Professional journalistic culture is a complex of journalistic values, practices, norms and media products. On the one hand it tends to unification across the globe, but on the other hand these cultures varies according to cultural diversities.  Technological development leads to a media convergence, increasing interactivity and plenty of opportunities for individualization of media content influence audience’s demands and consequently challenge of traditional routine of journalists’ work, affect professional practices and even undermine traditional role of a journalist in society. Social media creates new conditions for both actors: readers/viewers/listeners and for media professionals who use it as a tool for media work.  Journalists in the different countries, however, use social media for professional needs not equally. This paper is discussing differences and similarities in the patterns of social media use by Polish, Russian and Swedish journalists.  The research is based on a survey of 500 journalists in each country.  

The chapter by Davydov and Johannson is dedicated to the history and current state of the TAM system in Russia. Special attention is payed to origins of national TV market and first steps in audience measurement in 1990s. The story of battles around series of TAM tenders, that didn't manage to unite the industry around the measurement project, is given in detail. Authors argue that the existing TAM project is a result of compromise between the needs of global advertisers and political system. It is shown, that during the reign of Vladimir Putin since 2000 Russian government has strong influence on decisions in the field of audience measurement. However the reached consensus on the TV measurement among various political groups seems to be quite fragile.

The specific of Russian media model called as Statist Commercial model is a combination of Western market economy elements with considerable influence from the political elite. It is also characterized by state control of media, lack of legal protection for journalists, restriction of professional journalistic autonomy, and censorship/self-censorship. However, the media market is represented not only by propagandistic national TV channels but also by press disloyal to the Kremlin, indicating a degree of diversity and pluralism.

The Russian media is targeting different audiences: the larger group serves the wide audience who passively absorbing the propaganda; the smaller (“liberal”) media group enables a small stratum of intellectuals to let off steam and as a facade of democracy for the worldwide public. Both groups are functioning diachronically, being directly or indirectly managed by the state.

The development of social media created new conditions for Russian journalists. LiveJournal is the most popular and relatively non-controlled blog platform in Russia. The core of political/public discourse is mainly held there and potentially can be useful for Russian journalists. This research is based on analysis of 100 journalist’s blogs in the period of the last presidential election 2012; the findings show how they use LiveJournal for professional goals. This paper is discussing to what extend journalists’ blogging works as a compensatory means and a tool for self-expression outside the media companies in conditions of press freedom restriction.  

The Russian journalism has certain peculiarities based on deeply rooted traditions and state of the modern media system. It has developed a double professional culture; on the one hand it has been serving the state interests and on the other hand journalism has been a mission of enligthment and education in the tradition of the “intelligentia”. New technologies drastically affect media work. Since the mid of 2000s the introduction of social media challenged journalists’ role in society as well as professional practices and norms. This paper discusses an existence of pattern of using social media by Russian journalists based on historical roots and socio-cultural and political background. 

To strive for autonomy is key to professional journalistic culture, although the degree of autonomy varies between countries and media systems. A survey distributed to 100 journalists in Sweden and Russia explores their views on journalistic autonomy: the professional duties of journalists, the degree of autonomy they enjoy in their day-to-day work, as well as journalists’ opinions about the development of press freedom. The findings reveal that journalists in both countries share many professional values but also feel pressures on their professional autonomy in Sweden mostly a commercial pressure and in Russia predominantly a political pressure but also the commercial interests of owners and advertisers. There are also some clear differences. Independence in daily work is less for Russian journalists and the obstacles ahead of publishing more common and they have a negative view on the development of press freedom.

The present article describes trends in the development of the journalistic profession as seen by Swedish and Russian students in journalism. The study focuses on the results of a survey carried out among students at three Swedish and three Russian institutions of higher education. The survey demonstrates numerous similarities in ideals and values as well as in understanding of the professional code of journalism among students in Russia and Sweden. Historical background is evident in the students' different interpretations of key problems of journalism and in their assessment of freedom of the press. Finally, the research questions the professional future of journalism, focusing on possible threats and presenting several development scenarios for the industry.

The object of this study is professional cultures among journalists in three countries. The first question in the process is to decide who is a journalist – and the answer is not evident. Deuze (2007:141) describes contemporary journalism as only one kind of work in the broad media sector – an industry with unclear borders between different parts and media workers going in and out of different professional roles. He calls them “portfolio workers” going between assignment and professional roles, which become liquid. Other research describes journalism as a profession passing through on the way to other  better paid jobs (Nygren, 2011:219; Pasti et al., 2012:280).

In this study, journalists are defined as people professionally producing content based on facts (not fiction or entertainment) for what  we traditionally label as “mass media”, in contemporary debate also called “legacy media”: newspapers and magazines, TV and radio channels, online and digital formats connected to the traditional media industry. Also the growing number of “content producers” outside  media companies is included; freelancers  and those employed in production companies. This classic definition of a journalist has problems, for example the borders towards public relations, content marketing and towards entertainment in feature journalism. It also means that independent bloggers and people producing all kind of content produced for  social media platforms are not included in the definition, even if this content has journalistic qualities and sometimes also can generate incomes making it professional in some sense.

It is likely that the definition of “journalists” is going to change, professional borders are not fixed forever and media development changes the industry quickly (Anderson et al., 2013). But still this old definition has relevance in relation to the content for daily media consumption. This old definition also makes it possible to connect to earlier research on journalists and their professional cultures in the coming analysis.

In this chapter we give the reasons behind the choice of Poland, Russia and Sweden, and some background on professional journalism in these three countries. We also describe the design of the project and the research questions to be answered. The methods in accomplishing the survey and interviews are described in detail.