Sustainability and its contradictory meanings in the digital media ecosystem:contributions from the Portuguese scenario

Sustainability and its contradictory meanings in the digital media ecosystem: contributions from the Portuguese scenario José Luís Garcia Teresa Duarte Martinho José Nuno Matos Joana Ramalho Diogo Silva da Cunha Marta Pinho Alves 14. 342 the diverse worlds of sustainability introduction Sustainability is one of the buzzwords of contemporary societies (Lélé 1991; Sneddon 2000). The term was first used in the Brundtland report on the environment, published in 1987, defining the kind of “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (apud Redclift 2006, 67). Although it emerged within the frame of ecological debates (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987; United Nations Conference on Environment and Development 1992), its ambiguity would promote a broadening into other domains, such as education, health, economy, and justice, as can be seen in the programme of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.1 Its adoption by the business world is seen through terms such as “financial sustainability” or “sustainable management”, relative to the association between shareholder values, social responsibility, and environmental standards, and also through the institutionalization of such perspectives as perceived in the existence of the Network for Business Sustainability and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (Dyllick and Muff 2015). In recent years, the use of expressions such as “media sustainability” and “sustainable journalism” seems to announce an extension of the concept of sustainability also to the media field. This expansion takes place in a period in which the convergence between the processes of digitalization, globalization, and liberalization brought about a thorough reconfiguration of the media universe and of the rationales underlying the production, dissemination, and consumption of information. In the current uses of sustainability in the context of the media field, one faces the confrontation between two fundamental aspects of journalism. On the one hand, there is the business aspect related with the media companies, its market positions, and stakeholders’ interests. The focus in this aspect resonates with the meanings of financial sustainability and sustainable management. On the other hand, there is the ethical and political aspect related with its informative function and counter-power role, aimed at inclusive, responsible, and responsive politics and at a more tolerant, plural, and vibrant civil society. Are these aspects complementary? Can the 1 The 2030 Agenda comprises 17 Sustainable Development Goals (sdgs) and Goal 16 aims to “(…) provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”. Among its specific objectives, Goal 16 proposes to “ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms (…)” (sdg 16.10). sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 343 new media, paved by the development of ict, help to build an unclosed process of information and social and political dialogue? What are the challenges and risks brought by this new media tendency? To what extent are technological and managerial developments in the media sector safeguarding information and communication as public instead of commercial goods? As in its ecological and social dimensions (Swyngedouw 2010; Raco 2014), the use of this concept in the media and communication realm seems to present some limitations. One of the main objectives of this chapter is, precisely, to question the extent to which the broadening of this term may have produced contradictory meanings (Redclift 2006). Our analysis moves within a theoretical framework of sociological enquiry into the new conditions of communicational mediation to question this new but already dominant idea of sustainability in the media field. This study promotes the discussion of this concept, mapping the concrete Portuguese journalistic scenarios against a background of new political-economic imperatives. As its empirical ground, it relies on a set of four case studies. The selection of such studies seeks to cover organizations with different kinds of trajectories, regarding business models, longevity, combination of online and printed formats, and integration with international networks. The study is based upon a qualitative methodology including in-depth interviews, document analysis, and website reviews (Garcia et al. 2018).2 The entities selected were approached with the common goal of identifying four dimensions of journalism: the characteristics of the media company, the editing modalities, the information producers, and the relations with the audiences (Oliveira 1988; 1992). In what follows, we will list, though in a necessarily concise way, the organizations included in the case studies under consideration. Expresso is a weekly newspaper founded in 1973, whose development is entirely connected with Impresa, one of Portugal’s largest media corporate groups, which includes besides Expresso, a wide range of publications and platforms. The creation of a daily digital publication in 2014 translates a phased process of business development and investment in technological apparatuses, with expected returns from advertising and cost reductions, basing itself primarily 2 All the research data used in this work are part of a previous wider enquiry on the consequences of the process of digitalization of journalism in Portugal, which was funded by the Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social. 