Journalists as Media Educators: Journalistic Media Education as Inclusive Boundary Work

ABSTRACT This article locates media literacy both theoretically and empirically in the public practices carried out by journalists and journalistic actors in the case of Finland. In the theoretical section, the paper discusses the activities under the frameworks of non-formal education and strategic audience development as part of media organisations’ work. In the empirical section, central journalistic actors and their typical best practices are identified. These activities are grouped into three categories: media education on, in and via journalism. It is found that the initiatives aimed at promoting journalistic media education can be seen as focusing on a specific form of journalism literacy in which drawing the boundaries of journalism and non-journalism is a distinguished feature. The paper concludes by suggesting that demarcating journalistic media education as a separate field within the media literacy framework helps to identify media education as more incorporated in media organisations’ functions and promotes the development of this field in its own right.


Introduction
In a changing media landscape, with increased distrust and misunderstanding about what journalism is, journalists have become aware of the necessities and possibilities of standing up for themselves. The professional journalistic community has increasingly become engaged as advocates for their field, resulting in an increased number of audience projects and partnerships, school visits, competitions and participatory initiatives with young people to increase their news literacy (Ashley 2020;Brites and Pinto 2017;Klibanoff 2012). As pointed out by Klibanoff (2012) in the American context in which the news literacy movement began to arise around 2007, the first people to recognise the need of improved news literacy were the journalists. Influential, long-standing initiatives and non-profit groups such as the News Literacy Project (founded in 2008, https:// newslit.org) have promoted the inclusion of the journalism industry in media education. "Working with children" has, as a consequence, become a prevalent strategic and a practical issue for journalists and newsrooms (see, e.g., Jusović and Krajišnik 2020). Even if media educational efforts are nothing new in the media industry, media educational activities has become to appear as a potential answer and a sustainable strategy for journalism, resonating with dimensions of open reflexivity, transparency and proactivity (see e.g., Zelizer 2013), or enhancing accountability, providing essential ways of combatting disinformation, ensuring the existence of future audiences and developing the participatory and public dimensions of journalism for a wider audience.
Media education refers to activities that aim at enhancing media skills and competencies among media audiences (see e.g., Buckingham 2013). The desired outcome of media education activities is media literacy, the ability to "access, analyse, evaluate, create and act upon" media messages (Aufderheide and Firestone 1993;NAMLE 2020;Livingstone 2004). While global and reagional policy frameworks have been promoted (UNESCO 2013), topics like media (and information) literacy and education, as well as children, young people and the media, have even been discussed extensively in the academy (see De Abreu et al. 2017;Frau-Meigs et al. 2020;Hobbs and Mihailidis 2019). However, the role of the journalism industry in media education has typically attracted less attention. Instead, the focus has been either on formal education institutions like schools or non-formal educational settings such as informal environments for self-directed learning in virtual communities.
This paper intends to explore the media education provided by journalists to audiences in order to understand the extent to which media education conducted by journalistic actors themselves can be considered to be public pedagogical practice. With Finland as an example, we intend to identify and describe the typical forms of industry-led journalistic media education (JME) in order to demarcate and understand it, first. as a field in its own right and, second, as a concept embedded in professional journalism. The pedagogical mission of journalism is traced by conceptualising JME as a boundary problem. The concept of boundary work has been richly employed to understand how journalism works by drawing its symbolic boundaries of definitional control both in discourse and action (Carlson 2016;Lewis 2012;Revers 2014). This discussion has, however, been less frequent in the educational-organisational context of journalism, in which we regard boundary work as a designated set of inclusive practices that finds its roots in the journalistic media organisation traditions of audience work and development (cf. discussions on news literacies, see e.g., Ashley 2015Ashley , 2020Maksl, Ashley, and Craft 2015). To understand JME as both a practice sitting in journalism as an institution and as part of the endeavour of media education, we need to bring together two traditions of communication research that do not too often talk to each other, journalism studies and media education/literacy research (cf. Drotner and Erstad 2014).
One central reason for the reduced focus on JME has been the fact that journalists often consciously avoid using terms like pedagogy, education, teaching or learning, as noted in interviews with journalists (Huovinen 2019;Kakkola 2009). Surveys on the professional roles of journalists have discovered that the educational role is often latent in journalistic performance (see, e.g., Hanitzsch et al. 2019;Mellado, Hellmueller, and Donsback 2017). Industry surveys point to the same trend. In a Finnish survey by the project "The newsmaker's ways of media education", the majority of respondents (N = 52) connected media education to the acquisition of new readers but had not conducted, or did not plan to conduct, any projects. Instead, they viewed media educational activities as inherent part of the regular journalistic work. (Aikakausmedia 2014;Puska, Romppainen, and Tolonen 2014).
