Kiedy wydarzenie może się stać newsem? Gatekeeping i selekcja źródeł informacji w komunikowniu o Unii Europejskiej

Marta Jas-Koziarkiewicz

Abstrakt
When Does the Event Become the News? Gatekeeping and Selection of Information Sources in Communication on the European Union 
 
The aim of this article is to present the process of selecting information on the subject of the European Union by the Polish journalists. For the purpose of the study the assumption has been made that the most important factors that the Polish journalists would point to when selecting the information are the validity of the information, its connection with Poland or Polish people, if the information relates to Poland or the Polish people, the significance of the information (influence on lives of ordinary citizens) and the medium specificity. In-depth interviews with journalists led to the verification of hypothesis. The respondents named the above mentioned criteria for selecting information, but also pointed to other factors. The journalists also prioritized the criteria for selecting information differently. What they found important was the type of prepared materials, the specificity of the medium they work with and the position they have. 
Słowa kluczowe: gatekeeping, selecting sources of information, European Union, in-depth interviews
References

Barzilai-Nahon K.(2009). Gatekeeping: A Critical Review. Annual Reviewof Information Science and Technology, vol. 43, s. 433–478.

Bass A.Z. (1969). Refining the ‘Gatekeeper’ Concept: A UN Radio Case Study. Journalism Quarterly,no.46, s. 69–72.

Beard F., Olsen R. (1999). Webmasters as Mass Media Gatekeepers: A Qualitative Exploratory Study. Internet Research, vol. 9, iss. 3, s. 200–211.

Bennett L.W. (2004). Gatekeeping and Press-government Relations: A Multigated Model of News Construction. W: L.L. Kaid (red.). Handbook of Political Communication Research (s. 283–315). Mahwah, NJ–London.

Berkowitz D. (1990). Refining the Gatekeeping Metaphor for Local Television News. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, vol. 34, no. 1, s. 55–68.

Bruns A. (2005). Gatewatching: Collaborative Online News Production. New York.

Breed W. (1955). Social Control in the Newsroom: A Functional Analysis. Social Forces, no. 33, s. 326–335.

Buttolph-Johnson J., Reynolds H.T., Mycoff J.D. (2010). Metody badawcze w naukach politycznych. Warszawa.

Coddington M., Holton A.E. (2014). When the Gates Swing Open: Examining Network Gatekeeping in a Social Media Setting. Mass Communication and Society, no. 17, s. 236–257.

Entman R. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, vol. 43 (4), s. 51–58.

Galtung J., Holmboe Ruge M. (1965).The Structure of Foreign News. The Presentation of the

Congo, Cuba and Cyprus Crises in Four Norwegian Newspapers. Journal of Peace Research, vol. 2, no. 1, s. 64–91.

Gans H. (1979). Deciding What Is News. New York.

Gieber W. (1956). Across the Desk: A Study of 16 Telegraph Editors. Journalism Quarterly, no. 33(4), s. 423–432.

Jas-Koziarkiewicz M. (2015). Prawne i instytucjonalne podstawy polityki informacyjnej Unii Europejskiej. Przegląd Europejski, nr 2, s. 26–57.

Johnstone S., Slawski E.J., Bowman W.W. (1972). The Professional Values of American Newsmen. Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 4, s. 522–540.

Kvale S. (2012). Prowadzenie wywiadów. Warszawa.

Lewin K. (1947). Frontiers in Group Dynamics II. Channels of Group Life; Social Planning and Action Research. Human Relations,vol. 1, no. 2, s. 143–153.

Livingston S., Bennett W.L. (2003). Gatekeeping, Indexing, and Live-Event News: Is Techno­logy Altering the Construction of News?. Political Communication, no. 20, s. 363–380.

Michalczyk S. (2013). Teoria wartości informacji: historia i współczesność. Studia Politicae Universitatis Silesiensis, t. 10, s. 131–146.

Mrozowski M. (2001). Media masowe – władza, rozrywka i biznes. Warszawa.

McQuail D. (2007). Teoria komunikowania masowego. Warszawa.