344 the diverse worlds of sustainability on the guideline that all the journalists and editorial staff get involved in the production processes of such a publication. Observador, launched in May 2014, is an online daily newspaper that explicitly presents itself as geared toward exploring the potential of digital media: interactivity, multimedia, continual updating of content, interaction with readers, and a noticeable presence in social networks. Its business model, based upon advertising revenues, includes branded content produced by the newspaper but defined according to the approach and strategy presented by sponsors. Blasting News, an online publication created in Italy in 2013 and available in Portugal since 2014, is guided by the principles of the so-called “citizen journalism” (which Blasting News refers to as “social journalism”). It functions, essentially, as a news platform, managed by a small number of employees, but sustained by the content produced by millions of registered participants (around 30,000 from Portugal), whose revenues depend on the number of views of their articles. Finally, Artecapital, founded in 2006, is a digital magazine that covers the visual arts to disseminate information and reflection on exhibitions and topics relating to the art world. It is produced by a small collective and an array of volunteers, who share an interest in the area and search for a capital of visibility, hardly obtained in mainstream media. The first part of this chapter offers a wide-angle view on the topic of media sustainability, pointing out the key features of the complex process of the emergence of new conditions for communicational mediation, from the end of the twentieth century to the present day. The second part addresses the profound changes this new communicational environment produced in the press, as new agents and players came to occupy the field: portal and content aggregators that also function as search engines, independent information websites and “born-digital media”. The third part deals with the new modes of production that underlie media digitalization and content development – a term that has gradually replaced the production of news, articles, and reports – in a process in which the web data of content views and shares has become the yardstick for the organization of work in digital media newsrooms. The fourth part focuses on the redefinition of the journalist profile and on the reorganization of the professional relations in the media and communication sector. sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 345 media sustainability in a new ecological-communicational environment From the end of the twentieth century complex social processes have emerged to create new conditions of communicational mediation. Over this period, the internet and other technological systems that placed information on a global marketplace arose, propelled by innovation projects. In the wake of new information and communication technologies, the idea of an information society, or a global information society, imposed itself, bringing about profound cultural shifts. The autonomization of the media field and the institutionalization of research on communication, media, and journalism was bound to the model of a mass society, to the mode of production and relations of production of industrial capitalism, and of the commonly named “mass media”. However, against this new backdrop, marked by the reorganization of societies through the stimulus of it networks, in the context of immaterial, digital, and informational capitalism, and by the multiplication of “new media” and “new new media”, research should focus on the site of mediation of communicational processes that drags us beyond co-presence. The overall media universe and, more specifically, that of journalism, is today overdetermined by the digital, global, and pro-market turn of industrialized societies. This brings about a specific set of socio-technical codifications, the most conspicuous manifestation of which is the development of digital industries and the expansion of the internet, alongside new practices and concentrations of power (Wu 2010). The socio-scientific understanding of the technological transformations at stake requires unpacking and with it the dismantling of the naturalization of these technologies in everyday life and in common knowledge. This naturalization tends to crystallize into two rationales: the existence of a technological object or of its consequences are attributed to a natural order of things, grounded on the teleological premise that all innovation is part and parcel of a road to a better or worse version of the world; alternatively, it is explained through an individual decision, in which it is assumed that events unfold as an outcome of individuals’ rational calculations. Denaturalizing knowledge grounded on these perceptions involves a critical gaze on the linear notion of technological evolution and of its potential uses, opened up by the configuration of the technologies themselves. Instead, the argument here is that technologies are not mere instruments, but rather apparatuses that 346 the diverse worlds of sustainability codify meanings (Alexander 2015), which embody these meanings within complex socio-semiotic processes (Carey 1990). The technical consequences in these recent transformations appear, therefore, as products that, as