Quality Press in Southeast Europe

A Brief Diachronic Review of Mass Media in Post-Communist Romania

The last two decades have seen a profound revaluation of the concepts of identity, belonging, and authenticity within the context created by a new socio-cultural paradigm (Kuhn) or project (Habermas) or condition (Lyotard), representing a shift in the codification of social practices and discourses. In the postmodern perspective, the concepts of progress, rationality, and scientific objectivity that legitimated Western modernity are no longer acceptable because they do not take into account the ‘cultural’ differences.

In the rediscovering of multiple identities and in the search for authenticity, the media and international communication will become a nuclear space of investigation.

Thus, in a ‘society of appearances’, of ‘teledemocracy’, which are gradually substituting the classical forms of deliberation, reflection, and representation, the role of the journalist will be that of a promoter and advocate of the public service mission, of a mediator of the democratic forum.

Whilst West European and North American countries are in the middle of an integration process (the Treaty of Maastricht for Europe, Alena, Mercosur for North America), post-communist societies are characterized by centrifugal and disintegrating tendencies (which normally follow the forced assimilation of the ‘communist camp’).

Romania is now going simultaneously through the different ages of advertising and mass media, and a rural, past-ridden society coexists with islands of post-industrial, information society etc. It is just as clear that a strong wind has blown away many certainties: ideologies, systems, doctrines, and dogmas. In the words of Alexis de Tocqueville, the past is no longer shedding light upon the future; we live in a period of transition, richer in aporias and uncertainties than in evidences.

In the change of regime brought about by the December 1989 revolution (popularly known as ‘the December events’), the media played an important symbolic role, the paradigmatic example being the ‘tele-revolution’ in which ‘the map and the territory’ merged, occulting the breach, i.e. the semiotic distance. The correlation between the mass media and the public sphere (first and foremost political communication) had three distinct moments:

i. the December outburst of national anti-Ceausescu consensus: the so-called ‘golden period’, dominated by utopian ideas, by a new feeling of Gemeinschaft, by a rediscovered identity;

ii. disphoric period: 1991-1992;

iii. period of critical, selective consumption of mass media, accompanied by fidelization of the public and of the supporters: 1993-1997 [1].

In the first stage (i), the media in general and television in particular had a magic connotation (as an effect of the tele-revolution as well as of the super-mediatization of the political sphere).

From the point of view of temporal vectoriality, we can speak of a focalization on the past: all the ‘burying’ rituals of the former socialist celebrations, the ‘re-baptising’ of streets that had internationalist-communist names, the demolition of Leninist statues, as well as the centring upon the mysteries of the revolution, Securitate’s archives, the secret history of the dictator’s family (residences, bank accounts, studies etc.).

However, starting in 1991 (ii), a certain saturation or indifference towards the media developed gradually as a result of the liberalization of prices and the general economic crisis. The media became more oriented towards the present: they tried to explain the tendencies and models of transition, to reflect on their own social status (this is the period of debates over the utility of a media law and over the deontological code of journalists).

Starting in 1993 (iii), journalists tried to optimize their service (transforming their work into a profession, anti-corruption campaigns); following the paranoia of failure (the metaphorical statement of ruin, sickness, catastrophe), they refocused on the configuration of the future (social, cultural policies, etc.).

The media’s emancipation from Party-State control and their transformation into an essential element of democracy requires multiple processes aimed at securing greater media autonomy: separation of powers, end of financial dependency, winning the loyalty of the client public, elimination of the vegetative status of the captive public, integration of new technologies, crystallization of the difference between information and opinion.

As regards the continuity/innovation paradigm of the Romanian media, at one extreme the Romanian post-revolutionary media are inscribed in a social cultural interwar continuity as well as in a 19th century continuity: this applies, for example, to Adevarul [Truth], Românul [The Romanian], Democratia [Democracy] or Timpul [Time], which have been published for more than a century. At the other extreme, Romanian media try to keep up with contemporary tendencies and to sever their ties with the old model: take Economistul [The Economist], inspired by the British magazine The Economist, Libertatea [Freedom], inspired by the British tabloid The Sun, and Cotidianul [The Daily], which seems to have been inspired by USA Today.

