Online discussion threads as promotors of citizen democracy: Current opportunities and challenges for small- and medium-sized media organisations in Finland
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Abbott, J. Y. (2017). Tensions in the scholarship on participatory journalism and citizen journalism. Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(3–4), 278–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1350927AbbottJ. Y.2017Tensions in the scholarship on participatory journalism and citizen journalismAnnals of the International Communication Association413–4278297https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1350927Search in Google Scholar
Ahva, L. (2013). Public journalism and professional reflexivity. Journalism, 14(6), 790–806. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884912455895AhvaL.2013Public journalism and professional reflexivityJournalism146790806https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884912455895Search in Google Scholar
Backholm, K., Hägglund, S., Rautanen, K., & Wingren, M. (2022). What drives news choices and trust in journalism of young people? In V. J. E. Manninen, M. K. Niemi, & A. Ridge-Newman (Eds.), Futures of journalism: Technology-stimulated evolution in the audience-news media relationship (pp. 313–328). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95073-6_20BackholmK.HägglundS.RautanenK.WingrenM.2022What drives news choices and trust in journalism of young people?InManninenV. J. E.NiemiM. K.Ridge-NewmanA.(Eds.),Futures of journalism: Technology-stimulated evolution in the audience-news media relationship313328Palgrave Macmillanhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95073-6_20Search in Google Scholar
Bergström, A., & Wadbring, I. (2015). Beneficial yet crappy: Journalists and audiences on obstacles and opportunities in reader comments. European Journal of Communication, 30(2), 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323114559378BergströmA.WadbringI.2015Beneficial yet crappy: Journalists and audiences on obstacles and opportunities in reader commentsEuropean Journal of Communication302137151https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323114559378Search in Google Scholar
Boberg, S., Schatto-Eckrodt, T., Frischlich, L., & Quandt, T. (2018). The moral gatekeeper? Moderation and deletion of user-generated content in a leading news forum. Media and Communication, 6(4), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1493BobergS.Schatto-EckrodtT.FrischlichL.QuandtT.2018The moral gatekeeper? Moderation and deletion of user-generated content in a leading news forumMedia and Communication645869https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1493Search in Google Scholar
Borger, M., van Hoof, A., Costera Meijer, I., & Sanders, J. (2013). Constructing participatory journalism as a scholarly object: A genealogical analysis. Digital Journalism, 1(1), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2012.740267BorgerM.van HoofA.Costera MeijerI.SandersJ.2013Constructing participatory journalism as a scholarly object: A genealogical analysisDigital Journalism11117134https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2012.740267Search in Google Scholar
Bro, P., & Wallberg, F. (2015). Gatekeeping in a digital era: Principles, practices and technological platforms. Journalism Practice, 9(1), 92–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2014.928468BroP.WallbergF.2015Gatekeeping in a digital era: Principles, practices and technological platformsJournalism Practice9192105https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2014.928468Search in Google Scholar
Canter, L. (2013). The misconception of online comment threads: Content and control on local newspaper websites. Journalism Practice, 7(5), 604–619. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2012.740172CanterL.2013The misconception of online comment threads: Content and control on local newspaper websitesJournalism Practice75604619https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2012.740172Search in Google Scholar
Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6(1), 307–326. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.6.121901.085538ChambersS.2003Deliberative democratic theoryAnnual Review of Political Science61307326https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.6.121901.085538Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (2002). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In D. Matravers, & J. E. Pike (Eds.), Debates in contemporary political philosophy (pp. 342–360). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203986820CohenJ.2002Deliberation and democratic legitimacyInMatraversD.PikeJ. E.(Eds.),Debates in contemporary political philosophy342360Routledgehttps://doi.org/10.4324/9780203986820Search in Google Scholar
Council for Mass Media in Finland. (2011, September 5). Journalistic guidelines. https://jsn.fi/en/council-for-mass-media/Council for Mass Media in Finland2011September5Journalistic guidelineshttps://jsn.fi/en/council-for-mass-media/Search in Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critics. Yale University Press.DahlR. A.1989Democracy and its criticsYale University PressSearch in Google Scholar
