Global journalism as a research area has long traditions, dating back to studies from the 1960's by such people as Raymond Nixon, for instance. Yet, tyhe term 'global' is of more recent origin, one might argue. The early studies done for instance at Mid-western US universities, tended to define 'the international' as that which took place outside of the USA. By the same definition, that which takes place within a country is then 'national'. This is one of those distinctions that more recent literature has done away with/ And by 'recent' I here refer to research from the 1990's and forward, after the debates concerning 'globalization' started to intensify. From then on, one has tended much more to question the distinction between 'nation' and 'inter', understanding global journalism as something occurring on a different scale or 'scalability' altogether. While research has tended to continue to compare situations, regions and countries, the question has become a more central one: What is it that we compare, and what are the implications of that question? Does it really make sense to compare nation-states if the idea is to study 'global flows'? In short, how do theories and models not always clarify but sometimes rather confuse matters?
In this video I go though basic issues and questions related to the concept of 'global journalism' – what it means, and how it is being used. Should we understand 'global journalism' as a particular style of news reporting? Or do we concentrate on the political economy of globalization? These questions are raised for a simple reason: 'Global journalism' has become a term, used generally and also particularly to refer to university&college degree programs. All of thich begs the question: What is it, really all about? Is there one particular meaning of the term?