An unlovable press - conversations with Michael Schudson –
Conference abstract – Frank Harbers
Dissecting objectivity
The development of reporting in Europe
In his eloquent essay ‘Would Journalism Please Hold Still!’ Michael Schudson (2013)
reflects on the current resonance of the appeal of scholars and journalists alike to
reconceptualize journalism in order to safeguard its role as information supplier within
democratic society. Although he sees the value of the endeavor, what he objects to is the
implicit suggestion that prior to the current situation within the media landscape
journalism was a stable discourse with steady professional standards. In his eyes the selfevidence with which the affordances of the objectivity regime are referred to as
‘traditional’ journalism does not do justice to the dynamic nature of journalism history.
This is particularly true with regard to the development of journalism in Europe, which is
too often treated as having a belated professional development in comparison to the rise
of the objectivity regime in America (Chalaby, 1996; Hoyer & Pöttker, 2005). Instead of
this normative and teleological perspective, journalism history in Europe should be
regarded as an ongoing search for a trustworthy professional framework that is typified
by a continuous competition between strongly diverging conceptions of journalism.
For this paper I have therefore ventured into a quantitative content analysis of the
development of reporting in Great Britain, the Netherlands and France between 1880 and
2005. The sample consists of two constructed weeks of three newspapers in each country
in 1885, 1905, 1925, 1965, 1985 and 2005; a total of 105.456 articles. My examination
focuses on the textual characteristics of these dailies in order to tease out the way
journalistic conceptions have developed in this period. This quantitative approach is
complemented with four case studies in different periods, which offer a more detailed
analysis of these textual characteristics. This mixed-methods approach combines a broad
and representative analysis of structural change in journalism with the analytic
complexity and depth necessary for a fruitful historical inquiry.
Based on this large-scale inquiry, I will argue that like in the United States
European journalism experienced a transformation from a reflective form of journalism
to an event-centered journalism practice. Yet, within Europe this development had a more
gradual pace and it took until the second half of the 20th century to move to the center of
everyday journalism practice. Moreover, contrary to the American context, this
development cannot be seen as shorthand for the growing dominance of objectivity as a
professional framework.
Schudson (2001) has suggested that objectivity did not develop a professional
framework as journalism practice in Europe– particularly continental Europe – was
already determined by norms derived from the literary or political domain. My analysis
shows that this outlook on European journalism certainly has its merit as continental
European journalism shows a long-lasting orientation on literary and political discourse.
Yet, this perspective lacks a certain nuance to do justice to the alternative and multiform
ways in which journalism in Europe adopted a professional practice. Objectivity as an
ideal did emerge, but was adapted to the particular national journalism traditions. As a
result the novel event-centered reporting routines were fused to certain elements from the
objectivity regime, while maintaining their orientation on literary or political discourse.
Only after the Second World War did journalists in all three countries adopt the
An unlovable press - conversations with Michael Schudson –
Conference abstract – Frank Harbers
objectivity regime in its entirety and did it grow into the dominant professional
framework in all these countries.