Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called “wicked problems,” with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for problem-solving towards innovation and social change, some of its proponents fall back on a solutionist position. This is despite a growing body of research highlighting critical approaches to design thinking. Drawing on, and adding to, such literature, this article examines how innovation and social change are concretely conceptualised in design thinking guides. Using a cultural media studies approach, the article first contrasts design thinking literature with critical design research, emphasizing the notion of (technological) solutionism. It then zooms in on a purposively selected case: a design thinking textbook aimed at tertiary students. Based on an interpretative analysis of this example, it discusses what understandings of innovation and social change are encouraged in the envisioned design thinking. In linking the reviewed literature and observations from the case study, the analysis highlights two main arguments: First, complex interrelations between innovation and social change are causally simplified in outlining design thinking, thereby fostering techno-fix approaches and mindsets: Readers are encouraged to not merely select but in fact construct solvable “problems,” in turn avoiding confrontations with substantive issues that cannot be fixed through the envisioned design thinking. Second, innovation is conflated with corporate activities and normative questions of innovation, (in-)equality, privilege, and social change are neglected, in turn suggesting a misleading symbiosis between economic and societal interests.
{"title":"Can’t Fix This? Innovation, Social Change, and Solutionism in Design Thinking","authors":"Annika Richterich","doi":"10.17645/mac.7427","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7427","url":null,"abstract":"Design thinking is commonly presented as a solution-oriented approach to innovation. It aims to solve so-called “wicked problems,” with various textbooks and toolkits promising to equip their readers with the skills needed to do so. By rendering design thinking as a magic bullet for problem-solving towards innovation and social change, some of its proponents fall back on a solutionist position. This is despite a growing body of research highlighting critical approaches to design thinking. Drawing on, and adding to, such literature, this article examines how innovation and social change are concretely conceptualised in design thinking guides. Using a cultural media studies approach, the article first contrasts design thinking literature with critical design research, emphasizing the notion of (technological) solutionism. It then zooms in on a purposively selected case: a design thinking textbook aimed at tertiary students. Based on an interpretative analysis of this example, it discusses what understandings of innovation and social change are encouraged in the envisioned design thinking. In linking the reviewed literature and observations from the case study, the analysis highlights two main arguments: First, complex interrelations between innovation and social change are causally simplified in outlining design thinking, thereby fostering techno-fix approaches and mindsets: Readers are encouraged to not merely select but in fact construct solvable “problems,” in turn avoiding confrontations with substantive issues that cannot be fixed through the envisioned design thinking. Second, innovation is conflated with corporate activities and normative questions of innovation, (in-)equality, privilege, and social change are neglected, in turn suggesting a misleading symbiosis between economic and societal interests.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138593899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
News source attribution in selective exposure has been examined in many contexts, but rarely in the context of selecting news from distrusted sources. As such, 800 US adults were asked to select one of two headlines attributed to CNN and/or Fox News. Results showed some people selected news from a distrusted source, but only under very specific circumstances. Others avoided the awkward moment of siding with a distrusted source, even when that meant selecting news from a trusted source that was counter-attitudinal to the source’s typical slant on global warming.
{"title":"The Awkward Moment When You Agree With News Outlets That You Normally Distrust","authors":"Robin Blom","doi":"10.17645/mac.v11i4.7153","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i4.7153","url":null,"abstract":"News source attribution in selective exposure has been examined in many contexts, but rarely in the context of selecting news from distrusted sources. As such, 800 US adults were asked to select one of two headlines attributed to CNN and/or Fox News. Results showed some people selected news from a distrusted source, but only under very specific circumstances. Others avoided the awkward moment of siding with a distrusted source, even when that meant selecting news from a trusted source that was counter-attitudinal to the source’s typical slant on global warming.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138591878","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Meyrowitz’s media context theory proposes that new media and their contexts will lead to new behaviors. This article adopts media context theory as a framework and utilizes a textual analysis approach to analyze what Meyrowitz termed middle region behaviors and the contextualization strategies of the traditional Chinese news media (People’s Daily) on the social media platform Weibo. The findings reveal three of People’s Daily’s Weibo news’ innovation strategies: the middle regionalization of news contexts (live news, vlog news, chatbox news); personalized production of important news (Weibo commentary, user-produced news); and equal dialogue with the public (daily greetings, holiday greetings, popularizing science). The study also indicates that traditional news media can utilize social media to consolidate communication effectiveness and reconstruct their credibility while actively participating in social governance. In light of these findings, we think that the “contextualization” strategies employed by People’s Daily on the Weibo platform offer meaningful possibilities for traditional news organizations’ integration into social media, such as exploring innovative approaches to news presentation, emphasizing audience interaction, appropriately providing “non-news content” for the audience, and maintaining a commitment to objectivity and fairness in news reporting.
