Volume 50, Issue 2

Just as burnout is manifested through changes in behavioural and communication patterns, it is important to examine whether certain aspects of communication can affect student burnout development. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the relationship between communication and academic burnout. To achieve this, the study proposes an integrated model examining the effects of three communication dimensions – support from academic staff, support from colleagues, and participation in decision-making – on four different dimensions of academic burnout, as well as students’ overall burnout. The model is tested using structural equation modelling (SEM) analysis. High coefficients of determination regarding particular burnout dimensions validate the strength of the proposed model. The results show that support from academic staff and support from fellow students significantly and negatively influence academic burnout, and might be instrumental in its reduction. Unexpectedly, participation in decision-making is shown to be positively related to academic burnout.

Misinformation perceptions related to global crises such as COVID-19 can have negative ramifications for democracy. Beliefs related to the prevalence of falsehoods may increase news avoidance or even vaccine hesitancy – a problematic context for successful interventions and policymaking. To explore how misinformation beliefs developed over a six-month pandemic period and how they corresponded to (digital) media preferences and selective exposure to the news, we rely on a five-wave panel survey conducted in the Netherlands (N =1,742). Our main findings show that misinformation perceptions got more pronounced as the pandemic evolved. Social media use related to more pronounced misinformation beliefs within waves, whereas mainstream news use corresponded to less pronounced misinformation beliefs. An important implication for journalists and policymakers is to lower the over-time accumulation of misinformation perceptions, for example, by increasing transparency and acknowledging “honest mistakes.”

In recent research, the concept of “media diets” has received increased attention. However, the concept remains vague and not fully developed, and rarely, if at all, do researchers ask citizens about their perceptions of their own and others’ media diets. With the ongoing transformation of the media landscape, there has never been a more pertinent time to explore these perceptions, which this research intends to do. The main goal of this paper then is to identify recommendations addressing recently voiced concerns about news consumption patterns in contemporary society to relevant stakeholders. Empirically, the study is based on a series of focus group interviews with younger (18–25 years old) and older (over 55) adults in five European countries (Germany, Poland, Romania, Spain, and the UK). Our results show important cohort differences as well as cross-country similarities, which are pertinent insights for the formulation of stakeholder recommendations.

People increasingly access news through ‘new’, algorithmic intermediaries such as search engines or aggregators rather than the ‘old’ (i. e., traditional), journalistic intermediaries. As algorithmic intermediaries do not adhere to journalistic standards, their trustworthiness comes into question. With this study, we (1) summarize the differences between journalistic and algorithmic intermediaries as found in previous literature; (2) conduct a cross-media comparison of information credibility and intermediary trustworthiness; and (3) examine how key predictors (such as modality, reputation, source attribution, and prior experience) affect the trustworthiness and credibility assessments. Results from a quasi-experimental online survey (n = 485) confirm that recipients assess journalistic intermediaries more positively than algorithmic intermediaries and audio more positively than text intermediaries. Furthermore, we found reputation and information credibility to be the most important predictors of intermediary trustworthiness, while general media trust is the most important predictor of information credibility. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused university education to transition from face-to-face contacts to virtual learning environments. Young adults were forced to live an entirely new life online, without valuable and enjoyable social interaction. We examined subjective perspectives towards life online during the pandemic. We identified four viewpoints about life mediated by computers. Two viewpoints express “struggling”: Viewpoint 1 (Angry, Depressed and Overwhelmed), and Viewpoint 3 (Restricted to and Overwhelmed by Virtuality). A third feeling-state conveys experiences of “surviving”: Viewpoint 4 (Isolated and Powerless in Convenience). Surprisingly, Viewpoint 2 is about “thriving” (Comfortable and Convenient Routine with Computers). The research shows that virtualization, confinement, and anxiety are taking a toll on the mental health of some members of the younger generation, while at the same time other members feel they are thriving in a situation of limited resources, virtuality, and reduced face-to-face human interaction.

The mediatization concept rests on the increasing centrality of media in everyday spheres. Within academia, mediatization is explored in various ways, such as through the use of social media, news media, and researchers’ adoption of certain media logic(s). While many studies focus on media logic(s) as an explanatory device, it can also be seen as a contextual relationship between actors enacted for various purposes. This paper explores how academics enact media logic(s) in climate communication and for what purpose. By drawing on interviews with initiators of open letters on climate change, this paper illustrates that media logic(s) is evoked as a publishing strategy and a way to demarcate academics from news media journalists. The study thus suggests a conceptual shift from debates about what media logic(s) is to what it does in specific communication contexts.

