Again, this indicator must be balanced between what is formally prescribed in some newsrooms and what the day-by-day routines actually show. Furthermore, it must be balanced between what the editors say about the allegedly existing procedures and what the rank-and-file journalists comment on the subject, with the first guaranteeing that clear procedures are generally followed, and the latter complaining that team-work and collective dynamics in the newsroom are disappearing. The economic crisis, the decreasing circulation figures, the downsizing of most newsrooms – all of these things seem to favour a climate of uncertainty, of demobilization, and of fear of losing one’s job, which reinforces an individualistic approach to work and a disinterest in more collective initiatives.
The leading reference newspapers, such as Público and Expresso, have defined extensive internal rules for selecting and processing news. They are commonly followed and seem to be very useful, for example, in the process of integration of new journalists. But this should be regarded more as an exception than as a rule.
In the past decade, the role of press ombudsman in recalling the principles for news processing, and in adding a reflective voice to the speed of journalistic routines, has been important. Three of the major dailies (Jornal de Notícias, Público and Diário de Notícias) used to have an ombudsman, but presently only Público keeps its “readers’ advocate”, apparently because it is not easy to pay for such a job when the number of journalists is being severely reduced.