Also at the level of the continuity/discontinuity paradigm, we can find continuity in journalistic practices (‘wooden language’, propaganda tool etc.) and discontinuity in the discovery and valorization of the freedom of opinion and speech [2].

top of page

The Cultural Press in Transitional Romania: A Few References

Despite the break with the communist regime, many periodicals changed their name only, keeping the same editorial board, with some changes: Informtia Bucurestiului was renamed Libertatea, Flamura [The Flag] became Flamura Libera [The Free Flag], and Scânteia Tinteretului [The Spark of Youth] changed its name to Tineretul Liber [Free Youth]. The few statistical surveys on the Romanian press [3] show that in the period between 1989 and 1999 there were 4,958 periodicals, of which the cultural press ranked fourth, with 514 titles – after the scholarly press (550), general information press (532), and entertainment press (522).

More recently, the Romanian Bureau for Circulation Auditing (BRAT), which uses international standards for auditing print media, has audited only 48 of the 138 daily newspapers (local and national), 45 weeklies, and 19 bimonthlies of 1,824 periodicals.

Generally, every year approximately 48 new titles appeared. The main change in the evolution of the press was the explosion of the tabloid press, based on hyper-sensationalism, rumour and gossip. This new kind of media developed mainly between the years 1994-1997, to the prejudice of the specialized, cultural, and religious press.

The last available figures, for the year 2000, show that out of a total of 1,932 titles there were 108 daily newspapers and 1,894 publications with other periodicity [4]. For the year 2001, out of 1,950 titles 279 belonged to the cultural press; which came second after the scholarly press and before the professional press (194) [5].

Although the titles are extremely numerous, the cultural press remains limited to a specific niche and is unattractive for the advertising market due to low circulation (1,000 – 5,000), weak distribution and, essentially, the poor economic context. For the Romanians who in 1990 read three to five newspapers a day, the year 2003 is a backward step with regard to the press. Only 30% of the population read (not buy) newspapers or magazines – a low percentage compared with the more developed post-communist countries and the Western European countries, where the higher economic level allows constant consumption of print media.

The predominance of the broadcast media (on average, Romanians watch TV 4.5 hours daily on weekdays and over six hours at weekends) is a result not only of the poor economic situation but also of geo-cultural factors (Romanians, like other Latin or South Europeans peoples, are fervent consumers of images, whereas German and Nordic peoples trust and consume in a proportion of 70% the print media). There seems to be a noteworthy paradox in Romanian society’s consumption of culture: even if the consumption of the press is low, in rating the topics that are of interest to Romanians culture and science are ranked ninth, after private life, health issues, nature and animals, but before domestic politics (ranked 12th), religion, psychology, finance, economy etc [6].

Despite the economic barrier, the quality press should survive in the market economy not only thanks to support from sponsors and donors, but also by offering a new kind of utilitarian information that would win loyal readers. If central newspapers and TV stations are excessively commercial and the intellectual press has settled into old editorial formulas, new offers have emerged: for example, Observator Cultural [Cultural Observer]. The message of this new weekly, which has succeeded Contrapunct [Counterpoint] (1990-1992), is the following: ‘Reconfiguration of certain cultural coherence at the level of the entire country, able to launch debates and polemics, intellectual effervescence, not only in the artistic sense but also with an opening up towards the entire society, towards the political field, the political culture’ [7].

top of page

Cultural Press Trends

In the opinion of journalists and media analysts, those that are most likely to develop first are the dailies’ cultural supplements, whereas the weeklies will deal with problems and not with news chronicles: ‘Magazines will not disappear, just like books have not disappeared, and as people will go more often to the theatre they will also read the reviews’ [8].