{"title":"Contextualization: A Path to Chinese Traditional News Media’s Integration Into Social Media","authors":"Difan Guo, Haiyan Wang, Jing Xu","doi":"10.17645/mac.7429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7429","url":null,"abstract":"Meyrowitz’s media context theory proposes that new media and their contexts will lead to new behaviors. This article adopts media context theory as a framework and utilizes a textual analysis approach to analyze what Meyrowitz termed middle region behaviors and the contextualization strategies of the traditional Chinese news media (People’s Daily) on the social media platform Weibo. The findings reveal three of People’s Daily’s Weibo news’ innovation strategies: the middle regionalization of news contexts (live news, vlog news, chatbox news); personalized production of important news (Weibo commentary, user-produced news); and equal dialogue with the public (daily greetings, holiday greetings, popularizing science). The study also indicates that traditional news media can utilize social media to consolidate communication effectiveness and reconstruct their credibility while actively participating in social governance. In light of these findings, we think that the “contextualization” strategies employed by People’s Daily on the Weibo platform offer meaningful possibilities for traditional news organizations’ integration into social media, such as exploring innovative approaches to news presentation, emphasizing audience interaction, appropriately providing “non-news content” for the audience, and maintaining a commitment to objectivity and fairness in news reporting.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138599797","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Despite industry-wide efforts in digitally transforming news organizations, research showed that most newspapers’ legacy products still outperformed the same newspaper’s digital offerings in terms of engagement, circulation, readership, pricing, advertising, and subscription revenue—all by a wide margin. But Covid-19 created an unprecedented scenario where the need for instant, local news updates, the fear of contacting anything tangible, and financial stress may have changed consumer behavior. To assess the state of the newspaper industry, this study analyzes short-term and long-term trends in US newspapers’ digital and print circulation before and during the pandemic. The analysis considered price, an important factor often neglected in discussions about newspaper demand. Utilizing rich industry data, this study analyzed 18 US metro daily newspapers’ circulation trends during 2016–2022. The results revealed that digital circulation increased rapidly after the onset of Covid-19 but subsequently decreased after reaching the peak in Q3 2021. Print circulation continued its rapid decline since 2016, accompanied by continuous, substantial price hikes for print subscriptions—a typical print subscription now costs over $1,000 a year. Despite circulation declines, the print edition remains the core product, with more subscribers paying far more than digital subscribers. Because of the immense price gap (6 to 1), the seemingly promising increase in digital subscriptions during Covid-19 could not generate nearly as much revenue to cover the loss on the print side, resulting in a substantial loss in total subscription revenue. The state of the US newspaper industry needs immediate attention.
