Experiences of External Interference Among Finnish Journalists

Open access


This study examines the prevalence, methods and implications of external interference among Finnish journalists based on survey responses from 875 working journalists. The definition of external interference used in the study encompasses all active and invasive methods external actors use to interfere in the journalistic process with the objective to influence editorial content. The findings indicate that low-level interference in everyday journalistic practices and mediated verbal abuse are the most frequent types of external interference. While severe interference is rare, results show that the perceived risk of interference causes concern and self-censorship among the respondents. The results are in line with previous Nordic and European studies, and underline how external interference may have detrimental effects on journalistic autonomy also in countries with strong legal, institutional and cultural safeguards of press freedom.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Berkowitz D. (2009). Reporters and their sources. In K. Wahl-Jorgensen & T. Hanitzsch (eds.) The handbook of journalism studies (pp. 102-115). New York: Routledge.

  • Chadwick A. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Clark M. & Grech A. (2017). Journalists under pressure: Unwarranted interference fear and self-censorship in Europe. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.

  • Cook C. Heath F. & Thompson R. (2000). A meta-analysis of response rates in web- or internet-based surveys. Educational and Psychological Measurement 60(6): 821-836.

  • Council for Mass Media (2016). Miksi JSN ei julkaise karsittuja kanteluja? [Why CMM does not publicise rejected complaints]. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.jsn.fi/blog/16-8-2016-miksi-jsn-ei-julkaise-karsittuja-kanteluja/. [accessed 2017 September 26].

  • Council for Mass Media (2017). Guidelines for journalists and an annex. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.jsn.fi/en/guidelines_for_journalists/. [accessed 2017 December 15].

  • Deuze M. (2005). What is journalism? Professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered. Journalism 6(4): 442-464.

  • Finnish Newspapers Association (2016). Media-ala puolustaa yhteisvoimin vastuullista sananvapautta [The media industry stands united in defence of responsible freedom of speech]. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.sanomalehdet.fi/ajankohtaista/uutiset/media-ala-puolustaa-yhteisvoimin-vastuullista-sananvapautta-2. [accessed 2016 August 11].

  • Freedom House (2017). Freedom of the press - United States. [online]. Retrieved from https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2017/united-states. [accessed 18 October 2017].

  • Haapalainen M. (2016). JSN: Toimittajien uhkailu vaarantaa sananvapautta [CMM: Intimidation of journalists jeopardises the freedom of speech]. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.journalisti.fi/ajankohtaiset/jsn-toimittajien-uhkailulla-on-laajoja-haittavaikutuksia/. [accessed 11 August 2016].

  • Hanitzsch T. (2011). Populist disseminators detached watchdogs critical change agents and opportunist facilitators: Professional milieus the journalistic field and autonomy in 18 countries. The International Communication Gazette 73(6): 477-494.

  • Hemánus P. (1983). Journalistinen vapaus [Journalistic freedom]. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.

  • Jann B. & Hinz T. (2016). Research question and design for survey research. In C. Wolf D. Joye T. Smith & Y-C. Fu (eds.) The SAGE handbook of survey methodology (pp. 105-121). London: Sage.

  • Kantola A. & Lounasmeri L. (2014). Viestinnän ammattilaiset promootioyhteiskunnassa: aktivisteja ja ajatusjohtajia [Communication professionals in a promotion society: Activists and thought leaders]. Media & Viestintä 37(3): 3-21.

  • Kodellas S. Papastavrou N. Giannakoulopoulos A. & Koutsompolis D. (2014). Journalists’ victimization experiences and fear of crime at the workplace: Results of a questionnaire survey from Greece and Cyprus. European Journal of Communication 29(4): 480-494.

  • Koivunen A. (2017). #Sipilägate and the break-up of the political bromance: Crisis in the relationship between Finnish Media and Politicians. Nordicom-Information 39(1): 44-51.

  • Krosnick J. (1999). Survey research. Annual Review of Psychology (50): 537-567.

  • Kunelius R. Noppari E. & Reunanen E. (2010). Media vallan verkoissa [Media in the networks of power]. Tampere: University of Tampere.

  • Kunelius R. (2003). Viestinnän vallassa: johdatusta joukkoviestinnän kysymyksiin [Mesmerised by communication: Introduction to questions of mass communication]. Helsinki: WSOY.

  • Kuutti H. (ed.) (2011). Julkisuusjournalismi [Publicity journalism]. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä.

  • Landsverk-Hagen A. (2015). Meningers mot - netthat og ytringsfrihet i Norge [The courage of opinions - internet hate and journalistic freedom of expression in Norway]. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

  • Löfgren Nilsson M. (2016). Hoten och hatet mot journalister [Threats and hate towards journalists]. [online]. Retrieved from http://jmg.gu.se/digitalAssets/1577/1577351_jp9-trakasserier-journalister.pdf. [accessed 2017 September 20].

