557 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 received: 2023-05-24 DOI 10.19233/ASHS.2023.29 THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA Jelka PIRKOVIČ University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Arts, Aškerčeva 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia New University, Faculty of Slovenian and International Studies, Mestni trg 23, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia e-mail: jelka.pirkovic@guest.arnes.si ABSTRACT In recent years, archaeological heritage management has become one of the most demanding tasks in heritage protection. It aims to integrate heritage sites into the contemporary life of local communities. Therefore, we need to increase public participation. The case study presented in the paper analyses the content of a set of journalistic reports published in Slovenian news media from 2005–2021. Content analysis was chosen as the most appropriate method for extracting data covering archaeological topics. Accord- ing to this method, we defined a basic concept, i.e., the “archaeological paradigm”, and supplementary concepts, further refined by categories and codes. The research aimed to detect changes in public attitudes towards the democratisation of archaeological discourse and towards public participation in archaeological activities. The active public participation in heritage management (and heritage is intrinsically embedded in a particular place and present time) can be seen as evidence of greater social integration. The main con- clusion is that the content of journalistic coverage in the selected period reveals only a gradual tendency towards democratising Slovenian archaeology rather than a decisive breakthrough in this direction. Keywords: archaeological paradigm, democratisation, heritage values, participatory heritage management, public archaeology IL RUOLO DEI SERVIZI GIORNALISTICI NELLA DEMOCRATIZZAZIONE DELLA GESTIONE DEL PATRIMONIO ARCHEOLOGICO – IL CASO DELLA SLOVENIA SINTESI Negli ultimi anni, la gestione del patrimonio archeologico si è rivelata uno dei compiti più impegnativi nell’ambito della tutela del patrimonio. Il suo obiettivo è quello di integrare i siti del patrimonio nella vita contemporanea delle comunità locali, e per raggiungerlo bisogna aumentare la partecipazione del pubblico. Nel caso di studio presentato in questo contributo è stata condotta un’analisi del contenuto di una serie di servizi giornalistici pubblicati sui media sloveni tra il 2005 e il 2021. L’analisi contenutistica è stata scelta come il metodo più idoneo per estrarre dati relativi agli argomenti archeologici. Utilizzando questo metodo, abbiamo definito un concetto di base ‒ ossia «il paradigma archeologico» ‒ e concetti supplementari, che sono stati ulte- riormente affinati attraverso categorie e codici. Lo studio mirava a rilevare cambiamenti negli atteggiamenti dei cittadini nei confronti della democratizzazione del discorso archeologico e della partecipazione pubblica nelle attività archeologiche. Dal momento che il patrimonio è intrinsecamente legato a un luogo specifico e al tempo presente, la partecipazione attiva del pubblico nella sua gestione può essere vista come prova di una maggiore integrazione sociale. La conclusione principale di questo studio è che il contenuto della copertura giornalistica nel periodo selezionato indica solo una tendenza graduale verso la democratizzazione dell’archeologia slovena piuttosto che una svolta decisiva in questa direzione. Parole chiave: paradigma archeologico, democratizzazione, valori del patrimonio, gestione partecipativa del patrimonio, archeologia pubblica 558 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 INTRODUCTION In recent years, archaeological heritage manage- ment has become one of the most demanding tasks in heritage protection. Even when archaeological re- mains are identified in situ and statutorily protected, it is hard to overpower the harmful effects of natural decay, illicit excavation, and development pressure. Moreover, heritage protection aims to integrate herit- age sites into the contemporary life of local com- munities. Therefore, the authorities, heritage service, and experts must increase public participation. The process goes in line with the general policies seek- ing to democratise European societies beyond the concerns of political democratisation. Studies analysing the attitude of citizens towards cultural heritage are scarce in Slovenia. Here, statistical surveys are regularly carried out only on the number of museum visitors. On the other hand, survey on patterns and motivations of museum visiting were introduced in the nineties (Rovšnik, 1997). However, visitor surveys were not implemented on a larger scale. At the international level, we should mention Nick Merriman’s pioneer publication, Beyond the Glass Case (Merriman, 1991). In Slovenia, practical cases of surveys eval- uating the public attitudes towards archaeological sites do not exist. We intend to analyse public attitudes towards in- site archaeological heritage. The primary sources of the research were not visitor surveys but journalistic articles published in Slovenian printed and internet news media retrieved from a digital corpus of media publications with the commercial name Kliping.1 When comparing the Kliping corpus with the Slo- venian National and university library information system COBISS,2 we noticed that COBISS did not catalogue all articles registered by Kliping. Moreo- ver, only a few articles catalogued in COBISS do not appear in the Kliping corpus. This observation led us to conclude that the Kliping corpus was a suitable data source for our analysis because it featured an appropriate quantity of digitised newspaper articles.3 The typology of journalistic articles is as follows: • reports on current archaeological research, • reports on other archaeological projects, • interviews with archaeologists and other herit- age experts, • reports on illicit or harmful activities related to the archaeological heritage. 