Mezclas asfálticas calientes

the newsroom, whether the division between the business department and the newsroom exists is examined. Kovach and Rosenstiel (2001) argue that the idea that ‘journalists should be protected by a wall between business and news is one myth’ (p.6). Although Barnhurst and Nerone (2009) criticise the fact that United States textbooks are against the ‘“wall of separation” between the counting room and the newsroom’ (p.21), empirical research in Taiwan shows that the wall between has collapsed. In fact, when news is paid-for, the negotiation between each department becomes crucial (Liu 2011:105). The business department might sometimes discuss how to make paid-for news with the newsroom (Liu 2011:101). Furthermore, research also suggests that even if paid-for news has become part of news production in Taiwan, the newsroom should take the leading role and the business department or advertisers should not interfere with the nature of news production (Chen 2005:237).

However, it is argued that the business department does affect paid-for news production, and the ‘wall of separation’ is influenced. Nevertheless, the business department

sometimes might become ‘the wall’ to protect journalists from external forces. For example, participant Yen Lee treats the business department as ‘a protecting wall’ that takes the responsibility for negotiating with the government and takes the risk away from journalists. She described:

When I worked at ATV, I did not need to take the responsibility for contacting the government because the business department did this and took the

responsibility. However, at DTV, I myself contacted the government; if you insist on professionalism, you might struggle (Yen Lee, STV, 8 years’ experience, female).

Yen Lee now works at STV and she described her previous work experience at ATV and DTV. From her perspective, the business department might be ‘a separation wall’

that is ‘responsible for negotiation’. It was not only Yen Lee who described the business department as ‘a protecting wall’. Feng Lin, who works at QTV, also said: ‘I did not contact the government directly. Under the protection of the business department, I have autonomy’. Feng Lin’s description enables us to understand that the responsibility of the business department might be not only to ‘mediate’, but also to ‘protect’ journalists from the direct interference of the government. More specifically, in order to

successfully produce paid-for news, journalists do not see the business department as interfering; but they see it as sharing the responsibility.

Interestingly, this is explained by the idea of Lemke (2012), and Miller and Rose (2008). With the concepts of ‘self-determination’ and ‘self-fulfilment’ (Lemke 2012: 87),

employers are able to ‘get the most out of their employees’ in order to achieve ‘efficiency’ (Miller and Rose 2008:49-50). If, as seen above, journalists themselves decide to release their individual autonomy to the business department in order to successfully produce paid-for news, this illustrates the reason why the mediation of the business department is treated by journalists as ‘taking the responsibility’ and

‘protecting journalists’ autonomy’. Under the influence of neoliberalism, the

interference of the business department might be treated as being responsible in order to achieve ‘efficiency’. Furthermore, the business department takes the responsibility not only for negotiating, but also for ‘taking money’, which might not be appropriate role for the newsroom. For example, participant Shuyu Lin said:

Because of the structure of television stations, the business department and the newsroom are different departments. If the newsroom takes money, then it is evil; however, the business department is responsible for acquring money…So for a television station, it is possible to acquire money and criticise it at the

same time. Ideally, the newsroom should not be influenced (Shuyu Lin, KTV, 21years’ experience, female).

Shuyu Lin’s narrative allows us to understand that due to the notion of the newsroom taking money as ‘evil’, the business department takes over the so-called ‘evil’ part from the newsroom. Business departments are mainly in charge of negotiating ‘money’.

If, as discussed above, the business department shares the responsibility and takes the risk of the newsroom, it is argued that the ‘wall of separation’ might be ‘fluid’.

Whenever the business department negotiates with newsroom, the ‘wall of separation’ does not exist. Nevertheless, whenever the business department takes the responsibility for ‘protecting journalists’ autonomy’ and the risk of taking over the ‘evil’, the business department becomes the ‘wall of separation’ in negotiating the government. More specifically, it is suggested that the separation wall between the business department and the newsroom is ‘fluid’ in accordance with, as Miller and Rose (2008:49-51) stress, how to achieve ‘efficiency’.

If, as seen above, the internal factors, the business department and the newsroom, mostly cooperate with each other, it is further argued that ‘a fluid wall’ between them might also refer to fluid autonomy. As Berger (2000) argues, ‘journalism as a practice has a (fluid) degree of autonomy’ (p.83). Furthermore, the ‘wall’ between the business department and the newsroom as a‘myth’ (Kovach and Rosenstiel 2001:6) - ‘wall of separation’ (Barnhurst and Nerone 2009: 21) might be simplistic. It should be

deconstructed and addressed the complexity (Kelsey 2013: 85). It is argued that the wall between the business department and the newsroom is ‘a fluid wall’. More specifically, it is argued that journalists’ autonomy is not absolute but ‘fluid’ between the business

department and the newsroom in accordance with how to achieve ‘efficiency’. It is suggested that in order to achieve ‘efficiency’, both the internal factors, the business department and the newsroom, take on the responsibility and risk for producing governmental paid-for news.