## Podcast - Commentary journalism in a digital public

## LISBETH MORLANDSTØ

Nord University

## BIRGIT RØE MATHISEN

Nord University

## Abstract

The  internet  and  digital  platforms  provide  commentary-  and opinion-based journalism with new opportunities to develop into new digital formats, such as podcasts. This article is based on the case  studies  of  four  Norwegian  podcasts  in  2020  and  2021.  The findings show that commentary journalism in the form of podcasts has an obvious dual purpose: as publicity and as a commercial. The podcast facilitates a societal mission for the public while creating branded goods for the companies involved. Based on the material and  the  categories  we  had  constructed,  we  developed  a  set  of binaries that, understood as typologies, capture important dimensions of the differences between the podcasts. These binaries are  monologue  vs.  dialogue,  factual  vs.  personal,  reflexive  vs. assertive, and intellectual discussants vs. experts. In the article, we discuss how podcasts draw commentary journalism in a dialogical direction. We also discuss what impact this has on public reasoning and the democratic role of commentary journalism.

## KEYWORDS

podcast, commentary journalism, columnist, digital public, dialogue

## Introduction

Commentaryand opinion-based journalism is growing worldwide (Knapskog et al., 2018; Esser & Umbricht, 2014; Salgado & Strömbäck, 2012) and is often characterised as an interpretative moment in the news cycle (McNair, 2000). This growth is explained, among other reasons, by a growing need to make the complex and rapid information flow in society understandable (Neveu, 2016; Le Masurier,  2015).  Furthermore,  profiled  columnists  are  valued  as branded  goods  for  media  companies,  drawing  digital  readers (Mathisen & Morlandstø, 2016).

This  commentary-  or  opinion-based  journalism  constitutes  a traditional  genre.  However,  the  internet  and  digital  platforms provide  new  opportunities,  and  the  genre  is  developing  into innovative new formats, such as dialogue-based debate arenas and podcasts  (Thyrum,  2018;  Berry,  2016;  Lindgren,  2016;  Menduni, 2007). Journalists and editors in Norway argue that the dialogical part of commentary  journalism makes it more  suitable for development online than news journalism. There is also an editorial willingness to experiment online, even if some experiments end in failure (Morlandstø & Mathisen, 2016). Such experience corresponds with findings in the Spanish media: 'The adage 'fail early, fail often' is a principle that some media outlets have adopted in their innovation strategies with some success' (García-Avilés et al., 2019, p. 13).

A  range  of  studies  focuses  on  the  commentary  genre  and  its development. Scholars also examine the podcast format. However, few  studies  elaborate  on  the  commentary  genre  in  the  podcast format. We aim to fill this research gap, discussing the evolution of commentary journalism by focusing on podcasts and using genre theory as the starting point. The research question in this paper is: What  characterises the podcast as  a  format  of  commentary journalism,  and  where  do  podcasts  take  the  commentary  genre? Later  in  the  text,  we  discuss  the  theoretical  foundations  before  a literature review that sheds light on both the commentary genre and podcasts. Then we elaborate on the data and methods used before discussing  the  findings.  Finally,  we  collect  the  threads  into  a concluding discussion.

## Theory

Genres  are  based  on  interactions  between  conventions  and expectations and are understood as a relationship between media and  the  audience  (Lüders  et  al.,  2010;  Lindgren,  2016).  Style, functions, and rhetoric vary from genre to genre. The commentary genre is described as the interpretative moment of news production (McNair, 2000, p. 61) and serves a societal mission of enlightening, opinion-making,  and  critique  (Mathisen  &  Morlandstø,  2016). Opinion-based journalism seeks to go beyond the mere reporting of news in the interest of context, explanation, analysis, and interpretation (Mathisen & Morlandstø, 2018).

Esser and Umbricht (2014) describe growth in commentary and a change in the news and in columns from observation to interpretation. The shift from 'news' to 'views' is explained by the level of education and the status of the profession of journalists (p. 245). Furthermore, the societal need for explanation and background  analysis  of  an  ever-increasing  information  flow  in society is put forward (Neveu, 2016). The news media fulfil distinct needs in society: circulating information, enabling public debate, and organising the public sphere (McNair, 2008). As Salgado and Strömbäck (2012)  state,  there  is  a  rather  wide  consensus  that  an important democratic function of journalism is to provide people with the kind of information they need to be free and self-governing, and  that  interpretative  journalism  makes  it  easier  for  people  to make sense of facts and understand what is happening (p. 156).

However,  the  genre  is  not  a  static  form  but  develops  and innovates. Rapid changes in infrastructure and material platforms fostered by digitisation are constantly exposing and challenging the concepts  of  genres  (Liestøl  &  Morrison,  2016).  Digital  platforms convey new possibilities for developing the old genres of journalism. Print-based commentary journalism constitutes a traditional genre, and  over  the  last  few  years,  it  has  moved  online.  Social  media increasingly impacts the distribution of columns and newsrooms attempting new commentary formats and new ways of communicating with audiences (Mathisen & Morlandstø, 2020).

Genre development and newsroom  innovation also imply autonomy  and  creativity  for  the  professionals  involved.  In  a previous  study,  we  elaborated  on  how  regional  newsrooms  in Norway  use  genre  innovation  in  opinion-based  journalism.  We found  an  adaptive  attitude  in  the  newsrooms,  where  innovating contextual  genres  was  perceived  to  strengthen  the  institutional values  of  journalism.  We  also  found  that  marketing  goals  and societal purpose  were  closely intertwined. Consequently, the columnist becomes increasingly important as a brand (Morlandstø & Mathisen, 2016). Deuze (2010) also talks about these integrated and convergent 'multimedia journalism units, where competitorcolleagues are now expected to collaborate in order to produce news across different media channels (print, broadcast, online), formats

(information, opinion), and genres (breaking news, feature reporting, blogging, podcasting, and so on)' (p. 268).

