Current issue

The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 64 , No. 5

[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies - Vol. 64, No. 5, pp.5-45
Abbreviation: KSJCS
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 31 Oct 2020
Received 07 Aug 2020 Revised 28 Sep 2020 Accepted 05 Oct 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2020.64.5.001

의례적, 방어적, 의도적 : 한국 주요 신문 에디터의 사실확인을 중심으로 한 게이트키핑 관행 연구
김창숙**
**이화여자대학교 커뮤니케이션․미디어연구소 연구위원 (changchangh@naver.com)

Ritual, defensive, intentional : A study on gatekeeping practices centered on fact-checking of major Korean newspaper editors
Changsook Kim**
**Researcher, Ewha Communication & Media Research Center (changchangh@naver.com)

초록

이 연구는 한국 주요 신문 에디터들이 게이트키핑 과정에서 취재기자가 작성해온 기사에 포함된 사실을 어떻게 확인하고, 어떻게 사실을 확정하는 방식으로 기사를 다듬는지 그 관행을 알아보았다. 기존 게이트키핑 연구가 주로 뉴스 주제 또는 게이트키핑에 영향을 미치는 요인에 대한 것이었던 것과 달리, 이 연구는 사실확인을 중심으로 한 게이트키핑 행태를 알아보는 것을 목적으로 했다. 6개 주요 일간지 사회부 에디터 12명을 인터뷰한 결과, 에디터들은 형식적이고 방어적으로, 통과의례처럼 사실 확인을 하고 있었으며, ‘요구된 사실’에 맞춰 진실을 왜곡하기도 하는 모습이 나타났다. 표현 측면에서는 취재원의 익명 표현과 관련해 인식과 실천이 괴리되어 있었고, 명백히 문제가 되는 표현만 수정하고 있었으며 객관성을 가장해 의견을 표현하는 관행이 있었다. 이를 해결하기 위해 에디터를 대상으로 한 저널리즘 교육 실시, 사실확인 담당자 배치, 시민의 뉴스 리터러시 교육 등을 제안했으며, 한국 언론이 진실 검증자로 거듭나는 것이 필요하다는 점을 주장했다.

Abstract

This study investigated the practices regarding how major Korean newspaper editors check and verify the facts contained in the articles written by reporters during the gatekeeping process, and how they refine articles in a way that confirms the facts. Unlike previous gatekeeping studies, which were mainly about news topics or factors that influence gatekeeping, this study aimed to investigate gatekeeping behaviors centered on fact verification. To that end, I conducted in-depth interviews with 12 editors of the social affairs department of six major daily newspapers: Chosun Ilbo, JoongAng Ilbo, Dong-A Ilbo, Hankyoreh, Kyunghyang Shinmun, and Hankook Ilbo. Results showed that editors were checking facts formally and defensively based on trust, common sense, and experience, like a rite of passage, and they also distorted the truth according to the 'required facts'. In terms of expression, perceptions and practices were separated from the reporter's anonymous expression, only the expressions that were clearly problematic were corrected, and there was a practice of expressing opinions by pretending to convey objectivity. Overall, editors were more aware of the fact-checking norms related to coverage and article writing, but it was found that, the more specific questions were asked, the more they emphasized the limitations of practice and justified the wrong way of doing things. Most interviewed editors had rationalized, internalized, and consolidated existing practices, and were unable to break away from existing wrong practices if they did not actively engage in learning with a sense of problem on their own. To solve this problem, the researcher suggested reinforcing journalism education for editors, assigning fact-checking staff, and teaching citizens' news literacy, and stressed the need for Korean media to be reborn as truth verifiers. The study is meaningful in that it has expanded its research on gatekeeping and media practices academically. Until now, gatekeeping research has mainly studied how gatekeeping has changed in the changing media environment and what factors affect gatekeeping. This study found out the gatekeeping practices, focusing on checking the facts, which can be said to be key in the news gatekeeping process, and found out more specifically the cause of the production of inaccurate reports that are not accurate. This study expands the subject and scope of research through specialized research for editors. In practice, it is meaningful that the clues for resolving the problem were substantiated by understanding the internal practices of the media. Until now, many studies have criticized news released without confirmation of facts, but the causes have been discussed somewhat abstractly. Editors' perceptions of facts, facts confirmation, and practices revealed through this study can be a practical guide in suggesting solutions that urge the press to report accurately and truthfully.