Deuze, M., Bruns, A., & Neuberger, C. (2007). Preparing for an age of participatory news. Journalism Practice, 1(3), 322–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780701504864DeuzeM.BrunsA.NeubergerC.2007Preparing for an age of participatory newsJournalism Practice13322338https://doi.org/10.1080/17512780701504864Search in Google Scholar
European Commission. (2022, July 28). Digital economy and society index (DESI) 2022: Finland. https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/redirection/document/88700European Commission2022July28Digital economy and society index (DESI) 2022: Finlandhttps://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/redirection/document/88700Search in Google Scholar
Finnish Broadcasting Company. (n.d.). Guidelines for discussion. https://yle.fi/aihe/s/discussion-policyFinnish Broadcasting Company(n.d.)Guidelines for discussionhttps://yle.fi/aihe/s/discussion-policySearch in Google Scholar
Fishkin, J. S. (2011). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199604432.001.0001FishkinJ. S.2011When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultationOxford University Presshttps://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:osobl/9780199604432.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (2004). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton University Press.GutmannA.ThompsonD. F.2004Why deliberative democracy?Princeton University PressSearch in Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1986). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Wiley.HabermasJ.1986The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society1WileySearch in Google Scholar
Heinonen, A. (2011). The journalist’s relationship with users: New dimensions to conventional roles. In J. B. Singer, D. Domingo, A. Heinonen, A. Hermida, S. Paulussen, T. Quandt, Z. Reich, & M. Vujnovic (Eds.), Participatory journalism: Guarding open gates at online newspapers (pp. 34–55). Wiley-Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747HeinonenA.2011The journalist’s relationship with users: New dimensions to conventional rolesInSingerJ. B.DomingoD.HeinonenA.HermidaA.PaulussenS.QuandtT.ReichZ.VujnovicM.(Eds.),Participatory journalism: Guarding open gates at online newspapers3455Wiley-Blackwellhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747Search in Google Scholar
Kohvakka, R., & Saarenmaa, K. (2022, March 3). Verkkomedian seuraaminen yleistyi erityisesti pandemian alussa – toisena vuotena muutokset pienempiä [Following digital media became common especially in the beginning of the pandemic – smaller changes in the second year]. Statistics Finland. https://www.stat.fi/tietotrendit/artikkelit/2022/verkkomedian-seuraaminen-yleistyi-erityisesti-pandemian-alussa-toisena-vuotena-muutokset-pienempia/KohvakkaR.SaarenmaaK.2022March3Verkkomedian seuraaminen yleistyi erityisesti pandemian alussa – toisena vuotena muutokset pienempiä [Following digital media became common especially in the beginning of the pandemic – smaller changes in the second year]Statistics Finlandhttps://www.stat.fi/tietotrendit/artikkelit/2022/verkkomedian-seuraaminen-yleistyi-erityisesti-pandemian-alussa-toisena-vuotena-muutokset-pienempia/Search in Google Scholar
Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2021). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect (4th ed.). Random House.KovachB.RosenstielT.2021The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect4th ed.Random HouseSearch in Google Scholar
Kreiss, D., & Brennen, J. (2016). Normative models of digital journalism. In T. Witschge, C. W. Anderson, D. Domingo, & A. Hermida (Eds.), The Sage handbook of digital journalism (pp. 299–314). Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957909KreissD.BrennenJ.2016Normative models of digital journalismInWitschgeT.AndersonC. W.DomingoD.HermidaA.(Eds.),The Sage handbook of digital journalism299314Sagehttps://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957909Search in Google Scholar
Liu, J., & McLeod, D. M. (2021). Pathways to news commenting and the removal of the comment system on news websites. Journalism, 22(4), 867–881. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919849954LiuJ.McLeodD. M.2021Pathways to news commenting and the removal of the comment system on news websitesJournalism224867881https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919849954Search in Google Scholar
MacDonald, J. B., Saliba, A. J., Hodgins, G., & Ovington, L.A. (2016). Burnout in journalists: A systematic literature review. Burnout Research, 3(2), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2016.03.001MacDonaldJ. B.SalibaA. J.HodginsG.OvingtonL.A.2016Burnout in journalists: A systematic literature reviewBurnout Research323444https://doi.org/10.1016/j.burn.2016.03.001Search in Google Scholar
Marchionni, D. M. (2013). Journalism-as-a-conversation: A concept explication. Communication Theory, 23(2), 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12007MarchionniD. M.2013Journalism-as-a-conversation: A concept explicationCommunication Theory232131147https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12007Search in Google Scholar
Masullo, G. M., Riedl, M. J., & Huang, Q. E. (2022). Engagement moderation: What journalists should say to improve online discussions. Journalism Practice, 16(4), 738–754. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1808858MasulloG. M.RiedlM. J.HuangQ. E.2022Engagement moderation: What journalists should say to improve online discussionsJournalism Practice164738754https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1808858Search in Google Scholar