1 Kliping d.o.o. Collection of media publications, client: ZVKDS, 2005–2021. 2 Co-operative Online Bibliographic System and Services forming a unitary online bibliographic/catalogue database (https://www. cobiss.si/en/cobiss.htm). 3 The list of printed news media we consulted covered newspapers (Delo, Dolenjski list, Gorenjski glas, Loški utrip, Novi tednik Celje, Primorske novice, Štajerski tednik, Večer) and magazines (Družina, ISG Magazin, Manager, National Geographic Slo, Reporter, SLO časi, kraji in ljudje). Several articles were published on online news portals (RTV, Siol.net, STA). Initially, our analysis covered articles published from 2016 to 2021. In the second phase, we en- larged the research timeline from 2005 to 2015. Namely, in 2005, the Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society 2005 (hereafter Faro Convention) marked a policy shift towards the democratisation of heritage by defining heritage rights and heritage communi- ties that have the right to enjoy, sustain and transmit heritage (Faro Convention, Articles 2, 4). The more extensive timeframe of our research and the increased number of articles allowed us to compare the attitude of the reports on several archaeological issues. However, the coverage of the whole period from 1991 onwards (when Slovenia became an independent country) would need a concerted effort to search non-digitised newspapers and magazines from data in 1991 to 2004; this task waits for other researchers in the future. PURPOSE AND GOALS Without going into the sociological debate about the process of democratisation in general (for more detailed information cf. Van Assche et al., 2014, 16–19), we define “democratisation”, “public par- ticipation”, and “social integration” as three inter- connected concepts essential in creating inclusive, just, and participatory societies. Democratisation is the overarching concept denoting expanding a system of political power from elected representa- tives and democratic institutions to citizens, giving them the right to participate in the decision-making processes, especially regarding individual rights and freedoms and the promotion of the rule of law. Public participation refers to various strategies and tools to engage individuals, groups, or communities in decision-making processes, such as providing input, sharing opinions, attending public meetings, participating in consultations, and participating in civic activities. Social integration is a phase of pub- lic participation when individuals or groups from diverse backgrounds, such as different socioeco- nomic statuses, cultures, or origins, form a cohesive and inclusive society. It involves creating a sense of belonging, mutual respect, and equal opportunities for all community members. The democratisation of heritage as a political goal is closely connected to decentralising the decision-making process and, consequently, the opening of heritage services. To achieve this goal, 559 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 public debate on heritage issues needs to be fos- tered (Pirkovič, 2009, 26). In the heritage manage- ment sphere, democratisation confronts specific obstacles in the form of the prevailing authoritar- ian approach from political decision-makers and professionals engaged in heritage identification, protection and interpretation. This paper aims to clarify some aspects of democratisation related to archaeological heritage in the Slovenian context. The purpose of our research is to give evidence of possible changes in public attitudes towards par- ticipation in archaeological activities in the everyday environment of citizens as reflected in the media. In turn, the media undoubtedly influences the public attitude and contributes to accepting or refusing certain phenomena (McCombs & Guo, 2014; Reese, 2011, 3–4). In short, media content is essential to study because it has proven to shape public opinion (Riffe et al., 2019, 7–15, and references cited there). Just as news media portrays archaeological themes to the public, media outlets can influence public perception and understanding of various topics. The understanding and active involvement of the public in heritage work (which is intrinsically em- bedded in a particular place and present time) can be considered an indicator of democratisation at the grassroots social level. Humanities, and in our case specifically archaeology, are essential because they are vectors of intercultural communication in society, support the establishment of democratic processes and enhance knowledge about the reli- gious, cultural, philosophical, and historical aspects of our communities (Jain, 2019, 210). As the source of evidence, we have analysed how Slovenian newspapers, magazines and news portals presented archaeological themes. Some media sources used in our analysis have the largest nationwide audience, while local media are rele- vant in reporting archaeological topics in individual Slovenian regions. METHODS Our approach differs from bibliometric meth- ods used mainly to analyse scientific literature from Web of Science (WoS), Scopus and Google Scholar. “Bibliometric methods employ a quantita- tive approach for the description, evaluation, and monitoring of published research. These methods can potentially introduce a systematic, transpar- ent, and reproducible review process and thus improve the quality of reviews. Bibliometric meth- ods are a helpful aid in literature reviews”(Župič 4 See the comparison of significant review methods in Donthu et al. (2021, 287). 