a result of their autonomization, and given that they are embedded with human values and are part of more or less widespread discourses, operate as vehicles for cultural, economic, and political forces. Digital technologies and new media, when turned into industries and commodities, articulate knowledge from various fields, namely the scientific, aesthetic, and design fields, in the shape of economic and commercial projects and innovation policies. They become ventures that are simultaneously scientific, technological, economic, and cultural. The recognition of this cultural dimension of technologies has a bearing on the way in which technological transformations are studied, and how the limits – particularly economic and technological in nature – of the crisis of digital industries and journalism are thought of. On the one hand, certain points of view contaminate research agendas, especially socio-metric research projects, with the premise that the new communicational context will open the door to a participation of the whole of society in decision processes. On the other hand, there are those who convey the idea that public space ceases to exist altogether on the internet. This chapter asserts the need to build an alternative perspective from which to consider the current situation of the media universe, the place that journalism and journalists occupy within it. The point, ultimately, is to argue for a reconfiguration of the question of sustainability. In its original sense this question emerges within the frame of an ecological conception of the media, and of the reorganizing impact of the internet. The concentration of ownership of media companies, the erosion of the practices traditionally understood as journalistic gatekeeping, the appearance of new forms of information control and censorship, and the creation of new modes of public participation came to question the viability of a democratic public sphere. In this context, international analysis and monitoring projects such as the Media Sustainability Index of the International Research and Exchanges Board, the Community Media Sustainability Policy Series of unesco, and the Monitoring Media Pluralism in Europe of the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom employ the concept of sustainability connecting pluralism with financial viability. In a section entitled “Economic, financial, and managerial requirements to ensure sustainable independent and pluralistic media” in a paper for unesco, sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 347 Robert Picard wrote that “the viability of news media organisations requires conditions that make it possible for such media to obtain and manage resources and capabilities necessary to maintain themselves and be sustainable” (Picard 2015, 3). “The focus here is on financial, structural, market and managerial factors”, he added (ibid.). Some authors state that politics for a “sustainable journalism” relies on the development of “high-quality, in depth coverage as well as robust business models, technology, education and organisations that take these challenges into account” (Benglez, Olausson and Ots 2017, xv). Given that it is at the centre of the technological and industrial fields, the internet has become a defining and reorganizing element of societies. This idea implies a conception of media as environments conditioning and structuring people’s perceptions, feelings, and values. The notion of “technological development”, concomitant with such a viewpoint, runs counter to cumulative perspectives, which see a change of medium as an additive evolution. Instead, this change should rather be thought of as an ecological reconfiguration (Mosco 1999). Therefore, as a medium or as a cluster of media, the internet enables a reorganization of the previously settled communicational ecology, opening the way for a new communicational ecology within which new social worlds take shape. This reorganizing force (sometimes seen as revolutionary, especially in terms of means of production) has led some authors to abandon the old notion of the “media landscape”, replacing this last term with “ecosystem”. Jean-Marie Charon (2015) considers the latter to be a more accurate term to describe the relations between a set of agents within media that is seen as creative, fluid, and horizontally organized, and at the same time more uncertain. It is against this backdrop that we can see the main challenges to the creation of a contemporary deliberative public sphere. new agents and players: against the backdrop of an “editorial effervescence” In this new communicational context, fostered by the digital industry and by its technological innovations, it seemed, since producing, distributing, and receiving digital content online became so prevalent, that the mediation role of journalism has been, as suggested above, weakened. This new communicational ecology places greater emphasis on the process of distributing information whilst it also means change in modes of production and consumption. We 348 the diverse worlds of sustainability thus encounter in the vast information field, and particularly in the journalistic field, a situation of turmoil and reorganization, where new agents and new entrepreneurial logics emerge, alongside new media products and professional roles that displace the very notion of “journalism”, as well as the professional status of journalists, to undermine their role and attributions. In Portugal, as in other countries