Masullo Chen, G., & Pain, P. (2017). Normalizing online comments. Journalism Practice, 11(7), 876–892. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1205954Masullo ChenG.PainP.2017Normalizing online commentsJournalism Practice117876892https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1205954Search in Google Scholar
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldanaJ.2019Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook4th ed.SageSearch in Google Scholar
Morrison, J. (2017). Finishing the “unfinished” story: Online newspaper discussion threads as journalistic texts. Digital Journalism, 5(2), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1165129MorrisonJ.2017Finishing the “unfinished” story: Online newspaper discussion threads as journalistic textsDigital Journalism52213232https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2016.1165129Search in Google Scholar
Nelson, M. N., Ksiazek, T. B., & Springer, N. (2021). Killing the comments: Why do news organizations remove user commentary functions? Journalism and Media, 2(4), 572–583. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia2040034NelsonM. N.KsiazekT. B.SpringerN.2021Killing the comments: Why do news organizations remove user commentary functions?Journalism and Media24572583https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia2040034Search in Google Scholar
Newman, N. (2022). Executive summary and key findings. In N. Newman, R. Fletcher, C. T. Robertson, K. Eddy, & R. K. Nielsen (Eds.), Reuters Institute digital news report 2022 (pp. 9–32). Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2022NewmanN.2022Executive summary and key findingsInNewmanN.FletcherR.RobertsonC. T.EddyK.NielsenR. K.(Eds.),Reuters Institute digital news report 2022932Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxfordhttps://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2022Search in Google Scholar
Nip, J. Y. (2006). Exploring the second phase of public journalism. Journalism Studies, 7(2), 212–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500533528NipJ. Y.2006Exploring the second phase of public journalismJournalism Studies72212236https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500533528Search in Google Scholar
Park, S., & Kim, Y. (2022). A metaverse: Taxonomy, components, applications, and open challenges. IEEE Access, 10, 4209–4251. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3140175ParkS.KimY.2022A metaverse: Taxonomy, components, applications, and open challengesIEEE Access1042094251https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3140175Search in Google Scholar
Peters, C., & Witschge. T. (2015). From grand narratives of democracy to small expectations of participation. Journalism Practice, 9(1), 19–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2014.928455PetersC.WitschgeT.2015From grand narratives of democracy to small expectations of participationJournalism Practice911934https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2014.928455Search in Google Scholar
Quandt, T. (2018). Dark participation. Media and Communication, 6(4), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1519QuandtT.2018Dark participationMedia and Communication643648https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v6i4.1519Search in Google Scholar
Reporters Without Borders. (n.d.). Finland. https://rsf.org/en/country/finlandReporters Without Borders(n.d.)Finlandhttps://rsf.org/en/country/finlandSearch in Google Scholar
Robinson, S. (2010). Traditionalists vs. convergers: Textual privilege, boundary work, and the journalist–audience relationship in the commenting policies of online news sites. Convergence, 16(1), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856509347719RobinsonS.2010Traditionalists vs. convergers: Textual privilege, boundary work, and the journalist–audience relationship in the commenting policies of online news sitesConvergence161125143https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856509347719Search in Google Scholar
Salonen, M., & Laaksonen, S. (2023). Post-publication gatekeeping practices. Exploring conversational and visual gatekeeping on Finnish newspapers’ Instagram accounts. Nordicom Review, 44(2), 253–278. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2023-0014SalonenM.LaaksonenS.2023Post-publication gatekeeping practices. Exploring conversational and visual gatekeeping on Finnish newspapers’ Instagram accountsNordicom Review442253278https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2023-0014Search in Google Scholar
Salonen, M., Olbertz-Siitonen M., Uskali, T., & Laaksonen, S. (2023). Conversational gatekeeping – Social interactional practices of post-publication gatekeeping on newspapers’ Facebook pages. Journalism Practice, 17(9), 2053–2077. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2022.2034520SalonenM.Olbertz-SiitonenM.UskaliT.LaaksonenS.2023Conversational gatekeeping – Social interactional practices of post-publication gatekeeping on newspapers’ Facebook pagesJournalism Practice17920532077https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2022.2034520Search in Google Scholar
Santana, A. D. (2011). Online readers’ comments represent new opinion pipeline. Newspaper Research Journal, 32(3), 66–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/073953291103200306SantanaA. D.2011Online readers’ comments represent new opinion pipelineNewspaper Research Journal3236681https://doi.org/10.1177/073953291103200306Search in Google Scholar
