Abstract
In the context of the globalization of academic communication and exchange in the field of social sciences and humanities, the question of the accuracy of the terms used is crucial. In particular, the difference in understanding of concepts tends to get worse in the theory of journalism. There are many examples of this, but this article studies the specific problem of confusion in terms and definitions. Namely, are the concepts “information flows”, “journalism”, “mass media”, “QMS” equal in volume, or are they multi-volume and different in meaning? Based on the chosen research methods – the use of a combination of analysis, comparison, induction, generalization – we came to the conclusion that the media concepts presented above cannot be considered as equivalents, synonymous or interchangeable terms. The scope and content of the considered concepts do not coincide. It will be beneficial to classify them as “interdependent”, since only in such a ratio is it possible to effectively study them.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
