CHAPTER 6

Three countries, one profession: The journalism cultures in

Poland, Romania and Moldova

Natalia Milewski
University of Bucharest, Romania

Paulina Barczyszyn
University of Wrocław, Poland

Epp Lauk
University of Jyväskylä, Finland

ABSTRACT: The following chapter compares journalism cultures in three Central and
Eastern Europe (CEE) countries – Poland, Romania and Moldova – in five aspects:
professional education, gender, income, organizational affiliation and professional role-
perceptions. The study is based on the results of six quantitative and qualitative research
projects completed in these countries during 2006-2012. The results of this comparative study
show that geographic proximity (Central and Eastern Europe) is not a decisive factor when
comparing journalism cultures. Neither is the ‘liberal’ (Anglo-American) model of journalism
fully applicable to journalism in CEE countries. Our study found more differences than
similarities among the three countries’ journalism practices, although journalists had, at least
at the theoretical level, assumed the principles of the liberal model of journalism. Our
argument is that contextual factors play a more important role in shaping journalism cultures
than the professional beliefs and values, no matter how well the journalists know them.

KEYWORDS: journalism culture, professional values, journalistic practices, professional

identity of journalists, Romania, Moldova, Poland

Introduction

The concept of journalism culture associates with editorial culture, culture of news
production and occupational ideology. These concepts are all used to describe the
diversity of journalistic values and practices, thereby helping to understand the
professional identity of journalists. Lauk (2009: 70) argues that many researchers in
Eastern and Central Europe assess journalism culture mainly from the perspective of
the ‘liberal’/Anglo-American model, which has become a kind of ideal to achieve.
Therefore, it is often assumed that impartiality, objectivity and accuracy are values in
the process of universalization, and that the ‘liberal’ journalism model is going to be
adopted in all democratic regimes. In this context a few basic questions are
unavoidable: Do these values exist in the new democracies that emerged after the
collapse of communism? Can all journalists in democratic countries have a common
professional ideology?
 Recent comparative journalism studies appear to offer a positive answer to
these questions, although some cross-national studies have shown “that substantive
differences continue to prevail, and that professional views and practices of
journalists are deeply colored by national media systems” (Hanitzsch, 2009: 413). As
Hanitzsch argues, comparative studies “[h]ave become one of the most fascinating
sub-domains in the field of journalism studies” (Hanitzsch, 2009: 413). However, one
must not overlook the fact that comparative journalism studies between West and East
are more prevalent than those between East and East. The absence of the latter reflects
the assumption that there are common patterns that characterize a particular
geographic area and that a comparative study would simply re-confirm these models.
The researchers’ fascination to align ‘other’ models to the ‘ideal type’ (‘liberal’
model) has distorted the picture of journalistic ‘peripheral’ cultures such as the
Eastern European ones. Labels like ‘former Communist countries’ and
‘Europeanization of the East’ are not sufficient for understanding journalism cultures
and their peculiarities in these countries. It is therefore, extremely important to
compare, what is actually common and what is different and why?
The analysis presented in this chapter derives from six qualitative and
quantitative studies that all applied similar methodology: “Journalism in Change”
(2012), “Media Accountability and Transparency in Europe (MediaAcT)” (2011),
“Journalists in Poland: values, priorities and professional standards” by Stępińska and
Ossowski (2009), “Professional Culture of the Romanian Journalists” (2010),
“Worlds of Journalism Studies” (2008), and “Moldovan Journalists in Post-
Communist Society” (2006/2011). For the comparison, we selected five categories:
professional education, gender, income, organizational affiliation and professional
roles. We avoided making quantitative comparisons because of the diversity and
specificity of studied samples1 and media system development in each country.
Our analysis starts from the assumption that each of these countries has
distinct features of journalism cultures, which can be seen as unique. We also assume
that although these journalistic cultures reflect some global trends in the development
of the profession of journalism, they do not form any particular Eastern or East-
Central European model.