If identified as a subarea of media education that is becoming increasingly prevalent in societies undergoing re-configuration in their media education ecologies, JME can be assigned a more visible and tangible place in the global discussion of harmonised policies and practices of media and information literacy (UNESCO 2013). At the same time, viewing JME as part of professionalism and organisational performance that reaches out to individual journalists enables its inclusion in the research agenda of journalism studies. JME is carried out by different actors, such as authorities, associations, as well as research and higher education institutions. Nevertheless, the media industry deserves special attention because of the overlapping roles between media industry and education. We begin by defining the research questions and, thereafter, proceed to defining media education as an inclusive boundary-work practice. To put this into practice, we will inquire into the typical infrastructures of JME in the Finnish context, distinguishing between three ideal types of JME, reflecting different types of practices of inclusion.

Research Questions and Methodology
Our research questions read as follows: First, what is JME-how can it be identified in journalistic organisations as an area of practice? Second, in particular, in what forms is JME carried out by journalistic actors themselves? Third, how do these forms work as an inclusive practice, enabling those receiving media education a degree of access to and membership of journalism-related communities? The idea of inclusion is based on an organisational attempt to reduce the cultural distance between the producers and receivers of journalism. It refers in this context 1 to activities that aim at increasing access to, interest in and understanding of journalism, with an intention to facilitate the sense of audience membership among the target groups by certain measures.
The characteristics of JME are further studied with a focus on the activities of journalistic media educators in a single country, Finland. Finland makes a quality case as it has a well-established tradition of media education, being internationally "a paragon of media education" (Forsman 2020, 65) as it is one of the few countries in the world with a governmentally regulated centralised media and information literacy strategy, formalised by public authorities. Indeed, according to the national media literacy policy, Finland has set itself the objective to become "an active global actor in media education" (Ministry of Education and Culture 2013, 28) and make its "media education visible globally" (Ministry of Education and Culture 2019, 17).
A "journalistic actor" in this context is defined as an organisation producing journalism (e.g., a newsroom) or representing the interests of an organisation (e.g., a professional union of journalists or a trade organisation, the press council), or an individual journalist representing either of these. Our focus, however, is on organisations, not on individual journalists, pursuing a macroperspective. The major journalistic actors, also in Finland, are the largest media companies and journalism newsrooms (public broadcasting, national and regional newspapers, magazines), actors collected and acknowledged by the national media education authorities, and relevant industry unions and professional/professionally related associations.
To capture these institutions' output, we went through the following sources identifying the projects, initiatives and organisations that specifically worked on journalism: (1) actors mentioned by the national media literacy authority, the National Audiovisual Archive KAVI, in the media literacy policies (Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland 2013, 2019), online publications on media literacy week 2010-2020 and reports summarising the media literacy week activities (Palsa et al. 2014); (2) lists of projects financed by the Ministry of Education and Culture 2015-2020 (Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland 2020); (3) the annual reports of the public broadcasting company YLE and the industry unions the Finnish Newspapers Association, the Finnish Periodical Publishers' Association (Aikakausmedia), the Finnish Media Federation (Finnmedia) and the Union of Journalists in Finland; (4) searching on Google with relevant Finnish terms (mediakasvatushanke, mediakasvatusprojekti).
Individual projects were abstracted and grouped according to the forms they represented, producing categories for JME according to different target groups. Their major forms of JME that we indentified are listed in the Appendix. Some of these examples represent long-standing and widely shared practices, while others are unique to one newsroom but have turned out to be influential in the JME ecology.

Media Education as a Set of Boundary Practices
Control over boundaries has been identified as central to the establishment and reproduction of professions (Malin 2000), including the journalistic professionalism (Waisbord 2013). In this respect, professionalism is an exclusive phenomenon and the recent calls for participation that have put weight on inclusivity have challenged journalistic structures (Lewis 2012). At the policy level, media education is connected to media competences as a means of participation and inclusion in a democratic society (UNESCO 2013; for Finland, see Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland 2013, 2019). JME is basically a case of inclusive boundary work, intended to lift barriers between boundaries rather than trying to establish and strengthen them. Inclusivity is often defined as a discourse and capacity to provide (all) members or participants access to resources (Berlach and Chambers 2011). An inclusive practice is thus a mindset that enables inclusivity to be realised and communities to be bridged. JME implies that journalistic actors function, to use Wenger's (1998) vocabulary, as boundary spanners, connecting audience communities to journalism by supporting boundary practices, i.e., sustaining connections between the audience communities of practice and journalism (see also Wenger-Trayner et al. 2015).
Theoretically, the boundary work takes on different forms if examined as education in the context of schooling or as part of journalism organisations' activity. Next, to capture the institutional foundations of JME we will first discuss JME from the schools' standpoint as non-formal and extramural education, and from the media organisations' standpoint as strategic audience work.