5 For archaeological research themes, we can quote the earliest and latest bibliometric analyses that illustrate the change in topic over the last couple of decades; cf. Mallia & Vidal (2009); Jakobson (2022). & Čater, 2014, 420). Bibliometric analysis is, in principle, limited to the information retrieved from titles, keywords, abstracts, and citations of research articles and book chapters. Nevertheless, it helps provide overview information about the research in a specific domain; it can detect trends and gaps and evaluate which documents have the highest citation scores and are, therefore, most influential in research communities (Salleh & Bushroa, 2022, e00225). According to the goal of our research, we needed to use a method appropriate to analyse article con- tent as a whole. The apparent reason for this is that journalistic production does not dispose of scientific apparatus per se. In our case, the methodological ap- proach resembles analysing attitudes and emotions in political messages conveyed in tweets, comments, and online news portals (Valmarska et al., 2021). The most appropriate method for our case is the so-called content analysis.4 Content analysis has been used mainly in social sciences and, to a more limited degree, in humanities. Our research fol- lowed the technique described in the seminal work on content analysis of mass media Analyzing Media Messages (Riffe et al., 2019). It is worth noting that, contrary to bibliometric analysis,5 we identified only one research using this method concerning archaeology (Rosenswig, 1997), which is quite outdated because it does not cover present societal challenges. The development of content analysis and its theoretical background is well known and can be consulted elsewhere (Mayring, 2004, 266–267). The method requires the identification of concepts and categories relevant to these concepts to ana- lyse published material. We have identified a core concept and four supplementary ones. The core concept is consistent with Merriman‘s broader definition of public archaeology. Merriman defines public archaeology as an activity that: opens up a space in which to discuss not just archaeological products (such as educational programmes, museum displays and site tours) but the processes by which meaning is cre- ated from archaeological materials in the public realm. Public archaeology, therefore, embraces the debates which open up be- tween the official provision of archaeology on behalf of the public, and the differing publics which have a stake in archaeology, who will often debate amongst themselves about the meanings and values of archaeological re- sources. (Merriman, 2004, 5) 560 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 Our core concept, which we named “Archaeo- logical paradigm”, is represented by two opposing categories, which determine the relationship be- tween archaeologists, archaeological evidence and practice on the one hand and the public on the other. The first core category is the so-called “deficit model” (Merriman, 2004). Some authors speak about, after Laurajene Smith, authoritative (Smith, 2004, 66, 84) or authorised archaeological discourse6 (Smith, 2006; 2022). According to this category, archaeolo- gists consider themselves to be the sole guardians of archaeological knowledge. On the other hand, the public has an intrinsic deficit in understanding the past, so they need to access only limited, filtered ar- chaeological information. The second core category reflects the recent development in archaeology and social science approach: “Disciplinary theoretical shifts over the last few decades, especially in ar- chaeology, and the various social and political movements that occurred from the 1960s onwards, have served to allow for the increasing emphasis of social values in the management of heritage in many countries” (Schofield, 2016, 182). As a result, various groups and communities have become partners in equal standing with the professionals working with heritage. Therefore, the participative or democratic archaeological model is the second category of the overall archaeological paradigm as the core concept. Interestingly, in her article on public archaeology, Australian archaeologist Yvonne Marshall lists seven components of public archaeology. These include research questions or areas of interest, setting up a project, field practices, data collection, analysis, storage and dissemination, and public presentation (Marshall, 2002, 211). We argue that Marshall‘s seven categories characterise a deficit understand- ing of the archaeological paradigm rather than its broader significance as defined by Merriman. The core of our analysis examines to what degree newspaper messages reflect the deficit category to persist or report on the introduction of the participa- tory or democratic one. As mentioned above, we have defined four supplementary concepts. The main idea came from the categories chosen to compare the implementa- tion of public archaeology in different countries; the research was carried out in the framework of the doctoral study (Curk, 2022, 375–381). The supplementary concepts shed additional light on the difference between the deficit, authorised approach to archaeological heritage and the par- ticipatory, democratic one. Differences become evident by finding wording that has negative or 6 Smith argues that “there is a hegemonic ‘authorized heritage discourse’, which is reliant on the power/knowledge claims of technical and aesthetic experts and institutionalise in state cultural agencies and amenity societies” (Smith, 2006, 11). 