The formal involvement of journalists in newsroom decisions has been law since the “25 April 1974”-revolution that brought democracy to the country. The Constitution states the right of journalists to elect newsroom councils, as well as their right to have a word in the editorial orientation of the news media. The underlying concept is that media activity is not just a business like any other (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001), only regulated by the supply-and-demand market laws. On the contrary, it deals with a public good of great importance for social and political life, nourishing democracy, and stimulating citizenship. For this reason, journalists are expected to actively work to guarantee that the media meet their social responsibilities. Furthermore, because the media deal with sensitive issues concerning the fundamental rights of citizens, they are supposed to adopt serious principles and standards of ethical behaviour. Journalists must be especially committed to these, even when they conflict with management priorities (Fidalgo, 2008a). The permanent tension in the journalistic field between the “cultural pole” and the “commercial pole” (Bourdieu, 2005), with a clear over-valuation of the commercial dimension in recent times (Garcia, 2009), makes participation in newsroom democracy even more delicate.
All news media with at least five journalists must have a newsroom council. And most of them have it, even if their function is sometimes confined just to formal consultations. There are two known exceptions in our sample: the leading radio station Rádio Renascençaand the leading popular daily Correio da Manhã. The newsroom council must be consulted when a new editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief is appointed, but, unlike in the first years after the democratic revolution that is now a non-binding opinion. As for media in the public sector (public television, public radio, and public news agency), the appointment of editors-in-chief (made by the board) must have the favourable opinion of the ERC after a formal hearing. Apart from this, regular meetings of the newsroom council with the editor-in-chief take place in order to discuss the editorial orientation of the medium and discuss internal problems that may arise. In most media in our sample (Público, Expresso, RTP, SIC), there is a dynamic tradition of involving the newsroom council in all the relevant decisions such as when a journalist is appointed in a leading position, when new journalists are to be hired, or when some controversy arises involving the outlet. The editors-in-chief interviewed for this report give great importance to this relationship and participate monthly in the council meetings. The council is elected by the newsroom, but the editor-in-chief is formally its president.
The weekly Expresso has a detailed Code of Conduct and the daily Público has a Style Book that goes far beyond the technical standards of newsmaking. It is an important instrument of accountability because it is often quoted when readers present their complaints to the newspaper’s ombudsperson. There is also a Style Book in public television (RTP).
Since July 2019, Expresso also has a special recommendation for all its journalists regarding their individual participation on social media (Expresso, 2019). The newspaper suggests that journalists do not separate their personal and professional profiles, in order to have “a coherent management of the online journalist’s identity and in accordance to [with] the ethical principles” of the profession. It also recommends that journalists “be aware if the expression of their opinions compromise[s] their independence”.
Some democratic control by journalists in the newsrooms still exists. However, the economic and financial problems of the media industry put a great deal of pressure on the newsrooms which threatens journalists’ jobs and contributes to their demobilisation. On the other hand, with the importance given by all media to online breaking news and follow-ups (even if they will later be developed in the traditional editions), time to debate is increasingly reduced in the newsroom, as several journalists interviewed in this research project revealed. With a downsized labour force and an increased demand for news on different platforms all the time, meetings are reduced to a minimum and time to discuss or reflect on what is being done has almost disappeared.
Internal rules to promote female journalists’ careers or their access to managerial positions do not exist at all. All the editors-in-chief from our sample (six editors-in-chief and one deputy editor-in-chief) insisted in their interviews that discrimination of female journalists is not an issue in their newsrooms. All these seven editors are men, although five of them have female journalists in their managing teams, and in intermediate leading positions (editorial departments) there is a fair balance in terms of gender.
