Newsroom journalists reported that they usually did not have an equal say in how political issues are framed, although guidelines and rules exist at an informal level. Managerial appointments were decided by managers and media owners, and journalists did not have a say in this process either. Finally, several gender issues abound in Greek journalism, whether recognised by the journalists or not. A complete lack of any formal rules to support or promote women journalists’ careers and access to managerial positions existed, as well as the lack of any system for monitoring and evaluating their participation in decision-making procedures.
Starting with the process of appointing editors-in-chief, the interview findings are rather uniform across all different media outlets. An exception was the newspaper Efimerida ton Sintakton, which is collaboratively owned by its journalists and, therefore, adopts different democratic procedures in the election of its editor-in-chief. Interviewed editors-in-chief and newsroom members of leading news media all concurred on how the appointment of the editor-in-chief was a decision made by directors of the organisation, and sometimes its owners. Some editors-in-chief interviewed underlined the importance of certain values, such as impartiality in the decision-making process:
For someone to become an editor-in-chief he/she needs a lot of things. They [editors-in-chief] need to know how to manage, to prove each day that they have professional judgment, and be impartial; to make sure that there are no political interests behind their actions, and make sure that what is broadcast is what most people want, what they are most interested in.
Another interviewee added the importance of experience:
It is first and foremost a matter of experience. It is a matter of a well-rounded understanding of news. One needs to have gone through various posts, so he/she can have an in-depth understanding of the issues and of the news itself. Whoever is good at what he/she does and works hard and in a correct manner, can move on.
However, most of the interviewees made it clear that although there are certain criteria that someone must fulfil before being appointed editor-in-chief, the decision ultimately rested with the organisation’s owners. For example, another editor-in-chief explained: “For privately-owned media, it is clearly a decision of the ownership. We do not have a self-governing system; the owners decide and appoint who will take charge of what in the framework of a structure”. Other interviewees argued that “the owner and the management decided it, obviously based on the work of each of us”, pointing to some cases where the ownership of the media had a more direct role in employees’ selection process. In other cases, however, the administration of the organisation did not play a role in the selection process. This was especially true for larger organisations, such as the one described here:
The director proposes someone; the administration cannot propose. The administration does not understand journalistic work. It has executives that they trust and, these are the executives who decide to propose, in a well-documented manner always, what it is that makes them believe that the person can fulfil the duties of an editor-in-chief, to the administration.
Finally, as aforementioned, the Efimerida ton Syntakton, a daily newspaper, which is a collaborative business endeavour owned by its journalists, is a key exception. One of the interviewees describes the process through which the journalists can have a say in the election of an editor-in-chief:
It is a simple mechanism. From the day we started, the general assembly chose the director and the director of editing. From then on, each department elected its own editor-in-chief […]. The editors-in-chief are elected and that is confirmed by the editing board, which is the sum of the editors plus the two members of the administration […]. The department can also propose someone for the position of the editor-in-chief, meaning, for example, the political department of the newspaper. When the position is vacant, they can say, for example, that we propose this or that person. The director and the editor in chief propose; it is discussed in the board of directors and if – let’s say – the department accepts it, then we are fine with it.
However, this example remains an outlier in the Greek media landscape, rather than the emergence of a new paradigm. The lack of formal rules, compounded with the lack of agency of journalists to be anything more than merely heard, was also noted by some interviewees with regard to how political issues were framed and how decisions were made.
In any case, the Greek media remains more politicised and partisan than their northern European counterparts. Moreover, the political stance of a medium’s owners is still the defining factor determining how news pieces are framed, as demonstrated in the arguments within journalists’ testimonies:
The sense I have is that each media company has a political identity, even if professionally non-partisan. You try to serve this identity, it in the best possible way without, of course, being against public opinion. This means that you do not misinform, you do not peddle propaganda. There is a visible line. Discussions between the editors and the editor-in-chief obviously result in the final decision.
Finally, the issue of women’s careers and women’s ascendance to managerial positions is also rather problematic. Most women journalists and editors-in-chief reported that there were very few women that climbed up the hierarchy of their media organisations. One of the female chief editors interviewed explained:
A woman’s career in journalism goes through many levels where she has to prove much more than a man [in the same position] what she is worth. It is enough to say that in 2019 in Greece there is not even one woman news director in any media house. A woman’s career stops at the position of the editor-in-chief, and very rarely in a managerial position, not because she is not qualified or cannot manage it, […] but the numbers speak for themselves. It is not acceptable that in a newsroom there are two women and ten men. Moreover, there can be no working place with ten men and one woman in the editor-in-chief positions.