Keywords: Journalism, Gatekeeping, Editing Practices, Fact Checking & verification, Objectivism
키워드: 저널리즘, 게이트키핑, 에디팅 관행, 사실확인(팩트체킹), 객관주의

Acknowledgments

This study is a revised and supplemented part of Kim Changsook's(2019) doctoral dissertation.(이 논문은 김창숙(2019)의 박사학위논문의 일부를 수정, 보완한 것입니다).


References
1. Bass, A. Z. (1969). Refining the “gatekeeper” concept: A U. N. radio case study. Journalism Quarterly, 46, 69-72.
2. Berger, A. A. (2000). Media and communication research methods: an introduction to qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3. Borden, S. L., & Tew, C. (2007). The role of journalist and the performance of journalism: Ethical lessons from “fake” news (seriously). Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 22(4), 300-314.
4. Borel, B. (2016). The Chicago guide to fact-checking. University of Chicago Press.
5. Bruns, A. (2003). Gatewatching, not gatekeeping: Collaborative online news. Media International Australia, 107, 31-44.
6. Canby, P. (2012). Fact-checking at The New Yorker. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from https://archives.cjr.org/critical_eye/fact-checking_at_the_new_yorker.php
7. Creswell, W. (2012). Qulilitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Cho, C.-R. (2006). A study of the election-related reporting and gatekeeping process on the local newspaper: Focused on Gans' multiperspectival approach. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 50(4), 381-410.
9. Choi, Y. (2011). The theory of the vicious circle of divided politics, divided media, and divided public opinion. Korean Journal of Journalism Symposium and Seminar, 137-152.
10. Choi, J.-H, & Han, D.-S. (2012). The partisanship of media and the media intervention in political-power creation in Korea: Focusing on the analysis of the major newspapers' editorial articles during the 13-17th presidential election campaigns. Journal of Communication Science, 12(2), 534-571.
11. Gieber, W. (1956). Across the desk: A study of 16 Telegrapf editors. Journalism Quarterly, 33, 424-432.
12. Hong, Y.-J. (2007). Types and Causes of the Korean Press' Incorrect Reporting: Study on Ten Presses (1990~2006). Master's Thesis, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea.
13. Hong, J., & Son, Y. J. (2017). Korean media partisanship in the report on THAAD rumor: Network and frame analysis. Korean Journal of Communication & Information, 84, 152-188.
14. Jang, H.-Y. (2004). A study of Korean journalists' organizational career path: Analysis of newsroom people. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 18(2), 36-67.
15. Jang, H., & Oh, S. (2001). Study on the use of reporters in the Korean-American newspaper. Press Criticism, 7.
16. Jung, Y. S. (2012). An attitudinal study of news value among Korean journalists. Journal of Korean Society for the Scientific Study of Subjectivity, 24, 25-44.
17. Kim, C. S. (2019). Fact checking or fact making?: A study on Korean newspaper fact-checking practice. Doctoral dissertation, Ewha womans University, Seoul, Korea.
18. Kim, C. (2020). A study on Korean newspaper fact-checking practices: Major daily newspapers, social department reporters. Journal of Communication Research, 57(3), 286-335.
19. Kim, D. (2017). A study on organizational factors to influence gatekeeping. The Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 21, 8(5), 107-126.
20. Kim, D. (2020, 6, 10). Wrong report, now we will definitely AS. Reporter Association. Retrieved fromhttp://www.journalist.or.kr/news/article.html?no=47781.
21. Kim, D., & Kim, J. (2017). An exploratory study on gatekeeping in the digital age. Journal of Korea Culture Industry, 17(3), 29-37.
22. Kim, D.-G., & Kim, K.-H. (2005). The qualitative study about the news material collecting organization and habitual practice of Korea newspapers. Journal of Communication Science, 5(2), 33-68.
23. Kim, D. Y., Kim, S. H, & You, Y. M (2013). Fair mediator or Biased Advocator: Understanding journalism partisanship through analyzing opinion section of national dailies in South Korea. Journal of Communication Science,13(3), 75-122.
24. Kim, D., & Kim, J. (2017). An exploratory study on gatekeeping in the digital age. Journal of Korea Culture Industry, 17(3), 29-37.
25. Kim, K. (2012). Online news production in the new journalism environment between tradition and change. Journal of Communication Research, 49(1), 7-37.
26. Kim, K. (2016). Gatekeeping of mobile portal news influence on using news in the perspective of journalism. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 60(3), 117-144.
27. Kim, K.-K., & Song, Y.-H. (2004). Exploratory of the classification of major press corps in Korea. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 18(1), 38-75.
28. Kim, S.-S. (2004). Relationship between specialism and news quality in newsgathering activities: Concerning recruiting routes. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 48(2), 56-78.
29. Kim, S.-S. (2009a). News executives’ attitudes towards usage of agency news. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 53(4), 276-298.
