Journal of Applied Journalism & Media Studies

Vol. 5, No. 3, 2016, pp. 465-484

DOI: 10.1386/ajms.5.3.465_1

Managing the newsroom: Perceptions

of inluence and control among
Swedish newspaper professionals
Jenny Wiik and Ulrika Andersson, University of
Gothenburg

Journalistic organizations are currently undergoing rapid change. One striking feature of
this transformation is the increased inluence of managerial discourse in the newsroom.
Editorial leadership is proving to be more professionalized, standardized and accentuated
than before, which could afect journalistic autonomy and status. In this article we inves-
tigate the shifting power balance in news production by focusing on the management–staf
relationship in Swedish newspapers and discussing the possible consequences of this develop-
ment for the professional autonomy of journalists. Empirical support is drawn from two
national surveys and a small interview study of Swedish newspaper journalists. he results
indicate a move towards managerial dominance in the newsroom during the last decade,
but also that journalists to some extent seem to approve of this development. Even so, the
results may be another indication of a de-professionalization of journalists to the beneit of
the managerial group in the news business.

Keywords: journalism; managerialism; editorial control; professional identity;

organizational identity; journalistic autonomy

ISSN 2001-0818 © 2016 Intellect Ltd

466 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

Introduction
his article focuses on the management–staf relationship of Swedish newspa-
per organizations, and possible shifts in the power balance of this relationship.
Furthermore, it investigates some possible consequences of such power shifts with
regard to two dimensions of journalistic activities: inluence over editorial content
and inluence over journalistic work environment. he origin of current changes
in the newspaper industry is derived from wider technological and socio-economic
changes, from deregulations of social institutions, and the globalization of values; for
example, by emphasizing market-orientation, eiciency demands, and higher proit-
ability in both corporations and the public sector (Baldasty 1992; Harrington 2008;
McChesney and Nichols 2010).
Over the past decade most Swedish newspapers have undergone numerous
attempts to revitalize themselves. hese attempts are characterized by, for example, a
large number of mergers, acquisitions, severe downsizings, and a range of other new
ventures. Some of these changes have indeed been successful and provided creative
contributions to the development of journalistic production, but they have not always
been unquestioned. Recent research has revealed an increasing emphasis on leadership
and managerial control in the newsroom, a situation that raises concerns over the
matter of journalistic autonomy and intra-organizational integrity (Andersson and
Wiik 2013; Tidningsutgivarna 2013). Research has also shown that Swedish dailies
have cut their editorial staf by approximately 25 per cent between 2004 and 2014
(Nygren and Althén 2015), fundamentally changing the conditions for the profes-
sional status of journalists.
Downsizing processes are, most of the time, handled internally in the sense that
negotiations or conlicts between journalists and their managers are kept within the
organization. Sometimes, however, this process takes place in the glare of publicity as
journalists and union representatives choose to express their concerns, frustrations,
and dissatisfaction in public. An example of such a situation occurred in October
2013 when many union clubs around the Swedish capital Stockholm decided to
release a joint attack on the management of one of the leading national newspapers,
Dagens Nyheter/he Daily News. he reason for this action was a long series of redun-
dancies at the paper combined with what was perceived as an authoritarian leadership
approach. Union representatives accused the CEO of harassment, bullying and freez-
ing out long-standing co-workers, as well as of trying to circumvent prevailing labour
regulation. In addition, the Swedish Journalist Union (SJU) leader, Johan Nordling,
chose to publish a statement in which he said that although the alleged newspaper may
be characterized by an especially tough management style, it nevertheless relected a
general development in the whole business (2013). He put forward the argument that
the current situation was marked by a general tendency of management becoming a
value in itself paired with a certain amount of hubris (Nordling 2013).
In line with Nordling’s reasoning, prior studies have indicated that the right to lead
has become an indubitable principle of many businesses and social arenas (Pollitt 1993;
 Managing the newsroom 467

Clarke et al. 2000). Some scholars go even further in their conclusions by considering
it to be a general trend in western society (Enteman 1993; Cutler and Waine 2000).
he consequences of this trend have not remained undisputed, but make a common
theme for conlict and debate. One reason for the antagonism is the clash between the
contrasting principles of managerialism on the one side and the discourse of profes-
sionalism on the other, as managerialism emphasizes the primacy of management
above all other activities (Le Grand and Bartlett 1993). Professionalism refers to ‘the
process to pursue, develop and maintain the closure of the occupational group’ (Evetts
2003: 3). It has also been called ‘the sum of all processes’ enclosed in the develop-
ment of professions, with the common factor that they all lead to higher status and
increased power, both individually and collectively (Siegrist 1990). Professionalism
can, in short, be said to frame journalistic work with speciic normative ideals, thereby
legitimizing journalists as an autonomous and self-regulating group (e.g. Aldridge and
Evetts 2003; Evetts 2003, 2006). Moreover it functions as a disciplinary mechanism
in times of change by establishing new ‘appropriate’ work identities and practices
when needed (Fournier 1999).
Managerialism, on the other hand, promotes globalized values of economy and
labour and follows the liberal economist strand once drawn from manufacturing
industries (Enteman 1993). As managerialism breaks into new areas of society it
challenges established principles and methods being represented by professional
groups, in this case the journalists. Although journalism has never fulilled all the
external criteria of professions, it has struggled iercely and successfully for profes-
sional status to the extent that it has come to be regarded as a ‘semi-profession’
(Singer 2003; Deuze 2005; Wiik 2010). he increasing turbulence of the media
industry during the past decade has, however, created considerable hindrances to the
professionalization process of journalism, and perhaps even reversed it into a process
of ‘de-professionalization’ (Nygren and Witschge 2009). he reasons for this cultural
and organizational shift in news media can be found in the substantially hardening
competition for audiences and advertising revenues; in the technical development
and socio-economic changes in the news business; and in a general movement of
society as a whole, where commercial and market values have become increasingly
imperative.
Western news organizations have long been pulled between the conlicting interests
of democracy and the market, which has increasingly come to mark the organization
of news work and led to a division between business-oriented and journalism-oriented
parts of the enterprise (McManus 1994; McQuail 2000). News media thus function
in the ield of tension between politics and markets, combining two diferent logics
in governing journalistic work: a public sphere model and a market model (Croteau
and Hoynes 2006). Current development has, however, served to merge those models,
creating hybrid organizations driven by ideals of professional journalism as well as
ideals of business administration. As hybrids they inevitably give room to diferent
cultures and subcultures in various parts of the organization, as well as to difer-
ent business aims, and it is largely the role of management to weigh those aims and
468 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

cultures against each other. Considering the democratic function still being ascribed
to journalism, in parallel with the developments currently marking the media sphere,
there is a need for research on how media professionals perceive their own as well as
other actors’ inluence in the newsroom. In this article we address this matter by focus-
ing on two aspects of news work where the discursive meeting between managerialism
and professionalism may be articulated: irst, the aspect of editorial inluence over
news content, and whether the perceptions of journalists and their managers reveal
a shift in the power balance over time; and second, the aspect of working conditions
and how journalists regard these with reference to a changing management culture.

