Journalists as targets of hate speech. How German journalists perceive the consequences for themselves and how they cope with it

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Bibliographische Infos

Cover der Ausgabe: SCM Studies in Communication and Media Jahrgang 7 (2018), Heft 4
Open Access Vollzugriff

SCM Studies in Communication and Media

Jahrgang 7 (2018), Heft 4

Autor:innen:
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyrightjahr
2018
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
ISSN-Print
2192-4007

Kapitelinformationen

Open Access Vollzugriff

Jahrgang 7 (2018), Heft 4

Journalists as targets of hate speech. How German journalists perceive the consequences for themselves and how they cope with it

Autor:innen:
ISSN-Print
2192-4007
ISSN-Online
2192-4007
Kapitelvorschau:

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Bard, M., & Sangrey, D. (1986). The crime victim’s book. New York: Brunner/Mazel. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  2. Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037// 1089-2680.5.4.323 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  3. Benight, C. C. (2012). Understanding human adaptation to traumatic stress exposure. Beyond the medical model. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 4, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026245 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  4. Benight, C. C., & Bandura, A. (2004). Social cognitive theory of posttraumatic recovery. The role of perceived self-efficacy. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 1129−1148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2003.08.008 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  5. Binns, A. (2017). Fair game? Journalists’ experiences of online abuse. Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies, 6, 183–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ajms.6.2.183_1 Buchanan, M., & Keats, P. (2011). Coping with traumatic stress in journalism. A critical Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  6. ethnographic study. International Journal of Psychology, 46, 127–135. http://dx.doi. org/10.1080/00207594.2010.532799 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  7. Chen, G. M., & Pain, P. (2017). Normalizing online comments. Journalism Practice, 11, 876–892. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1205954 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  8. Chen, G. M., Pain, P., Chen, V. Y., Mekelburg, M., Springer, N., & Troger, F. (2018). ‘You really have to have a thick skin.’ A cross-cultural perspective on how online harassment influences female journalists. Journalism. Advance online publication. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/1464884918768500 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  9. Davison, W. P. (1983). The third-person effect in communication. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1086/268763 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  10. Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2004). Understanding words that wound. Boulder: Westview Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  11. Domingo, D. (2008). Interactivity in the daily routines of online newsrooms. Dealing with an uncomfortable myth. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 680–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.00415.x Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  12. Erjavec, K., & Kovačič, M. (2012). ‘You don’t understand, this is a new war!’ Analysis of hate speech in news web sites’ comments. Mass Communication and Society, 15, 899– 920. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2011.619679 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  13. European Federation of Journalists (EFJ). (2017). There can be no press freedom where journalists work in fear, end impunity! Retrieved from http://europeanjournalists.org/ blog/2017/10/31/there-can-be-no-press-freedom-where-journalists-work-in-fear-end-impunity/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  14. Fedler, F. (2004). Insiders’ stories. Coping with newsroom stress. An historical perspective. American Journalism, 21, 77–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/08821127.2004.10677596 Fischer, A. H., & Roseman, I. J. (2007). Beat them or ban them: The characteristics and social functions of anger and contempt. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  15. 93, 103–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.1.103 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  16. Flanders, C. E. (2015). Bisexual health. A daily diary analysis of stress and anxiety. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 37, 319–335. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01973533. 2015.1079202 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  17. Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219–239. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/ 2136617 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  18. Freedom House. (2018a). Freedom in the world 2018. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/FH_FITW_Report_2018_Final_SinglePage.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  19. Freedom House. (2018b). Freedom in the world 2018. Germany profile. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2018/germany Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  20. Fries, S. (2018). Hass und Hetze. Bedrohte Journalisten vermissen Solidarität [Hate and agitation. Threatened journalists miss solidarity]. deutschlandfunk.de. Retrieved from https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/hass-und-hetze-bedrohte-journalisten-vermissen-solidaritaet.2907.de.html?dram:article_id=427133 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  21. Frieze, I., Hymer, S., & Greenberg, M. (1987). Describing the crime victim. Psychological reactions to victimization. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 18, 299– 315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.18.4.299 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  22. Frijda, N. H., Kuipers, P., & ter Schure, E. (1989). Relations among emotion, appraisal, and emotional action readiness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 212– 228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.57.2.212 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  23. Gardiner, B., Mansfield, M., Anderson, I., Holder, J., Louter, D., & Ulmanu, M. (2016). The dark side of Guardian comments. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www. theguardian.com/technology/2016/apr/12/the-dark-side-of-guardian-comments Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  24. Hawdon, J., Oksanen, A., & Räsänen, P. (2017). Exposure to online hate in four nations. A cross-national consideration. Deviant Behavior, 38, 254–266. http://dx.doi.org/10.108 0/01639625.2016.1196985 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  25. Hoel, H., Cooper, C. L., & Zapf, D. (2002). Workplace bullying and stress. In P. L. Perrewé & D. C. Ganster (Eds.), Historical and current perspectives on stress and health (pp. 293–333). Oxford: Elsevier. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  26. Hülsen, I. (2018). Misstrauen gegen Medien. „… dass ich ständig belehrt werden, was ich zu denken habe“ [Distrust of the media. „… that I am constantly taught what to think”]. Spiegel Online. Retrieved from http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/journalismuskrise-warum-viele-leser-den-medien-misstrauen-a-1195175.html Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  27. Jandura, O. (2011). Fehler durch Nichtmessen in der Journalismusforschung [Errors due to non-measurement in journalism research]. In O. Jandura, T. Quandt & J. Vogelgesang (Eds.), Methoden der Journalismusforschung [Methods of journalism research] (pp. 189–202). Wiesbaden: VS. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  28. Klein, C. T., & Helweg-Larsen, M. (2002). Perceived control and the optimistic bias. A meta-analytic review. Psychology and Health, 17, 437–446. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 0887044022000004920 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  29. Kobilke, L. (2017). Lügenpresse: Über die Verbreitung und Verwendung eines umstrittenen Begriffs im Onlinenetzwerk von PEGIDA [Lying Press. On the distribution and use of a controversial term in PEGIDA’s online network]. Unpublished Master Thesis: LMU Munich. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  30. Kühne, R., Weber, P., & Sommer, K. (2015). Beyond cognitive framing processes: anger mediates the effects of responsibility framing on the preference for punitive measures: beyond cognitive framing processes. Journal of Communication, 65, 259–279. https:// doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12151 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  31. Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press. Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  32. Leets, L. (2002). Experiencing hate speech. Perceptions and responses to anti-Semitism and antigay speech. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 341–361. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/15404560.00264 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  33. Lilienthal, V., & Neverla, I. (Eds). (2017). Lügenpresse – Anatomie eines politischen Kampfbegriffs [Lying Press – Anatomy of a political battle term]. Köln: Kiepenheuer & Witsch. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  34. Löfgren Nilsson, M., & Örnebring, H. (2016). Journalism under threat. Intimidation and harassment of Swedish journalists. Journalism Practice, 10, 880–890. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2016.1164614 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  35. Luszczynska, A., Benight, C. C., & Cieslak, R. (2009). Self-efficacy and health-related outcomes of collective trauma. A systematic review. European Psychologist, 14, 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.14.1.51 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  36. Matsuda, M. J. (1989). Public response to racist speech. Considering the victim’s story. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  37. Michigan Law Review, 87, 2320–2381. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1289306 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  38. Nielsen, L. B. (2002). Subtle, pervasive, harmful. Racist and sexist remarks in public as hate speech. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 265–280. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/15404560.00260 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  39. Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2012). Outcomes of exposure to workplace bullying. A meta-analytic review. Work & Stress, 26, 309–332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267837 3.2012.734709 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  40. Norris, F. H., & Kaniasty, K. (1996). Received and perceived social support in times of stress. A test of the social support deterioration deterrence model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 498–511. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.3.498 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  41. Novak, R. J., & Davidson, S. (2013). Journalists reporting on hazardous events. Constructing protective factors within the professional role. Traumatology, 19, 313–322. