Preiskovalno novinarstvo, ustvarjanje škandalov in novinarska etika

Poler Kovačič, Melita (author)

Avtorica obravnava vprašanje, kako razlikovati verodostojno preiskovalno novinarstvo od aferaško in senzacionalistično naravnanega množičnosporočanjskega diskurza. Ugotavlja, da aferaški diskurz oz. kvazipreiskovalno novinarstvo primarno ni zavezano normi resničnosti, ampak je bistvena medijska objava - ne glede na resničnost in verodostojnost informacij. Novinar premalo preverja informacije, kar se kaže v odsotnosti njegovih vprašanj, in nekritično sprejema "preiskave", ki jih namesto njega opravljajo drugi subjekti. Sporočanje pogosto ni ali je pomanjkljivo utemeljeno: manjkajo dokazi, viri informacij v besedilu niso prepoznavni, novinar se sklicuje na govorice. Besedilo je neuravnoteženo, pogosto predstavlja le "eno stran" zgodbe, uporablja vire, ki jo potrjujejo, viri informacij bodisi niso navedeni ali pa so zgolj uradni viri. Domnevne akterje svojih zgodb pogosto prikazuje kot storilce oziroma krivce. Temelji na odkriti pristranskosti, vnaprejšnjih prepričanjih, pričakovanjih in stereotipih, v skladu s katerimi izbira ali "ustvarja" dokaze, ki postanejo ogrodje njegovega konstrukta. Ugotovitve avtorica ponazarja z analizo serije prispevkov o "mafijskem uvozu zdravil" iz Nedeljskega dnevnika, ki se kažejo kot poskus preiskovalnega novinarstva.

• Language: Slovenian
• Keywords: informacijski viri
• Work type: Not categorized
• Typology: 1.01 - Original Scientific Article
• Organization: FDV - Faculty of Social Sciences
• Year: 2003
• Number of pages: Str. 207-228
• Numbering: Let. 40, št. 2
• PID: 20.500.12556/RUL-22326
• UDC: 070
• ISSN on article: 0040-3598
• COBISS.SI-ID: 22000989
• Publication date in RUL: 11.07.2014

POLER KOVAČIČ, Melita, 2003, Preiskovalno novinarstvo, ustvarjanje škandalov in novinarska etika. Teorija in praksa : revija za družbena vprašanja [online]. 2003. Vol. 40, no. 2, p. 207–228. [Accessed 14 April 2025]. Retrieved from: http://dk.fdv.uni-lj.si/db/pdfs/tip20032poler_kovacic.pdf

Record is a part of a journal

• Title: Teorija in praksa : revija za družbena vprašanja
• Shortened title: Teor. praksa
• Publisher: Fakulteta za družbene vede
• ISSN: 0040-3598
• COBISS.SI-ID: 763652

Secondary language

• Language: English

Abstract

The author deals with the question how to distinguish between credible investigative reporting and sensationalistically oriented mass communication discourse. She finds out that what matters at affaire discourse or quasi-investigative reporting is in fact not the norm of truth but the fact ofmedia publication - irrespective of truth and credibility of information. A journalist does not verify information well enough, as we can see in a lack ofhis/her questions and in an uncritical acceptance of "investigation", carried out by other subjects instead of the journalist himself/herself. Reporting often lacks arguments or is not well argued: there is lack of evidence; sources of information in the text are not transparent; the journalist refers to rumors. The text is unbalanced, often it presents only "one part" of the story, based on the sources confirming it; sources of information are not stated or there are only official sources. The supposed agents are usually presented as perpetrators or guilty persons. The text is based on clear bias, a priori conviction, expectations and stereotypes as a basis for choosing or "creating" evidence, which become an instrument of its construct. The arguments in the article are illustrated by analysis of series of articles on "mafia import of medicaments" published in "Nedeljski dnevnik" as a case of an attempt of investigative reporting.