Managerialism breaking grounds

Critical media scholars often describe news production as a factory, and it certainly
is an industrialized production in many ways, with standardized news values and
routines (Nygren 2008a). But usage of the factory metaphor may lead to exaggerated
conclusions regarding the organizational behaviour of news companies. Journalism is,
in many ways, similar to industrial production, but it is not the same (Picard 2006).
In order to understand the situation of journalists in their workplaces, it is there-
fore crucial to apply a perspective that combines organizational preconditions with
creative possibilities and unpredictability (Eide 1992). Such a deinition is ofered by
Alvesson (2004), among others, through the concept of knowledge-intensive irms:
entities comprising highly qualiied professionals using intellectual and symbolic
skills in their work. Knowledge-intensive irms are characterized by various degrees
of autonomy and quickly adaptable organizational forms, but also by subjective
quality assessments and the need for extensive communication to solve problems.
hese features may be described as typical of western news production, as it is often
focused on commercial concerns and attempts to catch the audience in a continuously
toughening competition. Organizationally, this has meant extended use of temporary
freelancers and, to those holding permanent positions, increasingly goal-orientated
working environments (Gade and Perry 2003; Gade 2004; Walters et al. 2006; Deuze
2007; Deuze and Fortunati 2010; Nies and Pedersini 2013). In this environment, the
role of management has become even more central. his group is growing in size and
constitutes the hub of control in an increasingly lexible and mobile organizational
landscape (Tidningsutgivarna 2013).
he Swedish newspaper industry has, along with many western media, for quite
a long time been marked by inancial loss: newspapers struggle with outdated and
insolvent inancial models, something that has created surges throughout the busi-
ness. Among media scholars as well as professionals, there is a growing awareness
of journalism in crisis, not only from an economical perspective but also regarding
professional boundaries and working conditions in the newsroom (Fenton 2011;
McChesney 2011). his development has a practical side in terms of extensive reor-
ganizations and repeated redundancies, but it is also embraced by the ideological
umbrella of managerialism. his comprehensive term focuses on the ideological
 Managing the newsroom 469

coniguration of ideas and practices enhanced by a certain way of organizing (Deem

and Brehony 2007). Enteman described managerialism as an ideology that on a
social level replaces the crackling ideologies of socialism and capitalism, presenting ‘a
lethal challenge to democracy, because it discounts the importance of the individual’
(1993: 159). he challenge lies in the managerial acknowledgement of organiza-
tions as organic entities, while disregarding the efective power of individual actors
below executive level. It represents the struggles and interactions of organizations –
or rather the leaders of those organizations, whose main objectives are advancing
their own interests. Society thus becomes the sum of those actions and negotiations
(Enteman 1993).
Managerial ideology originates from the old scientiic management approach where
factors such as close measurement and strict control of individual performances were
believed to lead to increasing quality and production eiciency (Mintzberg 1989;
Shenhav 1999). he power of management increases the more members the organi-
zation has, and its main objective is to remove obstacles to organizational growth and
eiciency. From this perspective the individual co-worker is – or should preferably
be – replaceable so that organizations remain safe and lexible in times of change
(Enteman 1993). Managerial theorists often conceive of management as a politi-
cal activity, thus including dimensions other than merely the technical (Deem and
Brehony 2007). he ideology is successfully being promoted by the growing group of
managers in diferent sectors and today embraces a wide range of social areas (Clarke
et al. 2000).
From a Swedish perspective, this discursive movement has, in the ield of news
media, contributed to a loosening of the clear line that during early professionaliza-
tion was drawn between journalism and management (Tuchman 1978; Djerf-Pierre
and Weibull 2011; Ohlsson 2012). Editorial leaders today work with business-related
issues to a greater extent than before, thereby bringing a ‘new’ perspective into news
work (Andersson and Wiik 2013). Organizational units such as editorial, administra-
tion, sales, technology and distribution have, since the 1950s, been governed by a two-
tier leadership from the editor-in-chief and the CEO (Ohlsson 2012). his division
may sometimes even be described as three-tier, as technical management has gained
an increasingly inluential position in many news companies (Westlund 2011). Many
newspapers still hold a two-tier leadership, but even so, it is evident that manage-
rial perspectives are being further integrated into the work of editors-in-chief (Gade
2008; Achtenhagen and Raviola 2009). here are also examples of newspapers merg-
ing organizational leadership positions in such a way that the CEO is shouldering the
roles of liable editor and editor-in-chief combined (Wilberg 2002; Ohlsson 2012).
Furthermore, as managers from diferent parts of the enterprise increasingly team up in
various projects and collaborations, the organizational goals and values seem to perco-
late from administrational/economical units out to the news desks (Andersson and
Wiik 2013, 2014). he previously clear boundaries between journalism and manage-
ment that emerged during the early days of journalistic professionalization must,
therefore, be considered much less palpable today (Djerf-Pierre and Weibull 2011).
470 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

