If you want to read the PDF, try requesting it from the authors.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

... In the case of an assumed code-breach, readers or viewers can file a complaint. It is also possible that a single media organization regulates the processes only for its own organization, something which is normally done by public service broadcasters (for this aspect see Schade and Künzler, 2006). Press and media councils are self-regulated in all cases with the exception of Denmark, and they are often not only responsible for the press but also for radio, television, and the contents distributed on the Internet (Sonninen and Laitila, 1995;Appelquist-Schmidlechner, 2001). ...
Full-text available
The necessity of the state’s involvement in self-regulation is a controversial issue in the debate about Governance. As Puppis (earlier in this section) mentioned, the role of the state varies across the six domains of media governance, but there are hardly any empirical studies about the question whether a state’s involvement is a key success factor for self350 The state as a key success factor for Self-Regulation? regulation. By focusing on three domains of media regulation, namely processes, content, and organizations, some answers will be formulated. What follows is a secondary analysis of two empirical studies, comparing forms of self- and co-regulation in the broadcasting sector in different western states (Jarren et al., 2002; Puppis et al., 2004). The cases were selected so as to include as broad a spectrum of different forms of self-regulation (SR) and co-regulation (CR) as possible. Document analysis and expert interviews were chosen as research methods. The advantages of these two qualitative methods are their openness and flexibility, which allow discovering new aspects not taken into consideration in existing theories, the possibility to take into account a small number of cases, and their ability to make a step in the direction of theorybuilding (Deacon et al., 1999). The interviewees were professionals from self-regulatory organizations, broadcasting companies, and representatives from regulatory agencies, ministries and researchers. Laws, codes of practice, and secondary literature about the organizations under study were analyzed. The case studies were updated by the author in 2006. The following presentation of some of the research results is conducted by comparing four dimensions of forms of co- and self-regulation: The types of media co- and self-regulation are responsible for, the role of the state, the rationales for implementing these forms of governance, and the assessment of self- and co-regulation by the interviewees.
Vor etwa 20 Jahren begann in der Fachöffentlichkeit die Diskussion über die Qualität im Journalismus. Inzwischen ist aus der anfänglich eher sporadischen wissenschaftlichen Beschäftigung mit der journalistischen Qualität ein eigener Forschungszweig in der Kommunikationswissenschaft geworden. In diesem Beitrag werden die wichtigsten theoretischen Perspektiven dargestellt und zu einem übergreifenden Konzept gebündelt, das die verschiedenen Herangehensweisen und Qualitätskriterien umfasst. Weiter werden theoretische Probleme diskutiert, ein kurzer überblick über die empirische Forschung gegeben und die Umsetzung in der Praxis in Form der Qualitätssicherung thematisiert. Abschließend werden Forschungslücken und Desiderata besprochen.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.