Professional education

                                                                                                                         
1
“Journalism in change – professional journalistic cultures in Russia, Poland and Sweden” (2012) is a
quantitative and qualitative study that was conducted on a sample of 500 respondents from national,
regional and local media in each country; “Media Accountability and Transparency in Europe
(MediaAcT)” project (2011) had a sample of 100 journalists and managers from each 14 participated
countries (incl. Poland and Romania); Stępińska’s and Ossowski’s study (2009) was conducted in
Poland among 329 journalists working for nationwide media; “Professional Culture of the Romanian
Journalists” (2010) is a qualitative and quantitative research that included 315 respondents and 51
interviewees from 40 national and local Romanian media; “Worlds of Journalism Studies” is a global
quantitative research project, that in 2008 included 115 Romanian journalists from twenty three media;
“Moldovan Journalists in Post-Communist Society” research is based on 52 semi-structured interviews
conducted in Moldova in 2006 and repeated in 2011.
During the communist period, journalism in Poland, Romania and Moldova was
regarded as a domain of ‘creative activity,’ while a journalist was considered a writer.
The societal and technological developments that have taken place in these countries
since the collapse of the communist regimes have gradually created a different kind of
journalism. More technology based and business oriented news media require from
journalists a variety of skills that are also applicable in other domains – politics,
public relations, economy etc. Journalists move away from the literary-creative
activities to ‘industrial’ news production that does not use complicated style and
literary language, but focuses on fact reporting. This linguistically simpler journalism
has also become poorer content wise, selling to the reader low quality infotainment.
The low quality of journalism has led to a lower trust in journalism by the public,
especially in Romania and Moldova.
The unlimited access of other professionals to journalistic jobs, which began
in the early 1990s, and the unwillingness of media employers to recognize the
importance of journalistic education, has paved the way to de-professionalization.
According to Tudorel “[I]n Romania it is considered that journalism is learned better
while working in newsrooms… The self-taught journalists believe that a journalist
should not have specialized studies and a college diploma is not necessarily a
prerequisite for a position in a newsroom, where there is no experience. Young
journalists usually have more education than older people” (Tudorel, 2008: 194-195).
Similar attitude towards journalistic education can be, to some extent,
identified also in the case of Polish journalists. As Szot concludes, college or
university education “is not a prerequisite for a young journalist’s employment”
(Szot, 2009: 472). Complementary to university courses, journalists attend short-term
specialized training organized by news media organizations and vocational schools.
This common practice, also found in Romania, is seen as a certain form of
counterbalance to theoretically oriented university education. Moreover, these courses
are mandatory for getting employed as a journalist.
The majority of Polish journalists have some kind of higher education, but not
necessarily a journalistic one. The findings of the “MediaAcT” project (2011) reveal
that only 36 per cent of journalists with university degree had it in journalism. The
findings of “Journalism in Change” study (2012) present similar data: 38 per cent of
the surveyed group of 500 journalists working in national news media have
journalism degree (Dobek-Ostrowska et al., 2013: 40).
In Moldova, the higher journalistic education system does not further the
professional development of journalists. Moreover, this is considered a factor that
prevents journalistic vocational training because of the mediocre quality of curricula
and teaching. Therefore, short courses in specialized journalism organized by media
NGOs (see the case of School of Advanced Journalism 2 ) substitute university
                                                                                                                         
2
In September 2006, the Independent Journalism Center in Moldova launched a project in journalism
education called the School of Advanced Journalism. This project, designed according to postgraduate
journalism programs around the world such as the School of Journalism and Media Management
Caucasus (Georgia), the Media Plan Institute in Sarajevo, the Novi Sad School of Journalism (Serbia),
the Caucasus Media Institute (Armenia), the Macedonian Institute for Media and the American
education. The number of professionals with such training has been increasing.
However, a qualitative change towards professionalism became possible only since
2009, when the first foreign investors appeared in the Moldovan media market. Their
investments advanced the media infrastructure, especially digitalization, which
simultaneously increased competition among the media and journalists. Being still
quite beholden to political and business interests, the Moldovan media market,
however, lacks dynamic development of pluralism of opinion and media diversity.
Differently from Moldova, the Polish labour market is dynamic and very
competitive. Working in this market requires a solid educational background and
professional experience in addition to flexibility and multi-skilling. According to
Szot, a high level of competition allows “[O]nly 10-20% of journalism graduates to
work in the profession … each year. Other graduates, though they try to work in the
media, often leave to enter different occupations. Some of them find employment in
organizations related to journalism (e.g., public relations, press offices)” (Szot, 2009:
473). Szot also states that journalism graduates have more difficulties finding jobs in
small towns where there are less news media outlets. On the other hand, as Bajomi-
Lázár et al. (2011: 21-22) explain, competition and ownership changes have put more
(economic, political and editorial) pressures on Polish journalists. As a result,
journalists have turned from creative people into media workers who produce
journalistic contents on the terms of industrial and business rules.
Trained in editorial or academic environments, Romanian journalists prefer to
be multi-specialized and to develop their skills in various types of media. The ability
to have more specializations enables them to be mobile and professionally in demand.
As the “Professional Culture of the Romanian Journalists” study (2010) illustrates, in
Romanian newsrooms, journalists’ activities are diverse and extremely demanding.
Being asked to work 47 hours a week, reporters and editors make 25 pieces of content
a week on average. Editors-in-chief and their deputies edit over 150 journalistic texts
weekly. The most significant part of journalistic activities comprises information
gathering and investigation, and news production. Journalists spend much less time
for presenting and design/layout, and editorial coordination and management.
Pressured by time and editorial policy, Romanian journalists often ignore the rule of
information verification from at least three sources. More than half of the journalists
of local and national newspapers spend about 10 hours per week on verifying
information, while the majority (65 per cent) of broadcast journalists check
information for only five hours per week on average. Journalists working in news
agencies and those specialized in investigative reporting in weeklies spend more time
on fact checking.
The professional practices of Moldovan journalists are fairly similar to those
of their Romanian colleagues, such as gathering, verifying, drafting and disseminating
information. However, Moldovan journalists practice teamwork - an activity seldom
seen among Romanian journalists. As stated by Angheli-Zaicenco (2007: 6) “[M]ost

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           
University in Bulgaria, propose to train each year twenty graduates of journalism and experienced
journalists working according to Western journalism standards and practices.
of the journalists have claimed that their media contents … are based on information
collected by the editorial teams. This rate appears to be highest among local media.”
Additionally, Moldovan journalists’ problems with verifying information are most
often caused by lack of transparency of public and private institutions, and the
constant and deliberate obstruction of the right to access information. Moldovan
professional journalists, especially journalists in local media, are therefore considered
‘generalists.’ Lack of specialization is caused by inadequate/generalized faculty
education and scarce opportunities on the job market.