Negotiating journalistic professionalism

Autonomy is a crucial part of the professional identity of journalists, and much of
their strivings are directed towards guarding and protecting professional freedom and
independence. Professional identity is a form of social identity linking members of the
same occupation, thereby referring to a wider frame of identiication – a discourse –
rather than the objectives and members of speciic news organizations. It is linked to
a sense of common understanding of experiences and expertise, cultivated through
professional socialization at several levels (education, associations, romantic lore, etc.)
(Soloski 1989; Evetts 2003). he original deinitions and understanding of profes-
sionalism need, however, to be nuanced, as current development has brought a far
more complex situation to professional collectives than before. In line with the overall
individualization processes a generally acknowledged conception of the individual as
an ‘entrepreneur of the self ’ has, during recent decades, become established at the
heart of organizational reform. Organizational management of professional identities
thus aims at imagining daily work not as merely fulilling instrumental tasks, but as
the self-optimizing and development of every worker’s life project. Organizational
success thereby rests upon the member’s engagement, something that may be achieved
by the promise of professional autonomy and auspicious career opportunities (Du
Gay 1996; Alvesson 2004).
Organizational identity, however, diverges theoretically from that of profes-
sional identity and could sometimes be contradictory. It stands for a connection
in culture and space, upheld by members of the same organization as long as they
belong to it, and comprises ‘the collectively constructed and continuously rene-
gotiated understanding among the members of an organization of “who-we-are”’
(de Bruin 2000, 2004). Research has shown that organizational identiication is
often more salient than that of the profession, which partly explains organiza-
tional diferences in journalistic ideals (Becker 1982; Wiik 2010). Furthermore,
the concept of organizational identity focuses on the negotiations between profes-
sional and managerial discourses, negotiations that are often described by journal-
ists in more antagonistic than cooperative terms (Sveningsson 1999; Gade 2004;
Westlund 2011).
his interplay of identities explains how and why the incorporation of busi-
ness values as professional standards occurs. he organizational identity refers to a
discourse of control, promoting managerial values, hierarchical structures of author-
ity, externalized forms of target-setting and performance review. It is an appealing
myth, attracting professionals with promises of higher status and autonomy, a myth
concealing excessive symbolic power that makes explicit manager supervision unnec-
essary; it means ‘control at a distance’ (Alvesson 2004). Professional identity refers
to the discourse constructed within professional groups, involving values of collegial
authority, trust and self-regulation. To individuals and groups within news organiza-
tions, daily work is marked by the constant negotiation between organizational and
occupational professionalism.
 Managing the newsroom 471

Research design
In our aim to reach a deeper understanding of how journalists and their manag-
ers perceive the inluence of diferent actors in the newsroom, we draw empirical
support from three studies: Swedish Journalist Surveys 1995–2011 (SJS), Swedish
Editor-in-Chief Survey 2011, and an interview study with journalists working at three
of the largest quality morning papers in Sweden. All three studies were conducted
at the Department of Journalism, Media and Communication at the University of
Gothenburg (JMG). Our analysis is based on a mixed-method approach as these
studies comprise both survey data and quantitatively thematized semi-structured
interviews.
he SJS were conducted as mail surveys targeting a representative sample of Swedish
journalists. All surveys conducted were carried out with collaboration between the
Department of Journalism, Media and Communication at the JMG and the Swedish
Union of Journalists (SUJ). An SJS survey has been conducted every ifth year since
1989 and the present study was performed in the autumn and winter of 2011–2012.
he representativeness of the SJS surveys comes from the very high degree of unioni-
zation among Swedish journalists. According to the union, about 85 per cent of all
employed journalists and about 50 per cent of all freelancers were members of the SUJ
in 2011 (Andersson 2012). he key reasons for the success of the union in attract-
ing members are its long history (it was founded in 1901) and the fact that the SUJ
serves both as a traditional trade union and as a professional organization for Swedish
journalists. To be accepted as a member of the SUJ one must be an active professional
journalist, a freelancer or employed by a Swedish media organization.
he SJS surveys target a sample of union members. In 2011, the union had 17,500
members and the survey sample consisted of 2500 individuals, randomly selected.
hose individuals received a postal survey containing questions about a wide range
of topics: gender, age, class and education, career and work experiences, working
conditions, professional values, journalistic norms and ethics, and media attitudes.
In 2011, the total net sample consisted of 2362 individuals. For newspaper journal-
ists, the net sample was 966 individuals out of which 556 returned a completed
questionnaire, providing a net response rate of 58 per cent, a number similar to
the response rates in the 1989–2005 SJS surveys (Andersson 2012). In the upcom-
ing results section we will deal with the results from two out of the six SJS surveys:
1995 and 2011.
he second study, the Swedish Editors-in-Chief Survey 2011, was conducted simul-
taneously with the Swedish Journalist Survey 2011 and included questions similar to
those of the SJS survey. he survey focused on all editors-in-chief working at daily
newspapers, television centres and radio stations in Sweden. However, only responses
from top managers at daily newspapers will be analysed in this study. In 2011, a
total sample of 87 top newspaper managers received a postal survey and 58 replied to
the questionnaire, providing a response rate of 67 per cent. he group of journalists
and editors-in-chief that responded to the surveys in 2011 was representative of each
472 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

population in terms of critical factors such as gender, age and workplace (Andersson
2012).
In our analysis we deal with two questions that relate to the issue of editorial inlu-
ence on professional journalism. First, how the daily inluence from speciic actors has
changed in the newsroom during the past decades. his question was addressed in the
1995 and 2011 SJS surveys and in the 2011 SES survey. Here, we regard this question
as a measure of how the power balance in news work has shifted over time. Second,
we also analyse how the working conditions of professional journalism are perceived
to have changed over time. his question was addressed in the 1989 and 2011 SJS
surveys. he question is used as a measure of a changing management culture in the
newsroom and how this cultural change afects journalistic work. Both questions
were measured by ordinal scales. he exact wording of the questions and the given
response set are presented in connection with the tables below. Measurements used to
analyse the quantitative data are based on percentages, balance measures and bivariate
correlations.
In addition, we also draw material from an interview study investigating the percep-
tions of journalists working at the three largest quality morning papers in Sweden:
Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten. All three of them have,
like most daily morning papers in Sweden, gone through some pervasive changes
over the past decades, caused by hardening competition, omnipresent digitaliza-
tion, marketization, reorganizations, and downsizings – conditions that make them
particularly relevant to study. Dagens Nyheter and Svenska Dagbladet are both located
in the Swedish capital Stockholm, while Göteborgs-Posten is located in Gothenburg,
the second-largest city in Sweden. hey are all subscribed morning papers and are
distributed seven days a week. In addition to the printed newspaper, all three of them
also ofer their readers online editions.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted at these newspapers in autumn 2012
and focused on how the respondents perceived news work to have changed during
the past decade, in terms of inluence and editorial management (see also Andersson

Dagens Nyheter Svenska Dagbladet Göteborgs-Posten

Location Stockholm Stockholm Gothenburg
Average daily
circulation
1990 400,100 230,700 278,000
2014 282,800 1
158,500 177,000
Publishing frequency 7 days/week 7 days/week 7 days/week
Financing model Prescriptions/ Prescriptions/ Prescriptions/
advertisers advertisers advertisers
For Dagens Nyheter the average daily circulation is based on igures from 2013.
[1]

Table 1: Basic facts about the newspapers.