  • Löfgren Nilsson M. & Örnebring H. (2016). Journalism under threat: Intimidation and harassment of Swedish journalists. Journalism Practice 10(7): 880-890.

  • Luostarinen H. (1994). Mielen kersantit: julkisuuden hallinta ja journalistiset vastastrategiat sotilaallisissa konflikteissa [Sergeants of the mind: Publicity control and Journalistic counter-strategies in military conflicts]. Helsinki: Hanki ja Jää.

  • Luque Martinez J. (2015). Trolled by the state. British Journalism Review 26(4): 61-66.

  • Marttinen M. (2016) “Hakkaan sinut paskaksi” [“I will beat you to a pulp”]. Journalisti March 17 2016. [online]. Retrieved from < https://www.journalisti.fi/artikkelit/2016/4/hakkaan-sinut-paskaksi/>. [accessed 2017 January 18].

  • Mäntylä J. (2008). Journalistin etiikka [Journalist ethics]. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.

  • Nerone J. (1994). Violence against the press: Policing the public sphere in U.S. history. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Noppari E. & Hiltunen I. (2018). Populistinen vastamedia eliittejä haastamassa [Populist counter media challenging the elites]. In M. Niemi & T. Houni (eds.) Media & populismi - Työkaluja kriittiseen journalismiin [Media & populism - Tools for critical journalism]. (pp. 236-272). Tampere: Vastapaino.

  • Nord L. (2008). Comparing the Nordic media systems: North between west and east. Central European Journal of Communication 1(1): 95-110.

  • Parker K. (2015). Aggression against journalists: Understanding occupational intimidation of journalists using comparisons with sexual harassment. Oklahoma: University of Tulsa.

  • Pietiläinen T. (2007). Selkeyttä vai sensuuria? [Clarity or censorship?]. In S. Seppä (ed.) Journalismikritiikin vuosikirja 2007 [The yearbook of journalism critique]. (pp. 91-98). Tampere: University of Tampere.

  • Pöyhtäri R. Ahva L. & Väliverronen J. (2014). Mistä on suomalainen toimittaja tehty? Worlds of journalism- surveyn tuloksia Suomesta [What is the Finnish journalist made of? Worlds of journalism survey results from Finland]. Tampere: University of Tampere.

  • Reich Z. & Hanitzsch T. (2013). Determinants of journalists’ professional autonomy: Individual and national level factors matter more than organizational ones. Mass Communication and Society 16(1): 133-156.

  • RSF (2016a). Suomi on jälleen lehdistönvapauden ykkösmaa [Finland is again the number one country for press freedom]. [online]. Retrieved from http://toimittajatilmanrajoja.com/fi/2016/04/20/tiedote-suomi-jalleen-lehdistonvapauden-ykkosmaa/. [accessed 2016 August 11].

  • RSF (2016b). Reporters without borders (RSF) remains concerned about actions taken by national broadcaster YLE. [online]. Retrieved from https://rsf.org/en/news/reporters-without-borders-rsf-remains-concerned-about-actions-taken-national-broadcaster-yle. [accessed 2017 November 15].

  • RSF (2017). Journalism weakened by democracy’s erosion. [online]. Retrieved from https://rsf.org/en/journalism-weakened-democracys-erosion. [accessed 2017 October 18].

  • Shoemaker P. & Reese S. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. New York: Longman.

  • Sivo S. Saunders C. Chang Q. & Jiang J. (2006). How low should you go? Low response rates and the validity of inference in is questionnaire research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 7(6): 351-414.

  • Sudman S. & Kalton G. (1986). New developments in the sampling of special populations. Annual Review of Sociology 12: 401-429.

  • The Union of Journalists in Finland (2017). Join the union. [online]. Retrieved from https://journalistiliitto.fi/en/membership/join-the-union/. [accessed 2017 November 15].

  • Trottier D. (2017). Digital vigilantism as weaponisation of visibility. Philosophy & Technology 30(1): 55-72.

  • Waisbord S. (2002). Antipress violence and the crisis of the state. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 7(3): 90-109.

  • Weaver D. & Elliott S. N. (1985). Who sets the agenda for the media? A study of local agenda-building. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 62(1): 87-94.

  • WJS (2018). The WJS 2012-2016 study. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.worldsofjournalism.org/research/2012-2016-study/. [accessed 2018 January 16].

Journal information
Impact Factor

CiteScore 2018: 0.54

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.223
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.270

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 294 294 13
PDF Downloads 194 194 16