Gender

In all three countries, the proportion of female journalists in the profession is

relatively large. Only in Poland is the proportion of female journalists less than a half
of the journalistic population (46 per cent, according to MediaAct study in 2011).
Another study, conducted in Poland two years earlier among nationwide news media
resulted in a slightly lower proportion – 41 per cent (Stępińska and Ossowski, 2011:
18). Most Romanian and Moldovan female journalists are less than 35 years old,
while the average age of their male colleagues is 40 years. This data reflects the age
of traditional news media journalists, while the average age of online media
journalists is considerably lower. Most often, women journalists hold non-executive
positions as reporters and editors and in some cases (Moldova) do not participate in
the decision-making process.
According to the aforementioned studies, the majority of women journalists
work in news agencies and monthlies, and less in online media and weeklies. Men
constituted the majority in all surveyed segments (except news agencies). In monthly
magazines, radio and television, their number noticeably surpasses that of women.
Using the existing studies, we compared the gender role in journalism in four
aspects: conditions of employment, career, specialization and income.
It seems that gender does not play a significant role in the hiring process. For
example, 86 per cent of the Moldovan journalists who participated in 2006 in research
about journalistic culture argued that gender did not play a role in getting a job as
journalists (Vasilendiuc, 2007: 7). However, a small number (6 per cent) of male
journalists thought that the gender factor had helped them to enter the profession, and
talked about positive discrimination in favour of men by editors-in-chief to
counterbalance the proportion of men and women in editorial offices. Female
journalists who argued that the gender factor had helped them to enter the profession
presented other arguments, such as physical attractiveness, lack of family obligations
or family relationships, and friendships with editorial staff. In Romania, the
journalists referred more to the employment practice based on friendship than gender
preferences (Vasilendiuc, 2010: 194).
While gender has insignificant importance in the employment process, it is
more pronounced in the journalistic career building opportunities. More men than
women occupy leadership positions, which demonstrates that the gender imbalance
grows with the increase of the rank. An illustrative example is the Polish public
television channel, Telewizja Polska S.A., which has sixteen regional stations
throughout the country. Furthermore, some social stereotypes have been highlighted
that emphasize gender discrimination. Below we give some examples of the
stereotypes identified in the discourses of the Moldovan journalists:

“[A]lthough women have become more prominent in journalism, it remains a

male profession that requires an ascetic life, manhood and sacrifice, which is
more difficult to achieve for women;” “my boss hires only men because they
know how to write better … they understand … the economy better;” “a man is
stronger, more confident in communication with … information sources;” “if a
man leads, the woman in any case remains in the second-hand position, even if
she is a good professional;” “it is not profitable to employ women in the
newspaper, as they may fall pregnant” (Vasilendiuc, 2011: 87-91).

Gender does generally not influence specialization of journalists. In most media

outlets in Poland, Romania and Moldova any journalist accepts work on any topic.
However, there is a thematic division of labour, which often depends on the gender
factor. The topics related to politics, economics and military belong to men, while
social, cultural and family issues are assigned to women. As one of the Moldovan
interviewees explained, “[T]he topics for men and the topics for women do not exist
as a matter of editorial decisions, as it is rather a psychological problem…” For
example, an editor said “I do not see a woman who could deal with politics”
(Vasilendiuc, 2007: 8).
Although an officially established salary for all employees with the same
editorial position exists, in 2006 research, Moldovan journalists claimed that men had
higher salaries than women. Among various reasons explaining this, one was that a
man is ‘the head of the family and should provide for their whole household.’
(Vasilendiuc, 2007: 8) The salary differences have to date been substantially reduced.
Among Polish and Romanian journalists, such discrimination no longer exists. The
only criteria determining the size of the salary of journalists are the quality and
especially quantity of journalistic contents they produce.

Results

The examined studies have revealed that Polish, Romanian and Moldovan journalists’
incomes correspond to the general pattern of journalistic earnings. There are two
extremes describing the incomes of journalists. Firstly, the VIP journalists or the
leading and largely known journalists, who are part of the administrative boards of
news media companies, may sometimes earn 15 times more than the vast majority of
rank-and-file journalists. Dobek-Ostrowska (2011: 34) states that many of these
journalists do not have a permanent contract of employment; rather, they have other
types of contracts or have established their own one-person companies. Secondly,
there is also a visible disparity between journalists in big cities and regional or local
ones. Urban journalists are better paid than those from regional or local media. The
latter do not earn all of their living by doing journalistic work. Moreover, the
economic crisis of the past few years was one of the factors that have changed
journalistic incomes in Poland and Romania. Moldova cannot be aligned to this
model, as it represents a unique case. In the following paragraphs we will present the
analysis of income and employment reports in the three countries during recent years.
In 2008, the minimum wage of a Romanian journalist was roughly €200 and
the highest salary could exceed €3 000. Three quarters of reporters and editors in the
national and local Romanian media were remunerated monthly with sums between
€300 and €800. The situation was different for journalists in leadership positions of
national and private media organizations, both print and broadcast media. Their
monthly wages varied between €1 300 and €2 500, and for 1.7 per cent of them the
sum could exceed €3 000 (Vasilendiuc, 2008: 13). During about the same period
(2006-2007), some of the local Moldovan journalists earned eight times less than the
lowest paid Romanian journalists. Moldovan journalists’ monthly salaries varied from
€25 to €300. Their wages depended on the types of media they were working for. In
the state owned media, the incomes were €90-€120, but payment of salaries was often
delayed. In some private media, salaries exceeded €400. Against this background, an
extremely small number of journalists were satisfied with their earnings (Vasilendiuc,
2007: 4-6).
In Moldova, the salaries were not the only form of income for journalists at
that time. In addition to fixed salaries and agreed wages, Moldovan journalists
received bonuses on several occasions (national holidays, for finding new materials or
winning contests). In the private media, journalists who had individual employment
contracts received fixed salaries (based on negotiations with the employers), and
bonuses for their professional achievements. However, the remuneration of journalists
was unstable and varied depending on quantity and not the quality of journalistic
outputs. In addition to wages, agreements and bonuses, Moldovan journalists also
received money for direct or hidden advertising. Journalists did not advertise only
products or services, but also had to produce ordered items, especially during
elections. (Vasilendiuc, 2007: 5)
The majority of Romanian journalists legally employed in private or public
national media had