 Managing the newsroom 473

2013). All interviewees worked as reporters, were aged 35–68 years, and had worked
between ten and 40 years at the newspaper. heir responses were analysed by the
thematic analysis of two dimensions of the management–staf relationship: irst, how
editorial inluence has changed over time; and second, how this change has come to
afect the working situation of journalists. Some of these responses will be quoted in
the analysis in order to highlight the main indings of the surveys.

Perceived inluence over news content

An aspect of news work where the discursive shift within news media may be visible
is inluence over the actual output, the news content produced at the oice on an
average day. Current media and professional debates often imply a degenerating news
industry, where money talks really loudly and commercial demands have undoubt-
edly gained increased importance for news companies over time (cf. McManus 1994;
Croteau and Hoynes 2006; Hamilton 2006). Suggested consequences following this
comprise, for instance, decreasing autonomy, toughening working conditions and
even ‘de-professionalization’ of the journalistic occupation (Nygren 2008b; Andersson
and Wiik 2013). he rise of a stronger management culture certainly seems to verify
those concerns (cf. Andersson and Wiik 2013), but when Swedish journalists are
asked how they perceive editorial inluence the result is twofold.
Focusing on the perceived impact of diferent actors on news content, journal-
ists agree that the main control of the output on an average day is found within the
newsroom. About 45% of them ind the editorial board to have a very large inlu-
ence on daily editorial content, followed by journalists themselves and the managing
editor in third place (Table 2). he journalists’ perception of their own inluence has
remained more or less stable since the mid 1990s. Some striking changes are visible
when assessing the management, however, as journalists deem the inluence of both
the editorial board and the managing editor to have become less assertive over time. In
1995, 67% of the journalists regarded the editorial board to have a very large impact
on everyday news work; in 2011 the number was 45%. his means that the number
of journalists who regard the impact of managing editors to be very large has decreased
by 32 percentages points over the past sixteen years. A similar view also applies to the
corporate board, although in that case the change is not as radical.
When managing editors are asked the same question, the result is diferent. Since
the Swedish Editors-in-Chief Survey did not start until the early 2000s, this part of the
analysis deals with managing editors´ perceptions in 2011. Compared to the percep-
tions of journalists, there were some signiicant diferences found in the perceptions
within the newsroom. For example, the managing editors of 2011 saw themselves as
being more inluential than the journalists perceived them to be. he share of manag-
ing editors that described their own impact as very high in 2011 was 40 per cent.
Furthermore, 62 per cent of the managers claimed that the editorial board had a very
high impact on the news work. From these results, managing editors appear to hold
editorial management in rather high regard when it comes to impact on daily work
474 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

Editorial Individual Managing Corporate Owner(s) Advertising

board journalists editor board department
According to journalists (J) 1995
Very large 67 33 34 9 7 2
Rather large 30 54 38 21 13 7
Rather small 2 11 18 39 31 25
Very small 1 2 8 21 31 39
None at all 0 0 2 9 17 27
According to journalists (J) 2011
Very large 45 32 20 5 3 1
Rather large 43 54 38 17 13 12
Rather small 9 13 29 34 28 25
Very small 3 2 11 25 25 32
None at all 0 0 2 19 31 30
Dif. very large
−22 −1 −14 −4 −4 −1
inluence
1995–2011
According to managing editors (ME) 2011
Very large 62 33 40 3 2 0
Rather large 31 55 43 10 5 3
Rather small 7 10 12 40 24 16
Very small 0 2 3 26 29 38
None at all 0 0 2 21 40 43
Dif. very large
17 1 20 −2 −1 −1
inluence 2011
J-ME
Surveys: SJS 1995, 2011 and SES 2011.
Notes: he question was worded: When considering who has inluence over the editorial content
on an average day at your oice how would you describe the inluence of the following actors? he
number of respondents among journalists was 404 in 1995 and 565 in 2011. he number
of managing editors in 2011 was 58. he correlations (Spearman’s correlation) in journalists’
perceptions 1995–2001 are: editorial board −0.24***; individual journalists −0.02; managing
editor −0.16***; corporate board −0.16***; owners −0.12***; advertising department −0.02.
he correlations in journalists’ and managing editors’ perceptions in 2011 are: editorial
board 0.10**; individual journalists 0.02; managing editor 0.16***; corporate board −0.04;
owners −0.08*; advertising department −0.12***. *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p=0.00.
Table 2: How journalists and managing editors perceive the impact of diferent actors
on the editorial content on an average day in 1995 and 2011 (per cent; Spearman’s
correlation).

and news content at the newspaper. he third most inluential group in the newsroom
was individual journalists, according to the perceptions of managing editors.
When comparing the perceptions of journalists and managing editors, one feature
comes out as particularly distinctive, namely that journalists and managing editors
 Managing the newsroom 475

