Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 384

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Reinventing professionalism: journalism and news in global perspective

·2013·Choice Reviews Online

Abstract

Acknowledgments vi Introduction 1 1 Paths to Professionalism 19 2 The Dilemmas of Professional Autonomy 43 3 The Ambiguities of Professional Journalism 73 4 Questioning Professional Journalism 94 5 The Professional Logic of Journalism 121 6 Professionalism and Media Patrimonialism 149 7 The Globalization of Professional Cultures 174 8 Post-Professional Journalism? 202 Conclusion: Reinventing Professionalism 222 References 234 Index 263

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5860/choice.50-5426

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Metadata

Venue
Choice Reviews Online
Published
2013-05-22
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
50-5426-50-5426
ISSN
  • 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-8253
OpenAlex
W1586134066
Cited by
384
References
0
Type
book review
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Reinventing professionalism: journalism and news in global perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.50-5426
The paper
Reinventing professionalism: journalism and news in global perspective. (2013). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.50-5426

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.