Media Education as Non-formal and Extramural Education
Media education is conducted in formal and informal contexts, and, between these contexts, there is a grey non-formal zone. If the formal context is primarily constituted by the school, and the informal context by the family, the workplace and free time, non-formal education is something that can be placed between these two. According to the OECD's lifelong learning framework (2010), formal learning is organised and structured; it is intentional; it has learning objectives. In contrast, informal learning is not organised; it has no set objective in terms of learning outcomes, and it is never intentional from the learner's standpoint.
For school organisations, extramural activities are known to play an important role in natural sciences or science, technology, engineering and mathematics, the so-called STEM subjects (Woolnough 1994). Transversal subjects that cut across the curriculum such as economy, biology and citizenship education, like media education, typically represent subjects for which going for visits outside school and using external environments as learning environments have become commonplace (Waite 2017). The benefits of extramural activities are connected to increasing learners' motivation (Hagger and Chatzisarantis 2012) and allowing learners to encounter real-word problems in authentic learning environments (Herrington and Herrington 2013). Hankala (2011) makes a distinction between institutional and non-institutional contexts for media. School and journalism form the institutional, the family and the free time non-institutional contexts. When partnering with schools, JME is well integrated into the formal learning outcome of the school curriculum. However, the media industry has particular objectives that inevitably reach beyond the school's institutional structure. A significant part of JME occurs outside of the school and its physical environment, led by journalistic actors rather than teachers. The learning outcomes of JME are not controlled, tested or assessed by teachers. Therefore, JME can be positioned at the limits of the formal learning environment. Non-formal JME can be conducted in an intramural way, in the classroom but assisted by journalistic interventions from outside, or in an extramural way, going beyond the school for learning opportunities.
In other words, in JME, the framework into which the extramural activities are placed is created by teachers, but the agenda for the learning is typically set by the media organisations. There is no centrally regulated structure, no formalised learning outcomes and no common systematic evaluation of the activities; these factors underscore the nonformal character of the activities. Materials provided by the media organisations enable a high degree of flexibility in use and in adjustment to teachers' needs. A significant part of JME targets teachers and pupils, and another part targets families and the role of the parent in education. JME has established firm ties in these spaces. There is a kind of symbiotic relationship between JME and places of other in-and non-formal learning like the library, youth work and virtual communities. The place that JME occupies within the educational framework is "excursional" by its character-the journalist actors inviting a school class to visit the newsroom or another place outside the school-or "integrative" and "interventionalist"-the journalist actors coming into the classroom.

Media Education as Strategic Audience Work
JME is strategically and structurally connected to the pedagogically-oriented work that media organisations conduct as part of their regular functions. The pedagogical dimensions of media organisations can be captured by the term public pedagogy, a term that generally refers to learning that occurs beyond formal schooling (Sandlin, Schultz, and Burdick 2010). The practice of most relevance to JME is the organisational public pedagogy conducted by museums. Museum educators, as a professional group, have similar educational roles to those of journalists (Tran 2006). In a similar manner to museum educators, journalistic media educators partner with teachers and try to make the output of their organisation accessible. However, the journalistic media educators' role seems to be less differentiated within the media organisation than the museum educators' in museums. Journalists typically perform as the industry contact persons (called "school links"), and there are no academic education programmes similar to those in museum pedagogy.
Increasing people's access to journalism shows similarities to audience development and engagement. Audience development refers to the strategic work carried out by the management of cultural organisations aimed at increasing the outreach of their output (Kawashima 2000), or the "planned process of enhancing the uses of contents, products and services by audiences to accomplish the goals of the organisation" (Gillard 2000, 126). Audience engagement means collaboration with audiences to create mutual relevance and reciprocity, a practice that has also gained ground in the strategies of newsrooms (Lawrence, Radcliffe, and Schmidt 2018;Lewis, Holton, and Coddington 2014). While audience development and engagement have been identified as emerging trends and industry buzzwords in journalism (Lawrence, Radcliffe, and Schmidt 2018; Newman 2020), media organisations have been engaged in JME as an activity for a long time. Kawashima (2000) distinguishes between four types of audience development in cultural organisations: audience education, taste cultivation, extended marketing and cultural inclusion. Audience education and taste cultivation target existing audiences, while extended marketing addresses potential and culturally inclusive unlikely audiences. JME strongly implies the idea of social inclusion, addressing potential and unlikely readers. Also, JME, to a great extent, depends on the inherent practices of journalism that aim at increased inclusion of audiences in journalistic processes and products. Participatory journalism (Singer et al., 2011) can, indeed, form a channel in which JME can work towards audience inclusion. Therefore, JME has a broader mission than the outwarddirected audience-related organisational processes of public pedagogy, audience development and engagement and participatory journalism. Still, the connections indicate that JME is an essential aspect of media organisations' strategies and practices. Tyner (1998, 123) offers four reasons why the media industry should be involved in supporting media literacy. First, the industry sees media education as good public relations in response to negative perceptions about the media industry. Second, the objectives of media literacy function as re-purposing news and entertainment media for educational purposes. A third reason is community philanthropy, enhancing the image of the media as good corporate citizens. Fourth, media education is audience development in that it educates young people about the media, and it promotes the sophisticated appreciation of media content.