have rather diferent perceptions about the importance of management. his opinion
gap could illustrate the professional self-suiciency of the journalists as well as the
mythological dimension of the managerial discourse (cf. Djerf-Pierre and Weibull
2011). Apparently, there is a dissonance somewhere in the meeting between those
discourses in the newsroom. But why is this so and what consequences does it have on
the professional work in news irms?
One possible explanation for the emergence of such diferences may be sought in
the fast-developing management culture of Scandinavian news irms. Previous research
indicates that tougher economic strains, reorganizations and changes in work routines
have relocated power from journalistic driving forces to management (Andersson and
Wiik 2013). his development follows similar changes found in the public sector,
where institutions such as universities, schools and health care are now characterized
by a stronger emphasis on managerialism (cf. Clark and Newman 1997; Deem 2004;
Dalkir 2011). Given this, it is logical that editorial managers perceive their position,
as well as the position of the editorial board, to be of utter importance. To express the
opposite view, i.e. that the leadership role is less important, would be a downright act
of self-degradation. Emphasizing managerial skills as well as the importance of these
may therefore be considered as crucial to managing editors. hey manifest their ability
to represent modern leadership and, thereby, also secure and legitimize their levelled
organizational positions. From this perspective, it may be that managing editors, more
or less consciously, tend to overestimate their inluence in the newsroom.
A similar approach also applies to the journalists. he increasingly insecure and
constrained working situation, regarding both working conditions in the news organi-
zation and in the labour market generally (Tyrkkö and Karlqvist 2005; Nygren and
Witschge 2009), raises the need to be perceived as important key players to news irms
as well as in society. his may, for example, be done by rating the impact of editorial
management much lower than it actually is. But it could also be that the journalists
simply tend to underestimate the power of managers, perhaps because managers are
unclear about their powers and inluence in daily work (cf. Tidningsutgivarna 2013).
A third explanation may be that they both perceive the situation correctly. Managers
perhaps do not need to be assertive because of the eagerness of journalists to adapt to
organizational goals and values. his perspective has been brought forward by Alvesson
(2004) as well as Evetts (2003, 2006), who both argue that the negotiation between
organizational goals and professional standards is one of the most eicient control
mechanisms of knowledge-intensive irms. What we could be seeing now is a gradual
movement of journalists from the core of professional values towards the organiza-
tional identity, as they have little choice but to take company goals into considera-
tion. his may eventually mean a change in the professional identity of journalists,
as the guiding ideals slowly transform into a more commercially beneicial formula.
In any case, the diference in attitudes between journalists and their managers regard-
ing editorial control indicates an ongoing negotiation over power still waiting to be
settled.
476 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

Perceived changes in working conditions

he second aspect of journalistic activities we ind relevant to address in this article
is the matter of working conditions within the newsroom. Our interest is based on the
assumption that a strengthened managerialism within news production may inluence
the working conditions for journalists, principally regarding professional autonomy
and the freedom to control one’s own work, but also in terms of the sense of fellow-
ship within the staf. A managerial reward system directed towards individual achieve-
ments rather than the collective could presumably result in increasing competition
and mistrust between co-workers (Serrano and Reichard 2011).
he survey data reveals that Swedish journalists perceive that managerial control has
tightened since the mid 1990s, but this change does not seem to have meant a wors-
ening of the working conditions (Table 3). Quite the opposite, in fact: the number
of journalists who perceive good cohesion among colleagues has increased, and those
who experience ierce competition between co-workers have decreased. Also, there
almost seems to be consensus among the journalistic corps regarding professional
values, and that it is even easier to gain support for one’s own ideas today than it was
two decades ago, at least according to the perceptions of Swedish newspaper journal-
ists. hese results suggest an accentuated homogenization of the corps, a movement
that may be explained by the unsecure conditions characterizing the business and, as
such, a way of coping with external pressure and uncertainty is to close ranks around
common professional ideals and practices (Wiik 2010). Another reason is repeated
redundancies in the news irms: large-scale staf cuts may have afected the composi-
tion of the workforce, by providing a dismantling of professional outliers (Andersson
2014). Whatever the explanation, the working conditions of newspaper journalists
appear to have improved, at least partially, over the past few decades.
Despite the weakening inluence of editorial management over news content, as
expressed by journalists in Table 2, the group perceiving their own speciic work-
place to be characterized by tough managerial control was larger in 2011 compared
to the situation in 1995. During the mid 1990s about every third journalist felt that
the editorial management had a tight rein over news work. Similarly, in 2011, this
view was shared by every second journalist. However, supplementary interviews with
journalists reveal that most of them seem to be rather accepting of the inluence of a
stronger management – at times they even appear to consider it a good thing.
Interviews conducted at the leading national dailies Dagens Nyheter, Svenska Dagbladet
and Göteborgs-Posten show that the journalistic staf to some extent agrees with the
managerial goals of cost-eiciency and standardization. he reporters verify a common
sense among journalists that both standardization and editorial control have increased
appreciably during the 2000s. A journalist on Dagens Nyheter describes that the newspa-
per used to have a ‘tradition where writers exerted extensive power over what they wrote’,
but that this has been weakened as ‘tougher editing and more distinct prioritizing’ were
applied. A colleague at Svenska Dagbladet told how journalists could previously work
pretty undisturbed in a bubble, something that changed during the early 2000s:
 Managing the newsroom 477

Tough Good Fierce Shared Hard to gain

control from cohesion competition values in support for
management among between important one´s own
colleagues individuals professional ideas
issues
According to journalists (J) 1995
Fully agree 5 36 7 14 4
Partly agree 27 50 28 66 25
Partly
disagree 40 9 33 14 31
Fully disagree 28 5 32 6 40
According to journalists (J) 2011
Fully agree 11 46 3 20 4
Partly agree 38 45 25 64 23
Partly
disagree 25 6 39 12 27
Fully disagree 17 3 33 4 46
Dif. fully 6 10 −4 6 0
Agree
1995–2011
According to managing editors (ME) 2011
Fully agree 2 53 0 26 3
Partly agree 50 40 33 72 9
Partly
disagree 33 7 48 2 19
Fully disagree 15 0 19 0 69
Dif. fully −9 7 −3 6 −1
Agree 2011
J-ME
Survey: SJS 1995, 2011 and SES 2011.
Notes: he question was worded: How would you like to characterize the work environment
in your newsroom? he number of respondents was 456 in 1989 and 562 in 2011. he
number of managing editors in 2011 was 58. he correlations (Spearman’s correlation) in
journalists’ perceptions 1995–2001 are: tough control 0.18***; good cohesion 0.11**; ierce
competition −0.06; shared values 0.08**; hard to gain support −0.06*. he correlations in jour-
nalists’ and managing editors’ perceptions in 2011 are: tough control −0.01; good cohesion
0.04; ierce competition 0.07; shared values 0.10**; hard to gain support −0.13**. *p<0.05,
**p<0.01, ***p=0.00.
Table 3: How journalists and managing editors perceive their working conditions in 1995 and
2011 (per cent; Spearman’s correlation).
478 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

You can still do that if you have a good idea, which is how it always has been.
But previously, people could deinitely go on living more unruled in their
module: ‘I’m doing a story on this and that’ and then straight into the news-
paper.