7 Pierre Nora’s question was as follows: “Does heritage have a common mobilising capacity to be inserted in the continuance of demo- cratic societies and to be positively integrated into the management of collective life?” (Nora, 1997, 396). positive connotations about archaeological work and the treatment of archaeological sites. Here, we have introduced two concepts: the “Attitudes towards archaeological work” and the “Attitudes towards archaeological site’s role”. The fourth concept – “Management approach to archaeologi- cal sites” – is intended to record a shift towards a broader understanding of handling in-situ ar- chaeological heritage (not in a museum context). The fifth concept – “Significance of archaeological heritage” – reflects on how newspaper messages communicate the significance of the archaeologi- cal sites for present-day society. In this case, cod- ing does not directly indicate positive or negative attitudes because every code relates to a specific significance. Here, the numerical value of a vari- able reflects the degree of significance ascribed to specific archaeology sites. If the variable value is 0, no significance is recorded in this case. We divided each of the first four concepts into two categories, the first having a negative and the second having a positive connotation. Finally, the fifth concept has four categories that illustrate the significance of in-situ archaeological heritage for present-day society, namely for the sense of belong- ing (identification), personal growth, economic and social development and the role of heritage at local, national and international levels. Table 1 presents the tree structure of concepts, categories and codes. Put together, our research aims to answer the research question we formulated after Pierre Nora thirty years ago when he asked us about the capacity of heritage in contemporary societies.7 • Does the journalistic coverage in the selected period reflect the democratisation of Slove- nian archaeology, and if so, in which thematic areas is the democratisation most evident? ANALYTICAL PROCESS Our research used no computational analytical tool because only a limited corpus of articles was involved (due to limited resources). The same goes for the engagement of coders. Identifying and sampling phase For the period 1. 1. 2005 to 31. 12. 2021, we iden- tified 458 entries under the keywords “archaeology”, “Centre for Preventive Archaeology”, and “Emona 2000” in the Kliping corpus of media publication. In the first period, 1. 1. 2005 to 31. 12. 2015, the Kliping database contains 182 entries under these keywords. For the second period (1. 1. 2016 to 31. 561 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 12. 2021), the corpus features 276 entries. The ratio between 2005–2015 and 2016–2021 favours the second period (276/182 = 1.5 increase). While sampling entries covering newspaper arti- cles, online news reports, and TV and radio report transcripts, we recorded and excluded duplicates, short reports (less than 500 words), and TV and radio report transcripts.8 The final number of analysed articles was 86 (41 from 2005–2015 and 45 from 2016–2021). The rate of excluded articles is high. Still, the exclusion aligned with our intention to con- centrate on articles with more pronounced content and a more diversified vocabulary. Coding phase Step one of coding consisted of the terms‘ ini- tial recognition from the sample of articles. In the second step, we transformed terms from step one into a more general form, such as substituting dif- ferent Slovenian language forms into one general grammatical form and replacing synonyms with only one representative term to upgrade them into codes as defined by the content analysis method (Riffe et al., 2019). In the seventy-six articles, we initially identified seventy-two codes pertaining 8 The transcripts proved not to be an adequate source of information because of many typos caused by unclear audio recordings, and the original message of the audio and video content was lacking. The number of transcripts eliminated was 54. 9 The first eliminated concept and its categories aimed to address how the reports were time-focused (if they predominantly re- ported about past events or dealt with present activities), as the reports should have been more specific about the time. The second concept and its categories eliminated aimed at financing where we intended to discover positive or negative attitudes related to the cost of archaeological work. Here, the value of variables was too low to bear any significance. to seven preliminary defined concepts. Each set of codes was assigned to an affirmative or opposing category that manifests either a participative or deficit archaeological paradigm. The coding of the articles’ content was carried out not to words‘ face value but rather according to the actual meaning of words in the context. Step three evaluated the relevance of categories and codes under seven initial concepts. In this step, we eliminated two concepts (together with related categories and codes) that proved to be irrelevant to the research question.9 Step four consisted of coding all selected articles according to finally ap- proved concepts, categories and codes (all together fifty-six codes, see Table 1). The coding was finalised by composing tabular variable data sets for each article organised by publication year. In addition, we recorded the variables of specific codes detected in each article. Typical graphs with code variables appearing in one particular year represent the annual fluctuation of public understanding and evaluation of archaeo- logical projects reported and communicated in media messages. The tables and graphs containing detailed data are stored in our archive and can be used for future research. CONCEPTS 1. Archaeological paradigm 2. Attitudes towards archaeological work 3. Attitudes towards archaeological sites' role 