An ethical code from the national journalism association, Colegio de Periodistas, does exist. But neither the document nor the entity was considered a referent by the media. In their interviews, they asserted it was a political entity, hindering journalistic labour and situating itself in opposition to the media, rather than being a true contributor to their work.
Three of the interviewed media houses stated they had stylebooks. The public television channel explained that it exists, and each journalist receives it, but also that its use was reserved only for critical situations. However, for another, it was reported as a fundamental tool, updated yearly, and it could imply a sanction for journalists not respecting it. In this case, an abridged version was displayed in the editorial meeting room. Generally, there was a certain consensus that journalists gradually learnt and knew the identity of the medium where they work. Therefore, either with or without a document, there were issues and ways of addressing them that respond to that identity, which are developed on the job.
In every case, the most relevant factor for defining the medium’s identity in its news selection was the decision taken by the editor together with the journalist. Editorial meetings, often more than once a day, are an established part of the daily routine for most media, where the staff decides on what news would be covered. Also, depending on the format – for instance, in-depth reporting or a live dispatch on television – journalists and editors agreed that the dialogue during the day is vital, whether it happens remotely or inside the newsroom. Such conversations were considered essential to internal deliberation. It is where, for instance, they defined how to treat issues of equality, the plurality of sources, and the language and focus of the news.
This, however, does not automatically imply high levels of reflection, and functions in the same way as the daily editorial meeting, answering to the agenda and urgent matters of the day. Studies on written and televised news in Chile (Gronemeyer & Porath, 2015; Mujica & Bachmann, 2015; Valenzuela & Arriagada, 2009) have shown that there is a tendency towards homogeneity in news selection. Explanations for this are that the media in general answers to routine, invitations to common briefings called by authorities or other public figures through communication agencies, journalists covering the same area for too long, and solidarity among colleagues from different media working on the same topic. The interviewed journalists and editors working in daily coverage recognised that routine has a heavier weight than strategic reflection about content. One editor interviewed commented: “The guidelines for daily reporting are constructed usually by heart. It is not as if we have heavy discussions in the mornings, because there is no time. The topics are the obvious ones”.
There are indications that digital media republishes content from other media, and therefore, it does not make a substantial difference in the news selection process (Mellado & Scherman, 2020). However, it was observed that media incorporating more investigative journalism intended to differentiate themselves and introduce topics in the agenda. While content published in social media is intended to be up to date with public discussion, both editors and journalists stated they were careful when checking this information. In interviews, they asserted a critical view against polarisation, uncivility, and disinformation occurring on social networks, therefore considering them less relevant than other mechanisms for the generation of news.