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1177/1534765613481854 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  42. Perloff, R. M. (2009). Mass media, social perception, and the third-person effect. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media effects. Advances in theory and research (pp. 252– 268). New York: Routledge. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  43. Preuß, M., Tetzlaff, F., & Zick, A. (2017). “Publizieren wird zur Mutprobe.” Studie zur Wahrnehmung von und Erfahrung mit Angriffen unter Journalist_innen [“Publishing becomes a test of courage.” Study on the perception and experience of attacks among journalists]. Retrieved from https://mediendienst-integration.de/fileadmin/Dateien/ Studie-hatespeech.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  44. Prochazka, F., Weber, P., & Schweiger, W. (2016). Effects of incivility and reasoning in user comments on perceived journalism quality. Journalism Studies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1161497 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  45. Reporter ohne Grenzen (Reporters without Borders, RwB). (2016). Rangliste der Pressefreiheit 2017. Nahaufnahme Deutschland [Ranking of the Freedom of the Press 2017. Close-up Germany]. Retrieved from https://www.reporter-ohne-grenzen.de/uploads/ tx_lfnews/media/ROG-Nahaufnahme_Deutschland_2017_03.pdf Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  46. Roseman, I. J. (2001). A model of appraisal in the emotion system. Integrating research, theory, and applications. In K. R. Scherer, A. Schorr, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (pp. 68–91). Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  47. Scherer, K. R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44, 695–729. https://doi.org/10.1177/0539018405058216 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  48. 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, 3–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08900520802644345 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  49. Smith, A. J., Felix, E. D., Benight, C. C., & Jones, R. T. (2017). Protective factors, coping appraisals, and social barriers predict mental health following community violence. A prospective test of social cognitive theory. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 30, 245–253. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22197 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  50. Springer, N., & Kümpel, A. S. (2018). User-generated (dis)content. Eine Literatursynopse zur Nutzung der Kommentarfunktion auf Online-Nachrichtenseiten [User-generated (dis)content. A literary synopsis for the use of commentary functions on online news pages]. In C. Nuernbergk & C. Neuberger (Eds.), Journalismus im Internet: Profession – Partizipation – Technisierung [Journalism on the Internet: Profession – participation – technology] (pp. 241–271). Wiesbaden: VS. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  51. Steindl, N., Lauerer, C., & Hanitzsch, T. (2017). Journalismus in Deutschland. Aktuelle Befunde zu Kontinuität und Wandel im deutschen Journalismus [Journalism in Germany. Current findings on continuity and change in German journalism]. Publizistik, 62, 401–423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11616-017-0378-9 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  52. Tokunaga, R. S. (2010). Following you home from school. A critical review and synthesis of research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 277– 287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  53. Torres, L., & Ong, A. D. (2010). A daily diary investigation of Latino ethnic identity, discrimination, and depression. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16, 561–568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020652 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  54. Weischenberg, S., Malik, M., & Scholl, A. (2006). Die Souffleure der Mediengesellschaft: Report über die Journalisten in Deutschland [The prompters of media society: A report on journalists in Germany]. Germany: UVK. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  55. Worlds of Journalism (WJS). (2018). Aggregated data on key variables. Journalists in the newsroom. Years of professional experience website. Retrieved from http://www.worldsofjournalism.org/research/2012-2016-study/data-and-key-tables/ Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  56. Young, M. J., Tiedens, L. Z., Jung, H., & Tsai, M.-H. (2011). Mad enough to see the other side. Anger and the search for disconfirming information. Cognition and Emotion, 25, 10–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02699930903534105 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  57. Ziegele, M., & Jost, P. B. (2016). Not funny? The effects of factual versus sarcastic journalistic responses to uncivil user comments. Communication Research. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650216671854 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  58. Ziegele, M., Springer, N., Jost, P., & Wright, S. (2017). Online user comments across news and other content formats. Multidisciplinary perspectives, new directions. Studies in Communication and Media, 6, 315–332. http://dx.doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2017-4-315 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499
  59. Zerback, T., & Fawzi, N. (2017). Can online exemplars trigger a spiral of silence? Examining the effects of exemplar opinions on perceptions of public opinion and speaking out. New Media & Society, 19, 1034–1051. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444815625942 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/2192-4007-2018-4-499

Zitation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download Kapitel (PDF)

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Per E-Mail teilen

Medien