| KRATKA VSEBINA | Avtorica v članku analizira aktualnodokumentarni oddaji Tednik na TVSLO1 in Preverjeno na POPTV. Poskuša pokazati, da oddaji, ki v polju televizijskega žurnalizma predstavljata forum za razvoj analize in kritične debate, tega ne izpolnjujeta. Vlogo argumentacije prevzame moralizacija. Ugotavlja, da se popularna modrost, temelječa na zdravorazumskih predpostavkah, v teh oddajah reproducira zaradi premika k zasebnemu jeziku in elementom folklorne tradicije, ki prek estetizacije teksta mobilizirajo čustva gledalcev/k, kot npr. naslonitev na individualnost, emotivnost, skeptičnost, fatalizem in distanciranje. Avtorica želi pokazati, da personalizacija, dekontekstualizirane zgodbe in kreiranje spektakla postajajo edini načini pripovedovanja zgodb. Bolj kot da razvija kritično analizo in predstavlja forum za participacijo občinstev v demokratičnih procesih, pa takšen žurnalizem reproducira popularne mitologije, ki pripovedujejo o 'našem tovarištvu in normalnosti'. Politični konsenz v Tedniku in Preverjenem zatorej ni proizvod kritične debate, ampak je artikulacija ideoloških diskurzov, tj. diskurza morale zahodnih družb in nacionalističnega diskurza. // The authoress analyzes current affairs programs "Tednik" on Slovenian national television TV SLO1 and "Preverjeno"on commercial television POP TV. These programs which are believed to that ought to represent the forum of analysis and critical debate in the field of TV journalism, do not accomplish this task because the role of argumentation is taken over by moralization. Popular wisdom, based on common sense, is reproduced with the shift to private language and folkloreelements, which mobilize readers' feelings through the aestheticization of the text, like for example leaning towards individuality, emotionality, skepticism, fatalism and distancing. The authoress argues that personalization, decontextualized stories, and creation of the spectacle are becoming the exclusive modes of telling the stories. Thissort of journalism functions in a greater deal as a reproducer of popular mythologies, which tell stories about 'our comradeship and normality' than a developer of critical analysis or a sphere for the audiences' participation in the democratic processes. Thus, political consensus in "Tednik" and "Preverjeno" is not a product of critical debate but primarilythe articulation of ideological discourses, especially the discourse of Western morality and nationalism. |