Search

To what extent do journalists differ in their vulnerability to pressure from actors outside media organizations? This study complements research on such external interference by introducing the interference-vulnerability model. It typologizes three types of interference—professional, economic, and violent—that damage three basic motivations of journalists: professional status, economic status, and physical security. Further, it explains journalists’ experience of the three types of interference by their differing vulnerabilities, which stem from their value to external actors and the costs of noncompliance with interference. This argument builds on the theorized dynamic interaction between media professionals and external actors and applies the theory of routine activities and of rational choice. Multivariate regression of 567 journalists’ responses to a survey in Switzerland confirms the proposed model. Professional interference is aimed at informationally vulnerable journalists who publish on sensitive and investigative topics and have a wide reach. Economic interference is aimed at financially vulnerable journalists who cover consumer-oriented topics, have financial decision-making power, and work in economically competitive structures. Violent interference is directed against journalists who are vulnerable because of their identities: women and marginalized minorities. The model helps to explain external interference more comprehensively and to counter threats to journalistic autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growing challenge of digital hate speech requires an understanding of its complexity, scale, and impact. Research on experiencing digital hate speech has so far been limited to the roles of personal victim, observer, and perpetrator, with a focus on young people. However, research on hate crimes suggests that vicarious victimization may also be relevant due to its negative impacts. In addition, the lack of knowledge about the older generation neglects the fact that older people are increasingly seen as vulnerable to digital risks. Therefore, this study introduces vicarious victimization as an additional role in research on digital hate speech. Prevalence rates for the four roles are examined across the life span, using a nationally representative sample of adult Internet users in Switzerland. Additionally, all roles are correlated with life satisfaction and loneliness, two stable indicators of subjective well-being. The results show that in this national population, personal victimization and perpetration are less common (<7 percent), whereas observation and vicarious victimization are more common (>40 percent). Prevalence decreases with age in all roles. As expected, multivariate analyses show that both forms of victimization are negatively related to life satisfaction and positively related to loneliness, with these effects being stronger for personal victimization. Similarly, being an observer and being a perpetrator correlate negatively, but not significantly, with well-being. This study contributes to a theoretical and empirical distinction between personal and vicarious victims and provides insight into their effects on well-being in a population largely unexplored in terms of age and national representativeness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study compares two explanations why some journalists are targeted more than others, both by general digital hostility and specifically by identity-based hostility, job-related hostility, and severe hostility such as threats and repeat offences. The first explains targeting by identity, especially of historically disadvantaged groups such as women and migrants; the second explains targeting by celebrity: journalists with larger audiences, greater social media presence, more television work, and focus on political coverage are targeted more. A Swiss survey of 568 journalists shows that celebrity mainly explains targeting with general hostility, whereas the effects of identity vary for different types of hostility. Additional interactions suggest that historically disadvantaged groups tend to experience more digital hostility, but only with increasing celebrity capital. This study emphasizes how hostility types differentiate explanatory values. Further, it contributes an innovative celebrity explanation and demonstrates how interactions can illuminate the tangled relation between identity, visibility, and hostility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature on public figures attacked by their audiences is unclear why female and male figures react differently to attacks. This study examines why female journalists are more likely than male journalists to use avoidance strategies as a reaction to online attacks. Avoidance includes limiting audience engagement, adapting reporting behavior, and thinking about quitting journalism. Drawing on social role theory and gender stereotypes, this study contrasts two explanatory hypotheses. The results, based on mediation analyses of online survey data of 637 journalists representative of Switzerland, show that women are more likely than men to use avoidance strategies because women are more stressed by attacks. This heightened stress is argued to result from differences in gender role socialization. In contrast, while women are somewhat more severely attacked than men, this cannot explain their greater probability of avoidance. Results contribute a theoretically and empirically rich explanation of gendered reactions to attacks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]