Another trend, which is associated with the development of new technologies, is the launch of online versions of cultural magazines, starting in 1996-1998. This has led to a decrease in the number of copies, but the number of readers has remained high.

Pursuing its agenda of rejecting facile information – ‘I am vehemently against the reasoning of some media makers according to which they offer the Romanian reader exactly what s/he wants’ [9] – Dilema has set out to explore the ample field of general anthropology and political anthropology, rethinking controversial historical moments: ethnic and multicultural issues (‘Them, the Gypsies’, ‘Them, the Hungarians’, ‘Them, the Germans’, ‘Us, the Romanians’), political culture (‘Left – Right, Right – Left, Today, Here, and Not Only Here’, ‘Political Culture’, ‘Romanian Communism from Myth to Fetish’, ‘Some are More Equal than Others’, ‘Public – Private’, ‘Human Rights’), new technologies (‘The Internet’), mass media (‘Liberty and Responsibility in the Media’, ‘The Media’, ‘Romanians’ Television: From Monopoly to Inflation’), European values (‘Acceding to NATO’, ‘What Kind of Europe’), historical issues (‘Gheorghe Tatarescu’s Case’, ‘Iuliu Maniu’s Case’), politics and morals (‘Nae Ionescu’s Case’), and some issues that are apparently frivolous and therefore ignored by the cultural press (‘Alcohol, Women, and Tobacco’, ‘The Curse Today’, ‘Punctuality. What’s That Supposed to Mean?’, ‘Yesterday’s, Today’s and Elsewhere Pubs and Cafés’).

Besides the strictly informative headlines in stereotype syntagms like ‘Diplomats and Diplomacy’, ‘Academia and Academics’, ‘Demagogy and Demagogues’, ‘Types, Archetypes and Feminine Stereotypes’, there are also playful and paradoxical headlines, such as the following: ‘Forget It, It Will Do’, ‘Could Have Been Worse’, ‘What They Read When They Don’t Read Anymore’, ‘What Was Good When It Was Bad’.

A characteristic and a success of a given magazine (Dilema or 22) is exemplified by the abundance of letters to the editor, ‘sometimes just as good as our own articles’ [10], the reason why those readers became loyal contributors to the magazine. Interviews, reviews and letters are in fact the most cherished genre in the cultural press [11].

Even if in Romania only ten percent of the adult population buy ten to fifteen books per year, while in the Netherlands 23% of the adult population read one book per month, Romanians read and dialogize in cultural, student, and scientific professional publications and trust the media (the credibility indicator is 70%, far higher than for Western journalism, placing the mass media among the top three institutions that people trust, after the church and the army). It is interesting that the public trusts the media, but not the journalists [12]. The loss of public trust has been explained and justified in various studies by citing a convergence of several elements: the tabloidization of the press and of the journalistic style, journalists’ incapacity to offer a positive image of their mission, and the phenomenon of generalized corruption. However, in the field of the cultural press those elements are far less relevant, the primary objective of the quality press being the transition from an unhealthy society to a normal one, the overcoming of the lack of professionalism, the undistorted freedom cult.

Another feature of the press, influenced by the different development of dailies and weeklies, is the following: the 1990-1992 period saw the rise of information and political debate weeklies such as Expres [Express], Zig-Zag, 22, Cuvântul [The World], România Mare [Greater Romania], Europa [Europe], which was followed by a boom in the number of new dailies: Evenimentul Zilei [Daily Event], Ziua [The Day], Jurnalul National [The National Newspaper], Cronica Româna [Romanian Chronicle], National [National], Monitorul [The Monitor]. Parallel with the political debate press, a special-interest press (business, technical, erotic, feminine, etc.) emerged in Romania [13].

top of page

The Major Cultural Magazines

Dilema

The magazine Dilema [Dilemma] was launched by the Romanian Cultural Foundation in January 1993, starting with a circulation of 15,000 per issue. Dilema currently has a circulation of approximately 10,000, depending on the season and on the fluctuation in living standards. The circulation dropped after 1995, when fragments of the magazine started to be published on the Internet. Since 1998 Dilema has had a full online version.