Since its early days, the labor movement has considered itself to be surrounded by a hostile bourgeois public and sought to counter this with a party press. As a result of the Cold War, Western social democratic parties abandoned in part their traditional beliefs about demarcation. Nevertheless, with the International Federation of the Socialist and Democratic Press, an organization emerged from 1951 to 1982 that manifested separation from the bourgeois public sphere. Drawing on an analytical framework derived from counterpublic theory, this article analyzes ideas and practices developed by members of the organization linked to the Socialist International. The analysis of archival sources reveals that social democratic journalists and publishers remained wedded to the idea of a socialist press countering a hostile public sphere. However, the ideas and practices were mostly limited to strategies aimed at adapting to the existing media structures and only later included media policy approaches.

Silicon Valley is both object of intense fascination and stark criticism. Academic observers have described it as a unique amalgamation of hippie culture, libertarian thinking, wild experimentation, but also scientific rigor, high-tech precision, and turbo-capitalism – a seemingly improbable, even paradoxical combination. Nevertheless, Silicon Valley continues to be an economic powerhouse and a global innovation hub. The current study explores its socio-cultural and ideological foundations through the lens of an insider perspective to find explanations for its stability and sustained success in light of conflicting components. Based on 15 interviews with Silicon Valley experts from start-ups, tech giants, and academic institutions, the study identifies several paradoxes on the level of ideology and environment, structure(s), and actors. These can be grouped into a binary, oppositional view, indeed describing the Silicon Valley paradox. However, alternative explanations are given, including the conceptualization as a non-dualist phenomenon.

Major changes in the technological, societal, political, and economic environment have forced organizations across Europe to reshape and expand their strategic communication activities. However, knowledge of the future viability of public relations, employee and consumer communication, public affairs, or investor relations is often scarce. This has led to an increased demand for external consulting in the field. The quality of such intangible services is difficult to assess; this is a challenge for clients and consultants alike, and often results in conflict. Communication research has rarely addressed this topic to date. This article expands the body of knowledge by introducing the key concepts, exploring drivers for quality assurance, and identifying sources of conflict in an empirical study of 1,558 communication practitioners in 43 European countries. The findings provide insights into current practices, indicate ways to secure quality and avoid conflict, and suggest directions for future research in an area of growing importance.

This study delves into the manifestation and characteristics of hate speech in the Greek online public sphere, specifically exploring its most prominent forms, namely racism, anti-immigrant sentiment, nationalism, sexism, and homophobia/transphobia. Combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the research analyzes popular Greek online news media. It aims to uncover the visibility and operational patterns of hate speech, addressing key questions about its prevalence and presentation on these platforms. Findings reveal the normalization of discriminatory speech, particularly sexism and nationalism, in the digital landscape. Moreover, distinct themes and linguistic elements associated with different forms of hate speech highlight the intertwined nature of these discriminatory expressions. This research sheds light on the pervasive nature of hate speech in Greece’s online realm, emphasizing its implications for democratic principles.

Disinformation poses a significant threat to democratic societies, particularly in the context of the Covid-19 health crisis. This study delves into the prevalence and nature of disinformation in social media by analyzing Facebook accounts of political actors and alternative media within the unique Swiss landscape during the first wave of the pandemic. Using standardized quantitative content analysis, we categorize posts as either accurate, reconfigured, or fabricated. Our findings reveal a disconcerting pattern: Disinformation was shared more frequently than accurate information. Notably, right-wing politicians and parties, alongside alternative media sources, emerged as the most prolific disseminators of disinformation. Digging deeper, we discovered that the predominant form of disinformation shared on social media was reconfigured disinformation, signifying manipulated or contextually distorted information. This prevalence of reconfigured disinformation on social media platforms raises pressing concerns about the public’s ability to discern fact from fiction. Moreover, our study shines a spotlight on the inadvertent or perhaps deliberate contributions of right-wing politicians and parties and alternative media sources to the propagation of disinformation. By examining this phenomenon within the Swiss context during the initial wave of the pandemic, we provide valuable insights into the dynamics of disinformation and its implications for society during crisis situations.

