There are not many possibilities for people to participate in the news process. The newspaper section “Letters to the Editors” is the most frequently used feedback tool. This traditional way of giving a feedback still has weight and is subject to newsroom selection. nowadays most letters to the editors are actually “emails to the editor”. Journalists complain about the bulk of emails, which are very often written in a sloppy non-reflexive way. With it, letters to the editor have experienced degradation.
Most interviewees see the importance of getting the civil society (or at least their audience) involved, but interference is avoided if possible. Public involvement has no high priority. Even though they take feedback seriously, any real participation is not taking place. The audience has no possibility to set the agenda.
A current study illustrates that the Internet, and especially the possibilities offered by Web 2.0, intensifies the interactivities with the audience and changes participation. The Internet has become the most important interaction channel. However, citizens’ comments are often filtered. Journalists collect comments on popular topics to re-use them in new articles. The audience – in rare cases – may thus influence the news selection (cf. Keel et al. 2010: 25). On a more regular basis, free sheets and tabloids use photographs sent in to their websites. Altogether, journalists and editors-in-chief are ambivalent towards the new possibilities offered by the Internet. A serious dialogue with the audience fails, due to the lack of time and the low quality of the feedback. More interaction mainly means more work (cf. Keel et al. 2010: 31).