“[I]ndividual work contracts for indefinite time periods and\or royalties. They
are paid monthly on fixed salaries (negotiated or established by the employers)
in accordance with the functions\positions they detain in the editorial office, to
which there are added the enhancement pay-rises and bonuses for
supplementary work hours” (Vasilendiuc, 2010, p.191).

According to Stępińska and Ossowski (2011), in Poland prior to 1989, most

journalists were permanent employees. This situation considerably differs from the
present day, where only about 20 per cent of journalists in all media and 60 per cent
of TV journalists have individual contracts. Full-time journalists in most cases work
for dailies, weeklies, magazines and radio. Many journalists work on a part-time
basis. The lowest level of job satisfaction has been detected among journalists who
work in TV stations on part-time contracts. Salary is a motivating factor for 80 per
cent of journalists in weeklies and only 54 per cent of those employed by newspapers
and magazines (Stępińska and Ossowski, 2011).
The economic crisis has significantly changed both the structure of the
journalistic profession and the earnings of journalists. The incomes of VIP journalists
decreased in some cases by as much as 50 per cent. However, the wage difference
between them and most other journalists still did not disappear.
The study “Professional Culture of the Romanian Journalists” revealed that
the salaries of 65 per cent of Romanian journalists had been reduced by 15-20 per
cent in 2010. The incomes varied between €250 and €700, and only about one per
cent of journalists earned more than €2 500. Romanian journalists in the national
press earned three times more than journalists in the local media. During the same
period, electronic and online media journalists incomes doubled compared to their
colleagues working in the print press. The largest discrepancy in wages was recorded
between reporters and editors. In 2010, the best reporters had a fixed salary of up to
€500 and an editor-in-chief’s salary exceeded €3 000. However, from the financial
point of view, the most uncertain situation was that of freelancers: most of them had
no fixed incomes. Although the economic crisis in Romania did not destroy freelance
journalistic activities, it has drastically reduced the number of ‘independent
journalists,’ and also created high mobility in the profession due to layoffs and wage
delays.
According to Polish monthly magazine Press, Polish commentators from
nationwide dailies and the editors-in-chief of news programs had the highest earnings
in 2011 (Kowalczyk, 2011). Their salaries ranged between €4 300 and €4 800. The
following top positions were held by journalists in weeklies such as Polityka and
Newsweek Polska, with salaries of €2 500 - €3 600, and reporters in public radio and
television, who earned up to €2 000 per month. The salaries of experienced full-time
journalists in online media exceeded €800. As the “MediaAcT” study shows, these
relatively high wages involve journalists working for prestigious nationwide media.
The earnings of journalists in local media were much lower. The incomes varied
between €400 and €1000. These salary differences characterize the labor market that
consists of a small group of highly paid journalists and a majority group with unstable
and unsatisfactory economy.
Since 2010-2011, salaries of Moldovan journalists have considerably
increased. This development can be explained by several major investments that have
been made in the Moldovan media market by Romanian and German media groups
(Reinstein Media Management Germany, Realitatea, Adevărul Holding), in total
roughly €10 million. These investments have technologically improved the Moldovan
media and have revived public television, as well as increased professional
requirements and standards of journalism. In order to motivate journalists, news
media organizations are increasing their wages. The new confidentiality and loyalty
clauses in work contracts have allowed some journalists to reach a very high salary
(€1 500) compared with the average income in the Republic of Moldova, which does
not exceed €200. Moldovan journalists in local newspapers continue receiving low
wages, some of them only earning a minimum salary (€72).
Organizational affiliation