Journalistic Actors in the Finnish Context JME typically implies the intersection of the media market, the educational system and civil society. Media education is centrally regulated by the authorities and implemented by teachers, parents or family members as key educators (see e.g., Buckingham 2013). Media organisations, in particular journalistic media, are typically discussed in this context concerning self-regulation. In this context, the primary concern is the safety of the online environment for the young (ibid., 169). Freedom of speech and citizens' rights constitute the core concepts in the policy documents. The media are thus positioned as protective actors rather than as active educating instances. Nevertheless, the basic purpose of the public broadcasting service strategy is to "increase our understanding of each other and the world" and, especially, to "strengthen" the "relationship with children and the young" by "making room for new content creators and the voices and ideas of young people". These aims resonate well with the basic principles of active media education (YLE 2020).
Schools appear as a natural partner for the media industry in advancing media literacy, as all institutions of formal education are expected to include media education in their curricula. According to the basics of the national curricula for all school levels, teachers of all disciplines are expected to promote media education as part of their teaching and as part of "multiliteracy" (Finnish National Agency for Education 2014, 2018, 2019). The national media education policy (Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland 2013, 2019) regards journalistic media as promoting and supporting instances of media education together with the government, authorities and national associations and networks, while municipalities and families are counted as actors implementing media education. According to the 2019 policy, media education should be "comprehensive"-"covering different topics extensively"-and targeted to diverse groups (Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland 2019, 14). In the media sector, media education work is aimed at promoting informed consumers.
Along with a wide variety of projects with civil society, industry and professional unions have typically named media literacy as one of the strategic priorities in their activities and have, therefore, been actively involved in projects and have published guidelines related to the development of media literacy (see, e.g., Finnmedia 2008). Here, the multi-stakeholder association the Finnish Society on Media Education, launched in 2005, is the central forum for promoting media literacy in Finland and gathering together actors from policy, pedagogy and research.
Professional unions bring together newspapers and schools within a long tradition that goes back to the 1960s, although "newspaper education", as it was initially called, was organised somewhat later in Finland than in the other Nordic countries (Hankala 2011, 62). In 1975, the Finnish Newspapers Association set up a committee to organise newspaper related education in schools. This was the starting point for nationwide, regionally organised, long-lasting activities that came to be called "the newspaper in teaching" (sanomalehti opetuksessa) (Puro 2014). According to Hankala (2011, 175), [b]ased on a historical review, the 'newspaper in teaching' activities by the Finnish Newspapers Association can be characterised as versatile. Over the decades, a considerable number of training events for teachers and pupils have been organised, and teaching materials on various topics have been prepared. Pupils have visited media organisations, and school visits by journalists have brought the subject to life. The wide-ranging nature of the activities can be seen in the variety of free materials produced by the association for numerous school subjects and for all levels from pre-school to university. The materials were intended to develop media literacy in a variety of ways. (Translated by the author) The first newspaper theme week was organised in 1976, and, since then, the Finnish Newspapers Association has provided schools with teaching and learning materials free of charge. It has designed school campaigns and organised regular courses and seminars for teachers. Similarly, the Finnish Periodical Publishers' Association (FPPA), which currently operates under the brand "Aikakausmedia", launched "the magazine in the classroom" (aikakauslehti opinnoissa -toiminta) in the 1970s (Hankala 2011). The thematic "magazine week", originally launched as a theme day the mid-1990s (Paavilainen and Parko 1996), with a pause of almost a decade from 2012 to 2019, takes place annually in April and coincides with the literacy theme week. Therefore, the industry unions for newspapers and magazines form a high-profile journalistic force that has, over decades, advanced the interests and practices of JME. Also, at the national level, media literacy activities are coordinated in the form of a third annual theme week, the media competence week in February, run by the media authority National Audiovisual Archive (KAVI 2020). It can thus be said that theme weeks, along with the Global Media and Information Literacy Week, led since 2012 by UNESCO, form the backbone of the media education activities. Theme weeks attract public attention for the wide variety of media education actors and their activities, while simultaneously supporting their collaboration.

Three Types of Journalistic Media Education
To further map and make sense of the variety of JME actors, three types of JME can be identified according to the form of activity and the roles assigned to the audiences in acquiring a particular type of knowledge and skills, as summarised in Table 1. Similarly, Schofield and Frantzen (2018) identify three perspectives in contemporary studies on media pedagogy: education and learning about the media, education and learning with the media, and socialisationinto media. This tripartite classification reflects the types of practices found among the JME actors.