What distinguishes this particular magazine from the rest of the Romanian ‘intellectual’ press is the existence of a thematic file which, for the first issue, was ‘Catastrophe’.

At the time when the first issue of the magazine Dilema appeared, Romanian society was divided – it was not only that no one talked to anyone anymore, but no one listened to anyone – and we planned, through the sequence of themes raised for debate (from the most serious ones to the more frivolous ones), to create a space for dialogue where the most fierce opinions could be decently expressed. Some of those interested in the activity of the press saw in Dilema a double financed by those in power in order to counteract the magazine 22. After the first issues, the ruling class privately and publicly expressed their discontent with regard to the free, uncommitted voice of the magazine [14].

The magazine Dilema, with its extremely implicative title for the paradigm shifts of the transition period, aims at a different presentation of the concept of culture: not reviews, poems or prose, but mentalities, attitudes and behaviours evolving from a sociological and anthropological perspective. The main goal of the founders of the magazine has been the introduction of a cultural and comparative perspective in the field of mentalities, as well as an opening up towards the multitude of viewpoints (an exigency expressed from the very beginning by Andrei Plesu, the director of the magazine).

Unlike the literary dailies and magazines, reviews and texts, Dilema discusses problems and not people – but in a reflexive, dilemmatic way, the very opposite of the model ‘You shut up for I’m speaking!’ According to the mission statement of the magazine, published in several issues, Dilema is designed to be a kind of cultural magazine different from those already on the market; it is designed to be a cultural magazine for those who do not make culture their profession, but who feel the need for some references in the effort to understand the problems they are confronted with [15].

Created ‘in stride’, not following already established patterns but itself generating models (there is a Dilemma in Bratislava), Dilema has won recognition by addressing a rigorously chosen thematic field – from imprecations to food and from literalism to responsibility in the media. The magazine has gradually built its own identity, also constituting a target audience of its own step by step.

As regards the print/broadcast media intertextuality, it is important to note that following the success of a number of thematic debates in the press, television followed up those debates by inviting different or even the same guests.

22

The magazine 22 is the first independent post-December weekly, and its name refers to 22 December 1989, the day when Ceausescu left the building of the Communist Party Central Committee. The first issue of the magazine appeared on 20 January 1990, in 150,000 copies. Its current circulation is around 12,000 per issue.

The magazine is published by Grupul pentru Dialog Social [Group for Social Dialogue], a non-governmental association established in December 1989 by dissidents and intellectuals who did not collaborate with the communist regime. Afterwards, the Group grew larger but continued to have a professional format (philosophers, sociologists, writers, historians) and to promote the plurality of opinions. The magazine 22 advocates the principles of the Group for Social Dialogue, promoting pro-Western orientation, support for democratic institutions and values, market economy, and support for minorities [16], establishing itself as one of the best political culture weeklies in Romania.

The first editor-in-chief of the magazine, Stelian Tanase, considers the consolidation of civil society as a fundamental mission. In other words, condemning the mistakes of those in power, whoever they may be. Ten years after the founding of the magazine, director Gabriela Adamesteanu published an article on the position of the Group for Social Dialogue (GSD): ‘Not expecting anything for itself, the GSD however felt compelled to react with responsibility to every major provocation of this heated decade’ [17]. This kind of approach to the problem of community as if it were your own is completely new and extremely rare in Romania.

Bringing together the major opinions and points of view of Romanian intellectuals, 22 is seen as a distinct voice in the area of post-communist quality press, which until 1996 supported the opposition parties but did not spare them criticism after they came to power. 22 has among its readers the entire political class – the Justice Department, the Presidency etc [18].

