Introduction

Although a harsh debate has been generated in connection with the repercussions on the journalistic practice of the Organic Law of Communication in Ecuador, no empirical studies have been carried out to analyze the changes that such law has generated in the news content of the national written press upon its performance in 2013. Likewise, the performance of professional roles in the news has not been a subject of research in Ecuador.

To journalists themselves, the Communication Law in Ecuador marked a milestone in the journalistic development of the country. Besides, journalists have continued doing their work according to their ethical beliefs and editorial lines - more carefully, though - to avoid confrontation with the government and comply with the new legislation that requires the media to provide useful content to the public. According to a previous study of perception of Ecuadorian journalists about their professional roles, one stands out:

The strong influence of the Organic Law of Communication and regulatory entities such as the Council for Regulation and Development of Information and Communication (Cordicom) and the Superintendence of Information and Communication (Supercom). In the light of the results, there is a certain distrust, and even fears, towards this new legislation “(^{Oller, Chavero, Carrillo & Cevallos, 2015, p. 181}).

On the one hand, members of the opposition believe that the above mentioned law was applied in order to control the news content of the media, to silence the journalist’s voice, to limit its investigative power on issues that question the public institutions or the power of the State and require the media to become facilitators of government power. How was it done? By publishing news of their sole interest, as well as frighten and restrict the freedom of expression.

On the other hand, supporters of the Government of Rafael Correa, promoter of this regulation, assure that the objective of such law never aimed to restrict the freedom of expression or control the news agenda of the media. Conversely, according to the main arguments, it is deemed necessary (among other communicational regulations) to ensure that the published information is true, accurate, contrasted and contextualized. In addition, the message that information had no mercantilist purposes was justified, but it would be understood as a public good for service purposes, without privileging the economic elites, building a more citizen-friendly and more inclusive journalism (^{National Assembly, 2013}).

All the aforementioned considerations regarding the way of doing journalism in Ecuador can be directly linked to the implementation of different professional roles that journalism fulfills in society. The doubt of many is whether with the application of the Law, a journalism more oriented to the citizen and the vigilance of those in power was achieved, or if on the contrary, a journalism more linked to the loyal-facilitator role was achieved.

Of course, there may be different influential factors in this change, the purpose of this article is not to intend to prove a causal relationship between the implementation of a law and the changes in the materialization of journalistic roles in Ecuador. However, it is pertinent to analyze the existing correlation between both factors, in order to start finding helpful clues to analyze this phenomenon in depth.

The creation of the Law is grounded on an ethical dispute. The center of the government’s criticism started with the questioning of “self-regulation”, that is to say, that discourse used by the owners of the private media trying to base their “independence against the powers”. Further on, through advertising criticism, the media was pushed, especially the largest and most traditional institutions, e.g. the newspapers El Universo and El Comercio, to be on the same side of the groups of economic and political power. These groups were discredited and identified as collaborators of decades to the corruption and inefficiency based on capitalism and neoliberalism (^{Benalcázar Andrade, 2015}).

This confrontation paved the way for a next phase: the creation of a law. The background of the current Communication Law in Ecuador comes from the mandate of the Constitution approved in 2008, which established that the National Assembly should approve a legal body for this matter (^{Benalcázar Andrade, 2015}).

Based on that context, this study raises the following research question: How have the journalistic professional roles expressed in the news content of the Ecuadorian written press of reference changed after the implementation of the new Organic Law of Communication?

Conceptual dimensions of professional roles in the news

^{Mellado (2015)} conceptualizes the performance or implementation of different professional roles in the news; that is to say, how the journalistic roles studied during the last decades by different authors through the application of surveys to journalists (^{Hanitzsch, 2007}, ^{Patterson & Donsbach, 1996}; ^{Weaver et al., 2007}; ^{Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996}). Studies materialized in the informative content produced which finally reaches the public. Considering the inevitable gap between the journalistic ideals and the professional practice (^{Lynch, 2007}, ^{Mellado & Van Dalen, 2014}), the research on journalistic roles has directed its interest towards the study of the implementation of said professional ideals (^{Mellado, & Donsbach, 2017}; ^{Tandoc, Hellmueller & Vos, 2013}).