Media education on journalism refers to activities in which journalism constitutes the object of inquiry and learning, and journalistic actors as mediators of this knowledge to the audience. This type-"education and learning about the media"-underlies all the basic forms of JME establishjed since the 1970s when the JME activities began to take shape. Media education in journalism includes the didactic choices made within journalistic work to teach specific audiences, typically young people, about journalism. This type of JME moves a step further from the "lecturing model" towards a more in-built didactic model in which media education is basically part of everyday journalistic work. It reflects the "socialisation" type of media education: journalists reach out to audiences with journalistic tools, creating coverage of their own activities, thereby socialising audiences to the journalistic worldview. Media education via journalism is focused on the acquisition of journalistic skills by engaging audience members in journalism. This type of JME is conducted through journalistic production and simulations by audience members adapting a journalistic producer role. It corresponds to "education and learning with the media". These three types-or ideal types-constitute different aspects of JME that are partly overlapping, partly complementary, and connected to some existing journalistic practices, "practices of reference", in the newsroom (see Table 1). They have different functions in advancing media education within the journalistic frame, implying different positionings of the actors conducting JME. In particular, they function by providing the receivers of media education with certain types of inclusion: audience inclusion, target group inclusion and authorship inclusion. Being included in a specific intended group of receivers, the targets of JME-mostly school children and their teachers-are provided with a particular type of information and experience, even if there are no formalised goals for these measures of inclusion. Next, the JME types are described briefly, and an account is given of how they have been manifested in the journalistic actors' activities.

Media Education on Journalism
Media education on journalism includes activities that aim at informing audiences about journalism. Journalism is the object of inquiry, positioned outside the media organisations engaged in media education and the audiences as receivers and target groups of that information. The form of the activities in this type of media education ranges from producing educational material such as pedagogical material to be used in classrooms, or from supplements and special issues to encountering audiences in live events and meetings. The aim of the media educational activities in this category is to produce information on journalism as a distanced fact or separate object of study. The focus is on general principles, such as the genres of journalism, news criteria, or journalism ethics. Instead of using the word "media education", the activities are often referred to as media criticism, source criticism, or audience contact. The public broadcasting company, with its special section for educational media, and the industry unions, are regular providers of pedagogical material.
The most basic form of media education on journalism is school visits. Individual newsrooms adopted this practice, developing routines and assigning contact persons to organise visits, and the trade organisations strongly support it, making it "best practice" for all newsrooms. Some newsrooms, for example, the regional newspaper Aamulehti, even developed a game for children to play in the auditorium as part of a regular visit, letting them simulate the everyday choices that a journalist has to make as part of the editorial process. Visits organised for school classes form part of the audience work that newsrooms are doing for all kinds of audience groups. Maintaining living contact with readers by opening up the newsrooms for visitors and giving them the opportunity to meet journalists, has long been an integral part of the way newsrooms work (see, e.g., Lewis, Holton, and Coddington 2014).
In 2017-2018, a stand-alone project funded by two foundations enabled journalists to do a tour of schools around the country. The project, Faktana, kiitos!, involved a total of 160 journalists who visited schools and talked to pupils about journalism (Koponen 2018). The initiative was seen as something new and worthwhile, as indicated by the fact that it was the Finnish Union of Journalists activity of the year in 2018, and it was shortlisted for the Bonnier prize in 2019. This type of activity has been established in the field of literature, as part of reading promotion where school visits are regularly arranged nationwide by the non-fiction writers' union and the Finnish Reading Center. Journalists may also give video lectures in schools as part of the Expert Network initiative run by Economy and Youth TAT, an NGO specialising in economic issues for young people. Many similar activities are supported and initiated by the industry unions, involving lectures and seminars led by journalists and aimed at enlightening the audiences of the future.
In 2018, the Council for Mass Media in Finland, the self-regulating body for ethical professional practice, introduced a campaign entitled "Responsible journalism" (Vastuullista journalismia). The campaign included information on citizen's rights to know about the ethical principles of journalism, and it highlighted the differences between journalism, marketing and fake content. The campaign introduced a "responsible journalism" label that qualified media could use to communicate their affiliation to ethical journalistic conduct. Educational videos on relevant topics to be used in the classroom were made available to download from a website.
In sum, media education on journalism relies on the notion that audiences need to be informed about the backstage of journalism, and the conviction that there is something fascinating about this backdrop that is usually hidden from the majority of readers. Advocating media education on journalism is also a way for media organisations to identify themselves as professionals who believe in serious journalism and quality. While the journalistic content is being produced, media education on journalism adds another layer, assigning journalistic actors roles in promoting learning.