The results of a survey conducted by the magazine show the profile of readership by several indicators. By occupation, 22% of the magazine’s readers are professors, 21% students and pupils, 19% engineers, 7% medical doctors, and 6% economists (over 80% have higher education). By age, 35% of the readers are in the 15-to-29 age margin, 17% are aged 30 to 39, 17% are aged 40 to 49, 14% are in their 50s, 10% are in their 60s, and 7% are over 70.

The general issues, as well as the supplements, plead for fundamental concepts and changes: ‘The Public Communication’ (No. 127), ‘The Romanian Christian Democracy (No. 125), ‘State, Nation and European Integration’ (No. 130), ‘Mass Media and Democracy in Transition Countries’, ‘Cultural Politics. Under the Slogan: “Enough Politics, It’s Time for Culture”’(No. 132), ‘European Exigencies and Romanian Realities’ (No. 133) [19].

România Literara

The magazine România Literara [Literary Romania] is mainly, as its name suggests, a literary periodical launched in October 1964 as a new and structurally different form of the older Gazeta Literara [Literary Newspaper]. România Literara is the Romanian Writers Union’s main publication and it is financially supported by the Union. The circulation of the magazine is in the range of 8,000 to 10,000 per issue.

According to Gabriel Dimisianu, deputy director of România Literara, the magazine has a general cultural profile, with topics ranging from literature, literary theory and visual arts to history, political culture, sociology and philosophy [20]. The magazine has developed along the same lines as the social and political reality in Romania, and it is open to all literary trends and ideas. It is not concerned with politics, but publishes opinions about social and political life [21].

A significant part of the România Literara readership is outside the Romanian borders: ‘There is a public abroad which reads România Literara and which is constituted by Romanians living permanently or temporarily in other countries. Some have literary preoccupations, some are former contributors of Radio Free Europe: in Munich, Paris, etc’ [22].

top of page

The Impact of the Cultural Press

Culture is a national priority in the entire world: ‘Without culture, in the wide sense, without humanist culture, without scientific culture, without juridical culture, without civic culture, terms like reform, restructuring, European integration or commitment to democratic values are left without substance’ [23].

If culture is a national priority, then cultural journalism likewise emerges as a necessary alternative to, for instance, the excesses of political journalism. The journalists active in the cultural field must take upon themselves the responsibility for what constitutes political socialization, i.e. the process whereby individuals and groups assimilate political culture. It is a commonplace that the accomplishment of the formative mission of cultural journalism conveys also political knowledge, the correct deciphering of events, tracing out and transmitting attitudes capable of influencing political opinions.

Political journalists are able to effectively render visible those models that have changed the world and that could represent moral references in the present-day world. ‘In the avalanche of political and cultural information, the necessary evaluative references are absent; and the cultural press should evaluate, form, be a reference in this information Babylon’ [24]. The key to the development of a free, transparent, democratic society can presently be found in the cultural area – more precisely, in the focusing of cultural politics and in the quality of cultural journalism, a kind of journalism capable of forming and winning a loyal public.

It is unfortunate that neither the interwar tradition nor the profound commitment of readers have been able to secure a well-deserved distribution of the quality press. In the transition period, all cultural journals are suffering from severe underfunding.

In ’92 – ’93, the Writers Union used its money, by then over one hundred million lei, to continue supporting its publications. Then, growing poor, it started to support only partially and only some journals, either by paying the salaries of the editorial staff or by subsidizing the fund for payment to contributors. Until 1997, the Ministry of Culture subsidized more than forty publications. Now it has stopped, allocating them only a subsidy that, being insufficient, compels them to seek financial support elsewhere, which they rarely manage to find (Ornea 1997).

Since cultural periodicals are neither party newspapers nor collections of gossips or pornographic images, but instruments that form society, it would be natural that in transitional Romania too culture should not be abandoned solely to the good will of sponsors or advertisers. Perhaps the lack of penetration of cultural periodicals in small and medium-sized towns, as well as their low circulation, are also due to the continuity between some periodicals and those from the Ceausescu period (România Literara, Convorbiri Literare [Literary Debates], Vatra [The Hearth], Familia [The Family], Tribuna [The Tribune], Tomis), which represented a resistance movement under the totalitarian regime. After 1990, when the political and social press took its proper place, the literary press lost its importance as a result of the fast exhaustion of the glorious 1990.