Schultz, T. (1999). Interactive options in online journalism: A content analysis of 100 U.S. newspapers. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 5(1), JCMC513. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00331.xSchultzT.1999Interactive options in online journalism: A content analysis of 100 U.S. newspapersJournal of Computer-Mediated Communication51JCMC513https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00331.xSearch in Google Scholar
Singer, J. B., & Ashman, I. (2009). “Comment is free, but facts are sacred”: User-generated content and ethical constructs at the Guardian. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 24(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/08900520802644345SingerJ. B.AshmanI.2009“Comment is free, but facts are sacred”: User-generated content and ethical constructs at the GuardianJournal of Mass Media Ethics241321https://doi.org/10.1080/08900520802644345Search in Google Scholar
Strandberg, K., Himmelroos, S., & Grönlund, K. (2019). Do discussions in like-minded groups necessarily lead to more extreme opinions? Deliberative democracy and group polarization. International Political Science Review, 40(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512117692136StrandbergK.HimmelroosS.GrönlundK.2019Do discussions in like-minded groups necessarily lead to more extreme opinions? Deliberative democracy and group polarizationInternational Political Science Review4014157https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512117692136Search in Google Scholar
Stroud, N. J., Scacco, J. M., Muddiman, A., & Curry, A. L. (2015). Changing deliberative norms on news organizations’ Facebook sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 188–203. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12104StroudN. J.ScaccoJ. M.MuddimanA.CurryA. L.2015Changing deliberative norms on news organizations’ Facebook sitesJournal of Computer-Mediated Communication202188203https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12104Search in Google Scholar
Strömbäck, J. (2005). In search of a standard: Four models of democracy and their normative implications for journalism. Journalism Studies, 6(3), 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500131950StrömbäckJ.2005In search of a standard: Four models of democracy and their normative implications for journalismJournalism Studies63331345https://doi.org/10.1080/14616700500131950Search in Google Scholar
Syvertsen, T., Enli, G., Mjøs, O. J., & Moe, H. (2014). The media welfare state: Nordic media in the digital era. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv65swsgSyvertsenT.EnliG.MjøsO. J.MoeH.2014The media welfare state: Nordic media in the digital eraUniversity of Michigan Presshttps://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv65swsgSearch in Google Scholar
Thomas, R. J. (2022). The welcome persistence of “we write, you read” journalism. In V. J. E. Manninen, M. K. Niemi, & A. Ridge-Newman (Eds.), Futures of journalism: Technology-stimulated evolution in the audience-news media relationship (pp. 143–158). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95073-6_10ThomasR. J.2022The welcome persistence of “we write, you read” journalismInManninenV. J. E.NiemiM. K.Ridge-NewmanA.(Eds.),Futures of journalism: Technology-stimulated evolution in the audience-news media relationship143158Palgrave Macmillanhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95073-6_10Search in Google Scholar
Wolfgang, J. D. (2016). Pursuing the ideal: How news website commenting policies structure public discourse. Digital Journalism, 4(6), 764–783. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2015.1090882WolfgangJ. D.2016Pursuing the ideal: How news website commenting policies structure public discourseDigital Journalism46764783https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2015.1090882Search in Google Scholar
Wolfgang, J. D., McConnell, S., & Blackburn, H. (2020). Commenters as a threat to journalism? How comment moderators perceive the role of the audience. Digital Journalism, 8(7), 925–944. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1802319WolfgangJ. D.McConnellS.BlackburnH.2020Commenters as a threat to journalism? How comment moderators perceive the role of the audienceDigital Journalism87925944https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1802319Search in Google Scholar
Zamith, R., & Lewis, S. C. (2014). From public spaces to public sphere: Rethinking systems for reader comments on online news sites. Digital Journalism, 2(4), 558–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.882066ZamithR.LewisS. C.2014From public spaces to public sphere: Rethinking systems for reader comments on online news sitesDigital Journalism24558574https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.882066Search in Google Scholar
Ziegele, M., & Jost, P. B. (2020). Not funny? The effects of factual versus sarcastic journalistic responses to uncivil user comments. Communication Research, 47(6), 891–920. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216671854ZiegeleM.JostP. B.2020Not funny? The effects of factual versus sarcastic journalistic responses to uncivil user commentsCommunication Research476891920https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216671854Search in Google Scholar