4. Management approach to archaeological sites 5. Significance of archaeological heritage CATEGORIES Deficit (authoritative) Participatory (democratic) Pejorative Respectful Critical Supportive Restricted Integrated Identitarian Personal Developmental Comparative CODES archaeology local/ citizen/ villager detectorist/ illicit digger good threatening/ threaten enable, enabeling excavation interpretation asset experience role for economy state/ national/ Slovenian archaeologist association/ volunteer/ amateur nasty/ troweler nice hinder/ obstruct/ challenge support/ supportive museum/ musealisation new technolo- gies/ITK remote sensing, visualisation, digitisation identity/ pride/ connectedness feeling development potential European architecture/ architect public harmful open cause, allow to deteriorate give an opportunity displaying park (archaeolo- gical), route (archaeolo-gical) meaning/ value understanding sustainability local design/ designer place/ locality looter/ vandal positive/ responsive harm/ harmful to place priority/ privileged research potential (archaeological) memory role in tourism regional profession/ expert resident nuisance timely complicate offer solution reconstruction presentation universal history/ historian community/ communal destroyer attractive delay/ delaying promote foreign archaeologist /foreign expert management Table 1: Content analysis of media messages on archaeology: classification of concepts, categories and codes. 562 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 The results of the evaluation phase are presented below in the discussion section, together with summary charts that illustrate general trends in the fluctuation of concepts. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The concepts, categories and variables of codes enabled us to evaluate the shift in public percep- tion of the relevance of archaeological work and heritage as reflected in media messages in more than a decade and a half of the new millennium (2005–2021). Results show that the shift is more gradual than expected initially. The difference between the two periods (2005 to 2015 and 2016 to 2021) is quantitative: the number of selected newspaper articles increased slightly (from 41 in the first period to 45 in the second). The increase also reflects the total number of articles in the Kliping database (from 182 in the first period to 276 in the second). The mere statistics do not prove the increase in the democratisation of archaeological public discourse; this should be demonstrated only through in-depth content analysis. Chart 2: Interviews with archaeologists and trends in deficit and participative paradigms. Chart 1: Trends in deficit and participative archaeological paradigms. 563 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 The number of articles analysed per year var- ies from 2 to 16. The peak was achieved in the pre-Covid year 2019, while the numbers for 2020 and 2021 diminished because of the reduction of fieldwork during the pandemic. For appropriate tracking of trends, we calculated an average per each year. The articles‘ length also increased in the second period, resulting in more codes de- 10 The archaeological site Panorama contains the remains of the central part of the Roman city Poetovio (today’s Ptuj), still hidden under- ground. At the same time, the agricultural area was recently converted into a public park. tected in the second period and, therefore, higher variable values. “Research” is the most frequent term in the corpus of analysed articles (variable 293). However, if we consider the terms “archaeology” (variable 266) and “archaeologist” (variable 234) together, the latter two outnumber the first. The theme of Panorama in Ptuj has the highest number of appearances out of eighty-six articles (eight, more than 9%).10 Chart 4: Fluctuation in critical and supportive attitude towards the role of archaeological sites. Chart 3: Fluctuation in pejorative and respectful attitudes towards archaeological work. 564 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 Comparing the two periods, they differ qualitatively in the predominance of reports on illicit activities and harmful actions against archaeological heritage during the first period (ten articles) compared to the second period (two articles) and, similarly, in the more significant number of interviews with archaeologists in the first period (eight interviews) compared to two interviews in the second period. Adverse reports and interviews most likely impacted the public sentiment towards archaeological themes in the first period. The following charts reveal crucial details of our content analysis of the archaeological para- digm as our core concept. The charts compare the distribution of affirmative and opposing codes in the eighty-six articles (Chart 1) against ten articles featuring interviews with archaeologists (Chart 2). Chart 6: Identitarian, personal and developmental significance assigned to the archaeological heritage. Chart 5: Reflection on the restricted and integrated concepts of archaeological heritage management. 