Specifically, ^{Mellado (2015)} operationalizes six roles in the news, from three major domains when analyzing the journalistic content. The first is linked to the Presence or absence of the journalistic voice in history (^{Patterson & Donsbach, 1996}; ^{Weaver & Wilhoit, 1996}); that is, to what extent the journalist is more active or passive in the narration of the stories. From this domain a unidimensional structure emerges: in one end, a disseminating role, where the journalist is a mirror of the reality and does not participate or include his voice in the news he produces and writes is found; and in another, the interventionist role. When this role is present, the journalist adopts a position in the news, either by opining about certain facts, including interpretation in their notes, proposing or demanding changes, using adjectives or the first person.

The second domain is called Power Relationships, linked to the relationships that journalism assumes in relation to the institutionalized or de facto powers in a society (^{Sparrow, 1999}; ^{Waisbord, 2000}). Two independent professional roles emerge from this domain: the watchdog or vigilant role and the loyal-facilitator role. When the watchdog role is present, journalist may reveals hidden facts about the wrongdoing of those in power, through different reporting strategies, such as questioning, criticizing or denouncing institutions, individuals of the political, economic, cultural elite or from the organized civil society, among others. Meanwhile, when the loyal-facilitator role is present, a journalist tends to follow and even promote the agenda of the government or of economic groups with power, highlighting the positive aspects of the elite, or becoming loyal to the state-nation, praising the characteristics and triumphs of the country.

Finally, the third domain is linked to the way journalism interacts with the audience: whether it is done as a citizen, as a client or as a spectator (^{Eide & Knight, 1999}; ^{Mellado & Lagos, 2014}; ^{Rosen, 1996}). Three independent professional roles emerge from this domain: a) the service role becomes present when the journalist reports on topics of daily interest to the public, providing information, knowledge and guidance on goods and services to apply in their daily lives; b) the role of infotainment, linked to the idea of ​entertaining and excite the public, observed when specific environments or characters are described, either by their physical appearance, psychological or way of dressing, when talking about private life or expressing feelings, using exaggeration or metaphors to create drama, as well as morbidity. Finally, c) the civic role is manifested when the news include the perspective or demand of social groups or citizens who are out of power and who seek the recognition or restoration of a right, providing them with tools and analysis to make political decisions.

Public Communication Policies in Latin America

A debate on the application of Public Communication Policies in Latin American countries has its history since the seventies of the last century (^{Beltrán & Fox de Cardona, 1981}), when on the one hand, the nations complained on the concentration of US capital by media companies, and on the other hand, that country and international organizations such as the Inter American Press Association (SIP) considered those policies as an aggression against the freedom of information of private companies, calling the Latin American critics as “fascists” and “communists” (^{Barranquero, 2009}).

A historical event that achieved a balance amid disputes about communication and information issues was the presentation of the document entitled Un sólo mundo, voces múltiples (Many voices, one world) (^{MacBride, 1993}), delivered to Unesco in 1977. Since the first legal regulations in Latin America were created, especially on issues of foreign investment in communication and advertising (^{Beltrán & Fox de Cardona, 1981}).

In the last decade, new communication laws are embedded in the context of political, economic and sociocultural changes promoted by governments elected with the banners of social justice and inclusion of the masses in the development processes (^{Moraes, 2011}). In Latin America, this is the case of center-left governments such as Nestor and Cristina Kirchner, 2004 and 2010 (Argentina), Ignacio Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff, 2003 and 2007 (Brazil) and Tabaré Vázquez and José Mujica, 2004 and 2010 (Uruguay). However, the greatest changes in communication occurred in leftist governments such as Evo Morales, 2005 (Bolivia), Hugo Chávez, 1998 (Venezuela) and Rafael Correa, 2006 (Ecuador).

All these governments have in common the taking over of the control in their respective countries, where a highly concentrated media structure was established within a communicational market dominated by few economic groups (^{Santander, 2014}), with a clear ideological tendency to oppose the socialist doctrine. Faced with this reality, the governments had the need to modify or create new communication laws.