Professional association was not seen as indicator of professionalism in the

journalistic environment in any of the studied countries. This leads us to the idea that
there is a lack of solidarity and self-regulation among journalists. The current
situation is complicated by the fact that different generations of journalists coexist in
the media. Older generations are more homogeneous, conservative and associative in
such activities, while younger generations are more heterogeneous, mobile, pragmatic
and professionally un-associated.
The Worlds of Journalism Study research (2008) showed that only journalists
with job careers of more than fifteen years belonged to professional organizations and
associations. The young journalists, representing both national and local media
expressed their disinterest concerning professional affiliation. This attitude was
confirmed by the survey Professional Culture of the Romanian Journalists (2010) with
86 per cent (from a total of 594 respondents) admitting that they had never been
members of journalists’ organizations, and only 14 per cent had participated at least
once a year in the organizations’ meetings. However, more than half of the surveyed
journalists in private and local media were interested in socializing with their peers,
but these relationships were more personal than professional. According to Bajomi-
Lázár, this situation is caused by the lack of a “journalism association with a national
reach” (Bajomi-Lázár, 2011: 14). Instead, there are many small organizations that try
to regulate activities of various professional groups of employers or employees, such
as The Romanian Press Club (an organization for media owners), Local Press
Owners, The Romanian Broadcasting Association, Botoșani County Association of
Professional Journalists, Journalists Society Galați, Journalists Union of Hungarians
in Romania, etc. Within these conditions self-regulation is more a goal than a guild
obligation. The high number of various professional codes (e.g. ten ethic’s codes in
Romania) does not prevent journalists in prioritizing organizational objectives
(ratings, circulation, advertising, revenue) instead of professional ones. Meanwhile,
professional associations are becoming more passive to the growing number of ethical
violations. As an older generation journalist noted in connection with a scandal about
the violation of a person’s privacy, Romanian journalism has failed to self-regulate
(Racheleanu, 2012).
In Poland, the professional organizations are stronger than in Romania,
although the number of journalists affiliated is relatively small. According to
Journalism in Change project, only 17 per cent of Polish journalists declared that they
are members of professional associations (Dobek-Ostrowska et al., 2013: 42). There
are three main associations reaching at least 30 per cent of all Polish journalists: the
Association of Polish Journalists, the Association of Journalists of the Republic of
Poland and the Catholic Journalists’ Association. The total number of Polish unions
and professional associations is about 10. As Bajomi-Lázár et al. affirm in the Media
and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe (MDCEE) Country Report – Poland
(2011: 20), this large number of professional organizations is a sign of fragmentation
within the journalism community. Moreover, as the same authors write, “professional
solidarity among journalists seems to be lacking, and the journalism community is
deeply divided along ideological, social and generational lines … as a result
journalists seem unable jointly to defend their common interests against political
pressure” (Bajomi-Lázár et al., 2011: 20). Even so, compared with other countries in
the region, Poland’s media accountability tools function better. In addition to legal
and professional instruments supporting accountability of media, such as the
Broadcasting Act (1992), Charter of Media Ethics (1995), Journalists Code of
Conduct (2002) etc. also some organizational structures exist that monitor their
implementation. One of these is the Council of Media Ethics, which includes
academics, media producers and representatives of journalists. According to
Głowacki and Urbaniak (2011: 136), the “Council of Media Ethics can make
statements and issue opinions, but does not have any legal basis to apply sanctions
after a violation of ethical standards by the mass media.” The same applies to the
Codes of Ethics of journalistic associations.
In Moldova, the majority of journalists are members of professional
organizations, whether the Union of Journalists or other types of specialized national
and international NGOs (Women’s Media Organization, United Nations Press Club,
Environment and Tourism Journalists Association, Centre for Investigative
Journalists, etc.). However, membership in the professional unions and associations is
more an assurance that they belong to a particular professional group rather than an
indicator of professionalism. Moldovan journalists do not trust professional
organizations because of their inefficiency in protecting their interests and the lack of
independence from the political system (Vasilendiuc, 2007). Most media
organizations have an ephemeral existence in terms of professional involvement. Lack
of financial resources increases functional difficulties. Many NGOs are formally
registered; they have very few members and are not engaged in any specific
professional activity. As Sîrbu (2001: 83) states, the “main cause [for unaffiliated
journalists] is lack of solidarity, passivity and journalists’ conservatism regarding
social initiative, due to divergence of interests between media owners on the one hand
and journalists on the other hand, many of whom are politically affiliated [to] or
sponsored [by] foreign sources.” For these reasons, self-regulation has a conjectural,
limited and local character. Weak self-regulation leads to a lack of self-protection of
journalists from internal and external pressure factors and limits their professional
cohesion.

Professional roles

The creation of dozens of journalism schools and professional organizations, as well

as strengthening academic education in journalism, have produced visible effects in
the structure of the journalistic field, as well as the professionalization, feminization
and rejuvenation of journalistic communities. Polish, Romanian and Moldovan
practitioners have tried to adopt the ‘liberal’ journalism model. They want to
reconstruct their professional identity by following the norms and values of objective
and unbiased journalism. Research has shown that these changes still appear only at
the narrative level. Journalists know and appreciate the Western values of the
journalistic profession without effectively putting them into practice. Journalists claim
that their values are the public right for information, unrestricted freedom of the press,
protection of human rights, and fighting against corruption and against the abuse of
power. They esteem objectivity, fairness, truth, honesty, professionalism, creativity
and credibility as professional values. The majority of journalists see themselves as
watchdogs and teachers who educate the public, opinion leaders and defenders,
supporters of social change and the main suppliers of information. However, we argue
that these statements demonstrate the discrepancy between the professional ideology
and real journalistic practice. On the other hand, they indicate that the profession is on
its way towards the generally recognized professional values and norms, towards
standardized and homogeneous work practices and a responsible and non-political
media (Gross and Kenny, 2010: 11-19). In order to illustrate these statements, we will
present three examples of the professional roles that have been assumed by Polish,
Romanian and Moldovan journalists in their professional practices.