and societies, one sees a press universe undergoing sweeping changes that have increasingly been the object of research.3 The various studies converge on the recognition that the landscape of information production and the role of journalism are going through a period of permanent adjustment and reconfiguration, somewhat akin to what Joseph Schumpeter described with the notion of “creative destruction” (Schumpeter 1942). Phrases such as “editorial effervescence” (Charon 2015) aim to register the reorganization of the field of the general press, between the “pure players” of information and content and the start-ups investing in the production of information. In this context, one should clarify the term “pure player”, given its increasingly common and undifferentiated use. It refers, generally speaking, to a company that specializes in a product or activity, with no vertical integration, and whose means and ends of production are wholly grounded on digital media. Examples in the media world would be news portals and platforms or content aggregators that also work as search engines, as well as independent information websites and born-digital media. Staying within the range of the cases addressed in this chapter, the electronic magazine Artecapital, the online platform Blasting News, and the born-digital newspaper Observador fit into this category of “pure players”. The overall process, sometimes described as a “reinvention” of the print media, refers to the multiplicity and heterogeneity of initiatives of this kind, which attempt to mobilize all the potentialities of the digital world that delineate and experiment with a new arrangement of media ecology. In Portugal, as elsewhere, one can indeed speak of an editorial effervescence. 3 In various disciplines there is a growing interest in framing these changes within the context of larger shifts in communication, media, public space, and journalism. On international cases, see, for example: McManus (1994); Bardoel (1996); Pavlik (2001); Boczkowski (2004); Scott (2005); Downie and Schudson (2009); Levy and Nielsen (2010); Grueskin et al. (2011); McChesney and Pickard (2011); Anderson et al. (2012); Alexander (2015); Charon (2015); Mabweazara (2015); Deuze and Witschge (2017). On the Portuguese case, the following works are particularly relevant: Traquina (2000); Canavilhas (2006); Cardoso et al. (2006); Garcia (2009); Bastos (2010); Rebelo (2014); Camponez et al. (2015); Cardoso et al. (2015); Granado and Zamith (2015); Cardoso et al. (2016); Gomes (2016); Matos et al. (2017). sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 349 In a preliminary early stage there is a generation of new players from within the general information field, generating a steady change in content and presentation models. In this group falls the online edition of the weekly Expresso, whose first steps in this field can be traced back to the end of the 1990s. These examples are forever geared toward finding an economically viable business model, framed in these contexts as “sustainable” (in an abusive use of the term). A second stage comes with the creation of other news organizations such as websites and blogs. Although these platforms are located outside of conventional editorial contexts and though they are subject to little or no commercial pressure, they nevertheless need to find ways to survive through the generation of revenue that will allow them to pay their contributors and content producers. In this radically changed scenario, one should highlight the publicizing of journalistic content in portals and content aggregators showcasing content from a variety of publications. Phenomena such as the clustering of content means that newspaper directors and managers now unceasingly worry over the conquest of online spaces. Expresso is a particularly eloquent example of such a case. Empirical research revealed that the relation between this publication and the portal Sapo4, the key content aggregator and provider of online advertising space in Portugal, has led to the steady favouring of Expresso content on that platform (Silva 2015). In a study on the convergences of Portuguese newsrooms, it is possible to discern that this portal hosts various websites and functions as an aggregator of news from a variety of publications. These platforms then compete amongst themselves for headline visibility, providing their clients with advertising spaces on newspaper websites, the sale of advertising space being indexed to the number of views of that website (ibid.). A newspaper like Expresso adopted a business model, despite its structural specificities, that came close to that of online journalism as described by Des Freedman in the following terms: “audiences largely refuse to pay for content, advertising revenue is dominated by search engines and pure-play companies, cannibalisation remains a concern […] and traffic goes more and more to internet portals and aggregators who invest virtually nothing in original news content and simultaneously fail to expand significantly the range of source material” (Des Freedman 2010, 47). 4 Founded in 1995, Sapo presents itself as “an online publication” which is “permanently updated, containing news and other useful information for all Portuguese-speaking internet users” (http://www. sapo.pt/estatuto-editorial). 