## Literature review

## Commentary journalism

Studies  of  commentary  journalism  address  and  discuss  its societal  role  and  democratic  function.  Both  in  scholarly  and political debate, there is increasing critique of the rising commentariat, both in relation to how it affects the societal role of journalism and whether it displaces fact-based, investigative journalism  and  reporting  from  the  field.  The  critique  has  been concerned  with  a  lack  of  relevance  and  analytical  depth  and suggestions that columnists assume a self-proclaimed and cynical expert  role  in  the  public  sphere  (Allern,  2010;  McNair,  2008).  An essential discussion is whether the commentators are becoming too powerful and are just reproducing the elites' perspectives (Raabe, 2018, p. 9). Meltzer (2019) talks about the increase in talk in news, 'also  known  as  opinion  and  commentary  in  news'  (p.  29).  In addition,  journalists  have  to  be  present  on  multiple  platforms, expand their brand and be part of the financial incentives of the media  business.  In the Scandinavian  political  debate,  young politicians in both Norway and Denmark have fronted some of the critiques through essays entitled 'The dictatorship of the punditocracy' (Lysbakken & Isaksen, 2008) and 'Mute the pundits' (Bengtsson, 2015).

However, the argumentative role of journalists in commenting on or analysing political developments has been widely acknowledged as  a  basic  professional  function  and  a  necessary  complement  to objective  reporting  (Nord,  Enli  &  Stur,  2015,  p.  88).  Ward  (2009) claims that the liberal idea that a free press should inform citizens is tied  to  the  tradition  of  interpretive  journalism,  which  seeks  to explain the significance of events (p. 299). In times of fragmentation, the  commentary genre might be one of the keys for professional journalism to a renewed contract with the increasingly demanding and fragmented audience and to defend its autonomy (Knapskog, 2016).

Usher  (2020)  argues  that  the  digital  sphere  has  transformed 'political  and  social  commentary  into  a  performance  of  self-asbrand and as journalist' (p. 2; see also Olausson, 2018). She talks about  columnists  as  'celebrified'  journalists,  a  combination  of social  media influencer, columnist, celebrity and political activist roles. Social media, where  the commentaries  are constantly negotiated by the audiences (comments, likes and shares), strengthens columnists as influencers and even contributes to their becoming  famous.  Such  personalised  social  media  performance and self-branding strengthen the columnists' political authority and authenticity.  Usher  (2020)  reflects  on  how  celebritisation  among columnists has transformed journalistic and political spheres 'from representation  to  self-presentation'  (p.  15)  and  whether  such journalistic  practice  is  good  or  bad  for  deliberative  democracies. Steensen (2015) uses the concept den profesjonlige journalisten ( the perfessional journalist ) to describe a double journalistic identity on social media: the personal but still professional journalist, which is also a valuable concept for the personalised behaviour of columnists in podcasts.

## Podcasts

This article analyses commentary journalism in a specific format, the podcast. Boczkowski and Ferris (2005) argue that digitalisation eliminates  the  boundaries  between  press,  television,  radio  and online  technologies  (p. 3).  Podcasts  developed  by  traditional newspaper companies might stand as an example. The podcast as a digital medium was first introduced in 2004 and was 'considered as converged media that bring together audio, web-based infrastructure  and  portable  media  devices'  (Bonini,  2014,  p.  21; Deuze, 2010). Bonini (2014) argues that ten years later, in 2014, a 'second  age'  of  podcasting  occurred,  not  least  because  of  the enormous success of the American public radio program 'Serial' 12 episodes were distributed as podcasts in 2014 with well over 20 million downloads in just a few months (p. 26). Over these ten years, the podcast has become increasingly professionalised and commercialised, a 'transformation from a do-it-yourself, amateur niche medium to a commercial mass medium: from narrowcasting to broadcasting' (p. 27). The podcast goes beyond the temporal and spatial boundaries that affect radio (Menduni, 2007, p. 8). Today, podcast is produced not only by media companies but also by artists and public and private institutions. Sterne et al. (2008) argue that podcasting  has  opened  'cultural  production  to  a  whole  group  of people who might otherwise have great difficulty being heard' (p. 12). In other words, podcasting has a democratic function. Bonini (2014), on the other hand, disagrees that podcasting is broadcasting in  a  broader  democratic  sense,  but  states  that  'podcasting  is becoming (commercial) broadcasting' (p. 28).

Podcasts also constitute a new format for the commentary genre, paving  the  way  for  a  more  dialogical  communication  between columnists and their audiences (see also Singer et al., 2011; Barnes,

2011). Oral podcasts have even facilitated a more personalised and intimate  type  of  journalism,  not  least  because  the  personalised listening space created by smartphones and headphones accommodates  a  bond  created  between  voices  and  listeners (Coward,  2013;  Lindgren  2016;  Lüders,  2008).  Menduni  (2007) suggests a role for podcasting as a niche prosumer activity, not as random listening or passive feed. He also states that the audience does not see podcasters as institutions but as peers.

Podcasts are also suitable for media criticism and contribute to transparency into how columnists and editors think, strengthening their  accountability and authority (Von Krogh & Svensson, 2015). Some scholars argue that analysis of a Swedish podcast showed that 'adding transparency to their news organizations and to themselves is stated as one of the main motives for the podcast' (p. 62).

## Method

This article is based on case studies of four podcasts in Norway in 2020 and 2021, operating on three levels of the public sphere. Two of them belong to regional media companies, are published once a week,  and  operate  in  the  regional  public  sphere: Omadressert , produced  by  Adresseavisen  in  Trondheim,  and Nokon  må  gå , produced  by  Bergens  Tidende  in  Bergen.  The  third, Giæver  og gjengen , is a daily published podcast in the national tabloid Verdens Gang published in Oslo, the capital of Norway and operates in the national public sphere. The fourth podcast, Norsken, svensken og dansken ,  is  produced  for  a  Scandinavian  public  body  and  is broadcast once a week by the national broadcasting companies in Norway (NRK), Sweden (SR) and Denmark (DR). This latter podcast is different from the others, as it is innovative and produced by an independent, self-employed journalist/columnist. The specific podcasts were chosen in order to embrace both the regional and national public spheres.

<!-- image -->

og gjongen

Visen SVENSKEN og NORSKEN.