565 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 The comparison leads us to conclude that attitudes in the archaeologists‘ interviews contributed to the general prevalence of the deficit paradigm to persist during this period. If reporters extracted informa- tion from archaeological sources, we could also understand that the archaeological profession most likely gave an overall tone to newspaper reports. The next pair of charts illustrates the trendlines in two supplementary concepts: attitude towards the general archaeological work and attitude to- wards the role of archaeological sites in a specific place (Chart 3 and 4). The first chart (Chart 3) shows peaks in negative attitudes at the start and the end. The peaks relate to two topics that gave the tone in 2005 and 2021 reports: the first being the failure in programming the archaeological park at Panorama and the question of providing depo for archaeologi- cal finds in Ptuj, while in 2021, the illicit vandal excavations in Dolenjska were reported. The chart in Chart 4 demonstrates two positive peaks during 2011–2014 during the implementation of several noteworthy archaeological projects, such as the presentation of Roman remains at Glavni trg in Celje, the results of preventive archaeology, the Interreg projects Claustra and Parsjad and the restoration of three archaeological sites in Ljubljana (in the framework of Emona 2000 project). The 2021 peak signals the success of archaeological projects such as the discovery of Roman frescoes under Muzejski trg in Celje, new perspectives for the presentation of the Panorama site, Ptuj, and the underwater research in Fizine, Portorož. The following chart (Chart 5) shows the fluctua- tion in understanding the archaeological site man- agement concept. The character of this supplemen- tary concept is more technical, as its codes indicate different site management methods. By showing the variables in these codes, sorted into two categories – restricted and integrated (which illustrate in more detail the two general archaeological paradigms – deficit and participatory, respectively), we sought to uncover different understandings of archaeologi- cal heritage management. The first is more tradi- tional and covers methods listed, for example, by Yvonne Marshall (2002, 211). The second follows the spirit of the Faro Convention (Articles 11–12). The comparison between the two periods confirms only a slight growth in the integrated understanding of management. However, the restricted paradigm still prevails over the integrated one. Furthermore, the code with the highest variable was “research”, indicating the dominance of the tra- ditional approach. We conclude that the restricted management paradigm has, until recently, prevailed in public archaeological discourse. Contrary to this, contemporary archaeological doctrine stresses the need to manage archaeological sites through other, more democratic measures, particularly those devel- oped by public archaeology (Curk, 2022, 157–283), rather than through digs and research alone. Chart 7: The comparative significance assigned to archaeological heritage in journalistic articles. 566 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 The last supplementary concept covers the sig- nificance of archaeological heritage for Slovenian society. Our analysis reveals that the traditional understanding of this topic is still quite present in the public eye. Codes such as significance and value, which characterise the identity dimension of heritage, are predominant (Chart 6). A steep upward trend illus- trates this category. Variables related to economic (tourism) significance codes are in second place, while sustainability significance appears only oc- casionally in the second period. Not surprisingly, codes such as “memory”, “experience”, “feeling”, and “understanding” – indicating personal con- nectivity to the archaeological heritage and their resonance in the present – were significantly under- represented in journalistic reports. Regarding the level of significance (Chart 7), journalistic reports usually try to emphasise the importance of archaeological heritage by assigning it nationwide and even European and international significance. Reports mention regional and local significance only sporadically as if such rank of im- portance proved a lesser reputation of archaeologi- cal heritage. From a psychological point of view, it is understandable. Nevertheless, exaggerating significance can be counterproductive. CONCLUSIONS Studies attempting to analyse content with extensive latent meaning assume that sampling, category definition, reliability assessment, or statis- tical analysis of the collected content data do not capture some essential communication characteris- tics. Instead, the proper judgment, evaluation, or interpretation of communication content rests with the researcher (Riffe et al., 2019, 145–146). We at- tempted to overcome this limitation by developing a refined framework of concepts, categories and codes to describe more detailed trends in the de- mocratisation of the archaeological domain in the research period. By analysing a relatively sizeable qualitative dataset in journalistic articles, we gained insight into how news media presented archaeological themes to the public. Furthermore, we identified specific changes in the public values assigned to archaeological heritage in real-time. While it may not be immediately apparent, we argue that heritage issues and values are always po- litical, regardless of whether heritage authorities or heritage communities define them. As David Held 11 Council of the European Union (2014): Council Conclusions on Participatory Governance of Cultural Heritage. Official Journal of the European Union C 463, 23. 12. 2014. 