Experience in qualitative research of institute of journalism deinstitutionalization

Abstract

This article describes the experience of qualitative social research of some aspects of the phenomenon of Russian journalism deinstitutionalization — which expresses features of institutional order demonopolization, deconstruction and decentralization. Unlike a number of related formal terms (for example, new media or alternative media), journalism deinstitutionalization points meaningfully to the whole complex of objective and subjective counter-institutional tendencies in the social institution of journalism. Journalism deinstitutionalization has two dimensions: internal and external. External deinstitutionalization occurs, under the influence of modern communication technologies, the so-called creative audience, much of which produces and distributes socially meaningful content by itself that creates a situation of “chaos paradigm” in communications. It demonopolizes expert (professional) journalistic knowledge and allows it to engage in a wide range of “amateurs”. The internal deinstitutionalization is a personal (hidden or open) protest of professional journalist against institutional coercion of journalistic organization, it’s a specific form of professional ethics, the desire to follow a professional mission and being guided by the merits of the journalistic case, even if it runs counter to the dominant institutional logic. The article gives the results of in-depth interviews with an expert and an non-expert groups of respondents. The author poses several research questions suitable for research, including: is there a process of journalism deinstitutionalization? What is it’s expression? What are the trends in modern journalism’s isolated representatives of the journalistic sphere (professional journalists and bloggers) and information consumers? Also raised is the question of trust in modern media sources. The conclusion is that there are signs of total distrust in media resources in a professional environment and environment of information consumers. Refs 19.