Sęk M. (2015). Dobór próby przy pomocy metody kuli śniegowej (snowball sampling).
W: B. Fatyga (red.). Praktyki badawcze (s. 59–76). Warszawa.

Shabir G., Safdar G.,Imran M., Seyal A.M., Anjum A.A. (2015). Process of Gate Keeping in Media: From Old Trend to New. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 6, no. 1, s. 588–593.

Shoemaker P.J. (1991). Communication concepts 3: Gatekeeping. Newbury Park.

Shoemaker P.J., Reese S.D. (1991). Mediating the Message Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content. New York.

ShoemakerP.J.,Vos T.P. (2009a).Gatekeeping. W: D.W. Stacks, M.B. Salwen (eds.). An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research (s. 75–87). New York.

ShoemakerP.J., Vos T.P. (2009b).Gatekeeping Theory. New York.

Shoemaker P.J., Eichholz M., Kim E., Wrigley B. (2001). Individual and Routine Forces in Gatekeeping. Journalism & Masscommunication Quarterly, vol. 78, no. 2, s. 233–246.

SingerJ.B.(1997). Still Guardingthe Gate? The Newspaper Journalist’s Role in an Online World. Convergence, no. 3, s.7289.

Singer J.B. (2001). The Metro Wide Web: Changes in Newspapers’ Gatekeeping Role Online. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, no. 78 (1), s. 65–80.

Singer J.B. (2014). User-generated Visbility: Secondary Gatekeeping in a Shared Media Space. New Media & Society,no.16 (1), s. 55–73.

Soroka S.N. (2012). The Gatekeeping Function: Distributions of Information in Media and the Real World. The Journal of Politics, vol. 74, no. 2, s. 514–528.

Szpunar M. (2013). Wokół koncepcji gatekeepingu. Od gatekeepingu tradycyjnego do technologicznego. W: I.S. Fiut (red.). Człowiek w komunikacji i kulturze (s. 55–65). Kraków.

Tandoc Jr. E.C. (2015). Reframing Gatekeeping: How Passing Gates Reshapes News Frames. Asia Pacific Media Educator,vol. 25, no. 1, s. 121–136.

Westley B.H., MacLean Jr. M. (1957).A Conceptual Model For Communications Research.Journalism Quarterly, no. 34 (4), s. 31–38.

White D.M. (1950). The “Gate Keeper”: A Case Study in the Selection of News. Journalism Quarterly, no. 27 (4), s. 383–390.

Williams B.A., Delli Carpini M.X. (2000). Unchained Reaction: The Collapse of Media Gate Keeping and the Clinton-Lewinsky Scandal. Journalism, no. 1, s. 61–85.

Sustein C.R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Sustein C.R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Templin J., Ray A., Delaney K. (2017). Filter Bubbles. Quartz, 21.02.2017 [https://qz.com/913114/bill-gates-says-filter-bubbles-are-a-serious-problem-with-news/; 5.06.2017].

Vestager M. (2017). A healthy democracy in a social media age, 7.06.2017 [https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissioners/2014-2019/vestager/announcements/healthy-democracy-social-media-age_en; 10.06.2017].

Waterson J., Dugan E. (2017). The Tories Are Exploiting A New Loophole To Launch A Last-Minute Facebook Ad Blitz. BuzzFeednews, 7.06.2017 [https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/the-tories-are-exploiting-a-new-loophole-to-launch-a-last?utm_term=.jsA1MNmvN#.caK9MV6nV; 07.06.2017].

Weedon J., Nuland W., Samos A. (2017). Information Operations and Facebook. [https://fbnewsroomus.files.wordpress.com/2017/04/facebook-and-information-operations-v1.pdf; 29.04.2017].

Zawadzki B., Strelau J., Szczepaniak P., Śliwińska M. (1998).Inwentarz osobowości NEO-FFI Costy i McCrae. Warszawa: Pracownia Testów Psychologicznych PTP.

Czasopismo ukazuje się w sposób ciągły on-line.
Pierwotną wersją czasopisma jest wersja elektroniczna publikowana w internecie.