356 the diverse worlds of sustainability conclusions In the confluence between the processes of digitalization, globalization, and liberalization, the media universe and the logics underlying the production, dissemination, and consumption of information have been profoundly reorganized. Shifts in form and format, pushed on by new digital technologies, did not however bring about any change in terms of the ownership structure. On the contrary, the crisis scenario, which made itself felt, for instance, in the decrease in sales numbers for the printed press and/or in the increase of the number of competitors in the sector, namely by open access digital media, has not attenuated the trend toward the concentration of media in large business conglomerates. It is within this economic framework, then, that new business and organizational models, as well as new products, routines, and production relations emerge. In this process, journalism’s communicational complexity has been reduced to a sum of sellable technical products, which has had a substantial impact on the Portuguese situation. One of the underlying trends is that the production of news, articles, and reports has increasingly given way to content production, which often goes well beyond the bounds of journalism. The instances of branded content, or even the organization of events in partnership with commercial companies promote a confluence between journalism and advertising, which nowadays takes places under the vector of the subsumption of the first by the latter, which leads to a permeability between the social role of journalism and commercial interests and logics. The unevenness of this relationship is equally clear in the importance attributed to page views data, taken as an index of consumer interest (and, therefore, of the interest of the advertiser). Their centrality is such that it brings about changes in the very organization and equipment of the workspace, which now includes, as we have mentioned, screens with real time statistics on content consumption. The attempt to capture the reader’s attention has led to an added sophistication of the journalistic piece, in terms of both production and distribution. This means new professional posts, such as digital analysts, social media managers, designers, and infographic designers, given their respective expertise in measuring and reading data on the circulation and reception of content, alongside the production of aesthetically-appealing information. It falls on journalists themselves to cultivate these new competencies, lest they become incapable of performing an activity that, for the majority of them, sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 357 did not involve much in the way of technical skills. With the communicational context fostered by the digital industry and its technological innovations, driven by a reorientation of the logics of production, dissemination, and consumption for digital supports, and by the fact that the internet allows virtually anyone to produce, distribute, and access digital content, we witness a destabilization and dislocation of the concept of “journalism” and of the profession of “journalist”, alongside an overall dispute over its frontiers and fields of application (Garcia 2009; Fidalgo 2016). In other words, tasks that were initially deemed non-journalistic have now been folded into the set of functions that make up a more versatile, multi-skilled definition of journalism. It is no longer a matter of simply writing the copy for a news piece, conducting an interview, or doing a report, but rather a case of becoming part and parcel of an advertising campaign, of integrating other content into the news (such as photographs, multimedia content, hyperlinks), of performing tasks such as layout, formatting, and editing or even handling interaction with the readers. The diffuse notion of a crisis of journalism can be reframed, therefore, beyond the strictly economic or purely technological spheres, against the wider cultural backdrop of a far-reaching crisis of meaning in journalism. We could verify that the nonstop follow-ups and updates on an event delineated by the internet means that there is no longer a “temporal break”. This fosters a kind of “on-the-spot” journalism that often ends up resorting to other media as sources. One is therefore forced to do more in less time, and often for a lower or even nonexistent salary and precarious work bonds, such as internships or freelance work. The two phenomena are closely interlinked, since precarity tends to operate as a guarantee that these norms will be followed, in the name of a more promising future: to do volunteer work on a cultural magazine may help in making the necessary professional contacts; the article published on the news platform operates as a means of advertising for its author. As far as the analysis of the four case studies allows us to see, the polysemy and comprehensiveness of the concept of sustainability applied to media and journalism, confronts, rather than harmonizes, different understandings on how to solve or face the challenges posed today by digitalization in this area. On the one hand, proposals stemming from concerns about the economic and financial sustainability of news media companies determine their migration to the digital sphere in order to reduce costs with their material and human resources or to encourage the creation of new types of content, in which the 358 the diverse worlds of sustainability difference between news and advertising becomes blurred. On the other hand, these results call into question the sustainability of a democratic public sphere, as