After the Covid-19 vaccination started, social media users created an enormous amount of content on the vaccines. Especially in the early stages of vaccination, people searched and watched YouTube videos sharing personal experiences after getting the vaccines (i.e., vaccine review videos), usually titled “I got the COVID-19 vaccine.” Few studies have examined the characteristics and impacts of vaccine review videos on viewers’ responses (e.g., likes, dislikes, comments). This study investigates the content of, and reactions to, the most-viewed Covid-19 vaccine review videos on YouTube, based on the social communication framework. A quantitative content analysis of 148 vaccine review videos revealed their unique characteristics, including source expertise, message valence, narration, and topics. Most of the videos had a positive tone, with some urging vaccination and showing pro-vaccine attitudes. Furthermore, source expertise and hybrid message types (messages conveyed in narrative and informative ways) were not significantly related to positive responses. Rather, non-expert videos received more positive responses. The findings concern the public opinions surrounding new vaccines, including related concerns and attitudes. Given the positive tone of the content, vaccine review content made by diverse groups can be encouraged by public health institutions regardless of the creators’ expertise.

This study examines the theory of media systems and the models offered by Hallin and Mancini (2004) by focusing on critical junctures in which changes occur. Based on critical political economy and historical institutionalism, we analyzed the Israeli media system transition in the 1980s and early 1990s, seeking to understand the nature of this change and its theoretical implications. Our findings show a combination of government, market, and public forces in a unique situation where political, economic, and social circumstances change. Accordingly, we conclude that a distinction between politics and economy, as the media system theory and, specifically, the liberal model suggests, is invalid under neoliberalism. We argue that research attention should be paid to critical junctions, and that a closer analysis of government and market interrelations can enrich theories of media systems.

Media use is always embedded in real everyday contexts, which would suggest that a profound change in everyday structure also brings about a change in the media repertoire. To explore the relationship between everyday structure and media use we present selected empirical findings from a qualitative panel study with couples on how they change their media repertoire in the wake of separation, new partnership, children leaving the parental home, and relocation. For analyzing the effects of these periods of upheaval we differentiate the mediatized ways of life into various dimensions: temporal, spatial, content-related, social, meaning-related, material, emotional, and physical. The findings tell us which changes in everyday structure bring about dynamics in the media repertoire, for example, more or less control over time (temporal), distance from family and friends (spatial), or emotional crises (emotional), and which factors are relevant for people when they renegotiate their media use within the new life situation.

Protective shields and medical devices produced in Makerspaces as well as the early detection of disease through self-measurement have been widely publicized in the media coverage of the Covid-19 pandemic. This article systematically examines this phenomenon by analyzing the coverage of the Maker and Quantified Self movements in Germany and the UK. Through a discourse analysis of (online) newspapers, the article demonstrates that during the pandemic the coverage of both pioneer communities was markedly positive. Makers were often portrayed as problem solvers, while Quantified Self members were depicted as seismographs of the pandemic. Overall, our analysis reveals an overarching narrative that constructs members of these groups as “do-it-yourself heroes” who respond to the Covid-19 pandemic through their experimental practices, promoting a form of technological solutionism.

Despite increased attention since 2015, there is little consensus on why audiences believe or share disinformation. In our study, we propose a shift in analytical perspective by applying the concept of resilience. Through a systematic literature review (n = 95), we identify factors that have been linked to individuals’ resilience and vulnerability to disinformation thus far. Our analysis reveals twelve factors: thinking styles, political ideology, worldview and beliefs, pathologies, knowledge, emotions, (social) media use, demographics, perceived control, trust, culture, and environment. By applying the results to the socio-ecological model (SEM), we provide a comprehensive view on what constitutes resilience to disinformation, delineate between different levels of influence, and identify relevant gaps in research. Our conceptualization contributes to an under-theorized field, in which the term resilience is much used yet rarely sufficiently defined.

In the current media landscape, it is becoming increasingly difficult for citizens to rely on trustworthy information, not least because reliable facts are mixed with dubious claims, unsubstantiated opinions, or outright lies. The ability to distinguish factual from other types of mediated information is becoming increasingly crucial, but we know little about how well-equipped citizens are to make these distinctions. In an original survey study conducted in ten European countries, we asked respondents whether they considered six different statements relating to the European Union to be factual or opinion statements. Our results show that citizens have considerable difficulties in correctly identifying both factual information and opinions. Next to pre-existing judgements, we identify media-related, political, and sociodemographic factors that influence categorisation accuracy. We discuss our findings in relation to citizens’ perceptions of journalistic credibility and their information literacy as well as ongoing debates about the effectiveness of fact-checkers on social media.