30. Kim, S.-S. (2009b). Understanding of political news production through analysis of news production practices. Paper presented at the meeting of Korea Press Foundation, Seoul.
31. Kim, S.-S. (2012). A study on tensions between newsgathering and copy editing domain. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 56(4), 55-79.
32. Kim, Y. (2009). A study on the career path of newspaper journalists. Master's Thesis, Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea.
33. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2014). The Elements of Journalism (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Three Rivers Press.
34. Korea press foundation (2013). Journalist Consciousness Survey. Seoul: Korea press foundation.
35. Korea press foundation (2017). Journalist Consciousness Survey. Seoul: Korea press foundation.
36. Korea press foundation (2019). Digital New Report. Seoul: Korea press foundation.
37. Lee, N. Y. (2018). Scientific objectivity, formal objectivity, Korean formal objectivity: Comparative analysis of news sources and quotations used in Korean newspapers and New York Times and The Times of London. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 62(2), 112-142.
38. Lee, J.-K. (2003). Conditions for a Free Press in Korean Society. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 47(2), 54-77.
39. Lau, R. W. K. (2004). Critical realism and news production. Media, Culture and Society, 26(5), 693-711.
40. Lippmann, W. (1922). The Public Opinion. San Diego, CA: Harcourt, Brace & Co.
41. Mcuail, D., & Windaghl, S. (1981). Communication Model for the study of mass communications. New York, NY: Longman.
42. Missouri group (2017). News reporting and writing.12th edition. Boston, MA: Bedford/st.martin's.
43. Nisbet, E., & Garrett, K. (2010). Fox News Contributes to Spread of Rumors About Proposed NYC Mosque. Retrieved from https://rkellygarrett.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Nisbet-Garrett-Fox-News-contributes-to-spread-of-rumors.pdf
44. Nam, J.-I. (2008). The cultural particularity of objectivism in Korea: The structural feature of routine reporting activities of police reporters. Journal of Communication Science, 8(3), 233-270.
45. Park, D. (2015). A study of double validity claims in quotations: News source network analysis of news on the four major rivers project in the Dong-A Ilbo and the Hankyoreh. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 59(5), 121-151.
46. Park, Y., & Kim, K. (2016). Journalism as a ritual: For a new understanding of partisan journalism in Korea. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 60(1), 202-228.
47. Park, Y.-G. (1996). A plan to improve the Korean newspaper coverage system. Journalism Research, 5, 87-140.
48. Paskin, D. (2018). News publishing across platforms: Gatekeeping for print, web, Facebook and Twitter [On-Line]. Newspaper Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739532918806897.
49. Redmond, J. W. (2006). Issues in Human Relations Management, In A. B. Albarran, S. M. Chan-Olmsted, & M. O. Wirth (Eds.), Handbook ofMedia Management and Economic (pp. 115-144). London: Routledge.
50. Schäfer, M. (2011). Science journalism and fact checking. Journal of Science Communication, 10(4), 1-5. Retrieved from https://jcom.sissa.it/sites/default/files/documents/Jcom1004(2011)C02.pdf
51. Schudson, M. (1996). The sociology of news production revisited. In J. Curran & M. Gurevitch (Eds.), Mass media and society (2nd ed.) (pp. 141-159). London: Arnord.
52. Shim, J.-C. (2003). A few thoughts on news values in an era of the digital media. Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunications Research, 33-60.
53. Shim, J.-C., Jung, W. K., & Kim, K. S. (2003). How Korean and American newspapers cover the educational news: A content analysis of news values. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 47(3), 95-124.
54. Shoemaker, P. J., Danielian, L. H., & Brendlinger, N. (1991). Deviant acts, risky business, and U.S. interests: The newsworthiness of world events. Journalism Quarterly, 37, 381-392.
55. Singer, J. B. (2008). The journalist in the network: A shifting rationale for the gatekeeping role and the objectivity norm. Trípodos. Facultat de Comunicació i Relacions Internacionals Blanquerna, 23, 61-76.
56. Siegal Committee (2003). Report of the Committee on Safeguarding the Integrity of Our Journalism. New York, NY: Author.
57. Szalavitz. M. (2010, 10, 1). 30 years since ‘Jimmy’s World’: The media and drugs. Retrieved from https://healthland.time.com/2010/10/01/30-years-since-the-phony-heroin-addict-article-the-media-still-blows-it-on-drugs/
58. Yoo, B.-S., & Jeong, I.-K. (2012). The difference of gatekeeping and professional role conceptions between portal news editors and internet media news editors. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 29(4), 267-303.
59. Westley, B. H., & MacLean Jr, M. S. (1957). A conceptual model for communications research. Journalism Quarterly, 34(1), 31-38.
60. White, D. M. (1950). The “gate keeper”: A case study in the selection of news. Journalism Quarterly, 27(4), 383-390.

