Javnost - The Public, Vol. 31 - 2024, Suplement
Guest Edited by Jernej Kaluža and Sašo Slaček Brlek
Kaj hoče ljudstvo? Problem javnega mnenja pri Heglu in sicer
Po Habermasu se je javnost oblikovala kot protiutež absolutistični državi, kot glas ljudstva, ki tako rekoč od zunaj nadzoruje delovanje državnih institucij. Sledeč Fraser, ki opozarja na zgodovinske in politične predpostavke tako razumljene javnosti in javnega mnenja, skušamo v članku osvetliti spremembe, ki izhajajo iz demokratične revolucije, ko tudi država postane izraz volje ljudstva. Kar je bil prej odnos med dvema skoraj samostojnima entitetama, se s tem preoblikuje v odnos ljudstva do samega sebe. V prispevku je najprej predstavljeno, kako je to dvojnost pod naslovom varanja ljudstva obravnaval Hegel kot ključni mislec moderne politične misli. Na koncu je na kratko navedeno, kateri nauki izhajajo iz tega za preučevanje javnega mnenja. Tako imenovana kriza javnega mnenja je toliko v resnici kriza države.
What Does the People Want? The Problem of Public Opinion in Hegel and Beyond
According to Habermas, the public sphere emerged against the backdrop of the absolutist state, as the voice of the people designed to control the actions of the state institutions. Following Fraser, who rightly emphasises the historical and political presuppositions of such a public sphere and public opinion, the article examines the implications of the establishment of democracy, when the state, too, becomes an expression of the people’s will. What was previously a relationship between two rather independent entities is thus transformed into a relationship within the people itself. In this paper, we examine how this incongruity of the people with itself was treated by Hegel as the key thinker of modern political thought. In the end, we briefly identify some lessons that emerge for the study of the public sphere. The so-called crisis of public opinion turns out to be a crisis of the state.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Kolaps razuma? Sociohistorični prispevek k obravnavi moderne javnosti in njenih kriz
Zadnje desetletje zaznamuje govor o krizi zahodnih demokracij in njenih javnosti. V ospredju analize so družbeni mediji in porast tipa razpravljanja, ki temelji na iracionalnem, čustvenem in intuitivnem zagovarjanju stališč. Splošna presoja, ki nastaja iz kakofonije spletnega deliberiranja, je, da gre za odmik od razsvetljenskih vrednot razumnega argumentiranja s ciljem iskanja skupnega dobrega in konsenza. Članek se tej obravnavi pridruži iz historično-sociološke perspektive, ki problematizira preprosto polariziranje moderne javnosti na racionalno razsvetljensko in iracionalno postrazvestljensko. Nasprotno, trdi, da je vsaka zgodovinska modaliteta javnosti – glede na tip tehnologije, na katerem je temeljilo prevladujoče javno komuniciranje – oblikovala svoj kolektivni prostor dojemanja družbene stvarnosti in odzive nanj, pri čemer »predmoderni« preostanki iracionalnega in »dionizičnega« ostajajo speči elementi modernosti. Če v analizo vključimo ta historični presek, postane jasno, da je »kolaps razuma«, ki ga zaznava sodobna razprava, toliko kontingenčni produkt izteka modernosti v neoliberalno stanje, kot je njen nujni epistemski izraz.
A Collapse of Reason? Socio-Historical Comment on the Modern Public and Its Crises
The last decade has been defined by the notion of the crisis of the (Western) democracies and their publics. At the forefront of the debate stand social media and the type of deliberation they promote, namely the irrational, emotional and intuitive defence of individual viewpoints. A general conclusion arising from the cacophony of the on-line modes of deliberation is that this presents a detour from the Enlightenment and its ideals of rational argument in pursuit of collective good and consent. In the article, we apply a historical-sociological perspective to argue against the simplified polarization of the modern public between the rational Enlightenment and the irrational post-Enlightenment public of the neoliberal phase. In fact, we argue that each of the modern publics formed its own collective space of public reflection whereby the pre-modern remnants of the irrational and “the Dionysian” remain the underlying currents of modernity. With this historical lens in place, it becomes evident that the “collapse of reason” is as much a contingent product of the neoliberal turn as it is its necessary epistemic expression.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Upravljanje umetne inteligence v evropskem digitalnem ekosistemu: kontekstualizacija, razvoj in trendi
Prispevek obravnava razvoj modela upravljanja t. i. evropskega digitalnega ekosistema in upravljanja sistemov umetne inteligence (UI) v družbenopolitičnih pogojih upodatkovljenja. Besedilo identificira mesto UI v evropskem digitalnem ekosistemu, pri čemer slednjega tudi ustrezno definira. Glavna teza raziskave, da je treba regulacijske namere upravljanja sistemov UI razumeti znotraj širšega evropskega digitalnega ekosistema, ki ga je treba kontekstualizirati znotraj epistemoloških okvirov Evropske unije, je razdelana na podlagi teoretskega pristopa Iana Mannersa (2008), ki EU v svojih analizah označi za svetovno normativno politično silo. Tako raziskava s sekundarno analizo, ki poleg literature vključuje še analizo dokumentov, kot so pripravljalni dokumenti Evropske komisije, gradiva in študije delovnih skupin na področju UI Organizacije združenih narodov za izobraževanje, znanost in kulturo (UNESCO) ter Organizacije za gospodarsko sodelovanje in razvoj (OECD), pokaže na umeščenost evropskega digitalnega ekosistema v normativno politično dediščino EU, kar se odraža tudi na ravni upravljanja sistemov UI.