Most journalists describe how they could previously just say ‘I am writing this’ to
the editorial management and that this was okay, while during the 2000s this has
become more of a discussion between the journalist and the editor, where the latter
demands a reason from the journalist as to why a certain article should be written.
Previous research has shown that editors-in-chief associate strengthened editorial
management with higher journalistic quality (Andersson and Wiik 2013). By provid-
ing professional leadership characterized by a irm grip on economy, staf and ei-
ciency, managing editors perceive themselves as standing stronger when it comes to
publicist integrity and journalism quality. he notion of rising journalistic quality,
as argued by the editors-in-chief (Andersson and Wiik 2014), also occur among the
journalists in our interview study. One of the reporters at Svenska Dagbladet describes
this perception in the following manner: ‘I think that texts in general have become
better due to the stronger management. Now you just don’t let somebody write 4000
letters if you don’t ind it interesting […]’.
It should be noted, however, that when journalists in the interview study talk about
an increase in journalistic quality, they mainly connect this increase to the removal
of less desirable and poorly written articles from the newspaper. In other words, this
change indicates a rise of the lowest level of quality in journalism, rather than an
increase in the quality of journalism as a whole.

Conclusions
In this article we have focused on the perceptions of inluence and control among
Swedish newspaper professionals; especially the inluence that diferent actors have
on news content, and how the working environment is perceived with reference
to a changing management culture. Our basic assumption was that journalists
and managers would perceive the managerial discourse to have gained inluence,
perhaps at the cost of the professional inluence of journalists. To some extent our
assumption proved to be right: managing editors clearly experience increased inlu-
ence over the newsroom, something that was veriied by the journalists´ perceptions
of their own working conditions. But the results also indicated something else:
journalists did not perceive the same shift in power regarding inluence over the
actual output; on the contrary, in this respect the journalists perceive themselves to
be in charge. Additionally, they seem to consider the last decade’s change in edito-
rial management to be beneicial to working conditions and, to some extent, to
journalistic quality.
he complex results conirm that the two survey questions measure diferent
dimensions of journalistic work. Journalists perceive that the managing editor has lost
 Managing the newsroom 479

inluence over editorial content, but simultaneously state the working environment to
be increasingly marked by management control – how does this it? First of all, it is
important to make the distinction between managers and management control. While
journalists have a personal relationship with their managers, providing an opening for
discussion and negotiation in the daily work, management control is a discursive force
inluencing work organization, norms and professional decisions more imperceptibly.
Regarding news content, the reining of journalistic standards and news valuation has
led to professional mainstreaming of journalistic work (Nygren and Witschge 2009).
his, along with the competition-driven rewriting and ‘churnalism’ of news (O´Neill
and Harcup 2009; Bakker 2012), is likely to make managerial control over news
content less noticeable than the organizational control. he organizational control
exerted by management is far more extensive and includes, for instance, work divi-
sion, payment and rewards, employment and so on. hese material factors constitute
the actual foundations of journalistic activities, and are increasingly being controlled
by management – a situation conirmed by both managers and journalists in our
surveys.
However, the interviews included in our empirical base indicate that journalists
may ind the increasing managerial inluence to have some positive efects. Talking
about news quality, they forward the opinion that the lowest level has been raised,
and that this is connected to increasing managerial control. While handling these
interviews with care, they still add to the understanding of the journalists’ percep-
tions of their working environment. Although they experience tougher control from
management, they also perceive improved cohesion among colleagues as well as shared
professional values and other positive developments. his discrepancy may partly be
explained by diverging identities. Evetts (2006) points to the contemporary paradox
of the increasing professionalization of service occupations, while the actual condi-
tions for professional autonomy seem to be on the decline. She explains this by divid-
ing professionalism into either an occupational or an organizational discourse. By
acknowledging the professional identity as being tied to occupational professionalism,
and the organizational identity as corresponding with organizational professionalism
(de Bruin 2000, 2004), we can clarify the shifting loyalties among journalists – and
hence, their seemingly contradictive opinions. Organizational identity centralizes
negotiations between professional and managerial discourses, and as news organiza-
tions are being increasingly dominated by managerial leadership (e.g. Djerf-Pierre and
Weibull 2011) it is likely to characterize this negotiation.
A positive approach among journalists to the current development may signal
increasing loyalty towards the workplace, which indeed is an important goal of
modern management (Serrano and Reichard 2011). he toughening situation of
the labour market makes organizational belonging even more attractive to the indi-
vidual, and journalistic work is still relatively free compared to many other semi-
professional occupations. Additionally it should be noted that no development is all
gloom; much newsroom reorganization has actually resulted in better use of economic
and technical resources, as well of human capital. Storey et al. (2005) argue, however,
480 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

that the increasing entrepreneurialism of journalism, at an individual level, is driven

by the managerial discourse applied from above. Such value changes represent the
outcome of changing organizational structures, where new forms of organizational
control attempt to redeine the professional identity of employees and freelancers. But
the alleged individualism of media workers is, according to Alvesson and Willmott
(2002), in many respects a chimera; covering up for reorganizations, outsourcing and
rationalizations. Control is still organizationally based, even if the organization itself
has become more loosely composed in its structure.
he attempts of managerial discourses to regulate the identity of workers could,
on the other hand, sometimes backire if challenged by professionalism. For
instance, too strong a stress on entrepreneurial values from the management may
cause workers to distance themselves from the company as a key source of identii-
cation. Previous research and general debate have strongly implied that journalistic
leadership is changing; that it has become increasingly dominating and that the
power balance within news organizations is shifting, a process that is conirmed by
the results in our study. his development will have far-reaching consequences for
journalistic work as well as for journalism’s role in society and therefore needs to be
further investigated. here is still often a vibrant working climate surrounding jour-
nalists, and we need to identify the constitution of this in relation to the weakening
conditions for news production that more or less characterize western media. he
journalists’ energy, cooperation and will to change creates the necessary basis for
future transformations of news media, but we have to ensure that those values are
not being lost or misused.