Polish Journalist – Citizen and Disk-Jockey

Under the pressure of a strong discourse about professionalism, Polish journalists

promote a socially responsible image of their profession. Olędzki’s (1998: 277)
statement that journalists worry about the increasing deficit of social respect shown
towards their occupation confirms the assumption that media professionals want a
social status that will assign them a symbolic power position in society. An average of
60 per cent of journalists associate their activities with helping people and influencing
public opinion through the dissemination of information on issues of common interest
(Stępińska and Ossowski, 2011). The same proportion of surveyed journalists
considered that their mission is highlighting social problems and motivating citizens
to act within the public sphere. They see the media as an agenda setter devoted to
public interest and themselves as active citizens who provide various social groups
with relevant information.
At times, the role of active citizens “turned out to be a requisite tool of
communication with the electorate” (Sula, 2008: 153). Treating the public as
electorate, the voters, reflects the pressure of political interests on journalists.
Simultaneously, according to the Media Act study journalists clearly recognize the
pressure of economic interests of the media owners, which often results in a shallow
entertainment journalism based on scandals, sensationalism and the trivialization of
media contents. Pisarek (cited in Coman, 2003: 146-147) labels the producers of such
journalism ‘disk-jockeys’ who can most often be found among young journalists.
According to Dobek-Ostrowska (2011: 45), young journalists have a more permissive
vision in terms of professional standards due to the lack of skills and professional
knowledge. However, we can say that media commercialization and tabloidization
have not entirely compromised the social mission of journalists, which has happened
in some other post-communist countries.
Romanian Journalist-Politician

One of the most important roles that has been assumed by Romanian journalists is
that of politician, as journalism is often regarded a substitute of politics. The results of
the Worlds of Journalism Studies project (2008) demonstrate that Romanian
journalists have no strict professional identity, but often identify themselves with
political parties or politicians. The media in Romania have close connections with
political parties in terms of ‘political parallelism’ (Hallin and Mancini, 2004).
According to Vasilendiuc (2008: 13-14), nearly half of male journalists were ‘very
interested’ in politics. As Bajomi-Lázár observes in a MDCEE Report about Romania
“[P]olitical parallelism as measured in terms of the extent to which the media reflect
the major political cleavages in society and the extent to which advocacy journalism
prevails, as is shown by the close link between media ‘oligarchs’ and the political
parties, as well as government pressure on formally independent outlets” (Bajomi-
Lázár, 2011: 20). The dependence of journalists on various groups of economic and
political interests is so deep that they do not hesitate to express their political
affiliation or praise politicians (not just during election campaigns) in return for
various rewards. Being a highly mobile profession, journalism does not offer many
opportunities for long subsistence, so journalists prefer to lose the status of objective
reporters than that of employees. They use their journalistic career to refocus on other
areas, so that the rewards they receive for their obedience is often a new profession
and politics is one of their favorites. As a result, the associated role of politician that
some journalists play in media becomes a reality following the completion of their
journalistic careers.

Moldovan Nepotism-Journalist

The journalistic profession in Moldova has developed in a media market that is almost
entirely unprofitable. The financial vulnerability has reduced the journalistic
standards of work. Journalism remains a deeply politicized profession, where personal
contacts are more important than public information. Journalism based on contacts
has been the norm since the early 1990s, when the media was detached from state
censorship and began to form its own agenda. Along with the limitation of state
control, the media lost government subsidies and were forced to seek other funding
sources. Moldovan journalists increased their incomes by conducting ‘friendly
services,’ for example, by promoting some political parties, politicians and
businessmen and denigrating others.
Sponsorship was not the only option for obtaining profit. Personal
relationships with officials were valued more than other benefits. Due to restricted
access to information, these contacts served as the only form of newsgathering. As the
Moldovan journalist Cornelia Cozonac stated in 2006,

“[N]obody gives you information on a platter … You have to pull your sources
by the tongue… This is done at certain meetings and nights out, for which the
 journalist needs to spend some money. If you meet with an official, of course
you have to buy him … a cognac or a good lunch or dinner, which costs
money… Sometimes we try to help our sources with different services when
they are in need, sometimes we give them some room in the paper, for example,
or help them to write something or to do some reports, all of which a journalist
knows how to make” (Vasilendiuc, 2011: 194).

The results of the Moldovan Journalists in Post-Communist Society research (2006)

showed that Moldovan journalists considered nepotism a condition of their
professional success (Vasilendiuc, 2011: 140-141). Moreover, they did not believe
that close relationships with politicians or state officials could reduce their credibility
as journalists. This type of journalistic practice has become a survival strategy in
Moldovan society where informal relations based on family and collegial and
friendship links are considered supportive of prosperity.