Media Education in Journalism
Media education in journalism means practices in which media education takes the form of journalism instead of being a separate educational undertaking beside the journalistic product; journalistic practice is adjusted according to pedagogical standards to reach educational aims. In media education in journalism, the journalist assumes the role of a pedagogue, applying their pedagogical thinking to journalistic products to conduct planned educational activity. The activity is to a high extent target-group oriented. Media education in journalism includes, for example, forms of media criticism and formats clarifying the backgrounds of journalistic stories, which are all created and published as part of regular journalism production. These activities are intended to give audiences better insights into the preconditions or production context in which journalism is being created. However, in contrast to media education with journalism, in media education in journalism, the audiences remain as receivers of information, not active coproducers. In media education in journalism, media education unfolds through everyday production-through informed choices and specially designed practices encompassing more didactic arrangements and educational objectives than usually.
Journalistic content is often targeted at young people as a category. Previously, newspapers used to publish separate sections in the newspaper for children and young people. While this practice has almost ceased, nowadays, content targeting children and young people is published as separate supplements or media concepts as part of product families. Examples include Lasten uutiset (Children's news) by Helsingin Sanomat, launched as a pilot project in 2016 (Katko 2018), and the junior supplements of magazines, for example Apu Juniori, launched by the general-interest magazine Apu in 2019. Lasten uutiset features a regular news feed designed for children, including a 10-minute news broadcast, dedicated pages in the print paper, a website, and distribution of content across different channels of the same company. In autumn 2020, a subscription print paper for children was launched (Laari 2020). YLE announced in 2019 that the public broadcasting company will launch a television news programme for children during 2020 (Mankkinen and Nurmio 2019). The Swedish daily Hufvudstadsbladet is about to issue a children's newspaper (Miettinen 2020). Educational media content for children and young people is a well-established and widespread tradition in several European countries, ranging from the BBC's Newsround, a classic programme launched in 1972, to Sweden's television news Lilla aktuellt and print paper SvD Junior.
Newspapers participate in the national newspaper and media awareness weeks by publishing designated stories on regular news topics written with children and young people in mind. These stories, sometimes even marked with a special vignette, are written on topics relevant to the younger readers' world and in a way that makes it easier and more interesting for young people to approach them. Schools typically receive newspapers free of charge during newspaper week, and, during that week, the papers are systematically studied in the classroom; this pedagogical gesture is meant to arouse interest in events and phenomena in society among young potential readers.
One of the most advocated means of media education in journalism is the in-house fact-checking and fact validation conducted by journalistic actors themselves, which has been on the rise during the past decade. Fact-checking has been discussed in terms of its pedagogical potential to educate citizens about the aims of journalism and to include young people in discussions on journalism, truth and related issues (Jaakkola 2018a). An example is the American Teen Fact-Checking Network by Poynter (Grau 2020). In Finland, however, in-house fact-checking practices have not yet been formalised in the same way as in neighbouring countries. For example, in Sweden, in 2017-2019, there was an attempt to build a digital platform dedicated to fact-checking carried out by big daily newspapers and by public broadcasting (Valkollen, later on Faktiskt.se), and in Norway, Faktisk.no is a collaborative fact-checking venture by the newspapers Dagbladet and VG and the public service company NRK that aims to identify fake content. The initiative is financed by NRK and some foundations (Jaakkola 2018a). In Finland, fact-checking has become embedded in regular journalistic practices, only occasionally promoted in, for example, blogs, or by non-journalistic actors such as the NGO Faktabaari.
Of course, one might say that all journalistic work entails a didactic, inherently boundary-practical element, as journalists are de facto cultural intermediators (Matthews 2014) and in every story project, they need to be pedagogical in a way that they present facts in a manner that enables the audience to learn something new. However, the intermediary function as such is not acknowledged as "pedagogical". Many specialised genres of journalism, such as cultural journalism and art criticism (Jaakkola 2015), as well as science journalism (Secko, Amend, and Friday 2013), include an enforced educational dimension. Also, media (self-)criticism has long been a branch of journalism with an ambition to increase people's knowledge about how media works (Haas 2006). News stories made with media education in mind are expected to maintain the authority and legitimacy of journalism, thereby making this form of JME a significant instrument of journalistic metacoverage (Kristensen and Mortensen 2016). Special contributions to self-exposure are, indeed, made as part of different milestones and changes in newsrooms and their environments. Newsrooms tend to introduce self-presentation campaigns, for example, they publish supplements or individual stories with their regular editions to mark anniversaries (e.g., regional papers have issued supplements about their newsrooms; the evening tabloid Ilta-Sanomat published a Donald Duck pocket comic volume, Donald Duck star reporter, on journalism-themed comics, IS 2012), or in conjunction with changes and exceptional conditions such as the COVID-19 crisis (e.g., newspapers reporting on how stories are being made). This contributes to increased engagement in JME.

