Journalists and Media Owners in the World 2401-OG-EN-JM

https://moodle.umk.pl/WFINS/course/view.php?id=519&notifyeditingon=1#
https://moodle.umk.pl/course/view.php?id=1242 (w cyklu 2024/25L)

1.Introduction. course roadmap; what counts as “media power”; seminar discussion protocol; case-study template.

Module 1. Media ownership & political power
2. Silvio Berlusconi – between media and politics, political parallelism, political and symbolic power, power of discourse, Berlusconi as a brand, media capture, populism, owner-politician fusion.
3. Rupert Murdoch – between business and ethics, tabloid journalism, platform distribution vs legacy tabloids; attention economy; ethics vs revenue.
4. Roger Ailes – tabloid journalism, teletabloid, partisan politics, partisan media ecosystems; outrage cycles; hybridization with social media.

Module 2. Cultural power, entertainment & celebrity influence
5. Walt Disney – media and entertainment, “disney culture” as a influence on society, Disney’s brand, streaming/platformization (Disney+), IP empires, cultural power.
6. Oprah Winfrey – celebrity journalism, political involvement, cultural phenomenon, influencer politics; parasocial power; platform celebrity vs broadcast celebrity.

Module 3. Tech leaders, platform power & philanthropy
7. Steve Jobs – between perfectionism and artistry, think different, charismatic leader. tech leadership as media narrative; product ecosystems as “media environments”.
8. Bill Gates – pragmatic visionary, philanthropy as a way to change the world, philanthrocapitalism + information influence; funding journalism/science comms.
9. Mark Zuckerberg – global phenomenon, power-knowledge, hate speech and fake news, platform governance, recommender systems, moderation/oversight, transparency.

Module 4. Journalists as power: genres, ethics, accountability
10. Oriana Fallaci – interpretative journalism, between journalism and literacy, journalism involved, opinion leadership, polarization, ethics of advocacy/identity framing.
11. Carl Bernstein & Bob Woodward – investigative journalism, journalism as “fourth estate”.
12. Günter Wallraff – between journalism and social experiment; searching journalism boundaries, ethics in journalism, undercover methods today; harm minimization; consent; platform “sting” culture.
13. Edward Murrow – journalism in times of war, the power of electronic media, verification in conflicts, OSINT, propaganda ecosystems, safety of reporters.

Module 5. Disinformation & information warfare
14. Jessika Aro – disinformation as instrument of state policy, technology and the state, troll factories, information warfare, coordinated inauthentic behavior, influence ops, synthetic media / AI-enabled propaganda.

15. Summary. Assessment of students. Synthesis (“who holds power now?”), course takeaways, reflective evaluation.

Całkowity nakład pracy studenta

Direct teacher participation: Participation in the discussion seminar: 30 Scheduled consultations connected with presentation preparation, source selection, discussion moderation and feedback: 25 Subtotal - direct teacher participation: 55 (2 ECTS) Independent work: Preparation of the individual presentation and seminar discussion: 25 Reading assigned literature and preparing for seminar discussion: 60 Subtotal - independent work: 85 (3 ECTS) Total: 140 (5 ECTS)

Efekty uczenia się - wiedza

J&MO_W1 (K_W07): Explains and compares key approaches to media power and media–politics relations (e.g., political economy of media, agenda-setting/framing, political parallelism, platform governance), using relevant terminology. J&MO_W2 (K_W08): Analyzes mechanisms of influence in social and political processes (ownership concentration, branding/celebrity power, algorithmic distribution, disinformation), and evaluates their consequences for pluralism and democratic deliberation.

Efekty uczenia się - umiejętności

J&MO_U1 (K_U02): Conducts a structured case analysis of a selected journalist/media owner/platform actor, formulates an argument, and supports it with evidence from assigned readings and credible sources. J&MO_U2 (K_U11): Delivers an academic presentation in English and moderates a seminar discussion, using clear structure, appropriate language, and responsive facilitation techniques.

Efekty uczenia się - kompetencje społeczne

J&MO_K1 (K_K01): Reflects critically on own competences and learning needs; uses feedback to improve analytical and communication performance. J&MO_K2 (K_K03, K_K04): Collaborates responsibly in an intercultural group, shares tasks fairly, and maintains academic integrity and ethical standards in discussion and written work.

Koordynatorzy przedmiotu

Aleksandra Seklecka

Metody dydaktyczne

• Short conceptual mini-lectures and guided reading introduce analytical categories and key arguments [J&MO_W1, J&MO_W2]. • Case-study and biographical methods are used to reconstruct actors, institutional contexts, strategies and outcomes [J&MO_W1, J&MO_W2, J&MO_U1]. • Problem-based and comparative discussion develops evidence-based argumentation and evaluation of ethical and regulatory dilemmas [J&MO_W2, J&MO_U1, J&MO_K2]. • Individual academic presentations and student-led seminar moderation develop communication and facilitation in English [J&MO_U2, J&MO_K1, J&MO_K2]. • Peer feedback, consultation and reflective self-assessment support revision and critical evaluation of personal competences [J&MO_K1, J&MO_K2]. • Online collaboration and Moodle resources support source sharing, presentation preparation and structured discussion.

Metody dydaktyczne podające

- opis
- opowiadanie

Metody dydaktyczne poszukujące

- biograficzna
- studium przypadku

Metody dydaktyczne w kształceniu online

- metody oparte na współpracy
- metody wymiany i dyskusji
- metody służące prezentacji treści

Rodzaj przedmiotu

przedmiot fakultatywny

Wymagania wstępne

English knowledge (min. B1)

Kryteria oceniania

Active participation and preparation: 28 points / 48% (J&MO_W1, J&MO_W2, J&MO_U1, J&MO_K2)
Up to 2 points in each of 14 assessed meetings for evidence of reading, accurate use of concepts, relevant questions, comparison of cases, constructive response to arguments and responsible intercultural participation.

