This section contextualises and explores journalistic professionalism within China’s context in reference to existing concepts on journalistic professionalism and normative claims. As Drechsel (2000) argues, journalistic professionalism, throughout its historical development, has been understood as “essential for quality, legitimacy, credibility, and respect” of journalists (2000: p.181). In ‘The Handbook of Journalism Studies’, Schudson and Anderson (2009) examine two major strands of scholarship in the field of journalism studies. The first focuses on journalism being “self-evident” and not dependent on its status in a hierarchy of occupations, and the second focuses on the character of journalistic knowledge (2009: p.89-98). These strands are both problematic as Schudson and Anderson (2009) argue:
“While the first strand suffers from its […] adoption of the “trait perspective” on the professions, the second strand confuses journalistic objectivity with journalistic professionalism per se” (Schudson & Anderson, 2009:p.88-9).
Objectivity is seen as an important professional norm within journalism (Soloski, 1989).
Practiced by journalists, objectivity requires news workers to “seek out the facts and report them as fairly and in as balanced a way as possible” (Soloski, 1989: p.213).
Arguably, objectivity allows news workers to produce work that best reflects elements of the two strands summarised above (Schudson & Anderson, 2009: p.99). However, it needs to be noted that objectivity is not a definitive professional norm in many non-American media systems where professionalism exists (Hallin and Mancini, 2004), such as, in the Chinese media being explored in this study.
32
Josephi (2009: p.51) argues that the ideology of objectivity can be a cover for loyalty, and is found in a majority of the world’s nations, including in China where the ideology of loyaltyaccommodates a form of investigative reporting. Thus, China’s political ideology should be considered when studying Chinese journalism. McNair (2009: p.240) argues that the authoritarian approach underpins the practice of political journalism in socialist states such as China, where journalism is “institutionally part of the ideological apparatus of the state”. Schudson and Anderson (2009: p.94) also indicate that the social function of the objectivity norm in American journalism may be different to that in Chinese journalism, as journalists in China work with norms other than objectivity. There is a political demand for journalists to support a dominant ideology “imposed by the ruling political faction” (McNair, 2009: p.241). Nevertheless, the Internet and online media are perceived to be a challenge to this dominant ideology, as Kalathil and Boas (2010) conclude from their research that the Internet has helped China, along with other countries such as Cuba and Singapore, to transform authoritarianism and pursue the “objective of building democracy and free media” (McNair, 2009, p.241; Kalathil & Boas, 2010).
It has been argued that the relevance of journalistic professionalism in China’s context is ambiguous (Lee, 1994:p9) The transformation of Chinese news media is taking place alongside political reformation (Zhao, 2000; Huters, 2003). Before the transformation that started in the late 1980s, Chinese media was integrated within the structure of communist politics (Lin, 1970). It has been argued that the media’s transformation and marketisation have eroded the Party-press ideology, and “potentially elevate the canons of journalistic professionalism, such as objectivity and press freedom” (Pan & Chan,
33
2003:p.653). In this period, Chinese journalists who were pressed to follow both the party line and ‘bottom line’ (Zhao, 1998) improvised ways of practicing journalism to “stay afloat in the tide of commercialization and political uncertainty” (Lo, Chan & Pan, 2005:
p.156). Journalistic professionalisation has been influenced by this transformation in China; although the Chinese authorities tried to maintain continued control over news media, the media organisations have shifted towards marketization:
“The transitional nature of China has rendered journalism paradigms in a state of flux, with the party ideals of journalism intertwined with professionalism imported primarily from outside China and blatant commercialism” (Lo, Chan & Pan, 2005:p.156).
Although journalistic professionalism in China is arguably fragmented and inconsistent (Chan, Lee & Pan, 2006), the transformation has assisted its development amongst Chinese news workers. Tong and Sparks (2009) indicate that Chinese journalists conceive of themselves as less dependent on political power and more so as a distinct occupational group with a distinct social function (Tong & Sparks, 2009). This can be seen as “an extension of a […] Chinese tradition of public intellectuals articulating society’s conscience” as well as a reflection of “analogies with western conceptions of journalistic professionalism” (Tong & Sparks, 2009: p.340). This encourages Chinese journalists to act as watchdogs and report corruption and scandals, otherwise considered as contradictory to the interests of the authorities.
In the Chinese case, the marketplace is considered a driving force for news workers to strive for autonomy. Xu et al. (2000) highlight that market consciousness is turning journalism education into a testing ground for the limits of the authorities’ tolerance, as
34
China’s journalism education has been “characterized by gradual movement towards the market without seriously violating traditional normative of propaganda” (Xu et al., 2000:
p.75).
It is also worth noting that news organisations need not devote money and time to establishing training programs for new journalists. This appears to be universal, as Soloski (1998: p.212)indicates that professional journalistic norms of conduct are already established during the journalists’ professional education. With their education and on-the-job professional training combined, news workers come to an understanding of shared professional norms (Soloski, 1998: p.213 cited from Johnstone, et al., 1976: p.65).
Nevertheless, Soloski (1998: p.213) also argues that these shared professional norms do not guarantee a problem-free existence for news organisations, because professionalism provides journalists with freedom and “an independent power base that can be used to thwart heavy-handed interference by management in professional activities of the news staff.”