부록
1. 김경희 (2016). 저널리즘 관점에서 본 모바일 기반 포털 뉴스의 게이트키핑과 이용자의 뉴스 이용. <한국언론학보>, 60권 3호, 117-144.
2. 김달아 (2020, 6, 10). 잘못된 보도, 이젠 확실하게 AS 해드립니다. <기자협회보>. Retrieved from http://www.journalist.or.kr/news/article.html?no=47781.
3. 김동윤·김성해·유용민 (2013). 의견지면을 통해 본 한국 신문의 정파성 지형: 공정한 중재자인가, 편파적 대변자인가. <언론과학연구>, 13권 3호, 75-122.
4. 김동원 (2017). 게이트키핑에 영향을 미치는 조직 요인에 관한 연구. <인문사회21>, 8권 5호, 107-126.
5. 김동원·김지연 (2017). 디지털시대의 게이트키핑에 관한 탐색적 연구. <문화산업연구>, 17권 3호, 29-37.
6. 김사승 (2004). 전문기자의 전문성과 뉴스의 질을 구축하는 취재보도 관행의 상관관계에 대한 분석. <한국언론학보>, 48권 2호, 56-78.
7. 김사승 (2009a). 편집국 간부의 통신기사 활용에 관한 인식 분석. <한국언론학보>, 53권 4호, 276-298.
8. 김사승 (2009b). <뉴스생산 관행분석을 통한 정파성 뉴스생산 이해>. 언론의 정파성 문제 세미나. 한국언론재단.
9. 김사승 (2012). 취재영역과 편집영역의 긴장관계에 관한 일고찰. <한국언론학보>, 56권 4호, 55-79.
10. 김창숙 (2019). <사실 확인인가, 사실 만들기인가: 한국 신문 사실확인 관행 연구>. 이화여자대학교 대학원 박사학위 논문.
11. 김창숙 (2020). 한국 신문 사실확인 관행 연구: 주요 일간지 사회부 취재기자를 중심으로. <언론정보연구>, 57권 3호, 286-335.
12. 김경모 (2012). 새로운 저널리즘 환경과 온라인 뉴스 생산: 전통과 변화의 경계. <언론정보연구>, 49권 1호, 7-37.
13. 김관규·송의호 (2004). 국내 주요 출입처 기자실 유형에 관한 탐색적 연구. <한국방송학보>, 18권 1호, 38-75.
14. 김동규·김경호 (2005). 국내 신문사 취재 조직체계와 관행에 대한 질적 연구. <언론과학연구>, 5권 2호, 33-68.
15. 김동원·김지연 (2017). 디지털시대의 게이트키핑에 관한 탐색적 연구. <문화산업연구>, 17권 3호, 29-37.
16. 남재일 (2008). 한국 객관주의 관행의 문화적 특수성. <언론과학연구>, 8권 3호, 233-270.
17. 박대민 (2015). 사실기사의 직접인용에 대한 이중의 타당성 문제의 검토: <동아일보> 와 <한겨레신문>의 4대강 추진 논란 기사에 대한 뉴스 정보원 연결망 및 인용문 분석. <한국언론학보>, 59권 5호, 121-151.
18. 박영흠·김균 (2016). 의례로서의 저널리즘: 한국 저널리즘의 정파성에 대한 새로운 이해. <한국언론학보>, 60권 1호, 202-228.
19. 박용규 (1996). 한국 신문 취재보도 체제 개선 방안. <언론연구>, 5호, 87-140.
20. 신연숙 (2009). <신문기자의 직업경로 패턴에 관한 연구>. 한양대학교 대학원 박사학위 논문.
21. 심재철 (2003). 디지털 미디어시대의 뉴스가치에 관한 소론. <방송통신연구>, 33-60.