<!-- image -->

DANSKEN

<!-- image -->

| Podcast                             |                                                                                  |                                                                |                                                                                       |                                                                                                                       |
|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Public sphere                       | Regional                                                                         | Regional                                                       | National                                                                              | Scandinavian                                                                                                          |
| Frequency                           | Every Friday                                                                     | Every Thursday                                                 | Daily                                                                                 | Every Sunday                                                                                                          |
| Length                              | About 40 minutes                                                                 | About 40 minutes                                               | About 20 minutes                                                                      | About 60 minutes                                                                                                      |
| Participants                        | Three (two columnists and the political editor) and occasionally a guest         | Three political columnists                                     | One permanent columnist and one columnist from another editorial area in the newsroom | Three: two columnists/ journalists and one author/artist/radio host                                                   |
| Topic                               | Three political and/or cultural topics; cultural recommendations for the weekend | Three political topics: at least one local and one national    | Two political topics: international and national                                      | Three political topics                                                                                                |
| Number of listeners (week 1, 2021)  | 54 unique devices, 38 downloaded/ streamed                                       | 3,310 unique devices, 4,498 downloaded/ streamed               | 31,317 unique devices, 115,306 downloaded/ streamed                                   | 5,058 unique devices, 6,323 downloaded/ streamed                                                                      |
| Number of listeners (week 20, 2021) | 814 unique devices, 1,681 downloaded/ streamed                                   | 3,354 unique devices, 4,785 downloaded/ streamed               | 24,800 unique devices, 75,086 downloaded/ streamed                                    | 12,611 unique devices, 17,229 downloaded/ streamed                                                                    |
| Analysed episodes (2020)            | 30.4. Drømmen om kohort, 1. Mai og helten som ble svindler                       | 1.5. Høiehyllest, Høgre og høgtid                              | 30.4. Tangens talenter og hemmelighets- kremmeri.                                     | 3.5. Om sex- symbolet Anders Tegnell, den drapssiktede norske milliardæren og shariasjeiken som lurte den danske stat |
| Analysed episodes (2020)            | 12.6. Podkast- stjerna Tete Lidbom om forskjells- behandling, rasisme og fotball | 11.06. Rasismedebatt, nedlegging av bokbåt og Stad skipstunnel | 11.6. Norges Bank, Norges Helter.                                                     | 14.6. Korona og identitetspolitikk                                                                                    |
| Analysed episodes (2020)            | 28.8. Giske-krise                                                                | 27.8. Sian-bråket, Frp-krisa og Giske                          | 27.8. Jonas uten kontroll i Ap.                                                       | 30.8. Skandaler                                                                                                       |

<!-- image -->

Table 1: The podcasts.

| Analysed episodes (2021)   | 28.1. Om gretne gubber, Vita og Wanda og AUFs vervemetoder                          | 28.1. Grensa stenger, kaos i FNB og alle skal til Vestland                      | 28.1. Portforbud i Norge, steile fronter før riksrett i USA   | 31.1. Lars Norèn, polkøer og vaksine                       |
|----------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------|
| Analysed episodes (2021)   | 18.2. Om raseri på tynt grunnlag, velferdsstatens fremtid, Clubhouse og Woody Allen | 18.2. Ferjekrig, klimakamp i Sp og kven skal du stemme på i grand prix-finalen? | 18.2. Jensens exit                                            | 7.2. Make bygda great again                                |
| Analysed episodes (2021)   | 26.2. Anmelderslakt, gondolentusiasme og medlemsras fra Ap                          | 25.2. Erna Solberg jubilerer, fødeopprør ogNMG hjelper deg                      | 25.2. Likvidering i konsulatet, gubbene på balkongen          | 28.2. Melodifestival- mobbing, nekrofili og Sylvi Listhaug |

According  to  the  number  of  listeners,  we  can  see  that,  for Omadressert and Norsken,  svensken  og  dansken ,  the  numbers increased in the first half of 2021. Norsken, svensken og dansken , the most recent podcast, has more than doubled its number of listeners in  the  first  half  of  2021. Omadressert started  in  2016  and  hit  the market in 2021. Nokon må gå seems to have stabilised its position among listeners, and Giæver og gjengen is the only podcast whose position has decreased 1 .

The article relies on text analyses of three podcast episodes from 2020 and three from 2021 (see Table 1). In addition, we have been listening to these podcasts more or less systematically for the past two years, and thus we will refer to more than these six episodes during the analysis. The selected podcasts have been transcribed and  coded  in  relation  to  the  way  the  columnists  appear  in  the programs, what topics they introduce, how they present and discuss the  different  topics,  how  discussions  between  the  columnists  are practised, and the tone in the dialogue.

The analysis also benefits from semi-structured interviews with six columnists related to these four podcasts 2 . They have backgrounds as political journalists, cultural journalists or foreign correspondents and were, for the most part, experienced journalists before  entering  the  commentary  genre.  Our  initial  plan  was  to interview two columnists from each podcast; however, due to the columnists' availability, we managed to recruit only one interviewee each for two of the podcasts. Three interviews were conducted face to face, one by the first author and two by the second author. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the two authors conducted the remaining three interviews using Teams. Even if the interviewees are identified, we do not use their names in relation to the quotations. The  interviews  were  transcribed  and  coded  in  relation  to  the questions in the interview guide, which focus mainly on four topics: 1)  the  (changed)  role  of  the  columnists,  2)  the  (changed)  role  of commentary journalism, 3) the podcasts (implementation, research, genre, etc.) and 4) the target group(s) of audiences/listeners.

In this article, the podcasts themselves and the (changed) role of the  commentary  genre  are  of  greatest  interest.  The  analysis  is supplied by additional 'in vivo' codes (Manning, 2017). Based on the material and the categories constructed, we developed a set of binaries that, understood as typologies, capture important dimensions of the differences between the podcasts. Each binary should be understood as extremes in a continuum, with no absolute distinctions  between  them.  These  binaries  are  monologue  vs. dialogue, factual vs. personal, reflexive vs. assertive, and intellectual discussants vs. experts. In the following, we explain the contextual background  and  aim  of  the  podcasts  based  on  the  columnists' perceptions. Then we discuss our further findings in relation to the binary categories we have developed, and, finally, we summarise with a concluding discussion.

## Contextual background and aim of the podcasts

The podcasts are all solidly anchored in a publicist tradition. In accordance with Newman and Gallo (2019), all can be characterised as  the  talk/debate/conversation  type  of  podcasts  (p.  13).  The podcasts we have studied mainly analyse, comment on, and discuss political  news  in  the  public  sphere,  characterising  Newman  and Gallo's  daily  news  type  of  podcasts,  even  if  only  one  has  daily episodes.