Media Education via Journalism
In media education via journalism, journalists and journalistic organisations give audiences an active role as producers or co-producers of journalistic content. This implies a role shift, differing from the two previous categories of JME. However, this dimension occurs in two stages. The first alternative, with a long tradition, is that media organisations provide local support for simulating newsrooms in schools, helping to create a production space with a limited audience and publicity. The second alternative, which has gradually gained ground during the past decade, is that news organisations harness their existing audience for young people's presentations by publishing their content as part of their productions.
Journalism organisations have always supported media education by promoting the acquisition of journalistic production skills. One example is the Finnish Newspapers Association's website, "Our story" (Meidän juttu), where children's stories can be created and shared online. In 2012, the FPPA launched a "School magazine machine" (Koululehtikone) that enables school classes to produce their own magazine, since 2017, also in digital form. Creating "class news" resonates to a large degree with the pedagogical tradition of producing school newspapers and school or campus radio. The audiences are limited, consisting of the school community. However, this version of in-school support has become less relevant as more accessible free publishing platforms have been developed and adapted for educational uses by teachers.
Establishing physical training newsrooms is no longer the preferred option. Helsingin Sanomat, the biggest Finnish daily paper together with two other papers of the same company, founded a pedagogical newsroom for school classes in 1999. The initiative followed similar newsroom simulations by the Swedish Aftonbladet and the Norwegian Verdens gang (Puro 2014, 156). The simulation environment had different programmes for different visitors, including exercises to hone ethical consideration skills and news selection criteria. The Helsingin Sanomat educational newsroom, Piste ("dot"), was closed down in 2013. Puro (2014, 156) describes the newsroom as a nationally unique investment and expresses the view that it may not be replaced in the near future.
A crucial detail in an educational newsroom is whether the audience is "hyperlocal" or national. Professional news organisations have become more relevant as supporters of media education in the sense that they can provide school classes with a connection to the mainstream public sphere (Jaakkola 2018b). For some time, news organisations have been providing internships for primary school children as part of the schools' work practice programme, in which 7th to 9th graders can spend 1-2 weeks in a workplace. YLE's media education project "YLE News Class" (YLE Uutisluokka) invited 11-18year-olds to produce journalistic material on topics of interest the young people themselves (Koski 2015). The process started in 2007 with the "Media Bus" (Mediabussi) travelling around to schools, making it possible for school children to make their own news by providing access to technical equipment and supporting teachers in journalistic thinking (Niemi 2015). The project targeted teachers and encouraged them to register their classes for the programme. YLE provided teachers with model syllabi and support material online, such as the "Crash course on becoming a star reporter", with instructions in the form of comic books (Visala 2015). YLE's staff journalists worked as tutors for the young people, and the material was published, "according to journalistic criteria" (Koski 2015) on YLE's webpage, reaching out to YLE's regular audiences. On a specific "News Class Day" once a year, children and young people are involved in television shows, and attention is focused on their work in different ways.
To some extent, the participatory practices of media organisations can also count as JME. For example, the girls' magazine Demi regularly publishes individual issues made entirely by readers who are hired as freelancers and supervised by staff journalists (see, e.g., Demi 2019). Alongside such nationwide projects, local and regional newspapers regularly conduct smallscale cooperative projects to attract young people as producers, and, consequently, as audiences. Established activities in this area are partnering with schools to produce news articles and columns, or arranging competitions for aspiring young people. Competitions have also been arranged in more marginal genres such as criticism to raise young people's knowledge about the specialised genre and to attract them into the field (Finnish Critics Association 2018; see also the Guardian 2020). However, many of the projects are based on a short introduction to the journalistic content producer's role, employing a concept such as "my day as a reporter". Typically, school classes are only temporarily involved in long-term projects promoting production skills. Therefore, while pop-up newsrooms have real value in providing an experience that will benefit production skills and the understanding of journalistic production, the most solid ground for learning journalistic skills is provided in training newsrooms or similar more permanent conditions created by formal educational institutions. Journalistic actors contribute to JME by providing examples from the authentic environment, and by demonstrating best practices and professional support. However, establishing media education with journalism input is typically resource-intensive, requiring time, staff and pedagogical competence, which are not always available in newsrooms.