{"title":"Unraveling US Newspapers’ Digital and Print Subscriptions in the Context of Price, 2016–2022","authors":"H. I. Chyi, Sun Ho Jeong","doi":"10.17645/mac.7482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7482","url":null,"abstract":"Despite industry-wide efforts in digitally transforming news organizations, research showed that most newspapers’ legacy products still outperformed the same newspaper’s digital offerings in terms of engagement, circulation, readership, pricing, advertising, and subscription revenue—all by a wide margin. But Covid-19 created an unprecedented scenario where the need for instant, local news updates, the fear of contacting anything tangible, and financial stress may have changed consumer behavior. To assess the state of the newspaper industry, this study analyzes short-term and long-term trends in US newspapers’ digital and print circulation before and during the pandemic. The analysis considered price, an important factor often neglected in discussions about newspaper demand. Utilizing rich industry data, this study analyzed 18 US metro daily newspapers’ circulation trends during 2016–2022. The results revealed that digital circulation increased rapidly after the onset of Covid-19 but subsequently decreased after reaching the peak in Q3 2021. Print circulation continued its rapid decline since 2016, accompanied by continuous, substantial price hikes for print subscriptions—a typical print subscription now costs over $1,000 a year. Despite circulation declines, the print edition remains the core product, with more subscribers paying far more than digital subscribers. Because of the immense price gap (6 to 1), the seemingly promising increase in digital subscriptions during Covid-19 could not generate nearly as much revenue to cover the loss on the print side, resulting in a substantial loss in total subscription revenue. The state of the US newspaper industry needs immediate attention.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138603054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This study investigates how Google is shaping journalism innovation, particularly in business models, through an analysis of one of its global funding competitions, the Innovation Challenge. It adds to an understanding of the impact of platforms on journalism through a descriptive analysis of 354 projects funded between 2018 and 2022 in 78 countries and five regions. Grant recipients were largely for-profit journalism organizations, with a significant US focus. Projects related to audience engagement, business models and distribution dominated the published winning innovation proposals, accounting for 72.6% of funded projects. The three areas were closely connected as they were mostly related to plans to increase reader revenue. Findings suggest that the Innovation Challenge validates reader revenue as the key innovation in business models through a funding competition aligned with Google’s global industry and government relations interests. The orientation is problematic as it narrows journalism innovation to a financial issue, with audiences as the answer, even though people are largely unwilling to pay for news and journalism is considered a public good rather than simply a commercial product.
{"title":"Google’s Influence on Global Business Models in Journalism: An Analysis of Its Innovation Challenge","authors":"Alfred Hermida, M. Young","doi":"10.17645/mac.7562","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7562","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates how Google is shaping journalism innovation, particularly in business models, through an analysis of one of its global funding competitions, the Innovation Challenge. It adds to an understanding of the impact of platforms on journalism through a descriptive analysis of 354 projects funded between 2018 and 2022 in 78 countries and five regions. Grant recipients were largely for-profit journalism organizations, with a significant US focus. Projects related to audience engagement, business models and distribution dominated the published winning innovation proposals, accounting for 72.6% of funded projects. The three areas were closely connected as they were mostly related to plans to increase reader revenue. Findings suggest that the Innovation Challenge validates reader revenue as the key innovation in business models through a funding competition aligned with Google’s global industry and government relations interests. The orientation is problematic as it narrows journalism innovation to a financial issue, with audiences as the answer, even though people are largely unwilling to pay for news and journalism is considered a public good rather than simply a commercial product.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139214075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Harry Dugmore, Renee Barnes, Peter English, Elizabeth J. Stephens, Rosanna Natoli
The Covid-19 emergency in Australia precipitated the closure of dozens of print newspapers across Australia but, conversely, the heightened state of anxiety of the early Covid-19 period amplified the need for local information and communality. This was the impetus for a wave of print-centric newspaper start-ups. We previously examined 22 Covid-19 era start-ups in Queensland (see Barnes et al., 2022, p. 21–34) and found that their editors/publishers universally “reassert(ed) and claim(ed) more vigorously the normative values associated with community journalism as ‘social glue.’” These proprietors deployed an “affective rationale” as the foundation of their journalism and their “lean start-up” business models. We called this a “community cohesion model.” Returning to these start-ups 18 months after the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions were lifted in Queensland, we find that about 60% of these newspapers have continued operating, still drawing on deep wells of community support. They are transitioning to more conventional “newsonomics,” seeking—like the news organisations they replaced—to expand their advertising and raise other revenue, keep costs low, and expand their digital channels while remaining focussed on their core print offering. Drawing on in-depth interviews and editorial statements by editors/owners of these start-ups, as well as a close examination of advertising in the surviving newspapers, this study argues that adopting affective “hybrid” business models can be a basis for news organisations’ longer-term viability.