Both Omadressert and Nokon må gå have  a  regional  public  as their main catchment area. The columnists express the importance of being active commentators in their local and regional public, and it  is  vital  to  'influence  what  happens'.  One  of  the  columnists  in Omadressert argues: 'It is our mission to be fact-oriented because it is a lot of people  just expressing  themselves  at  all  possible platforms...  […]  It  abounds  of  all  sorts  of  weirdness'.  The  role  of being  a  serious  and  fact-oriented  regional  debate  arena  among media outlets is vital. 'It is important to interpret and explain the meaning of the news and guide our readers', another columnist at Omadressert asserted. The most important topics to comment on in Omadressert are the political and cultural fields.

Simultaneously, it is also important for the regional columnists to be visible voices in the national public sphere by delivering regional and alternative perspectives on national issues. One  of the columnists  for Nokon  må  gå argues:  'If  something  happens  in Bergen that attracts attention from people elsewhere in the country - then we are at our best'. As for Omadressert , they mostly discuss political  issues  and,  to  a  large  extent,  the  same  political  events, understandably because both podcasts are published at the end of the week.

The national podcast Giæver og gjengen emphasises commentary on  international  and  national  issues.  This  is  especially  true  with Donald Trump and his political activity being a recurring theme in their podcasts over the last two years. The head of the podcast was previously a foreign correspondent in the United States. During the presidential  election  in  the  autumn  of  2020,  several  columnists travelled to  the  United  States  to  cover  the  political  process. Simultaneously,  the  columnists  underlined  the  importance  of discussing 'a national issue in every program'. In addition, their daily podcasts always have one participant from another part of the editorial staff who takes on the role of discussion partner in relation to issues close to the person's own work or competence. It is 'often a topic from the cultural section', stated the leading columnist of the  podcast.  For  instance,  in  one  episode,  they  discussed  the practice of tearing down statues and destroying pictures of national and international heroes. The host turned their attention to a news story  close  to  the  current  participants'  fields  of  work  (namely culture, 11 June 2020). This linkage to actual news is important for all  podcasts.  The  columnists  expressed  in  the  interviews  that  the criterion of actuality is a guideline when setting the agenda for the episodes.  This  corresponds  with  the  practice  of  columnists  who write (Mathisen & Morlandstø, 2016).

Norsken,  svensken  og  dansken aims  to  reach  the  Scandinavian public and put national political issues from the three countries on their agenda. A typical statement and a question from the Norwegian  participant  in  this  podcast,  when  discussing  'the controversial  hiring  of  the  head  of  the  oil  fund  in  Norway',  was: 'Why  does  this  [news]  not  cross  the  borders?'  The  Swedish participant replied: 'We hate your oil in Sweden. We hate it. We do not want to talk about it, so we don't care' (30 August 2020). Even if this specific issue does not resonate with the Swedish public, the host of the podcast emphasises in the interviews that 'the 'art' is to make  the  unknown  interesting  in  a  way  that  the  audiences experience it as relevant'. This podcast also seeks 'to create their own news'. 'Good commentary journalism simply puts things into play', the host of the podcast argues. A fixture of their program is to pick  up  reactions  and  comments  on  their  discussions  since  last week - a way to focus on the news they have created.

These podcasts are all important for the columnists, not least to advance their oral skills as well as live performances and arrangements.  Except  for Norsken,  svensken  og  dansken ,  which actually  started  as  an  offline  live  arrangement,  all  informants communicate the ambition to have live arrangements. The political editor of Omadressert states: 'An important role is to create debate arenas and meeting places for people in the community, facilitate relevant  and  good  debates,  and  bring  the  debates  out  where  the people  are'.  The  practice  of  oral  conversation  and  debate  in  the podcast  is,  as  we  can  see,  preparation  for  dialogue  in  an  offline arena.

These live arrangements have a clear publicist purpose - to create meeting  places,  facilitate  public  debate,  and  help  the  audience make sense of facts (Salgado & Strömbäck, 2012).  Simultaneously, we can also observe a commercial purpose connected to the live arrangements. The columnist in Giæver og gjengen put it this way: '[Live arrangements] are both promo for the actual podcast and for other income opportunities'. We can argue that this dual purpose might blur the borders between journalism's editorial and commercial parts. In the interviews, the columnists talk about this dual  mission  in  the  same  breath,  which  we  have  experienced  in former studies as well (Mathisen & Morlandstø, 2016). The columnists  still  do  not  see  this  as  a  challenge,  but  rather  an advantage, and underline that this duality has always been present in the press. The columnist in Giæver og gjengen argues: 'They [the management of the newspaper] will make this podcast work, which has always been a claim in the press' and adds that this kind of dual work practice 'has been my life for 35 years'. From this perspective, this dual mission has perhaps always been part of the consciousness of a columnist.

Prominent  columnists  are  important  for  the  branding  of  the podcast  and  the  newspaper.  One  example  is  how  informants describe the work with podcasts as a preparation for participation in Dagsnytt 18 3 , where they are visible in the national public sphere. For the media companies, it becomes vital that their columnists are invited to participate in prestigious debate programs, contributing to  both  branding  and  authority.  As  one  of  the  participants  in Omadressert puts  it:  'We,  the  columnists,  should  preferably  be heard  and  shown  in  other  media,  so  that  Adresseavisen  can  be relevant in a national context'. Several scholars have discussed this type  of  journalistic  self-promotion  and  branding  (Raabe,  2018; Rogstad, 2016). Some call the columnists 'celebrified journalists' (Usher, 2020; Olausson, 2018), which indicates that the columnists become influencers, and even celebrities, with the power to impact commercial and political processes.

## Variety of dimensions

In  the  next  part  of  the  article,  we  will  use  the  introduced categories/typologies to illuminate differences between the podcasts  and  will  discuss  these  differences  in  relation  to  the changing role of the commentary journalism genre.

## Monologue vs. dialogue

We  can  argue  that  the  podcast  format  is  more  dialogical  than monological,  not  least  because  there  is  always  more  than  one person present in a podcast program, communicating and discussing  the  topic(s).  All  interviewees  agree  on  the  concept  of dialogue rather than monologue as the first and foremost characteristic of a podcast (in comparison to written commentary). The  host  of Norsken,  svensken  og  dansken ,  who  came  from  a position as a writing columnist, phrases it this way: 'I got tired of the monologue-based comment that tells the world what I think […] I need the conversation more than the monologue'.