this is founded, among other features, on the autonomy of both news genres and news producers. Although we can point out some attempts at complementarity between the two aforementioned aspects implied in the ideas of media sustainability and sustainable journalism, the business aspect, the ethical aspect, and political aspect, the empirical analysis presented on the media field in Portugal points to a clear primacy of commercial interests, especially visible in the market orientation of technological products. In the light of our understanding of the problem and the evidence from the case studies, the concept of sustainability is inconsistent in the context of the media field, because it absorbs opposite meanings without synthesizing them, without offering a complementary solution. ____________________________________ josé luís garcia Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa Av. Prof. Aníbal Bettencourt 9 — 1600-036 Lisboa, Portugal jlgar[email protected]lisboa.pt orcid.org/0000-0002-9387-9047 ____________________________________ teresa duarte martinho Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa teresa.d[email protected]oa.pt orcid.org/0000-0003-1463-4197 ____________________________________ josé nuno matos Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Universidade de Lisboa jose.mat[email protected]l.pt orcid.org/0000-0001-8772-6223 ____________________________________ joana ramalho Unidade de Investigação em Design e Comunicação, Faculdade de Design, Tecnologia e Comunicação, Universidade Europeia [email protected] orcid.org/0000-0003-3723-6052 ____________________________________ diogo silva da cunha Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa e Centro de Filosofia das Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa [email protected] ____________________________________ sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 359 ____________________________________ marta pinho alves Escola Superior de Educação e Centro de Investigação em Educação e Formação, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal [email protected]t ____________________________________ references alexander, J. C. 2015. “The crisis of journalism reconsidered: cultural power”. Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 8 (1): 9-31. anderson, C. W., E. Bell, and C. Shirky. 2012. Post-Industrial Journalism: Adapting to the Present. New York: Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia University. bardoel, J. 1996. “Beyond journalism: profession between information society and civil society”. European Journal of Communication, 11 (3): 283-302. bastos, H. 2010. Origens e Evolução do Ciberjornalismo em Portugal: Os Primeiros Quinze Anos (1995-2010). Porto: Afrontamento. benglez, P., U. Olausson, and M. Ots., eds. 2017. What is Sustainable Journalism? Integrating the Environmental, Social and Economic Challenges of Journalism. New York: Peter Lang. boczkowski, P. J. 2004. Digitizing the News: Innovation in Online Newspapers. Cambridge, ma: The mit Press. bourdieu, P. 1980. “Le capital social: notes provisoires”. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, 31: 2-3. camponez, C., F. Pinheiro, and R. B. de Simões, orgs. 2015. Estudos do Século xx, n.º 15: Comunicação, Jornalismo e Espaço Público na Era Digital. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra. canavilhas, J. 2006. “Do jornalismo online ao webjornalismo: formação para a mudança”. Comunicação e Sociedade, 9-10: 113-119. canavilhas, J., V. Torres, and D. de Luna. 2016. “Da audiência presumida à audiência real: influências das métricas nas decisões editoriais dos jornais online”. Mediapolis: Revista de Comunicação, Jornalismo e Espaço Público, 2: 135-149. cardoso, G., et al. 2006. O Jornalismo Hoje. Uma Análise de 14 Redacções de tv, Rádio e Jornais. Lisbon: OberCom cardoso, G., C. Magno, and T. de M. Soares. 2015. Modelos de Negócio e Comunicação Social: Telcos, Legacy Media, Novos Media e Start-ups Jornalísticas em Navegação Digital – Estudo Prospectivo (2015-2020). Lisbon: Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social and Centro de Investigação e Estudos de Sociologia do Instituto Universitário de Lisboa. cardoso, G., et al. 2016. A Imprensa em Portugal. Performances e Indicadores de Gestão: Consumo, Procura e Distribuição. Lisbon: OberCom. carey, J. W. 1990. “Technology as a totem for culture, and a defense of the oral tradition”. American Journalism, 7 (4): 242-251. charon, J.-M. 2015. “Presse et numérique – L’ invention d’un nouvel écosystè me”. Rapport à Madame la Ministre de la culture et de la communication, http://www.culturecommunication. gouv.fr/Ressources/Rapports/Rapport-Charon-Pres se-et-numerique-L-invention-d-unnouvel-ecosysteme. 360 the diverse worlds of sustainability corrigan, T. 2015. “Media and cultural industries internships: a thematic review and digital labour parallels”. Triple C, 13 (2): 336-350. deuze, M. 2004. What is Journalism? Professional Identity and Ideology of Journalists Reconsidered. London: Sage. deuze, M., T. Witschge. 2017. “Beyond journalism: theorizing the transformation of journalism”. Journalism, 1-17, http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1464884916 688550. downie, L. Jr., M. Schudson. 