References
Achtenhagen, Leona and Raviola, Elena (2009), ‘Balancing tensions during convergence:
Duality management in a newspaper company’, International Journal on Media
Management, 11: 1, pp. 32–41.
Aldridge, Merryl and Evetts, Julia (2003), ‘Rethinking the concept of professionalism: he
case of journalism’, British Journal of Sociology, 54: 4, pp. 547–64.
Alvesson, Mats (2004), Knowledge Work and Knowledge-Intensive Firms, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Alvesson, Mats and Willmott, Hugh (2002), ‘Identity regulation as organizational control:
Producing the appropriate individual’, Journal of Management Studies, 39: 5,
pp. 619–44.
Andersson, Ulrika (2012), ‘Metoddokumentation’/‘Methodology’, in K. Asp (ed.), Svenska
Journalister 1989–2011/Swedish Journalists 1989–2011, Gothenburg: University of
Gothenburg, pp. 117–25.
—— (2013), Från Fullformat till Tabloid: Formatets Betydelse för Nyhetsjournalistiken/
From Full Format to Tabloid: he Meaning of Format to News Journalism, Sundsvall:
Demicom.
—— (2014), Organisationsteori för mediemedarbetare/Organizational heory for Media
Practitioners, Lund: Studentlitteratur.
 Managing the newsroom 481

Andersson, Ulrika and Wiik, Jenny (2013), ‘Journalism meets management: Changing lead-
ership in Swedish news organizations’, Journalism Practice, 7: 6, pp. 705–15.
—— (2014), ‘New demands on editorial leadership: Perceived changes in Swedish newspa-
per management’, Observatorio (OBS*) Journal, 8: 2, pp. 1–16.
Bakker, Piet (2012), ‘Aggregation, content farms and Huinization: he rise of low-pay and
no-pay journalism’, Journalism Practice, 6: 5&6, pp. 627–37.
Baldasty, Gerald (1992), he Commercialization of News in the 19th Century, Madison and
London: he University of Wisconsin Press.
Becker, Lee B. (1982), ‘Medium inluence on reporters’, in J. S. Ettema and D. C. Whitney
(eds), Individuals in Mass Media Organizations: Creativity and Constraint, Beverly
Hills: Sage Publications Inc., pp. 145–61.
Clarke, John H., Gewirtz, Sharon and McLaughlin, Eugene (2000), New Managerialism,
New Welfare?, London and housand Oaks, CA: Open University in association with
SAGE Publications.
Clark, John G. and Newman, Janet (1997), he Managerial State: Power, Politics and Ideology
in the Remaking of Social Welfare, London: Sage.
Croteau, David and Hoynes, William (2006), he Business of Media: Corporate Media and the
Public Interest, housand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Cutler, Tony and Waine, Barbara (2000), ‘Managerialism reformed? New labour and public
sector management’, Social Policy and Administration, 34: 3, pp. 318–32.
Dalkir, Kimiz (2011), Knowledge Management in heory and Practice, Cambridge, MA: MIT.
de Bruin, Marijn (2000), ‘Gender, organizational and professional identities in journalism’,
Journalism, 1: 2, pp. 217–38.
—— (2004), ‘Organizational, professional and gender identities: Overlapping, coinciding
and contradicting realities in Caribbean media practices’, in M. de Bruin and K. Ross
(eds), Gender and Newsroom Cultures: Identities at Work, Cresskill: Hampton Press Inc.
Deem, Rosemary (2004), ‘he knowledge worker, the manager-academic and the contem-
porary UK university: New and old forms of public management’, Financial
Accountability and Management, 20: 2, pp. 107–28.
Deem, Rosemary and Brehony, Kevin (2007), ‘Management as ideology: he case of “new
managerialism” in higher education’, Oxford Review of Education, 31: 2, pp. 217–35.
Deuze, Mark (2005), ‘What is journalism?: Professional identity and ideology of journalists
reconsidered’, Journalism, 6: 4, pp. 442–64.
—— (2007), Media Work, Digital Media and Society Series, Cambridge: Polity.
Deuze, Mark and Fortunati, Leopoldina (2010), ‘Journalism without journalists: On the
power shift from journalists to employers and audiences’, in G. Miekle and G.
Redden (eds), News Online: Transformations and Continuities, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan, pp. 164–77.
Djerf-Pierre, Monika and Weibull, Lennart (2011), ‘From idealist-entrepreneur to corporate
executive’, Journalism Studies, 12: 3, pp. 294–305.
Du Gay, Paul (1996), Consumption and Identity at Work, London: SAGE Publications.
Eide, Martin (1992), Nyhetens Interesse: Nyhetsjournalistikk Mellom tekst og Kontekst/he
Interest of News: News Journalism Between Text and Context, Oslo: Univ. forl.
Enteman, Willard F. (1993), Managerialism: Emergence of a New Ideology, Madison, WI:
University of Wisconsin Press.
Evetts, Julia (2003), ‘he sociological analysis of professionalism: Occupational change in the
modern world’, International Sociology, 18: 2, pp. 395–415.
482 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