A  discussion  on Omadressert (30  April  2020)  can  be  used  to illustrate  the  dialogical  climate  of  conversation  typical  of  the podcast  when  the  participants  discussed  the  cancellation  of  the national in-person  May  1 st celebration due to the Covid-19 pandemic. One of the participants argues 'May 1 st is  more actual than  ever,  related  to  class,  unemployment  and  so  on'.  Another agrees, adding, 'We have more than 400,000 unemployed now (…) highest unemployment rates since the 1930s'. The third participant brings in the concept of 'elites' and argues that 'the workers on the front  line  have  a  salary  level  far  below  [that  of]  more  privileged working groups'. The first participant followed up by commenting that the tribute to the health workers (applauding from balconies) 'is not what they want, but higher wages'.

In addition, the columnists on the podcasts generally use social media  to  actively  promote  and  distribute  their  columns  and  to communicate both with sources and with audiences. In our study, all  participants  are  more  or  less  active  users  of  Facebook.  Some participants  use  Twitter  to  introduce  and  advertise  their  specific podcasts and often preview some of the upcoming discussions. The podcast Nokon må gå undoubtedly has the most active community on  Facebook.  Still,  all  the  columnists  from  these  four  podcasts communicate with listeners, though admit that such communication is not as active as it could be. To conclude, we can argue  that  the  dialogical  aspect  is  a  feature  characteristic  of  the podcasts'  content  as  well  as  of  the  participants'  communication with audiences. Despite this, the dialogue is quite different in the different podcasts being studied, a topic we will return to.

The  dialogue  structure  permits  less  authoritative  rhetoric  than the style of written commentaries does and might illustrate how the genre's development makes columnists climb down from their ivory towers. The tone is casual, free, and playful. One of the columnists of Nokon  må  gå terms  their  podcast  a  'Fredagspils'  (Friday afternoon beer), which indicates that the dialogue will take place in a relaxed, comfortable, and calm environment. Nokon må gå is the most 'relaxed' podcast of the four, with the most frequent use of humour, laughter and teasing amongst the participants, and we can ask whether the dialogue is real in all of the discussions. Omadressert and Giæver og gjengen are the most 'serious' podcasts, which focus on the discussed issues without the columnists teasing each  other,  and Norsken,  svensken  og  dansken is  somewhere  in between. We will examine this further below.

## Factual vs. personal

In  relation  to  this  more  casual,  free,  and  humorous  style,  the podcasts  are  more  personalised  than  written  commentaries  are. Several scholars focus on the fact that podcasts invite a much more personalised  style  of  journalism  because  podcast  is  a  radio-like medium  in  which  the  human  voice  always  has  intimated  the intended  messages  to  a  greater  extent  than  printed  media  can (Lindgren, 2016; Berry, 2016; Thyrum, 2018), not least because the audiences also use their private smartphones, often with headphones, to listen. At the same time, we find a wide range of personalisation, from podcasts that are highly person-oriented to podcasts  that  are  more  topic-oriented,  even  if  they  are  rare.  To distinguish  the  podcasts,  we  describe  them  as confessional  and personal (Coward, 2013, p. 12) on one side, where columnists offer their opinions in more personalised and intimate ways, and factual and analytical on the other, where columnists more seriously focus on the facts and the background information concerning the issues under discussion. These two aspects can also be seen as the duality of  the  journalist's  role,  expressed  by  Steensen  (2015)  as  'the perfessional journalist': personal, but still professional.

We observe this personalised style in the podcasts under study. In Nokon må gå and Norsken, svensken og dansken the  participants reveal personal information during the programs. One example is when the host of one of these podcasts asks her Swedish colleague, 'Åsa, what  kind  of  'cemetery-belonging'  do  you  have?'  The colleague answers that she does not know where she wants to be buried because her roots are not in the capital where she lives: 'I feel completely lost in my present time, and even lost when thinking of my cemetery' (3 May 2021). During several episodes, we learn that the Swedish participant belongs to the political left and had a father who was an alcoholic. The Norwegian participant grew up on a farm and suffered from an eating disorder as a young woman. The Dane is about to become a father and is nervous and constantly irritated by his prime minister, Mette Frederiksen. Moreover, the participants from Nokon må gå get personal. One example is when one of the male participants says about a female participant: 'and you are soon giving birth to a little child'. In the same episode, the political affiliation of one of the participants is discussed: 'You have converted from FrP (The Progress Party) to Høyre (the Conservative Party)' (27 August 2020). During one program, the audience is also informed  that  one  of  the  participants  is  homosexual.  In  the discussions  and  dialogue,  the  participants  actively  refer  to  these political and personal positions. The participants for Omadressert and Giæver  og  gjengen reveal  less  personal  information.  Their discussions and reflections do not address personal aspects in the same  way,  and  we  can  argue  that  they  are  more  distant  than personally  oriented  in  their  discussions  when  compared  to  the others.

## Reflexive vs. assertive

We find that all four podcasts studied here reflect both personal and  professional  features,  albeit  to  varying  degrees.  All  discuss current  political  issues  and  events,  often  related  to  the  news. Everyone is open-minded and sharing; they laugh and try to create a  relaxed  atmosphere.  However,  we  did  find  some  differences between the programs. As already highlighted, Norsken, svensken og dansken and Nokon må gå have a more personal style. For Norsken, svensken og dansken the conversation is more reflexive and open. To a greater extent, participants can change their minds than on Nokon må  gå ,  where  the  arguments  are  more  established. Norsken, svensken og dansken is also more exploratory; for example, someone might ask, 'what do you think the answer to this question would be in  Denmark,  Hassan?'  (30  August  2020)  or  'what  do  you  think, Hilde… when you read this, what are your thoughts?' (03 May 2020), the latter relating to Covid-19 prevention practices in Sweden. In addition,  we  find  examples  where  the  participants  of Norsken, svensken og dansken even allow themselves to change their opinions during  the  program  or  between  two  programs  or  to  distinguish between  their  public  and  personal  opinions.  For  instance,  in relation to a discussion of the #MeToo movement focused on the fact  that  Cecilia  Wallin  had  publicly  accused  a  named  Swedish person of rape, Åsa Linderborg thinks this is wrong, but still, she argues:

I just have to admit, though, that I constantly alternate between thinking that if  something  like  this  happened  to  me  and  I  got  the  feeling  that  nobody believed me, then I may at some point think: I'll tell it anyway (30 August 2020).