{"title":"“Communal News Work” as Sustainable Business Model: Recent Print-Centric News Start-Ups in Regional Queensland","authors":"Harry Dugmore, Renee Barnes, Peter English, Elizabeth J. Stephens, Rosanna Natoli","doi":"10.17645/mac.7555","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7555","url":null,"abstract":"The Covid-19 emergency in Australia precipitated the closure of dozens of print newspapers across Australia but, conversely, the heightened state of anxiety of the early Covid-19 period amplified the need for local information and communality. This was the impetus for a wave of print-centric newspaper start-ups. We previously examined 22 Covid-19 era start-ups in Queensland (see Barnes et al., 2022, p. 21–34) and found that their editors/publishers universally “reassert(ed) and claim(ed) more vigorously the normative values associated with community journalism as ‘social glue.’” These proprietors deployed an “affective rationale” as the foundation of their journalism and their “lean start-up” business models. We called this a “community cohesion model.” Returning to these start-ups 18 months after the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions were lifted in Queensland, we find that about 60% of these newspapers have continued operating, still drawing on deep wells of community support. They are transitioning to more conventional “newsonomics,” seeking—like the news organisations they replaced—to expand their advertising and raise other revenue, keep costs low, and expand their digital channels while remaining focussed on their core print offering. Drawing on in-depth interviews and editorial statements by editors/owners of these start-ups, as well as a close examination of advertising in the surviving newspapers, this study argues that adopting affective “hybrid” business models can be a basis for news organisations’ longer-term viability.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139217680","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The modern news industry demands a continuous stream of products ready to meet audience needs; the emergent newsroom role of product manager serves to prioritize them by providing a holistic perspective on an organization’s goals. Product professionals bring in new skill sets and help to bridge the divide and align the priorities among editorial, business, and technology functions, serving as a locus of change in journalism. This sets the stage for institutional complexity where actors struggle to make decisions due to competing logics, which are socially constructed rules created to normalize behavior. This article thus focuses on the dynamics of change in a complex environment by examining news product professionals as institutional arbitrageurs, which are actors who bring competing logics together to create value during a time of complexity. This framing raises questions regarding the locus of change in journalism and aims to further understand the tactics used by actors in a complex environment such as the field of journalism. A qualitative study using interviews with digital journalism’s product professionals is used to address this phenomenon, which allows for a theoretical contextualization of the dynamics of change in journalism and specifically, how product managers act as a locus of change using their roles to manage complexity by bringing incompatible logics together to leverage differences between them.
{"title":"Institutional Arbitrageurs: The Role of Product Managers as a Locus of Change in Journalism","authors":"Allie Kosterich, Cindy Royal","doi":"10.17645/mac.7374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7374","url":null,"abstract":"The modern news industry demands a continuous stream of products ready to meet audience needs; the emergent newsroom role of product manager serves to prioritize them by providing a holistic perspective on an organization’s goals. Product professionals bring in new skill sets and help to bridge the divide and align the priorities among editorial, business, and technology functions, serving as a locus of change in journalism. This sets the stage for institutional complexity where actors struggle to make decisions due to competing logics, which are socially constructed rules created to normalize behavior. This article thus focuses on the dynamics of change in a complex environment by examining news product professionals as institutional arbitrageurs, which are actors who bring competing logics together to create value during a time of complexity. This framing raises questions regarding the locus of change in journalism and aims to further understand the tactics used by actors in a complex environment such as the field of journalism. A qualitative study using interviews with digital journalism’s product professionals is used to address this phenomenon, which allows for a theoretical contextualization of the dynamics of change in journalism and specifically, how product managers act as a locus of change using their roles to manage complexity by bringing incompatible logics together to leverage differences between them.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139218571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Klaus Meier, Michael Grassl, J. García-Avilés, Dámaso Mondéjar, A. Kaltenbrunner, Renée Lugschitz, Colin Porlezza, Petra Mazzoni, Vinzenz Wyss, Mirco Saner
Where does innovation in journalism come from, how is it implemented, and what factors drive or hinder its development? Scholars have explored these questions from different perspectives for over two decades. Our research holistically considers the broader factors that influence the development of journalistic innovation at the macro, meso, and micro levels, and whether it is internally or externally driven. In a three-year international research project, we have unpacked innovation with this multidimensional approach, looking at the most important innovations in journalism in Austria, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK. Our study focuses on the mutual interplay between journalists, media organizations, and society. We investigated 100 case studies with 137 guided interviews with senior managers or project leaders. The results show that the focus of supporting and obstructive factors is internal and on the meso level and that many parallels exist between media systems. Internal factors are the intrinsic motivation of individuals, which need the support of open-minded management, allowing a culture of experimentation without economic pressure and assembling interdisciplinary teams. Across countries and independent of the respective media system, three external key drivers of innovation in journalism can be identified: technology, societal change, and change in the digital media universe. The study confirms once again as if through a magnifying glass that journalism is primarily a public service, especially for those innovations that strengthen the role of journalism in a democratic society.