12 World Heritage Committee (2021): Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Paragraphs 64, 119 and 123. stated, “Democracy should be conceived as the privileged conception of the political good because it offers – in theory at least – a form of politics and life in which there are fair and just ways of deliberat- ing over and negotiating values and value disputes” (Held, 2006, 260). According to the Faro Convention (Article 2b), heritage communities play a critical role in formulating and negotiating heritage values and management with heritage authorities, whether at the local, regional, national, or international levels. The participative heritage process, grounded on international standards, initially by the Council of Europe (Faro Convention and related activities) and later by the European Union11 and UNESCO,12 ensures that heritage values reflect the values and beliefs of all stakeholders. Local heritage significance matters because herit- age democratisation starts predominantly from the grassroots. The Slovenian local newspaper reports claiming the significance of archaeological heritage rooted in the local communities’ territory confirm that: two strong sets of views centring on the heritage discourse, the one considerably more pessimistic than the other. One set … sees heritage as an essentially conservative and nostalgic project. It encompasses a ro- manticised and idealised view of the past… The countervailing view is considerably more optimistic and, drawing predominantly on binary oppositions such as amateur/ professional, insider/outsider, history/herit- age, recognises a more democratic form of heritage… The ‘spirit of local places’ gains prominence in this construction, as do urban places. (Robertson, 2016, 143) From the research presented in our paper, we can conclude that the most reasonable response to our research question is as follows: • The content analysis of journalistic cover- age in the selected period reveals a gradual tendency in the democratisation of Slovenian archaeology. Still, we have collected no evi- dence of a decisive breakthrough yet. • Our analysis recorded the most positive trend in concept 4, “Attitude towards the archaeo- logical sites’ role”, where overcoming the deficit archaeological paradigm was most evident. • As detected through the content analysis of journalistic reports, the increased sensibility 567 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 towards individual sites proves a specific shift in public attitudes towards democratis- ing archaeological discourse. • Therefore, the recorded interest towards archaeological sites in the Slovenian regions and towns proves to have the most significant potential for public participation in archaeo- logical heritage management. Our main takeaway derived from the supporting data explained in the previous chapter is as follows. The democratisation of public archaeological discourse depends on the alliance between the archaeological experts and heritage communities. Experts should use the media’s communication channels to strengthen this alliance. Furthermore, experts and journalists should cooperate in encouraging local actors to par- ticipate in heritage management directly (Pirkovič, 2020, 833–834). The public will understand more clearly that heritage (including archaeological) offers diverse possibilities for sustainable local de- velopment. Simultaneously, analytical tools should be implemented to measure the receptibility of heritage-related opportunities. Content analysis of journalistic articles reporting on archaeological heritage in Slovenia is just one of them. 568 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 VLOGA MEDIJSKIH POROČIL PRI DEMOKRATIZACIJI UPRAVLJANJA ARHEOLOŠKE DEDIŠČINE – PRIMER SLOVENIJE Jelka PIRKOVIČ Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta, Aškerčeva 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija Nova univerza, Fakulteta za slovenske in mednarodne študije, Mestni trg 23, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija e-mail: jelka.pirkovic@guest.arnes.si POVZETEK V zadnjem času je upravljanje arheološke dediščine postalo ena najzahtevnejših nalog na področju varstva dediščine. Da bomo dediščino vključili v sodobno življenje lokalnih skupnosti, moramo povečati sodelovanje javnosti. Ta proces je v skladu s splošnimi politikami, ki si prizadevajo za demokratizacijo evropskih družb. V prispevku je predstavljena vsebinska analiza novinarskih prispevkov na arheološko tematiko, objavljenih v slovenskih časopisih in revijah v obdobju 2005–2021. Vsebinska analiza je bila izbrana kot najprimernejša metoda za razumevanje tovrstnih objav. Metoda opredeljuje osrednje koncepte, v našem primeru je to “arheološka paradigma”, in dodatne koncepte, dopolnjene s kategorijami in spre- menljivkami. Cilj raziskave je podati dokaze o morebitnih spremembah odnosa javnosti do demokratizacije arheološkega diskurza oziroma sodelovanja v arheoloških dejavnostih in odgovoriti na raziskovalno vpraša- nje, ali novinarska poročila odražajo demokratizacijo slovenske arheologije. Aktivno vključevanje javnosti v dediščinsko delo (ki je neločljivo vpeto v določen kraj in sedanji čas) lahko štejemo kot kazalnike de- mokratizacije na vseh ravneh družbe. Raziskovalne faze so vključevale identifikacijo in vzorčenje člankov (končno število je bilo šestinsedemdeset), kodiranje (s šestinpetdesetimi spremenljivkami) in vrednotenje rezultatov. Glavni rezultati so predstavljeni v sklepnem delu. Glavna ugotovitev je, da vsebina novinarskega poročanja v izbranem obdobju razkriva le postopen trend demokratizacije slovenske arheologije in ne odločilnega preboja v to smer. V prihodnje morajo slovenski arheologi z uporabo različnih komunikacijskih kanalov krepiti zavezništvo z dediščinskimi skupnostmi in s tem spodbujati lokalne akterje k sodelovanju pri upravljanju dediščine. Ključne besede: arheološka paradigma, demokratizacija, vrednote dediščine, participativno upravljanje dediščine, arheologija za javnost 569 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 SOURCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY Council of the European Union (2014): Coun- cil Conclusions on Participatory Governance of Cultural Heritage. Official Journal of the European Union C 463, 23. 12. 