The  participants  in Nokon  må  gå can  also  be  generous  to  each other-in  one  episode  on  11  June  2021,  one  participant  says  to another, 'Gerd, what do you think?'-but we also noticed that they are confrontational. For instance, this conversation on 18 February 2021 between the two of them:

A: Imagine life with free ferries!

B: No, it [free ferries] is too much…

A: Why is it too much?

B: Because the roads are not free of charge…

A: Some of the roads are free of charge…

B: No, they're not…

It is not easy to represent the impression that the podcast creates in written form, but in Nokon må gå ,  participants often interrupt each  other,  generally  with  a  humorous  touch,  and  protest  each other's  utterances.  These  interruptions  and  harsh  tones  seem intentional, and we feel as though the participants enjoy provoking and confronting each other during the podcasts. This makes sense when we recall they nicknamed their podcast 'Fredagspils' (Friday afternoon beer). Such interruption and provocation are not characteristic of Norsken, svensken og dansken , where participants have a more polite tone. They invite each other to reflect, as we can see when one of them says, 'Åsa, you have also read the article in Politiken , what do you think?' (03 May 2020).

In contrast, we have Giæver og gjengen and Omadressert ,  which are closer to a factual and distant genre of commentary. Participants discuss various topics with a more serious tone, and each person speaks  one  at  a  time.  Commentators  stick  to  these  cases  under discussion  in  a  more  'serious'  manner  by  presenting  facts  and arguments covering the topics. One of the participants in Omadressert is  a  cultural  columnist  who  ends  each  program  by presenting a cultural recommendation for the weekend, such as a film, a book, or a computer game. For instance, in the episode aired 30 April 2020 the columnist recommended the film Bad Education .

These  different  features  of  the  podcasts  allow  for  a  model consisting of two intersecting dimensions (as shown in Figure 1): a vertical axis that spans the personal and the factual, and a horizontal axis  spanning  reflexiveness  on  one  end  and  assertiveness  on  the other. This provides a range of possible podcast profiles. Podcasts with a personal style can be more reflexive or more assertive, and the same goes for podcasts with a more factual style.

Podcasts  located  in  the  upper  left  side,  with  a  personal  and reflexive  style,  can  be  characterised  by  a  relaxed  and  homely atmosphere where participants can draw on personal experiences while reflecting openly about the topic(s) at hand. Participants trust each other, and the aim is to collaboratively explore the topics being discussed, not to win the discussion. In the podcasts belonging to the upper right side, the atmosphere is tenser, the voices are louder, and  the  utterances  are  in  danger  of  being  cut  off  by  other participants.  Also,  participants  know  each  other  well,  so  they interrupt each other and engage personally in the discussion. We will  place Norsken, svensken og dansken and Nokon må gå in  the upper part of the modelNorsken, svensken og dansken more to the left, and Nokon må gå more to the right.

Podcasts in the lower part of the model have a more serious style, with participants being stricter about sticking to the topic and not interrupting  each  other.  Here,  the  atmosphere  is  more  like  a disciplined  discussion  in  which  individuals  are  given  the  floor  to present their arguments one by one. However, while the podcasts on the lower left side have a more reflective tone, allowing more open-ended  reasoning,  podcasts  on  the  lower  right  side  are characterised by participants defending their own opinions. We will argue that Giæver og gjengen and Omadressert can be placed in the lower part of the model.

## Intellectual discussants vs. experts

To  separate Giæver  og  gjengen and Omadressert, we  turn  to another  dimension,  namely  the  contrast  between  intellectual discussants and experts, which can also be placed on the horizontal axis in the Figure. This dimension is more related to the observed roles participants are given or those they assume in the podcasts. One  distinction  is  between  the  podcasts  containing  participants communicating  equally  and  podcasts  with  a  host  who  leads  the discussion. In Giæver og gjengen ,  it  is  indisputable who is leading and in charge of the plan of each program. Anders Giæver is the

+

Personal

host; he asks questions in every program and is the one who changes the  topic  of  discussion.  In  that  regard,  we  might  argue  that  the placement of Giæver og gjengen should be more to the lower right than to the left. In Giæver og gjengen , other participants also often appear to be experts. For instance, when the host of the program asks a political columnist, 'How close is it to the barrier limit now for [the political party] Venstre [to become  represented in parliament]?' (25 March 2021), the columnist is given an expert role. Also, Omadressert has  a  host,  but  it  is  not  easy  to  identify  the hierarchy during the discussion and the turn-taking is less monitored.  All participants appear  as intellectual discussants reflecting on the actual problem under discussion. This would place Omadressert more to the lower left in the figure. Then, the model would be like this:

Figure 1: Dimensions of podcasts

<!-- image -->

Scholars  have  also  identified  commentary  journalists'  frequent practice  of meta-communication in  podcasts  (Lindgren,  2016; Knapskog,  2016;  Thyrum,  2018).  Knapskog  (2016)  argues:  'The commentary genre is a vehicle for self-reflexivity and examination with a critical lens' [on behalf of the journalistic profession] (p. 175). Some  columnists  critique  the  media  as  their  main  activity  on  a regular  basis.  However,  it  seems  easier  to  discuss  their  own journalistic  practice  more  freely  (see  also  von  Krogh  &  Svensson, 2017). We find such self-critique or media critique in some of the podcasts along both the upper and lower axis of the model.

Norsken, svensken og dansken often discusses media practice. For instance, in an episode aired on 14 June 2020, the commentators discuss mass media's coverage of the Black Lives Matter movement. The Norwegian participant argues:

I think it is exciting to see how Western liberal media so actively support Black Lives Matter, at the same time as they had such a problem with the Yellow Vests in France - it was just scum, they were primitive, they were violent. It was no problem to put in the National Guard and shot at their eyes [the protesters] with rubber bullets, made people blind, it was no problem. But this [Black Lives Matter], this is the big hallelujah.

We find something similar in the Giæver og gjengen episode from 30 April 2020, in which commentators discuss whether news coverage contributed  to  public  prejudice  against  a  man  whose  wife  had disappeared. The columnist present, who commented on this case in the newspaper, says: 'It is strange how many people went from being epidemiologists [Covid-19] to becoming experts in investigation [...] I understand that this criticism affects myself as well'. The host of this podcast even informs us in the interview that: 'One goal [of the podcast] was exactly that we should give an insight into the journalistic processes - show the cards [...] it could be a way to greater transparency'. Such transparency could even strengthen media accountability (von Krogh & Svensson, 2017).