Managing artificial intelligence in the European digital ecosystem: contextualisation, developments and trends
This paper examines the development of a governance model for the so-called European digital ecosystem and its management of artificial intelligence (AI) systems within the socio-political conditions of datafication. The text identifi es the role of AI in the European digital ecosystem, which is also appropriately defined. The main thesis of the research—that the regulatory intentions for managing AI systems should be understood within the broader European digital ecosystem, contextualized within the epistemological frameworks of the European Union is elaborated using the theoretical approach of Ian Manners (2008), who in his analyses describes the EU as a global normative political power. The research, through secondary analysis, which includes not only existing literature but also the analysis of documents such as preparatory documents of the European Commission, materials, and studies from working groups in the fi eld of AI from the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), demonstrates the positioning of the European digital ecosystem within the normative political legacy of the EU, which is also reflected in the governance of AI systems.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Medijsko ustvarjanje protibegunskega sovražnega govora v komentarjih na Facebooku
Članek z analizo protibegunskega sovražnega govora v komentarjih v profilih izbranih medijev na Facebooku ugotavlja, kako je bila tema migracij komunicirana in komentirana na spletu v obdobju povečanih migracij v Evropo z Bližnjega vzhoda, iz Afrike in Azije. Kot država na zahodnobalkanski migracijski poti je Slovenija leta 2015 doživela z »dolgim poletjem migracij« povezan porast sovražnega govora, predvsem na spletnih družbenih omrežjih. Na vzorcu 6.545 spletnih komentarjev na objave novičarskih medijev, objavljenih v obdobju 2012–2017, združujemo kvantitativno in kvalitativno analizo proti beguncem uperjenih komentarjev, ki jih je mogoče opredeliti kot sovražni govor, in člankov, pod katerimi se pojavljajo. Analiza kaže, da največ nasilnih komentarjev izzovejo članki, ki pri poročanju o temi migracij uporabljajo senzacionalistično retoriko in poudarjajo deviantna dejanja beguncev. Senzacionalistično medijsko poročanje neposredno soustvarja sovražni govor. Članek je z združevanjem sociološke analize družbeno razdiralnih komentarjev, s premisleki o kazensko pregonljivem izražanju in vplivu družbenih medijev edinstven prispevek k preučevanju vloge, ki jo ima ekonomija pozornosti digitalnih platform pri širjenju sovražnega govora.
Media creation of anti-refugee hate speech in Facebook comments
The article, analyzing anti-refugee hate speech in the comments on Facebook profiles of selected media outlets, examines how the topic of migration was communicated and commented on online during the period of increased migration to Europe from the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. As a country on the Western Balkans migration route, Slovenia experienced a surge in hate speech in 2015 linked to the “long summer of migration”, especially on social media. Using a sample of 6,545 online comments on news media posts published between 2012 and 2017, we combine quantitative and qualitative analysis of anti-refugee comments that can be classified as hate speech and the articles under which they appear. The analysis shows that articles using sensationalist rhetoric and emphasizing deviant actions by refugees provoke the highest share of violent comments. Sensationalist media reporting directly contributes to the creation of hate speech. By combining a sociological analysis of socially divisive comments, with considerations of criminally prosecutable speech, and the influence of social media, the article provides a unique contribution to the study of the role that the attention economy of digital platforms plays in the propagation of hate speech.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Čuvajsko novinarstvo na sodišču: metanovinarski diskurz v slovenski sodni praksi
Članek proučuje diskurzivni boj med različnimi akterji v postopkih na sodiščih kot pomembnih in ne dovolj raziskanih prizoriščih, ki sooblikujejo dopustne novinarske prakse in meje. Analiza sodb iz obdobja 2013–2022, temelječa na Carlsonovem analitičnem okviru metanovinarskega diskurza, prikazuje, kako potekajo interpretativni procesi za vzpostavljanje definicij čuvajskega novinarstva in (de)legitimiranja novinarjev za izvajanje čuvajske novinarske vloge v sporih, povezanih z novinarskim sporočanjem o temah v javnem interesu, pred slovenskimi višjimi sodišči ter vrhovnim in ustavnim sodiščem. Rezultati ne razkrivajo jasne artikulacije čuvajskega (watchdog) novinarstva; prevladujejo negativne definicije in razlikovanje od popularnega (tabloidnega) tiska. Kljub monološkosti diskurza, v katerem udeleženci sodnih postopkov z zagovarjanjem lastnih stališč poskušajo sodnike prepričati o svojem prav, se celo ob nasprotnih argumentativnih pozicijah pojavlja soglasje, da imajo novinarji čuvaji, ko obravnavajo zadeve javnega pomena, dokajšnjo svobodo pri izbiri jezika, posegih v zasebnost in poročanju o nepreverjenih govoricah. Pri tem članek pokaže odločilno vlogo interpretacij sodišč, saj pri novinarjih lahko sprožijo zastraševalni učinek, ki slabi demokratični dialog in družbeno razpravo.