Individual presentation and discussion moderation: 30 points / 52% (J&MO_W1, J&MO_W2, J&MO_U1, J&MO_U2, J&MO_K1, J&MO_K2)
A 15-minute presentation on a journalist, media owner or platform actor, followed by at least 10 minutes of student-led discussion. The work must present a clear problem, use credible sources, formulate and defend an argument, evaluate consequences and dilemmas, and respond to questions and feedback.

Participation scoring per meeting
0 - not demonstrated - Absent without an approved make-up task, unprepared, or no meaningful contribution.
1 - satisfactory - At least one relevant contribution or question showing familiarity with the assigned reading or case.
2 - strong - Substantive, evidence-based contribution that connects concepts and cases, evaluates an argument or source, and supports constructive discussion.

Presentation and moderation rubric - 30 points
- Problem, purpose and structure (0-4): The presentation defines a focused analytical question, follows a coherent structure and respects the time limit.
- Conceptual framing (0-5): Relevant concepts of media power, ownership, media-politics relations or platform governance are explained and applied accurately.
- Research and source credibility (0-6): Claims are supported by assigned readings and credible additional sources; evidence is distinguished from interpretation; references are transparent and verifiable.
- Case analysis, argument and conclusions (0-6): The presentation reconstructs mechanisms and outcomes, considers consequences for pluralism or public debate, identifies dilemmas and formulates justified conclusions.
English-language communication and visual support (0-4): Delivery is clear and appropriately academic; terminology is used correctly; visual materials support rather than replace the argument.
Discussion moderation and response to feedback (0-5): The student asks purposeful questions, involves participants, manages time, responds to counterarguments and uses feedback reflectively.

Grading scale:
0-59% - 2.0 - fail
60-67% - 3.0 - satisfactory
68-75% - 3.5 - satisfactory plus
76-83% - 4.0 - good
84-91% - 4.5 - good plus
92-100% - 5.0 - very good

Literatura

Core:
Boven C. 2013. A comparison of Australian and German literary journalism, https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1579&context=theses
Bradshaw S., Ph.N. Howard. 2018. The Global Organization of Social Media Disinformation Campaigns. “Journal of International Affairs”, Vol. 71, No.1.5.
Caldwell C. 2002. The Fallaci Affair. “Commentary” October.
Cinelli M. et al. 2020. The limited reach of fake news on Twitter during 2019 European elections. “PLOS ONE” June 18.
Cosentino G., W. Doyle. 2010. Silvio Berlusconi, One Man Brand.
“Popular Culture And Everyday Life” 12, p. 219-240, http://www.academia.edu/5287579/Silvio_Berlusconi._One_Man_Brand (12.12.2018).
Dahl Rendtorff J. 2016. Whistleblowing as Employee’s Fredoom of Speech. Günter Wallraff’s Authorship as an Illustrative Case. “Nordicum Mediterraneum” January
Dearlove D. 2010. The Unauthorized Guide To Doing Business the Bill Gates Way: 10 Secrets of the World's Richest Business Leader. E-book.
Dickey J.. 2017. Died Roger Ailes, shaper of partisan politics. “Time” June 5.
Ellison S.. Roger, Over and Out!. “Vanity Fair” November.
Illouz E. 2003. Oprah Winfrey and the Glamour of Misery : An Essay on Popular Culture. New York : Columbia University Press.
Gerrits A.W.M. 2018. Disinformation in International Relations: How Important It Is?. “Security and Human Rights” 29
Kirkpatrick D. 2018. The Facebook Defect. “Time” 4.
Klein S. (ed.). Steve Jobs and Philosophy: For Those Who Think Different. E-book.
Junod T. 2011. Why Does Roger Ailes Hate America?. “Esquire” February.
Lashinsky A. 2016. Zuckerberg. “Fortune” 12.
Lashmar D. 2009. Investigative journalism: a case for intensive care?, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=7C957C710C3A4F5BF7DE500A28593169?doi=10.1.1.425.8314&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Leaf C. 2020. The conversation: Bill Gates. “Fortune” October
Motta V. 2011. The courage of rhetoric: Niente e così sia by Oriana Fallaci. Italianist 31,
Seib P.M.. 2006. Broadcasts From the Blitz: How Edward R. Murrow Helped Lead America Into War. E-book.
Sponholz L. 2016. Islamophobic Hate Speech: What is the Point of Counter-Speech? The Case of Oriana Fallaci and The Rage and the Pride, “Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs”, Vol. 36, No. 4
Wills J. 2017. Disney culture. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Wolff M. 2010. The man who owns the news. Inside the secret world of Rupert Murdoch. London: Vintage Books.
Zuckerberg M. 2019. People should decide what is credible, not tech companies. “Vital Speeches of the Day” December.

Suplementary:
Aro, J. 2022.Putin's Trolls: On the Frontlines of Russia's Information War Against the World. New York: Ig Publishing.
Bernstein C., B. Woodward. 1974. All the President’s Men. New York: Simone and Schuster Paperbacks.

Więcej informacji

Dodatkowe informacje (np. o kalendarzu rejestracji, prowadzących zajęcia, lokalizacji i terminach zajęć) mogą być dostępne w serwisie USOSweb:

Strona przedmiotu 2401-OG-EN-JM w USOSweb