## Concluding discussion

This article aimed to discuss the characteristics of podcasts as a commentary activity and to reflect on where the podcast has taken the  genre.  Commentary  journalism  is  part  of  a  critical  tradition, given its societal mission to facilitate public debate and reasoning. As we have discussed, it has also drawn criticism. A vital question is whether commentary in the podcast format improves the public's reasoning skills  and  makes it  easier  for  citizens  to  make  sense  of what happens in society (Salgado & Strömbäck, 2012; Neveu, 2016). Or, is the podcast a place where columnists can finally gain exposure and become 'celebrified' journalists and branded goods for their companies  (Usher,  2020;  Steensen,  2015),  and  thus  support  the critique that their commentary is superficial? Are podcasts a sort of democratic broadcasting tool, as Sterne et al. (2008) claim, or are they, as Bonini (2014) contends, merely a commercial activity?

On  the  one  hand,  we  can  argue  that  oral  podcasts,  a  more intimate and personalised media format (Lüders, 2008; Lindgren, 2016), bring audiences closer to the discussions presented and may perhaps make reflections  and  explanations  in  the  episodes  more understandable,  and  thus  serve  a  democratic  function.  Arguably, the dialogical form of podcasts could also contribute to listeners' reflections  and  thus  create  greater  audience  engagement.  The general rise in podcasts' popularity (Newman & Gallo, 2019) could also be said to add to democratisation. The dialogical form is also less  authoritative,  where  columnists  step  down  from  their  ivory towers through the invitation to dialogue, resulting in more genuine participation (Barnes, 2011; Singer et al., 2011; Mathisen & Morlandstø, 2020). Listening to the columnists' own reflections and opinions may inspire other citizens to become interested in politics, beyond those who already are. The reflexive and dialogical style of the  podcast  might  better  stimulate  the  reflections  and  opinionmaking of the audience than one-way bombastic utterances do. In that way, we can claim that podcasts produced by columnists on one  side  strengthen  the  public  debate  and,  thus,  the  democratic process in society.

On  the  other  hand,  we  can  argue  that  the  columnists  in  the podcasts have increased their power by personalising communication  and  combining  podcasts  and  social  media  to become  visible,  famous,  and  celebrified,  rather  than  facilitating public  debate.  Such  cross-platform  persona  construction  (Usher, 2020, p. 14) transforms opinion-based journalism from an analytical, reflective act to a channel for an authoritative political influencer's focus on their own opinions. Thus, it might confirm the critique of the columnist as an analytically shallow self-proclaimed cynical expert. This can be further reinforced by an increased focus on the commercial side of columnists' work, exposing the blurred line between the societal missions of journalism and columnists as branded goods for the media companies. We may also use Meltzer's (2019)  'From  news  to  talk'  to  illustrate  how  the  relationship between  journalists  and  technology  has  transformed  journalistic practice. She argues that the expansion of opinion and commentary in television has engendered a new discursive practice in the media, one more related to talk: both a movement towards entertainment (as in talk shows ) and towards leading people/citizens to talk 'in all sorts of ways' (p. 209), made possible by emphasising the dynamic of social media.

To conclude, we can argue that the dual mission (of church and state)  always  has  been  present  in  media  companies  and  still  is. Columnists  have  always  been  important  as  brands  for  media companies, even in the pre-digital print era. However, we argue that columnists as branded goods on a podcast may have strengthened market  orientation  towards  commentary  journalism,  not  least because of their personalised and celebrified position on podcasts as opposed to the profiles they maintain through writing.

Our contribution sheds light on how  the podcast format innovates  the  genre  by  moving  it  in  a  dialogical  direction  and, further, how this development is grounded in both commercial and societal  considerations.  However,  our  study  analyses  only  four podcasts. The genre of commentary podcasts thus requires further research  that  will  scrutinise  the  podcast  format  and  employ methods  that  include  audiences.  If  we  understand  the  societal mission of podcasts to be part of the commentary genre and its use and perception by citizens, we must also give voice to the listeners.

## NOTES

- [1 http://www.podrapporten.no/](http://www.podrapporten.no/)
- 2 Omadressert :  Kari  Hovde  and  Kato  Nykvist; Nokon  må  gå :  Gerd Tjeldflåt and Jens Kihl, Giæver og Gjengen :  Anders Giæver; Norsken, Svensken og Dansken : Hilde Sandvik.
- 3 Daily  debate  program  on  weekdays  on  the  national  broadcast company NRK's radio (P2) and television (NRK2) stations in collaboration.

## REFERENCES

- Allern, S. (2010). 'From Party Agitators to Independent Pundits. the Changed Historical Role of Newspaper and Television Journalists in Norwegian Election Campaigns.' Northern Lights, 49-67. https://doi.org./10.1386/nl.8.491
- Barnes, R. (2011). The Ecology of Participation. In T. Witschge, C. W. Anderson, D. Domingo & A. (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Digital Journalism (pp. 179-191). Sage.
- Berry, R. (2016). Part of the establishment: Reflecting on 10 years of podcasting as an audio medium. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 22 (6), 661-671. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957909.n12
- Bengtsson, M. (2015). Approaches to political commentary in Scandinavia. A Call for Textual, Evaluation Scholarship. Nordicom Review , 36 (1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2015-0002
- Boczkowski, P. & Ferris, J. (2005). Multiple Media, Convergent Processes, and Divergent Products: Organizational Innovation in Digital Media Production at a European Firm. Annuals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , 597 (1), 32-47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716204270067
- Bonini, T. (2014). The 'Second Age' of Podcasting: reframing Podcasting as a New Digital Mass Medium. Quaderns del CAC, 41 (XVIII), 21-30.
- Coward, R. (2013). Speaking personally: the rise of subjective and confessional journalism . Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-36851-5
- Deuze, M. (2010). Journalism and Covergenze Culture. In S. Allan (Ed.), The Routledge Campaigned to News and Journalism . London:

- Routledge (pp. 267-276). https://doi.org/10.4324/978020386946828
- Esser, F. & Umbricht, A. (2014). The Evolution of Objective and Interpretative Journalism in the Western Press: Comparing Six News Systems since the 1960s. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91 (2), 229-249. London: Sage.