Watchdog Journalism in Court: Metajournalistic Discourse in the Slovenian Case Law
The article examines the discursive struggle between different actors in court proceedings as important and under-researched arenas that co-shape acceptable journalistic practices and boundaries. The analysis of judgments from the period 2013–2022, based on Carlson’s analytical framework of metajournalistic discourse, shows how the interpretive processes for establishing definitions of watchdog journalism and (de)legitimizing journalists for performing the role of watchdog journalists in disputes related to journalistic reporting on topics of public interest take place at the Slovenian higher courts, together with the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. The results do not reveal a clear articulation of watchdog journalism; negative definitions and differentiation from the popular (tabloid) press prevail. Despite the monologic nature of the discourse, in which the participants of the court proceedings try to convince the judges of their right by defending their own positions, there are occurrences of consensus, even in cases of opposing argumentative positions, that watchdog journalists, when dealing with matters of public interest, have considerable freedom in the choice of language, intrusions into privacy and reporting unverified rumours. Here, the article points to the decisive role of court interpretations, as they can have a chilling effect on journalists, which weakens the democratic dialogue and social debate.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Privatizacija medijev v Sloveniji - izgubljena priložnost za neodvisnost medijev?
Kmalu po osamosvojitvi Slovenije se je država odločila za privatizacijo velikega dela družbenih podjetij, med katerimi je bila tudi večina medijskih družb. Ob privatizaciji so zaposleni pridobili 60 odstotkov podjetij. Čeprav so imela izkušnje s samoupravljanjem in čeprav so bili zaposleni v mnogih medijskih družbah v tistem času odločeni, da bodo ostali lastniki družb, se to ni zgodilo. Prav vse medijske hiše so doživele proces koncentracije lastništva, ki je nato večinoma vodila v prodajo deležev zunanjim kupcem. Te prodaje so bile pogosto politično dogovorjene, mnoge so zaobšle zakone, ki so prepovedovali koncentracijo lastništva in navzkrižno lastništvo v medijih. Triintrideset let po osamosvojitvi so mediji v primežu interesov svojih lastnikov, v boju s hudo konkurenco digitalnih platform, novinarji pa se soočajo s stalnim pritiskom po znižanju stroškov in povečani storilnosti. Pomanjkljiva zakonodaja in pogosto brezzobi regulatorji trga ne uspejo zaščititi svobodnega novinarstva, sanje o neodvisnem novinarstvu, ki so bile tako žive med osamosvajanjem in privatizacijo, so se razblinile. V prispevku je poskus odgovora na vprašanje, zakaj se je to zgodilo in kaj je sploh še mogoče spremeniti.
Privatisation of the Media in Slovenia - Missed Opportunity for Media Independence?
Shortly after the declaration of independence, Slovenia decided to privatise a large part of the socially-owned companies at the time, including most of the media companies. During privatisation, the employees of these companies acquired 60 percent of the companies. However, the employees did not retain ownership for long, even though the companies had experience with self-management and even though the employees were initially determined to retain ownership of their companies. All media companies went through the process of ownership concentration, which later usually led to the sale of company shares to external buyers. These purchases were often politically collusive, while many of them circumvented legislation prohibiting the concentration of media ownership and cross-shareholding in the media. Thirty-three years after independence, the media are run in line with the interests of their owners while facing fierce competition from digital platforms. Journalists are under constant pressure to cut costs and increase productivity. Inadequate laws and market regulators, which are often toothless, do not protect free journalism. The dreams of independent journalism that were alive in the days of independence and privatisation have been shattered. This article attempts to explain why this has happened and whether anything can be done to change it.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Struktura slovenskega medijskega trga v ekonomiji pozornosti
Dnevnoinformativni mediji se zaradi sprememb v spremljanju medijev in selitve oglaševalskih sredstev v digitalno okolje soočajo z močnejšo konkurenco digitalnih platform, ki prevladujejo v ekonomiji pozornosti. Najina raziskava razkriva, da digitalizacija, kljub specifičnostim slovenskega trga, temeljito preoblikuje delovanje tradicionalnih medijev in novinarstva, zlasti časopisnega. V proučevanem obdobju 2008–2020 so se prihodki medijske dejavnosti nominalno nekoliko znižali, prihodki iz oglaševanja pa so relativno, v primerjavi z mediji in časopisi, močno narasli. Analizirani mediji se na negativne trende odzivajo predvsem s poslovnimi strategijami tesnejšega sodelovanja z oglaševalci in diverzifikacijo svojih dejavnosti. V tem procesu se uredništva vse bolj preoblikujejo v upravljalne centre, odgovorne za nadzor nad produkcijo in distribucijo vsebin, kar prinaša spremembe tudi v nalogah novinarjev. Vendar niti te strategije (vsaj) v Sloveniji ne prinašajo večje prodaje časopisov, zato ohranjanje pozitivnih rezultatov v veliki meri omogoča prav intenzifikacija izkoriščanja delovne sile ob njenem neprestanem zmanjševanju.