Gabriel Dimisianu, deputy director of the magazine România Literara, establishes a direct connection between the development of cultural magazines and the political situation and groups in Romania:

Today in Romania … the political groups have only vaguely configured their ideology and it will take a long time before this reverberates in the cultural field. And it will take an even longer time before political parties’ doctrines are capable of inspiring the action line of some cultural magazine [25].

The state subsidizes primarily national radio and television, as well as some national periodicals, parts of the minority press, a few magazines for the Diaspora and the limited-circulation press of some ministries, governmental agencies and departments. All those institutions have a decreasing weight in the ensemble of the domestic press, for their audiences are lower than those of the private media institutions [26].

Victoria Anghelescu [27], cultural journalist at the daily Curentul [The Trend], and Ioszef Balogh [28], Secretary of the Romanian Writers Union, think that many dailies contain supplements with solid cultural pages (such as Adevarul Literar si Artistic [The Literary and Artistic Truth], Ziua Literara [The Literary Day]), which have the advantage of a large distribution in comparison with the cultural magazines.

The educational mission undertaken by the cultural press is counteracted either by the disinterest of media owners, for whom culture is a necessary evil, or by a dull and obsolete format. Continuing a prestigious magazine, Contemporanul. Ideea Europeana [The Contemporary. European Idea] has become too elitist by publishing translations of Nietzsche and other philosophers – texts appropriate for philosophy students and not for an average intellectual eager for cultural information. The calling of journalists is, in the opinion of Victoria Anghelescu, to educate the public by presenting a broad cultural horizon and, through competence and cultural appetite, facilitating the understanding of political and economic phenomena: ‘They would better and easier understand a system or mechanism if they were able to make multiple connections’ [29].

Because of tele-entertainment, the press can hardly resist the commercial pressure of advertising and the general trend towards vulgarization. The chances for exercising the cultural and educational function of the daily and weekly press lie in three directions: (1) continuing evolution of society, which would reduce the economic and cultural handicaps; (2) support of culture by the newspapers’ and trusts’ owners; and (3) continuing publication of reviews, debates and cultural information by journalists [30]. Far from being an unessential act, the debate on culture is in fact about transmitting a tradition, creating an identity, offering ontological references.

top of page

Conclusion

The dominant tabloid press is characterized by features like mimicry, heterogeneity, eluding responsibility, credibility crisis, populism or commercialism [31], whereas for the quality press the main trends are choosing and explaining real social issues, synchronization with external problems or asserting certain themes that were tabooed during the communist period.

The only alternative to tabloidization (understood as transition from an opinion-oriented press to soft news and sensational stories) is the quality press, which equally safeguards the quality of language and of the text, and the thematic interest and the educational objective. The main characteristic of the quality press is the concern for the ideas of debate, politics, and attitude. Gabriela Adamesteanu considers 22 a ‘stronghold of civic attitudes’, a place of resistance; the magazine is ‘driven by polemics’ [32].

Gabriela Adamsteanu, one of the editors of 22, launched in 1992 issues focusing on domestic violence, women managers, ecology, women’s rights, disabled people, Roma, the situation of minorities, the process of communism. The general focus of the magazine is on the entire recent history, raising some unpopular issues for the first time. Many articles published by 22 are taken up by foreign publications and included in debates and comments: Libération, Politique Internationale and Uncaptive Mind.

The socio-discursive characteristics of the post-communist media products are marked by mimicry and intertextuality: excessive sensationalism in the print and broadcast media, copying foreign success models, especially in tabloid media, quoting each others’ news, rumours, and comments, on the ‘Snow-White’ pattern – the press looks at the mirror of the press and not at that of the world. In a period when press/television interaction was still unimportant, the column ‘Dilemma’s Divan’ started an avant-la-lettre talk-show that lasted for two years. The director of the publication managed to bring at the same table, in the same debate, people that otherwise communicated very little.