—— (2006), ‘he sociology of professional groups: New directions’, Current Sociology, 54: 1,
pp. 133–43.
Fenton, Natalie (2011), New Media, Old News: Journalism & Democracy in the Digital Age,
Los Angeles: Sage.
Fournier, Valerie (1999), ‘he appeal to “professionalism” as a isciplinary mechanism’,
Sociological Review, 47: 2, pp. 280–307.
Gade, Peter J. (2004), ‘Newspapers and organizational development: Management and jour-
nalist perceptions of newsroom cultural change’, J&C Monographs, 6: 1,
pp. 35–55.
—— (2008), ‘Journalism guardians in a time of great change: Newspaper editors’ percei-
ved inluence in integrated news organizations’, Journalism & Mass Communication
Quarterly, 85: 2, pp. 371–92.
Gade, Peter J. and Perry, Ernest L. (2003), ‘Changing the newsroom culture: A four-year case
study of organizational development at the St.Louis post-dispatch’, Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, 80: 2, pp. 237–347.
Hamilton, James T. (2006), All the News hat’s Fit to Sell: How the Market Transforms
Information into News, Princeton, NJ and Woodstock: Princeton University Press.
Harrington, Stephen (2008), ‘Popular news in the 21st century: Time for a new critical
approach?’, Journalism, 9: 3, pp. 266–84.
Le Grand, Julian and Bartlett, Will (1993), Quasi-Markets and Social Policy, London:
Macmillan.
McChesney, Robert W. (2011), ‘he crisis of journalism and the Internet’, in G. Miekle
and G. Redden (eds), News Online: Transformations and Continuities, Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 53–68.
McChesney, Robert W. and Nichols, John (2010), he Death and Life of American
Journalism: he Media Revolution that will Begin the World Again, Philadelphia, PA:
Nation Books.
McManus, John H. (1994), Market-Driven Journalism: Let the Citizen Beware?, housand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McQuail, Dennis (2000), McQuail’s Mass Communication heory, London: Sage.
Mintzberg, Henry (1989), Mintzberg on Management: Inside our Strange World of
Organizations, New York: Free Press.
Nies, G. and Pedersini, Roberto (2013), Freelance Journalists in the European Media Industry,
Brussels: European Federation of Journalists.
Nordling, Johan (2013), ‘Beklagansvärd Utveckling på Dagens Nyheter’/‘Pitiful development
at Dagens Nyheter’, Journalisten/he Journalist, 3 October, p. 3.
Nygren, Gunnar (2008a), Nyhetsfabriken: Journalistiska Yrkesroller i en Förändrad
Medievärld/he News Factory: Journalistic Roles in a Changed Media World, Lund:
Studentlitteratur.
—— (2008b), Yrke på Glid: om Journalistrollens De-professionalisering/A Sliding Occupation:
On the De-professionalization of Journalism, Stockholm: Sim(o).
Nygren, Gunnar and Althén, Kajsa (2015), Landsbygd i medieskugga: Nedmonteringen av
den lokala journalistiken och bilden av landsbygden i Dagens Nyheter/he country-
side in Media Shadow: he Dismantling of the Local Journalism and the Image of the
Countryside in Dagens Nyheter, Stockholm: Södertörns högskola.
Nygren, Gunnar and Witschge, Tamara (2009), ‘Journalism: A profession under pressure?’,
Journal of Media Business Studies, 6: 1, pp. 37–59.
 Managing the newsroom 483

Ohlsson, Jonas (2012), he Practice of Newspaper Ownership, Gothenburg: University of

Gothenburg.
O’Neill, Deirdre and Harcup, Tony (2009), ‘News values and selectivity’, in K. Wahl-
Jorgensen and T. Hanitzsch (eds), he Handbook of Journalism Studies, New York:
Routledge, pp. 161–74.
Picard, Robert G. (2006), ‘Capital crisis in the proitable newspaper industry’, Nieman
Reports, 60: 4, pp. 10–12.
Pollitt, Christopher (1993), Managerialism and the Public Services: Cuts or Cultural Change in
the 1990s?, Oxford: Blackwell.
Serrano, Shawn A. and Reichard, Rebecca J. (2011), ‘Leadership strategies for an engaged
workforce’, Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 63: 3, pp. 176–89.
Shenhav, Yehouda (1999), Manufacturing Rationality: he Engineering Foundations of the
Managerial Revolution, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Siegrist, Hanne (1990), ‘Professionalization as a process: Patterns, progression and discon-
tinuity’, in M. Burrage and R. Torstendahl (eds), Professions in heory and History:
Rethinking the Study of the Professions, London: Sage, pp. 177–202.
Singer, Jane B. (2003), ‘Who are these guys?: he online challenge to the notion of journalis-
tic professionalism’, Journalism, 4: 2, pp. 139–63.
Soloski, John (1989), ‘News reporting and professionalism: Some constraints on the
reporting of the news’, Media Culture & Society, 11: 20, pp. 207–28.
Storey, John, Salaman, Graeme and Platman, Kerry (2005), ‘Living with enterprise in an
enterprise economy: Freelance and contract workers in the media’, Human Relations,
58: 8, pp. 1033–54.
Sveningsson, Stefan (1999), Strategisk Förändring, Makt och Kunskap: om Disciplinering och
Motstånd i Tidningsföretag/Strategic Change: On Diciplin and Resistance in Newspaper
Companies, Lund: Lund University Press.
Tidningsutgivarna (2013), Kartläggning: Kompetensförsörjning redaktionella chefer/Mapping
the Field: he Skills of Editorial Managers, Stockholm: Tidningsutgivarna.
Tuchman, Gaye (1978), Making News: A Study in the Construction of Reality, New York: Free
Press.
Tyrkkö, Anja and Karlqvist, Lena (2005), Arbetsvillkor och arbetsbelastning i journalistiskt
arbete: en studie av tidningsredaktioner/Working Conditions and Workload in Journalistic
Work: A Study in Newspaper Oices, Stockholm: Arbetslivsinstitutet.
Walters, Emma, Warren, Christopher and Dobbie, Mike (2006), he Changing Nature of
Work: A Global Research Report, Brussels: International Federation of Journalists.
Westlund, Oscar (2011), Cross Media News Work – Sensemaking the Mobile (R)evolution,
Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
Wiik, Jenny (2010), Journalism in Transition: he Professional Identity of Swedish Journalists,
Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
Wilberg, Erik (2002), An Investigation into Leadership Practices in Sweden and Norway,
Uxbridge: Henley Management College, Brunel University.

Suggested Citation
Wiik, J. and Andersson, U. (2016), ‘Managing the newsroom: Perceptions of inluence and
control among Swedish newspaper professionals’, Journal of Applied Journalism &
Media Studies, 5: 3, pp. 465–484, doi: 10.1386/ajms.5.3.465_1
484 J. Wiik and U. Andersson

Contributor details
Jenny Wiik (Ph.D.) is a senior lecturer of journalism at the Department of Journalism,
Media and Communication at the University of Gothenburg, Sweden.
Contact: University of Gothenburg, Department of Journalism, Media and Communication
(JMG), Box 710, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
E-mail: jenny.wiik@jmg.gu.se
Ulrika Andersson (Ph.D.) is associate professor and researcher at the SOM-institute and
the Department of Journalism, Media and Communication at the University of Gothenburg,
Sweden.
Contact: University of Gothenburg, Department of Journalism, Media and Communication
(JMG), Box 710, 405 30 Gothenburg, Sweden.
E-mail: ulrika.andersson@som.gu.se

Jenny Wiik and Ulrika Andersson have asserted their right under the Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act, 1988, to be identiied as the authors of this work in the format that was submitted
to Intellect Ltd.