Conclusions

Comparative analyses involve challenges and require a contextual knowledge of all

compared subjects. In this way their findings have a higher value than those of mono-
cultural studies. The main conclusions that emerged from our comparative analysis do
not necessarily change theories of the construction of professional identity of
journalists in post-communist countries. However, they validate our assumption that
journalism in post-communist countries has not had a unitary evolution. Instead, it
revealed various particular characteristics that do not accord with the Western
professional ideal of journalism. In the following we will summarize some of the
major similarities and differences among the professional cultures of journalists in
Poland, Romania and Moldova.
Shaping a new post-communist journalistic identity has been especially
difficult in Romania and Moldova. In the early 1990s, in both countries, journalism
was regarded as a liberal occupation practiced by various professional groups
(engineers, teachers, doctors, etc.) with no specific education in journalism. Editorial
office was considered to be the most effective place for professionalizing journalists.
It was believed that “many brilliant journalists [had] never been to a journalism
school, whereas quite a few of those who [had attended, had] not [made] it into [the]
profession” (Ulmanu, 2009: 482). The ‘ideology’ of talent and innate vocation has
dominated journalists’ discourse, valuing amateurism and minimizing any attempt to
professionalize the occupation. Challenging this ‘ideology’ was seen as an attempt to
destabilize professional activity or to marginalize and discard the old generation of
journalists who dominated the editorial offices (Tudorel, 2008).
After the 1990s, the journalistic profession in Moldova entered a long
hibernation period, determined by the political context (return to power of the Party of
Communists), while Romanian journalism went through a process of
commercialization and excessive tabloidization losing sight of its social mission. In
Polish journalism, the post-communist period represented a return to journalism’s
cultural roots. A long tradition of literary writing and reportage was an important
background against which the profession was able to renew advocacy journalism.
Although engaged journalism did not disappear, competency-based occupation and
objective reporting were much easier to put into practice due to the legalization of the
Polish samizdat press, an activity that had been entirely absent in communist Romania
and Moldova. Consequently, the professionalization of Polish journalism had less
evolutional syncope, and from the beginning established its development objectives.
Poland is one of the countries that introduced formal criteria for access to journalism
as a profession (e.g., university degree in journalism) and proposed a legal definition
of the journalistic profession. Although the Polish journalistic community is quite
fragmented due to generational differences, it has managed to strengthen devices for
professional self-regulation. The competition that has been imposed by foreign
investment in Polish media have consolidated even more the professional
environment by developing professional standards, which can be observed in the
significantly higher quality of journalistic contents when compared to Romanian and
Moldovan media.
The main changes that have been recorded (at different levels) in the past two
decades in the development of journalism as a profession in all three compared
countries are feminization, rejuvenation and professionalization. In Moldovan and
Romanian newsrooms, the number of women in subordinate positions has increased
steadily since the 1990s. The deep feminization of the profession has removed gender
differences; nowadays, one can even claim a balance in the representation of women
and men in executive positions. This is not the same for Polish editorial offices, where
men exceed women journalists in numbers. The feminine niche media are the only
areas where women have a priority. The rejuvenation of the journalistic profession
comes together with a high level of job mobility and insecurity. The constantly
changing media markets in Central and Eastern European countries do not provide
stable workplaces for journalists. Therefore, the occupation is often seen as a spring-
board for a ‘more serious’ field, such as politics, advertising or PR. Celebrity
journalists, who receive higher salaries than most other journalists, have the best
chance for exchanging their journalistic careers to a well-paid job in a more secure
environment. From this point of view, in the countries like Romania and Moldova,
where journalistic activity is not sufficiently self-regulated, professionalization seems
to be an individual choice. In the other words, the organizational and editorial
environments in which journalists work, determine their ethical compliance. The
more politically engaged a medium is, the greater the editorial pressure will be on
journalists.
Based on above findings, we can highlight an ambiguity that frequently occurs
in the studies on journalistic culture: the post-communist countries are placed all on
the same scale of comparison, and a standard approach is from the perspective of the
Western standards, roles and values of professional practices. The surveys detect that
self-perceptions of journalists in Central and Eastern European countries align with
those of their fellow journalists in the Western world, as in the survey responses they
identify themselves with the professional roles of the ‘liberal’/Anglo-American model
of journalism. However, our comparison reveals that in their everyday practice,
journalists do not adhere to these values and standards, and define their professional
roles quite differently, depending on circumstances and national contexts. Journalists
claim they have “independence of action and the right to control” (Tudorel, 2008:
197), but in reality, these values are attainable only to those belonging to the
professional elite. Supposedly, the majority of journalists in these countries identify
themselves with the elite, and overestimate their professional autonomy and ability
for independent decision-making. Or – the criteria of the ‘liberal’ model of journalism
are not fully applicable to CEE journalism, and the researchers should look for other
concepts to understand the identities and role perceptions of CEE journalists. And
last, but not least, (non)existence of a sustainable past experience and the impact of
other contextual (especially cultural) factors obviously play a more important role
than has so far been considered by journalism scholars.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the strategic grant POSDRU/89/1.5/S/62259 Project,

Applied social, human and political sciences. Postdoctoral training and postdoctoral
fellowships in social, human and political sciences co-financed by the European
Social Fund within the Sectoral Operational Program Human Resources Development
2007-2013.