Important themes discussed in the quality press are taken up by dailies and broadcast media (Dana Deac’s investigation on the euro and dollar, the revaluation of Noica, Eliade and Cioran discussed simultaneously in the most prestigious cultural magazines, as well as the debate initiated by 22 on Securitate’s archives, were taken up by the daily newspapers).

The cultural press with political leanings continues to be uncomfortable for any political leadership. Rodica Palade, the deputy editor-in-chief of 22, thinks that there are two kinds of pressures when editing a cultural and political magazine: psychological pressure and commercial pressure. She recalls two critical moments when the magazine and the editorial board were on the verge of being physically assaulted (in 1990, during the miners’ invasion, and in 1999, when they received threats from the miners). Palade considers that economic survival is extremely difficult, 22 has to seek financial support for each supplement, there is no VAT reduction for 22, and that is the reason why she thinks there is a need for legislative amendments [33].

Even if public interest in the press has decreased because of the Internet and also because of television and entertainment, there are valuable magazines in the provinces, with readers just as loyal as sports fans. There is a continuity in the traditional cultural magazines: România Literara, Contemporanul [The Contemporaneous], Timpul [The Time], Ramuri [Branches], Apostrof [Apostrophe], Orizont [Horizon], Vatra [The Hearth].

Gabriel Dimisianu thinks that the periodicals that are most popular among the Romanian public are those that are directly concerned with social and political life, thus not those that are purely cultural [34].

Alex. Stefanescu, the editor-in-chief of the cultural magazine România Literara, is optimistic about the future of the quality press in Romania. He thinks that the downward curve of interest in literature and culture has already come to it lowest point, reaching a so-called ‘hard core’ of the public that reads literature. He is confident in the readership of his magazine and believes that România Literara now has a loyal public which not only reads the magazine but also makes efforts for its acquisition, since because of distribution and circulation problems the magazine is not available in all parts of the country.

Therefore, it cannot decrease anymore. It is true that interest in literature has dropped dramatically compared with the reality before 1989, when literature fulfilled other functions as well by spreading information that the regular press did not; thus many people bought cultural periodicals out of a non-literary concern … However, I am sure that twenty thousand people would buy the magazine if it had a better distribution and if it reached every place were it is in demand [35].

Just like the advent of photography did not bring about the death of painting nor has the Internet replaced books, the over-valuation of entertainment will not destroy the cultural press as long as it accepts the rules of change, faces the technological and marketing challenges, and wins a loyal readership.

If the illness of the tabloid press is tautology, for the cultural press intertextuality and thorough study of a particular topic become a quality capable of promoting a discourse of change and of a meeting of spirits. Only the logic of adequate information and not that of sensationalism, of pseudo-events, will give the necessary answers demanded by society.

top of page

References

Primary Sources:

Adamesteanu, G. (2000) ‘Sfârsitul istoriei amânat’ [‘The End of History Postponed’], 22 plus, supplement 98:1.

Anuarul statistic (2001), published by INSSE (The Statistical Year-book of the National Institute of Statistic and Economic Studies).

Catina, D. A. (2003) Tipologia presei române [The Typology of Romanian Press]. BA thesis, University of Bucharest, Faculty of Journalism and Mass Communication Studies (unpublished manuscript).

Coman, M. (2003) Mass-media în România post-comunista [Mass Media in Post-Communist Romania]. Iasi: Polirom.

Dimisianu, G. (1994) ‘O revista de directie?’ [‘A Direction Magazine?’], România Literara 4: 8.
IRSOP (Romanian Institute for the Poll of the Public Opinion) poll, 2002.

Lefter, I. B. (2003) ‘Multe s-au schimbat sau totul s-a schimbat’ [‘Many Things Have Changed or Everything Has Changed’], Timpul [The Time] 6: 4.