22. 심재철·정완규·김균수 (2003). 한국과 미국 신문의 뉴스가치 비교: 대학 관련 기사를 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 47권 3호, 95-124.
23. 유봉석·정일권 (2012). 포털 뉴스와 인터넷신문 편집자의 전문가 역할 인식과 게이트키핑 차이 분석. <사이버커뮤니케이션학보>, 29권 4호, 267-303.
24. 이나연 (2018). 과학적 객관주의, 형식적 객관주의, 한국형 형식적 객관주의. <한국언론학보>, 62권 2호, 99-138.
25. 이재경 (2003). 언론인 인식을 통한 한국사회와 언론 자유의 조건 연구. <한국언론학보>, 47권 2호, 54-77.
26. 장하용 (2004). 한국 언론인의 조직 내 승진 요인에 관한 연구: 편집국과 보도국의 분석. <한국방송학보>, 18권 2호, 36-67.
27. 장호순·오수정 (2001). 한미 신문의 취재원 이용 관행 연구. <보도 비평>, 7권.
28. 정윤서 (2012). 신문기자의 뉴스가치에 대한 인식 유형에 관한 연구. <주관성연구>, 24권, 25-44.
29. 조철래 (2006). 지역신문의 선거보도와 게이트키핑 과정에 관한 연구: 갠즈(Gans)의 다원주의적 접근을 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 50권 4호, 381-410.
30. 최영재 (2011). 분열 정치와 분열 언론 그리고 분열 여론의 악순환 이론. 강준만 (편), <한국 사회의 소통 위기: 진단과 전망> (137-152쪽). 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
31. 최진호·한동섭 (2012). 언론의 정파성과 권력 개입: 1987 년 이후 13~17대 대선캠페인 기간의 주요일간지 사설 분석. <언론과학연구>, 12권 2호, 534-571.
32. 한국언론진흥재단 (2013). <언론인 의식조사>. 서울: 한국언론진흥재단.
33. 한국언론진흥재단 (2017). <언론인 의식조사>. 서울: 한국언론진흥재단.
34. 한국언론진흥재단 (2019). <디지털뉴스리포트>. 서울: 한국언론진흥재단.
35. 홍유진 (2007). <한국 신문의 오보 유형과 발생원인: 10개 중앙일간지를 중심으로(1990~2006)>. 이화여자대학교 대학원 석사학위 논문.
36. 홍주현·손영준 (2017). 사드 루머 (THAAD rumor) 보도에 나타난 한국 언론의 정파성: 네트워크 분석과 프레임 분석을 중심으로. <한국언론정보학보>, 84권, 152-188.
37. Berger, A. A. (2000). Media and communication research methods: an introduction to qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 류춘렬·김대호·김은미 (역) (2001). <커뮤니케이션 연구, 어떻게 할 것인가>. 서울: 커뮤니케이션북스.
38. Kovach, B., & Rosenstiel, T. (2014). The Elements of Journalism (3rd ed). New York, NY: Three Rivers Press. 이재경 (역) (2014). <저널리즘의 기본 원칙>. 서울: 한국언론진흥재단.
39. Lippmann, W. (1922). The Public Opinion. San Diego, CA: Harcourt, Brace & Co. 오정환 (역) (2011). <여론/환상의대중>. 서울: 동서문화사.