| Abstract [eng] |
This master thesis explores the relationship between social media and journalists in the context of the Belarusian post-electoral protests of 2020. The goal is to understand the view of professional journalists regarding social media and how they interact with it in the context of an undemocratic regime, and the new challenges that this relationship creates. Existing literature focused on how journalists from western democracies use social media, and on how journalists from authoritarian countries see their role within their society. Research on the use of social media by journalists in an authoritarian context was scarce, giving a basis for this thesis to exist. Authors noticed that the appearance of social media changed how journalists work and that the emerging role of gatewatcher brought new challenges. The goal is to answer the question “how Belarusian journalists perceive that new role, which challenges do they face, and what was their relationship with social media while covering Belarus protests?”. The initial tasks were to define the normative role of journalists, the specificities of citizen journalism, the challenges raised by social media, and the advantages it offers. A questionnaire was elaborated using existing literature on the relationship between social media and journalists, the definition of the normative role of the journalist, the specificities of social media, and extra questions focused on the functional coverage of the protests. Based on the most important aspects of the research, an in-depth analysis of the interviews was carried out. The interviews were semi-structured. Questions were open and closed for journalists to give their insights and practices, as well as formulate their opinion on specific issues. A sample of twelve journalists was composed, separated into two groups. Half of them were Belarusian journalists, three reporters working for independent media, and three freelancers that covered the protests for local or foreign media. The other half was made of Lithuanian foreign news reporters. Interviewing both Lithuanian and Belarusian journalists helped in highlighting two contrasting aspects: the differences of social media practices whether they worked in the field or in a newsroom, and the particularities of journalistic work in a democratic or an authoritarian country. Interviews were carried out in Lithuanian, English, and Russian. Research showed that the main differences were not only the channels chosen by either Lithuanian or Belarusian journalists but also their purpose. Regarding the use of social media, journalists perceived that their role not only as gatewatchers but also as gatekeepers became more important, with their tasks not limited to filtering information for the audience, but also bring insights, analysis, comments, and control the flow of information. 148 While Lithuanian journalists did identify Telegram as the most important platform during Belarus protests, they did not use it directly to carry out their journalistic work but only to keep track of the events in a passive way. For their material, they mostly relied on the curating work of Belarusian journalists on Twitter. Both groups praised the work of channel moderators, who selected trustworthy information. Belarusian journalists relied on Telegram as their main social media platform in order to find material, reach out to sources, and spread their content to their audience. If in the new era of information, professional journalists are usually presented as competing with citizen journalists and bloggers, the context of civilian unrest forced them to collaborate in synergy. |