Structure of the Slovenian media market in the attention economy
News media face increasing competition from digital platforms that dominate the attention economy, driven by changes in media consumption and the shift of advertising funds to digital environments. Our research shows that despite the specific characteristics of the Slovenian market, digitalization is profoundly changing the operations of traditional media and journalism, especially print journalism. During the analyzed period (2008–2020), media industry revenues have slightly decreased in nominal terms, while advertising revenues have significantly increased in relation to media and newspapers. The media companies analyzed have responded to these negative trends primarily with business strategies focused on closer cooperation with advertisers and diversifying revenues. In this process, newsrooms are increasingly being transformed into management hubs responsible for overseeing the production and distribution of content, which also leads to changes in the role of journalists. However, these strategies have not led to higher newspaper revenues, at least in Slovenia. Maintaining positive financial results depends largely on the increased exploitation of labor in conjunction with its continuous reduction.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article
Novinarska svoboda skozi optiko novinarjev: analiza izsledkov ankete svetovi novinarstva v Sloveniji
Članek, ki izhaja iz kompleksnega konceptualnega razmerja med novinarsko svobodo, avtonomijo in neodvisnostjo, temelji na empirični analizi anketnih podatkov, zbranih med prvo izvedbo mednarodne raziskave Svetovi novinarstva na vzorcu slovenskih novinarjev. Avtorji novinarstvo razumejo kot verovanjski sistem, v katerem novinarsko svobodo ključno sooblikujejo percepcija neodvisnosti in pogoji avtonomije. Študija se osredinja na percepcijo vplivov na novinarsko delo, pri čemer avtorji razlikujejo med ‚svobodo za‘ (avtonomnost delovanja v skladu z moralnimi in etičnimi načeli ter vrednotami) in ‚svobodo od‘ (neodvisnost od ovir, omejitev in vmešavanja v novinarsko delo). Rezultati nakazujejo razlikovanje med štirimi skupinami novinarjev glede na tipe vplivov na njihovo delo: novinarji pod vplivom “pomembnih drugih”, avtonomni novinarji, novinarji pod poslovno-ekonomskimi vplivi in novinarji pod politično-poslovnimi vplivi. Politični in ekonomski vplivi so glede na anketirance najmočnejši v komercialnih medijih ter v skupnostnih in neprofitnih medijih, medtem ko avtonomni tip novinarstva prevladuje v javnih medijih. Hkrati ugotavljamo, da novinarji nižje v odločevalski hierarhiji zaznavajo politične vplive intenzivneje in bolj oprijemljivo kot tisti z uredniškimi funkcijami.
Journalistic Freedom Through the Lens of Journalists: An Analysis of the Findings from the Worlds of Journalism Survey in Slovenia
The article analyses the complex conceptual relationship between journalistic freedom, autonomy, and independence, drawing on an empirical analysis of survey data collected during the first edition of the international Worlds of Journalism study among a sample of Slovenian journalists. The authors conceptualize journalism as a belief system in which journalistic freedom is fundamentally shaped by perceptions of independence and conditions of autonomy. The study examines perceptions of influences on journalistic work, distinguishing between “freedom for” (the autonomy to act in accordance with moral and ethical principles) and “freedom from” (independence from obstacles, constraints, and interference). The results identify four groups of journalists based on the types of influences on their work: those influenced by “significant others,” autonomous journalists, those affected by business-economic influences, and those impacted by political-business influences. Respondents report that political and economic pressures are strongest in commercial and community/non-profit media, while autonomous journalism is most prevalent in public service media. Additionally, journalists in lower positions within the decision-making hierarchy perceive political influence more intensely than those in editorial roles.
Full text PDF (in Slovene) | Export Reference | Link to this article