The case of Ecuador

Prior to the approval of the new Communication Law, the media was considered the fourth power, not only due to its ability to present the agenda setting and define the topics of public opinion, but also because the media was used as a “trench” for powerful economic and political groups to protect their interests, whether by publishing or hiding facts. The power exercised by the journalists themselves could affect the stability of the government of Rafael Correa, whose opponents were identified as owners of media, friends of shareholders and journalists of private media.

Because of the tension between the media and the government, and along with a strong campaign by the latter, a plebiscite was called in 2011 and Ecuadorians voted overwhelmingly for the elimination of the concentration and influence of the political and economic power over the media. Based on this popular support, the National Assembly approved two years later, in 2013, the new Organic Law of Communication, which currently controls the news content of all media through a Superintendence of Communication that functions as a regulating and sanctioning entity.

The Law presents several articles related to the concepts and characteristics of professional roles. It also expresses the deontological norms of journalism, it tells the journalists and the media what to do and what not to do with regard to the treatment of certain information (^{National Assembly, 2013}). Focusing only on the concepts of professional roles, in summary, the legal regulation expresses the following (article 10, numeral 3, paragraphs a, d, g, f and articles 13, 14, 25 and 27):

After over four years of the passing of the Organic Law of Communication in Ecuador, little is known about the changes generated in the journalistic practice, while the results have generally been left in the opinions and perceptions of the journalists themselves. Thus, and without knowing the true consequences of the Law, this has been used as a reference in other countries, where the regulation of content is not regulated yet and it is thought that it is necessary to do so in order to improve the content of the media. Therefore, studying the Ecuadorian case is important to see how such a controversial subject has generated changes in the way of doing journalism and how the role of the journalist varied with the validity of a Communication Law.

Previous studies on the perceptions of journalists in Ecuador on their professional roles show that there is a certain distrust and fear on the part of journalists when performing their duties (^{Olle et al., 2015}), as well as negative changes regarding the freedom of expression and, therefore, with the professional practice of journalism and in the generation of content (^{Benalcázar Andrade, 2015}).

Methodology

The methodological design of this research is framed in a quantitative study with descriptive and correlational purposes, through a content analysis that measures the presence of six professional roles of journalists, in the news of the Ecuadorian written press of reference.

Results

In order to provide an answer to the formal research question, it was decided to present the results of this study through each of the domains in which the analyzed professional roles are framed. For this, there was a work with contingency tables, the χ² test (which measures the discrepancy between an observed and a theoretical distribution) and descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation). Meanwhile, to know if there were significant differences in the presence of each role before and after the implementation of the Law of Communication in Ecuador, the statistical test t-students for independent samples (which measures the difference of means between two groups) was applied, considering the before and after the passing of the Law in mention as a control group.

Conclusions

The main objective of this study was to analyze how the materialization of different journalistic roles observed in the elite media varied, after the enactment of the new Organic Law of Communication.

The results showed a close relationship between the approval of the Communication Law and the implementation of journalistic roles. Specifically, from the results obtained it was inferred that the change in the ways the practice of the profession is regulated, influenced to some extent the lower participation of journalists when preparing their stories, leading them to adopt a rather passive voice, and also assuming a less watchdog role towards central government and the powers of the State. On the contrary, the results indicated that through their stories, journalists had a tendency to present more topics and more government sources to promote their activities, after passing the Law than in the past.

These findings show that the Organic Law of Communication in Ecuador, in force since 2013, influenced the performance of some professional roles played by journalists in Ecuador. The main changes are present in the interventionist, watchdog and loyal-facilitator roles. Meanwhile, the presence of service, infotainment and civic roles tend to remain stable, with certain nuances, though.

The data gathered in this study revealed that the main characteristic of the Ecuadorian written press journalist from the elite media is the “interpretation”; that is to say, to explain in writing, for example, macroeconomic data, a political context, based on their own observation of the facts or the background of a news story to be written. Although this characteristic is still the most relevant, its level of interpretation decreased, since a lower interventionism was observed once the Communication Law was in force.