2014. Curk, Tadej (2022): Vključevanje javnosti v obravnavanje arheološke dediščine v urbanih naseljih. Doktorska disertacija. https://repozitorij. uni-l j .s i / IzpisGradiva.php?id=144167&lang=slv (last access: 2023-01-10). Council of Europe Framework Convention on the Value of Cultural Heritage for Society. Council of Europe Treaty Series - No. 199, Faro, 27 October 2005 (2005): https://rm.coe.int/1680083746 (last access: 2023-09-23). Donthu, Naveen, Kumar, Satish, Mukherjee, Debmalya, Pandey, Nitesh & Weng Marc Lim (2021): How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis: An Overview and Guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. Held, David (2006): Models of Democracy. 3rd ed. Cambridge – Malden, Polity Press. Jacobson, Mathew J. (2022): Archaeological Evidence for Community Resilience and Sustain- ability: A Bibliometric and Quantitative Review. Sustainability, 14, 16591. Jain, Surbhi (2019): Research Methodology in Arts, Science and Humanities. https://www.perlego. com/book/2041326/research-methodology-in-arts- science-and-humanities-pdf (last access: 2023-12- 30). Mallia, Matthew & Aixa Solange Vidal (2009): From the Opposite Corner: A Bibliometric Analysis of Research on American Archaeology in European Publications. Archaeologies: Journal of the World Archaeological Congress, 5, 446–467. Marshall, Yvonne (2002): What is commu- nity archaeology?. World Archaeology, 34, 2, 211–219. Mayring, Philipp (2004): Qualitative Content Analysis. In: Flick, Uwe, von Kardorff, Ernst & Ines Steinke (eds.): A Companion to Qualita- tive Research. London – Thousand Oaks, Sage, 266–269. McCombs, M. E. & Lei Guo (2014): Agenda- Setting Influence of the Media in the Public Sphere. In: Fortner, Robert S. & P. Marc Flacker (eds.): The Handbook of Media and Mass Communication Theory. Chichester, Wiley, 251–268. Merriman, Nick (2004): Introduction: Diversity and Dissonance in Public Archaeology. In: Merri- man, Nick (ed.): Public Archaeology. London – New York, Routledge, 1–18. Merriman, Nick (2016 [1991]): Beyond the Glass Case: The Past, the Heritage, and the Public in Britain. New York – London, Routledge. Nora, Pierre (1997): Conclusion des entre- tiens. In: Nora, Pierre (ed.): Science et conscience du patrimoine. Paris, Fayard, 391–397. Pirkovič, Jelka (2009): Unpacking the Conven- tion into Challenging Actions for Member States. In: Heritage and Beyond. Strasbourg, Council of Europe Publishing, 23–27. https://rm.coe.int/Co- ERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCT MContent?documentId=09000016806abdea (last access: 2023-09-23). Pirkovič, Jelka (2020): Heritage Management at the Local Level: Heritage Communities and Role of Local Authorities. Etnoantropološki Prob- lemi/Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology, 15, 3, 829–842. Reese, Stephen D. (2011): Understanding the Global Journalist: A Hierachy-of-Influence Ap- proach. In: Berkowitz, Daniel A. (ed.): Cultural Meanings of News: A Text-reader. Thousand Oaks, Sage, 3–16. Riffe, Daniel, Lacy, Stephen, Watson, Brendan & Frederick Fico (2019): Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research. 4th ed. New York – Lon- don, Routledge. Robertson, Ian J. M. (2016): Heritage from Below: Class, Social Protest and Resistance. In: Howard, Peter & Brian Graham (eds.): The Routledge Research Companion to Heritage and Identity. London – New York, Routledge. Rosenswig, Robert M. (1997): Ethics in Cana- dian Archaeology: An International, Comparative Analysis. Canadian Journal of Archaeology/Jour- nal Canadien d‘Archéologie, 21, 2, 99–114. Rovšnik, Borut (1997): Istraživanje muzejske publike. Informatica museologica, 28, 1–4. Salleh, Siti Zuliana & Abd Razak Bushroa (2022): Bibliometric and Content Analysis on Publications in Digitization Technology Imple- mentation in Cultural Heritage for Recent Five Years (2016–2021). Digital Applications in Ar- chaeology and Cultural Heritage, 25, e00225. Schofield, John (ed.) (2016): Who Needs Ex- perts?: Counter-mapping Cultural Heritage. 1st ed. New York – London, Routledge, Taylor and Francis. https://www.perlego.com/book/1632985/ who-needs -exper t s -coun te rmapping-cu l tu ra l - heritage-pdf (last access: 2022-12-29). Smith, Laurajane (2004): Archaeological Theory and the Politics of Cultural Heritage. Lon- don – New York, Routledge. Smith, Laurajane (2006): Uses of Heritage. London – New York, Routledge. Smith, Laurajane (2022): Heritage, the Power of the Past, and the Politics of (Mis)Recognition. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 52, 24, 623–642. 570 ANNALES · Ser. hist. sociol. · 33 · 2023 · 3 Jelka PIRKOVIČ: THE ROLE OF MEDIA REPORTS IN THE DEMOCRATISATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT – THE CASE OF SLOVENIA, 557–570 Valmarska, Anita, Cabrera-Diego, Luis Adrian, Linhares Pontes, Elvys & Senja Pollak (2021): Ex- ploratory Analysis of News Sentiment Using Subgroup Discovery. In: Babich, Bogdan & Senja Pollak (eds.): Proceedings of 8th BSNLP Workshop on Balto-Slavic Natural Language Processing, co-located with the 16th European Chapter of the Association for Com- putational Linguistics (EACL), 20 April 2021. Strouds- burg, The Association for Computational Linguistics, 66–72. http://bsnlp.cs.helsinki.fi/papers-2021/2021. bsnlp-1.7.pdf (last access: 2022-12-29). Van Assche, Kristof, Beunen, Raoul & Martijn Duin- eveld (2014): Evolutionary Governance Theory. Cham – Heidelberg – New York – Dordrecht – London, Springer. https://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/ viewBook?id=0 (last access: 2023-09-23). World Heritage Committee (2021): Operational Guidelines for the implementation of the World Heritage Convention. Župič, Ivan & Tomaž Čater (2015): Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organi- zational Research Methods, 18, 3, 429–472. https:// doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629 (last access: 2022-12-29).