## [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014527459](https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699014527459)

- García-Avilés, J. A., Carvajal-Prieto, M., Arias, F. & De Lara-González, A. (2019). Journalists' views on innovating in the newsroom. Proposing a model of the diffusion of innovations in media outlets. The Journal of Media Innovation, 5 (1), 1-16.

[https://doi.org/10.5617/jomi.v5i1.3968](https://doi.org/10.5617/jomi.v5i1.3968)

- Knapskog, K., Iversen, M. H. & Larsen, L. O. (2016). The Future of Interpretative Journalism. In M. Eide, H. Sjøvaag & L. O. Larsen (Eds.), Digital Challenges and Professional Reorientations: Lessons from Northern Europe (pp. 165-179). Bristol, UK/Chicago, USA: Intellect.
- Le Masurier, M. (2015). What is Slow Journalism? Journalism Practice , 9 (2), 138-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2014.916471
- Liestøl, G & Morrison, A. (2016). Genre Innovation - a Prologue. Journal of Media Innovations . 3 (2), 1-
3. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/jmi.v3i2.408](http://dx.doi.org/10.5617/jmi.v3i2.408)
- Lindgren, M. (2016). Personal narrative journalism and podcasting. The Radio Journal International Studies in Broadcast and Audio Media , 14 (1), 23-41. http://doi.org/10.1386/rjao.14.1.23\_1.
- Lüders, M., Prøitz, L. & Rasmussen, T. (2010). Emerging personal media genres. New Media & Society , 12 (6), 947-963. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809352203
- Lysbakken, A. & Røe Isaksen, T. (2008). Kommentariatets diktatur. Samtiden, 1 (4-15). Oslo: Aschehoug.

[https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1890-0690-2008-01-03](https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1890-0690-2008-01-03)

- Manning, J. (2017). In Vivo Coding. In J. Matthes (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication research methods. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0270
- Mathisen, B.R. & Morlandstø, L (2020). Audience participation in the mediated Arctic public sphere. Journalism . First Published December 16, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884920973102
- Mathisen, B.R. & Morlandstø, L. (2018). Genre Innovation in Regional Media, in Sur le journalisme - About Journalism - Sobre journalism . International scientific journal . 7 (2).
- Mathisen, B.R. & Morlandstø, L. (2016). Kommentaren - en sjanger i endring [The Commentary - a changing genre]. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.

- Meltzer, K. (2019). From News to Talk. The Expansion of Opinion and Commentary in US Journalism . New York: State University of New York Press.
- McNair, B. (2008). I, Columnist. In B. Franklin (Ed.), Pulling Newspapers apart: Analyzing Print Journalism (pp. 112-120) . London: Routledge.
- McNair, B. (2000). Journalism and Democracy. An Evaluation of the Political Public Sphere . London: Routledge.

[https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203021286](https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203021286)

- Menduni, E. (2007). Four Steps in Innovative Radio Broadcasting: From Quick Time to Podcasting. Radio Journal: International Studies in Broadcast & Audio Media , 5, 9-18.

[http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/rajo.5.1.9\_1](http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/rajo.5.1.9_1)

- Morlandstø, L. & Mathisen, B.R. (2016). Participation and control: the interactions between editorial staff, technology and users in online commentary journalism work. Digital Journalism, 5(6), pp. 791808. http://10.1080/21670811.2016.1195133.
- Neveu, E. (2016). On not going too fast with slow journalism. Journalism Practice , 10 (4), 448-460.

[https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1114897](https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1114897)

- Newman, N. & Gallo, N. (2019). News Podcasts and the Opportunities for Publishers . Oxford: Reuters Institute.
- Nord, L., Enli, G. & Stúr, E. (2015). Pundits and Political Scandals. A Study of Political Commentators in Norway and Sweden. In S. Allern & E. Pollack (Eds.), Scandalous! The Mediated Construction of Political Scandals in Four Nordic Countries (pp. 87-102). Göteborg: Nordicom.
- Olaussen, U. (2018). The celebrified journalist: Journalistic selfpromotion and branding in the celebrity constructs on Twitter. Journalism Studies , 19, 2379-2399.

## [https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1349548](https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1349548)

- Raabe, T. (2018). The power of political commentators in the age of social media . Dissertation for the degree of MPhil, Master of Philosophy, Department of Sociology. University of Cambridge.
- Rogstad, I. L. (2016). Politisk kommunikasjon i et nytt medielandskap . Oslo: Cappelen Damm.
- Salgado, S. & Strömback, J. (2012). Interpretive journalism: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13 (2), 144-161. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884911427797
- Singer, J. B., Hermida, A., Domingo, D., Heinonen, A., Paulussen, S., Quandt, T., Reich, Z. & Vujnovic, M. (Eds.) (2011). Participatory Journalism: guarding open gates at online newspapers. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444340747

- Steensen, S. (2015). Den profesjonlige journalisten. Individer, rollespill
- og masterplot i journalisters bruk av sosiale medier. In H. Hornmoen, T. Roksvold & J. Alnæs (Eds.), Individet I journalistikken (pp. 187-203). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademisk.
- Sterne, J., Morris, J., Baker, M. B. & Moscote Freire, A. (2008). The politics of podcasting. Fibreculture Online December 13, Journal, 13.
- Thyrum, T. (2018). Podkast - radio på ny plattform? En tekstanalyse av de norske journalistiske podkastene Aftenpodden og Giæver og Joffen . Masteroppgave. Universitetet i Oslo.
- Usher, B. (2020). The celebrified columnist and opinion spectacle: Journlism's changing place in networked public spheres. Journalism 22(11), 2836-2854.

[https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919897815](https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919897815)

- von Krogh, T. & Svensson, G. (2017). Media Responses to Media Criticism. Nordicom Review , 38 (1), 47-64. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2016-0042
- Ward, S. J. A. (2009). 'Journalism Ethics.' In K. Wahl-Jorgensen and T. Hanitzsch (Eds.), The Handbook of Journalism Studies (pp. 295309). New York: Routledge.

## LISBETH MORLANDSTØ

Professor

Faculty of Social Sciences

Nord University

[lisbeth.morlandsto@nord.no](mailto:lisbeth.morlandsto@nord.no)

## BIRGIT RØE MATHISEN

Professor

Faculty of Social Sciences

Nord University

[birgit.r.mathisen@nord.no](mailto:birgit.r.mathisen@nord.no)