2009. “The reconstruction of American journalism”. Columbia Journalism Review, http://www.cjr.org/reconstruction/the_reconstruction_of_american. php?page=all. dyllick, T., K. Muff. 2015. “Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability”. Organization & Environment, 29 (2): 156-174. fidalgo, J. 2016. “Disputas nas fronteiras do jornalismo”. In Digital Media Portugal – 2015, org. Rui Gomes. Lisbon: Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social, 35-47. freedman, D. 2010. “The political economy of the ‘new’ news environment”. In New Media, Old News: Journalism & Democracy in the Digital Age, ed. N. Fenton. London: Sage, 35-50. garcia, J. L., org. 2009. Estudos Sobre os Jornalistas Portugueses: Metamorfoses e Encruzilhadas no Limiar do Século xxi. Lisbon: Imprensa de Ciências Sociais. garcia, J. L., et al. 2018. Os Media em Mudança em Portugal: Implicações da Digitalização no Jornalismo. Lisbon: Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social. gill, R. 2011. “ ‘Life is a pitch’: managing the self in new media work”. In Managing Media Work, org. M. Deuze. London: Sage, 249-262. gomes, R., ed. 2016. Digital Media Portugal – erc 2015. Lisbon: Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social. granado, A., F. Zamith, eds. 2015. “Ciberjornalismo: 20 anos ‘made in Portugal’”. Estudos de Jornalismo, 4, http://www.revistaej.sopcom.pt/ficheiros /20151007-ej_4_2015.pdf. granado, A. 2016. “O online nas principais redações portuguesas em 2015”. In Digital Media Portugal – erc 2015, org. R. Gomes. Lisbon: Entidade Reguladora para a Comunicação Social, 65-74. gradim, A. 2002. “Os géneros e a convergência: o jornalista multimédia do século xxi”. Biblioteca On-line de Ciências da Comunicação, www.labcom.ubi.pt/agoranet/02/gradimanabela-generos-convergencia.pdf. grueskin, B., A. Seave, and L. Graves. 2011. The Story So Far: What We Know About the Business of Digital Journalism. New York: Columbia University Press. heinich, N. 2012. De la visibilité: excellence et singularité en régime médiatique. Paris: Gallimard. lélé, S. M. 1991. “Sustainable development: A critical review”. World Development, 19 (6): 607-621. levy, D. A. L., R. K. Nielsen, eds. 2010. The Changing Business of Journalism and Its Implications for Democracy. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. mcchesney, R. W., V. Pickard, eds. 2011. Will the Last Reporter Please Turn Out the Lights: The Collapse of Journalism and What Can Be Done to Fix It. New York: The New Press. mcmanus, J. H. 1994. Market-Driven Journalism: Let the Citizen Beware. Thousand Oaks: Sage. mabweazara, H. M., ed. 2015. Digital Technologies and the Evolving African Newsroom: Towards an African Digital Journalism Epistemology. London, and New York: Routledge. sustainability and its meanings in the digital media ecosystem 361 matos, J. N., C. Baptista, and F. Subtil, eds. 2017. A Crise do Jornalismo em Portugal. Lisbon: Le Monde Diplomatique and Deriva. mosco, V. 1999. “Economia política da comunicação: uma perspectiva laboral”. Comunicação e Sociedade, 12 (1-2): 97-120. oliveira, J. M. P. de. 1988. “Formas de ‘censura oculta’ na imprensa escrita em Portugal no pós-25 de Abril (1974-1987)”, Doctoral Dissertation in Sociologia, Lisbon: iscte. oliveira, J. M. P. de. 1992. “A integração europeia e os meios de comunicação social”. Análise Social, xxvii (118-119): 995-1024. pavlik, J. V. 2001. Journalism and New Media. New York: Columbia University Press. picard, R. G. 2015. Journalists’ Perceptions of the Future of Journalistic Work. Berlin: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. raco, M. 2014. “The post-politics of sustainability planning: privatisation and the demise of democratic government”. In The Post-Political and Its Discontents, eds. J. Wilson and E. Swyngedouw. Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 25-47 . rebelo, J., ed. 2014. As Novas Gerações de Jornalistas em Portugal. Lisbon: Mundos Sociais. redclift, M. 2006. “Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age”. Horizontes Antropológicos, Porto Alegre, ano 12, 25: 65-84. schumpeter, J. A. 1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper & Row. scott, B. 2005. “A contemporary history of digital journa lism”. Television & New Media, 1 (6): 89-126. silva, N. M. 2015. “Renovar ou morrer: a adaptação das redações de três diários e um semanário em papel às práticas convergentes”. Doctoral Dissertation. Porto: Faculdade de Ciências Humanas e Sociais da Universidade Fernando Pessoa. sneddon, C. S. 2000. “‘Sustainability’ in ecological economics, ecology and livelihoods: a review”. Progress in Human Geography, 24 (4): 521-549. swyngedouw, E. 2010. “Apocalypse forever?: post-political populism and the spectre of climate change”. Theory, Culture & Society, 27 (2-3): 213-232. traquina, N., org. 2000. Jornalismo 2000: Revista de Comunicação e Linguagens, 27. Lisbon: Centro de Estudos de Comunicação e Linguagens. world commission on environment and development. 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. wu, T. 2010. The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. young, S., A. Carson. 2016. “What is a journalist? The view from employers as revealed by their job vacancy advertisements”. Journalism Studies, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ pdf/10.1080/1461670X.2016.1190665. cite this chapter as: garcia, J. L. et al. 2018. “Sustainability and its contradictory meanings in the digital media ecosystem: contributions from the Portuguese scenario”. In Changing Societies: Legacies and Challenges. Vol. iii. The Diverse Worlds of Sustainability, eds. A. Delicado, N. Domingos and L. de Sousa. Lisbon: Imprensa de Ciências Sociais, 341-361. https://doi.org/10.31447/ics9789726715054.14