On the other hand, whilst the news produced by journalists, prior to the passing of the Communication Law, were characterized by the presentation of information on judicial or administrative processes, and also by giving space to sources that questioned or criticized the actions or statements by the government, members of the political party supported by the government and state institutions; once this Law came into force, a decreasing space in the news for criticism and questioning against the government is observed in the sources. In addition, there is less space for information about judicial processes and against groups of power.

The loyal-facilitator role has not had a relatively continued presence in the Ecuadorian newspapers part of elite media, before and after adopting the Law in mention. However, data revealed that after the enactment of this Law, journalists tended to be less loyal to the business sector and economic elites and their role of facilitators with the information provided by the government increased, either promoting or accepting what the State says or does.

As shown in the results, the Law of Communication did not influence how journalists conceive their audience. However, in the news no larger space is allowed for groups or individuals outside the political or economic circle of power to have an active participation as sources of information.

If one of the objectives of the Law of Communication was to achieve an eminent citizen inclusion and achieve more participatory, pluralistic and inclusive news from social groups outside the circle of power, such goal seems not to have been entirely achieved, although there was an increase of indicators that intended to educate and show citizens the implications of certain political decisions.

In sum, the results of the present study tend to reflect that the Law of Communication in Ecuador influenced to some extent the presentation of a more cautiously work by Ecuadorian journalists at the moment of preparing stories and also in their investigation, probably due to a fear of receiving a censure from the Superintendence of Communication or that the media they work at can be economically penalized, affecting their labour stability.

Of course, this does not mean that such changes were directly generated by the Law of Communication, or that this study suggests a causal connection between both parties. In this sense, the results obtained by this research do not allow us to assure that the Law of Communication directly restricts the autonomy or press freedom. However, this study does show the existence of an irrefutable correlation between both phenomena, where it is possible to appreciate a relationship between the implementation of the Law and the change in journalism work in the country.

Although this is a pioneer study in Ecuador, by analyzing the materialization of journalistic professional roles in a country with scarce empirical research on the subject, it is not free of limitations.

One of the limitations faced by this study was the fact of having considered only the analysis of the printed press, and specifically, the national and elite media. Although the printed press is still a reference and keeps on marking the media agenda in global terms (^{Skovsgaard & van Dalen, 2013}), future studies should compare these results with the analysis of more than one information platform (^{Mellado & Vos, 2017}), to see if the implementation of the Communication Law in Ecuador affected all the media equally, audiovisual, broadcast and written. Likewise, to achieve a more complete analysis of how professional roles have changed in Ecuadorian journalism, studies could be conducted comparing elite press media with popular press media, including national and regional media in the country, not only the two with highest circulation. It would also be interesting to include in a later analysis the public newspaper, El Telégrafo, which is aligned to the government, whose editorial line differs from two elite media newspapers taken into account for this analysis.

In turn, this study could be extended to topics not only related to politics and economy, but also to issues deemed as second-order, such as sports, show business, police and crime, which comprehend a relevant space in the national agenda. On the other hand, this research could motivate future studies that would compare the presence of different journalistic roles within the information note format -as this is the case-with the editorials and opinion columns of newspapers.

Considering that this study does not consider a comparison with other countries, it would be relevant that future research could replicate this line, comparing Latin American countries, especially those that have undergone changes in their public communication policies.

For instance, similar studies could be performed in countries like Argentina, Venezuela or Bolivia that have also faced new communication laws. In effect, regulations are a part of the public communication policies that emerged as a trend in many countries of the region and that, in the case of Ecuador, it was established when the government administration of Rafael Correa was going through a moment of great popularity.

Finally, this study explored changes in professional roles before and after the implementation of the Law, but other factors were not analyzed. It would be interesting that future investigations inquire about the influence that other aspects have on this variation, aspects such as: the presidential election in Ecuador, the judicial problem between the government and various media institutions, changes of editors or journalists, etc. For this, a mixed methodology could be used, whether in-depth interviews or interviews with journalists, where subjects can establish the role of the Communication Law in the change of their journalistic practice.