Manolache, D. (1998) ‘Cultura - o prioritate nationala’ [‘Culture: A National Priority’], pp. 37-38 in Sireteanu, A. M. and E. Perdichi (eds) O introducere în jurnalismul cultural [An Introduction to Cultural Journalism]. Bucharest: Societate Româna de Radiodifuziune.

Ornea, Z. (1997) ‘Revistele si finantarea lor’ [‘Journals and Their Financing’], Dilema 232: 8.

Petcu, M. (2000) Tipologia presei românesti [The Typology of Romanian Press]. Iasi: Institutul European.

Popescu, D. (2003) ‘Familia si cuplul – subiectele favorite ale românilor’ [‘The Family and the Couple: Romanians’ Favourite Topics’], Adevarul, June 1: 5.

Roventa-Frumusani, D. (1994) ‘The Press of the Transition – The Transition of the Press. Romania’s Case’, Balkanmedia 3, vol.III: 27 –30.

Roventa-Frumusani, D. (1999), Semiotica, societate, cultura [Semiotics, Society, Culture]. Iasi: Institutul European.

Sireteanu, A. M. and E. Perdichi (eds) (1998) O introducere în jurnalismul cultural [An Introduction to Cultural Journalism]. Bucharest: Societate Româna de Radiodifuziune.

Tânjeala, Em. (2003) ‘Literatura urâtului’ [‘The Literature of the Hideous’], Dilema 536: 8.

Zubascu, I. (1998) ‘Informatie si evaluare’ [‘Information and Evaluation’], p. 120-121 in Sireteanu, A. M. and E. Perdichi (eds) O introducere în jurnalismul cultural [An Introduction to Cultural Journalism]. Bucharest: Societate Româna de Radiodifuziune.

Secondary Sources:

Bertrand, C. J. (1995) Les Médias aux États-Unis. Paris: PUF.

Bertrand, C. J. (1995) Médias. Introduction à la presse, la radio et la télévision. Paris: Ellipses.

Cayrol, R. (1991) Les Médias [The Media]. Paris: PUF.

Cârstean, Sv. (1997), ‘Starea presei culturale’ [‘The State of the Cultural Press’], Dilema 232:6.

Coman, M. (1998) ‘Romanian Media in Post-Communist Era’, The Global Network/Le Reseau Global 9-10: 11-28.

Coman, M. (2000) ‘Developments in Journalism Theory about Media “Transition” in Central and Eastern Europe (1990-1999)’, Journalism Studies 1.

Dragan, I. (1996) ‘Les médias roumains: la crise de crédibilité’, The Global Network/Le Reseau Global 2: 61-66.

Gross, P. (1998) ‘The First Nine Years – a Reappraisal of Romanian Media’, The Global Network/Le Reseau Global 9-10: 5-10.

Gross, P. (1999) Colosul cu picioare de lut [The Colossus with Legs made of Clay]. Iasi: Polirom.

Gross, P. (2002) Entangled Evolutions: Media and Democratisation în Eastern Europe. Washington: Woodrow Wilson Centre Press.

Marinescu, V. (1998) ‘Trends in Romanian Audience Development after 1989’, The Global Network/Le Reseau Global 9-10: 97-116.

Tessier, R. (ed) (1995) La transition en Roumanie: communication et qualité de la vie. Quebec: Presses de l’Université du Quebec.

Websites:

http://www.algoritma.ro/dilema (last accessed 29 July 2003).

http://www.observatorcultural.ro (last accessed 29 July 2003).

http://www.revista22.ro (last accessed 29 July 2003).

http://www.romlit.ro (last accessed 29 July 2003).

http://www.trafic.ro (last accessed 29 July 2003).

top of page

This article is part of:
Spassov, O. (ed) (2004) Quality Press in Southeast Europe. Sofia: SOEMZ, European University 'Viadrina' (Frankfurt - Oder) and Sofia University 'St. Kliment Ohridski'