detrimental Effect of Public Information, Law on Protection of Personal Information, Law of Authors' rights, Law on Copyright and Related Rights. In this research paper, a comparative analysis of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers and the Law on the Provision of Public Information is based on the use of rules of law and estimates that 47 articles in the Law on the Provision of Public Information (out of 75) have the same essence as in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. Three articles of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers have the duplicate formulation like the Law on the Provision of Public Information. However, transfer of legal rules from the Law on the Provision of Public Information into the code of professional ethics in such clichéd manner demonstrates low standards of juridical behaviour and juridical ignorance of the participants in the field of public communication, both organisers of public information and journalists. Evaluating the proportion of the rules of law, which are being used by the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers, it is possible to propose that this Code is a set of legal rules, but not a document intended for a professional society to declare their principles and moral values.

This article presents a survery of the competence of the institutional system that regulates the provision of public information in Lithuania as well as ascertains the functional aspects of self-regulation institutions in the area of the provision of public information. Those factors are regulated by the Law on the Provision of Public Information. Three aspects of functional competencies of institutions – political, juridical and ethical are abstracted. The basic principles of professional ethical codes and requirements for the contents and form of such documents are also considered being important. The aim of the article is to analyse the quality of the content of Law on the Provision of Public Information and to compare its rules with the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. A detailed analysis of the content of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers leads to a conclusion that the content and form of this document setting down regulations on which journalists' ethics in the area of public information is based, only partially covers the common principles of codes of professional ethics. A significant factor for making such conclusion is that the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers is not a code intended for one professional group only. Although journalists, as well as organisers of public information, participate in the same field of the provision of information, there are differences in their juridical status. Investigation has revealed that a document regulating the professional ethics of two different groups in the area of the provision of public information does not involve the whole cohesive purposes as is recommended for such documents. This is caused by a factor that articles in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers often use the rules of law, and their basic content elements repeat the rules of laws in the same way as they are defined by the Law on the Provision of Public Information, Law on the Protection of Minors Against Detrimental Effect of Public Information, Law on Protection of Personal Information, Law of Authors' rights, Law on Copyright and Related Rights. In this research paper, a comparative analysis of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers and the Law on the Provision of Public Information is based on the use of rules of law and estimates that 47 articles in the Law on the Provision of Public Information (out of 75) have the same essence as in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. Three articles of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers have the duplicate formulation like the Law on the Provision of Public Information. However, transfer of legal rules from the Law on the Provision of Public Information into the code of professional ethics in such clichéd manner demonstrates low standards of juridical behaviour and juridical ignorance of the participants in the field of public communication, both organisers of public information and journalists. Evaluating the proportion of the rules of law, which are being used by the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers, it is possible to propose that this Code is a set of legal rules, but not a document intended for a professional society to declare their principles and moral values.

This article presents a survery of the competence of the institutional system that regulates the provision of public information in Lithuania as well as ascertains the functional aspects of self-regulation institutions in the area of the provision of public information. Those factors are regulated by the Law on the Provision of Public Information. Three aspects of functional competencies of institutions – political, juridical and ethical are abstracted. The basic principles of professional ethical codes and requirements for the contents and form of such documents are also considered being important. The aim of the article is to analyse the quality of the content of Law on the Provision of Public Information and to compare its rules with the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers. A detailed analysis of the content of the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers leads to a conclusion that the content and form of this document setting down regulations on which journalists' ethics in the area of public information is based, only partially covers the common principles of codes of professional ethics. A significant factor for making such conclusion is that the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers is not a code intended for one professional group only. Although journalists, as well as organisers of public information, participate in the same field of the provision of information, there are differences in their juridical status. Investigation has revealed that a document regulating the professional ethics of two different groups in the area of the provision of public information does not involve the whole cohesive purposes as is recommended for such documents. This is caused by a factor that articles in the Code of Ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers often use the rules of law, and their basic content elements repeat the rules of laws in the same way as they are defined by the Law on the Provision of Public Information, Law on the Protection of Minors ...

Community media, as opposed to mainstream newsmedia, is an alternative source of information which plays a facilitative role by encouraging community members to express their interests, to join policy debates, and therefore to give authorities feedback on how ongoing policy changes affect members of communities. Due to high levels of concentration of poverty in Lithuanian rural areas and the start of a social assistance decentralisation program to poor residents in five Lithuanian regional municipalities in 2012, the role of local media in policies concerning poverty reduction has increased. Content analysis of five newspapers that served communities affected by the changes reveals that community members are provided with options to communicate poverty issues through community media. This is an empirical finding which supports the author's claim, presented in this article, that analytical concept of rhisomatic community media rather than liberal critique of local press (which focuses on negative pressures from market and state institutions erected toward the media), is more useful for assessing deliberation processes in local newspapers. Research results show that while communicating poverty, community members prefer to communicate charity initiatives and not to directly engage in public policy debate. Coverage of policy changes is dominated by local authorities and community media journalists. Images of 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor (often without references to actually existing cases) dominate poverty framing in an attempt to support new cash social assistance distributions. Despite facilitating some non-governmental community-organised poverty reduction initiatives, community media acts collaboratively towards on-going policy changes and fails in empowering the poor of the communities they serve.

Community media, as opposed to mainstream newsmedia, is an alternative source of information which plays a facilitative role by encouraging community members to express their interests, to join policy debates, and therefore to give authorities feedback on how ongoing policy changes affect members of communities. Due to high levels of concentration of poverty in Lithuanian rural areas and the start of a social assistance decentralisation program to poor residents in five Lithuanian regional municipalities in 2012, the role of local media in policies concerning poverty reduction has increased. Content analysis of five newspapers that served communities affected by the changes reveals that community members are provided with options to communicate poverty issues through community media. This is an empirical finding which supports the author's claim, presented in this article, that analytical concept of rhisomatic community media rather than liberal critique of local press (which focuses on negative pressures from market and state institutions erected toward the media), is more useful for assessing deliberation processes in local newspapers. Research results show that while communicating poverty, community members prefer to communicate charity initiatives and not to directly engage in public policy debate. Coverage of policy changes is dominated by local authorities and community media journalists. Images of 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor (often without references to actually existing cases) dominate poverty framing in an attempt to support new cash social assistance distributions. Despite facilitating some non-governmental community-organised poverty reduction initiatives, community media acts collaboratively towards on-going policy changes and fails in empowering the poor of the communities they serve.

Community media, as opposed to mainstream newsmedia, is an alternative source of information which plays a facilitative role by encouraging community members to express their interests, to join policy debates, and therefore to give authorities feedback on how ongoing policy changes affect members of communities. Due to high levels of concentration of poverty in Lithuanian rural areas and the start of a social assistance decentralisation program to poor residents in five Lithuanian regional municipalities in 2012, the role of local media in policies concerning poverty reduction has increased. Content analysis of five newspapers that served communities affected by the changes reveals that community members are provided with options to communicate poverty issues through community media. This is an empirical finding which supports the author's claim, presented in this article, that analytical concept of rhisomatic community media rather than liberal critique of local press (which focuses on negative pressures from market and state institutions erected toward the media), is more useful for assessing deliberation processes in local newspapers. Research results show that while communicating poverty, community members prefer to communicate charity initiatives and not to directly engage in public policy debate. Coverage of policy changes is dominated by local authorities and community media journalists. Images of 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor (often without references to actually existing cases) dominate poverty framing in an attempt to support new cash social assistance distributions. Despite facilitating some non-governmental community-organised poverty reduction initiatives, community media acts collaboratively towards on-going policy changes and fails in empowering the poor of the communities they serve.