Exogenous shocks like the COVID-19 pandemic unleashes multiple fundamental questions about society beyond public health. Based on the classical concept of ‘need for orientation’ and the literature on the role of the media in times of crisis, we investigate to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic affected news consumption in comparative perspective. Based on a two-wave panel survey in 17 mostly European countries, our study targets the role of both legacy news brands (TV, radio, newspapers) and so-called contemporary news media (Internet-based and social media) during this global health crisis. Our results show an overall rise of news use across countries, but only for some types of news media. We find an increase of TV news consumption, and a higher reliance on social media and the Internet for news and information. This indicates that in times of crises and an unusually strong need for orientation, people mainly turn to news sources that are easily available and offer a more immediate coverage. Furthermore, we find the rise in news use to be mainly present among those who already have a higher level of trust in legacy media and among people that were more concerned about the impact of the pandemic.

The transition from low- to high-choice media environments has had far-reaching implications for citizens’ media use and its relationship with political knowledge. However, there is still a lack of comparative research on how citizens combine the usage of different media and how that is related to political knowledge. To fill this void, we use a unique cross-national survey about the online and offline media use habits of more than 28,000 individuals in 17 European countries. Our aim is to (i) profile different types of news consumers and (ii) understand how each user profile is linked to political knowledge acquisition. Our results show that five user profiles – news minimalists, social media news users, traditionalists, online news seekers, and hyper news consumers – can be identified, although the prevalence of these profiles varies across countries. Findings further show that both traditional and online-based news diets are correlated with higher political knowledge. However, online-based news use is more widespread in Southern Europe, where it is associated with lower levels of political knowledge than in Northern Europe. By focusing on news audiences, this study provides a comprehensive and fine-grained analysis of how contemporary European political information environments perform and contribute to an informed citizenry.

This article presents key results of a comparative journalists’ survey on media accountability, for which 1762 journalists in 14 countries had been interrogated online. The article explores how European journalists perceive the impact of old versus new media accountability instruments on professional journalistic standards – established instruments like press councils, ethics codes, ombudsmen and media criticism, but also more recent online instruments like newsroom blogs and criticism via social media. Thus, the study also adds empirical data to the current debate about the future of media self-regulation in Europe, ignited by the Leveson Inquiry in the United Kingdom as well as the European Commission’s High-Level Group on Media Freedom and Pluralism.

The article explores training programs in higher education with regard to data journalism from a multi-national perspective. By carrying out a comparative analysis in six European countries (Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Italy, Poland, and the United Kingdom), it covers different models of media systems and journalistic cultures envisaged by Hallin and Mancini. Based on a desk review and in-depth interviews with instructors of data journalism in each country, the article identifies different approaches to the way data journalism is taught. In Europe, such programs are offered by four types of organizations: academic, vocational, professional, and civic. The role played by those organizations can be explained as a result of the peculiarities of national media systems. But there are also commonalities, for example, non-academic institutions (such as the European Journalism Center or the Center for Investigative Journalism) and major international news outlets (such as The Guardian and The New York Times) seem to take over a leading role in all of the analyzed countries. Generally speaking, data journalism education appears to be a very young discipline that frequently neglects fundamental journalistic topics such as ethical issues, transparency, accountability, and responsiveness although they are crucial in a journalistic field as sophisticated tools to reveal hidden aspects of reality.

This article presents findings from a 1-year-long ‘online news ethnography’ and 20 semi-structured interviews conducted in Italian local newsrooms. It explores journalists’ practices in their relations with sources throughout the entire process of news production: discovering, gathering, and writing news. The relation between institutional sources and journalists sees the former acquiring increasing importance for the latter. At the same time, journalists guarantee access also to a limited array of non-elite sources. The result is what can be called the ‘pluralization’ of primary definers: the extensive and unframed use of a wide range of sources (mainly institutional, but also non-elite). Whether this asymmetrical coverage reinforces or weakens conceptions of political, social, and cultural power should be investigated further, but the work of journalists as watchdogs appears to be in danger.