Discussion
The examination of JME infrastructures and activities indicates that the boundary practices of JME publicly promote the specific form of journalism literacy. Recent discussions about raising (young) people's awareness of journalism have been centred around, above all, news literacy (Mihailidis 2012), and critical media literacy (Kellner and Share 2019). These terms focus specifically on journalistic content and the news genre as a factbased and reliable form of presentation, to be differered from fake news and disinformation, as well as on the receivers' capabilities, such as their critical, civic or democratic skills, also seen predominantly as countermeasures against the post-truth condition (Ashley 2020;Dvorkin 2018). The common derivatives of the general term "media literacy" are focused on types of media other than journalism, such as "film literacy" or "audiovisual literacy" (Tyner 1998). Often, the word "journalism" and its production context are taken for granted as included in the literacy skills and, therefore, not often explicitly mentioned. Even policy does not yet especially acknowledge JME; in the Finnish national media literacy policy (Ministry of Education and Culture in Finland, 2013, 9), journalistic actors are included as an undifferentiated entity referred to as the "media branch", which merges journalism into non-journalistic fields such as the gaming, entertainment and advertisement industry.
A pervasive goal of JME as a promoter of journalism literacy is to demarcate the special and distinctive character of journalism that makes it different from other aspects of media. The distinction between journalism and other media content is pivotal in establishing the particularity of journalism. In this vein, it is supposed that when audiences learn to appreciate the quality standards set by journalistic actors, they will be capable of selecting quality journalism and the conditions for producing that kind of journalism will be improved. This way, JME implies investments for future for media organisations. When it is seen as audience development ensuring future audiences, it is relatively easy to promote the need to develop media education in media organisations.
Further, promoting journalism literacy seems to take on at least three perspectives among the journalistic actors engaged with JME: protection, marketing, and enlightenment. In terms of protection, promoting journalism literacy can be seen as a response to the alleged crisis in journalism, in which the boundaries between serious and nonserious, professional and non-professional media are blurred. JME seems to function as an attempt to restore the authority and legitimacy of journalism, as distinguishing oneself from non-journalism and low-quality journalism is essential boundary work for the institution of journalism. Media educational practices are also self-promotion, ways to highlight the supremacy of the newsroom, including an endeavour to draw attention and attract new audiences. Finally, engaging in media education dovetails neatly with journalism's democratic aim, the promotion of informed and educated citizens. However, what is noteworthy in the educational functions of protecting, promoting and informing about journalism, they seem to be more dedicated to including audiences in existing structures than letting these structures to be contested, problematised or renewed.
Even if JME could imply a high renewing potential for journalistic practices, the audience inclusion practices that were identified as lectures, educational and journalistic material and participatory processes gatekept by professional journalists do not always per se a moment where the basic structures of journalism would be altered. Rather than being transformative, these practices of JME seem more often restorative, including existing and potential audiences in structures that are still to a large extent pre-defined by industry norms. In co-production audiences have better possibilities for transformative actions, as they may address uncovered topics and suggest alternative approaches. Additionally, as discussed earlier, there are many inclusive practices, formats and genres in contemporary journalism in which producers and audiences intend to be close to each other or even converge. However, these are not often perceived as excplicitly pedagogical or associated with an explicit educational mission similar to or under the umbrella term of JME. This suggests that the inclusive practices that exist incorporate journalists as educative but without identifying them as educators, and the connection of participatory and educative remains unarticulated.
This observation may be returned to the fact that JME has reached a position where the word "pedagogical" is preferably placed somewhere else rather than with journalism. Schools, or those involved in youth work, conduct the pedagogy, while industry unions and third-sector associations prepare educational material to be used in different educational settings. As Kakkola (2009) observed in her interviews with Finnish journalists, journalists do not typically cross the line between professional journalists and educators; they rather continue to be journalists both in newsrooms and beyond. The attempts to conduct education within media organisations require additional resources, such as the establishment of a project, the recruitment of individuals with adequate pedagogical-journalistic competence, and the separation of the educational work from the day-to-day production. Even this may contribute to the willingness in media organisations to remain as promoters of media education rather than taking a more active role of becoming media educators.

Conclusion
The purpose of this paper was to define JME, industry-led media or news literacy education, as a boundary practice in journalism. As the connection between education and media industry may be different in different media systems and journalism cultures, the types and functions of JME should be further explored in different national contexts, further crystallising the specific character of JME. Obviously, JME is embedded in very different media literacy landscapes. The differences may to some extent be purely semantic, partly connected to the different policy approaches adapted by different regions. Nevertheless, the immense heterogeneity of media literacy approaches and related vocabulary is a well-known fact, and it also affects JME.
Generally, however, the macrostructures of inclusion outlined in this article pave ways for inquiring into the innovative and transformative potential of JME products and microprocesses. Identifying and acknowledging JME as clearer as a designated part of journalism organisations' performance may fruitfully advance the development of the presentation of how the post-industrialist newsroom might work. Newsrooms are entering into distributed production modes that include more than the reported stories but also live journalism and other new forms and processes of audience engagement including the pedagogical practice dimension. Note 1. It has to be noticed that the term inclusion takes on different meanings in the context of education (inclusive education of learners with disabilities) and organisational theory (inclusion and diversity management), which are not pursued here.

Disclosure Statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).