Juhtkirja valimine päevalehes (Eesti Päevalehe, Postimehe ja Äripäeva näitel)
The current bachelor thesis „The Process of the Completion of an Editorial in a Daily Newspaper (Case Study of Eesti Päevaleht, Postimees and Äripäev)” observed closely the process of completing the editorial in Estonian daily newspapers. The first, theoretical part of the research paper gives an overview of the functions and structure of the editorial. It also analyses its objectives and position in the newspaper, including the role of the editorial as a basis on which public opinion is formed. The second, empirical part of the paper is based on 11 in-depth-interviews with editors of Eesti Päevaleht, Postimees and Äripäev who serve on the editorial boards of the respective newspapers. This part mapped the process of completing an editorial in all three newspapers and reviewed and compared the dilemmas that the editors face. The main issues that the bachelor thesis concentrated on were the following: the selection of the topic for the editorial; the formation of the editorial board’s standpoint; finding arguments that both support and contradict the proposed standpoint; the process of writing (assigning a writer, determining the structure of the text). Based on the results of the research, it can be concluded that the topic of the editorial is formulated by the opinion editor (arvamustoimetaja) responsible for this day’s editorial in all three daily newspapers. He/she suggests the topic during the daily meeting, where representatives of various departments of newspaper assemble. If the meeting does not approve the topic, the final decision will be made by the editorial board collectively. Regard to the topic, the most important news of the day is usually selected as the topic for the editorial. Thus, the standpoint of the editorial is formulated by the opinion editor together with editors of other departments who offer their input. While determining the standpoint, the majority wins. In Äripäev and Eesti Päevaleht, this standpoint should be in accordance with the formulated key values of the newspaper. Postimees has not formulated such values. By finding arguments that both support and contradict the standpoint, the archives of different newspapers, statistics etc are used as a source. In Äripäev, there is a special team called editorial council (juhtkirjagrupp) who suggests arguments to the writer. In Postimees and Eesti Päevaleht, it is the opinion editor together representatives of other departments who has to find relevant arguments. If counter-arguments are stronger than those which support the agreed standpoint in Äripäev, the standpoint of the editorial will be changed. In Postimees and Eesti Päevaleht, the topic of the editorial will be changed in this case. Counter-arguments cannot always be found in the editorials of Eesti Päevaleht and Postimees. Äripäev’s editorial has to follow a fixed structure (respectively: topic, standpoint, argumentation, conclusions). In Eesti Päevaleht and Postimees, editorial is more free in its structure. In Äripäev and Eesti Päevaleht, only opinion editors write editorials. In Postimees, only 1/3 of editorials are written by opinion editors, the rest 2/3 are completed by members of other departments of the newspaper. In Äripäev, if the writing editor does not share the chosen standpoint, he/she will nevertheless complete the editorial as agreed by the majority. In Postimees and Eesti Päevaleht, a new writer is selected under the circumstances.
H Social Sciences (General), bakalaureusetööd, meedia, meedia, trükiajakirjandus, ajakirjandusžanrid, juhtkirjad, päevalehed