References

Angheli-Zaicenco, N. (2007). Peisajul mass-media din Republica Moldova [Media

landscape in Moldova]. Independent Journalism Center in Moldova. Retrieved
March 17, 2008 from http://ijc.md/Publicatii/Peisajul.pdf.
Bajomi-Lázár, P., Örnebring, H., and Štětka, V. (2011). Poland: A country report for
the ERC-funded project on Media and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe.
In: J. Zielonka and P. Mancini (eds), A Media Map of Central and Eastern
Europe. Retrieved August 12, 2011 from http://mde.politics.ox.ac.uk/.
Bajomi-Lázár, P. (2011). Romania: A country report for the ERC-funded project on
Media and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. In: J. Zielonka and P.
Mancini (eds), A Media Map of Central and Eastern Europe. Retrieved August
12, 2011 from http://mde.politics.ox.ac.uk/.
Coman, M. (2003). Media în România post-comunistă [The media in post-communist
Romania]. Iasi: Polirom Publishing House.
Dobek-Ostrowska, B., Barczyszyn, P., Michel, A., and Baranowski, P. (2013). Polish
journalists – from politics to market. In: M. Anikina, B. Dobek-Ostrowska and G.
Nygren (eds), Journalists in three media systems. Polish, Russian and Swedish
journalists about values and ideals, daily practice and the future. Moscow:
Journalism Faculty Lomonosov Moscow State University.
Dobek-Ostrowska, B. (2011). Polski system medialny na rozdrożu. Media w polityce,
polityka w mediach [Polish media system at a crossroads. Media in politics,
politics in the media]. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
Głowacki, M., and Urbaniak, P. (2011). Poland: Between Accountability and
Instrumentalization. In: T. Eberwein, S. Fengler, E. Lauk, and T. Leppik-Bork
 (eds), Mapping Media Accountability – in Europe and Beyond. Köln: Herbet von
Halem Verlag.
Gross, P., and Kenny, T. (2010). The Media Transformation in Central and Eastern
Europe Is Over; Long Live the Transformation. In: M. Coman (ed.), Models of,
Models for Journalism and Communication/Modèles de, Modèles pour le
Journalisme et la Communication. Bucharest: Ars Docendi Publishing House,
University of Bucharest.
Hallin, D.C., and Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing Media Systems: Three models of
media and politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Hanitzsch, T. (2009). Comparative Journalism Studies. In: K. Wahl-Jorgensen and T.
Hanitzsch (eds), The Handbook of Journalism Studies. London: Routledge.
Kowalczyk, M. (2011). Czekając na kryzys. Zarobki w warszawskich mediach w
2011 roku [Waiting for a crisis. Earnings in the media in Warsaw in 2011], Press
12(191): 16-17.
Lauk, E. (2009). Reflections on Changing Patterns of Journalism in the New EU
Countries, Journalism Studies, 10(1): 69-84.
Olędzki, J. (1998). Polish Journalists: Professionals or Not? In: D. Weaver (ed.), The
Global Journalist: News People Around the World. New York: Hampton Press.
Racheleanu, O. (2012). Capatos despre CTP: ‘Păcălește oemnii pe internet la o
fantomă de ziar’ [Capatos about CTP: ‘Trick people on the internet at a phantom
newspaper’], Adevarul. Retrieved February 17, 2012 from
http://www.adevarul.ro/actualitate/eveniment/
web-Capatos-despre_Cristian_Tudor_Popescu-_-Pacaleste_oamenii_pe_internet-
la_o_
fantoma_ de_ziar_0_647935488.html.
Sîrbu, A. (2001). Organizaţiile mass-media şi eficienţa lor în spectrul societăţii civile
[Media organizations and their effectiveness in the spectrum of civil society]. In:
Media in Moldova. Annual Report 2000. Chişinău: Journalists Union of Moldova.
Sula, P. (2008). Party System and Media in Poland after 1989, Central European
Journal of Communication, Vol. (1): 145-155.
Szot, L. (2009). The Polish Journalism Education Landscape. In: G. Terzis (ed.),
European Journalism Education. USA: The University of Chicago Press.
Stępińska, A., and Ossowski, S. (2011). Dziennikarze w Polsce: wartości, priorytety i
standardy zawodowe [Journalists in Poland: values, priorities and professional
standards], Studia medioznawcze 1(44): 17-28.
Tudorel, N. (2008). Mass-media – constrângeri şi libertăţi organizaţionale [Mass
media - organizational constraints and freedoms]. Bucharest: Publishing House of
the University of Bucharest.
Ulmanu, A.B. (2009). The Romanian Journalism Education Landscape. In: G. Terzis
(ed.), European Journalism Education. USA: The University of Chicago Press.
Vasilendiuc, N. (2007). Portretul socio-profesional al jurnalistului din Republica
Moldova [The Social-Professional Portrait of the Journalists from Republic of
Moldova], Romanian Review of Journalism and Communication, II (1): 3-12.
Vasilendiuc, N. (2008). Cultura profesională a jurnaliștilor din România [The
Professional culture of the Romanian Journalists], Romanian Review of
Journalism and Communication, III (1-2): 11-22.
Vasilendiuc, N. (2010). The Social-Professional Portrait of the Romanian Journalists.
In: M. Coman (ed.), Models of, Models for Journalism and
Communication/Modèles de, Modèles pour le Journalisme et la Communication.
Bucharest: Ars Docendi Publishing House-University of Bucharest.
Vasilendiuc, N. (2011). Cultura profesională a jurnaliștilor [The Journalists’
Professional Culture]. Bucharest: University of Bucharest Publishing House.