{"title":"Innovations in Journalism as Complex Interplay: Supportive and Obstructive Factors in International Comparison","authors":"Klaus Meier, Michael Grassl, J. García-Avilés, Dámaso Mondéjar, A. Kaltenbrunner, Renée Lugschitz, Colin Porlezza, Petra Mazzoni, Vinzenz Wyss, Mirco Saner","doi":"10.17645/mac.7443","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7443","url":null,"abstract":"Where does innovation in journalism come from, how is it implemented, and what factors drive or hinder its development? Scholars have explored these questions from different perspectives for over two decades. Our research holistically considers the broader factors that influence the development of journalistic innovation at the macro, meso, and micro levels, and whether it is internally or externally driven. In a three-year international research project, we have unpacked innovation with this multidimensional approach, looking at the most important innovations in journalism in Austria, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and the UK. Our study focuses on the mutual interplay between journalists, media organizations, and society. We investigated 100 case studies with 137 guided interviews with senior managers or project leaders. The results show that the focus of supporting and obstructive factors is internal and on the meso level and that many parallels exist between media systems. Internal factors are the intrinsic motivation of individuals, which need the support of open-minded management, allowing a culture of experimentation without economic pressure and assembling interdisciplinary teams. Across countries and independent of the respective media system, three external key drivers of innovation in journalism can be identified: technology, societal change, and change in the digital media universe. The study confirms once again as if through a magnifying glass that journalism is primarily a public service, especially for those innovations that strengthen the role of journalism in a democratic society.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139234029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ragne Kõuts-Klemm, Tobias Eberwein, Zrinjka Peruško, Dina Vozab, Anda Rožukalne, I. Skulte, Alnis Stakle
Big and small states all function as comprehensive entities: they require state apparatuses, the ability to provide services for citizens, the capacity to protect themselves, and appropriate media systems to guarantee a deliberative communication space for democratic processes. Investigating media, in turn, is important since it informs us about risks and opportunities for media transformations. To examine the impact of smallness on monitoring and research capabilities in news media and journalism, we have compared four small European countries with contrasting historical backgrounds and different types of media systems: Austria, Croatia, Estonia, and Latvia. While earlier research has mainly focused on Western European countries, the current study broadens the perspective to Central and Eastern European countries. The analysis shows that smallness can influence research capabilities in different ways, with advantages and disadvantages for media and journalism research. Fewer national resources can foster internationalisation, with the side effect of less attention to country-specific problems. In the situation of growing specialisation in media and journalism research, small countries may be less capable of providing sufficient infrastructure for knowledge exchange. The article builds on research performed within the framework of the H2020 project Mediadelcom.
{"title":"Media and Journalism Research in Small European Countries","authors":"Ragne Kõuts-Klemm, Tobias Eberwein, Zrinjka Peruško, Dina Vozab, Anda Rožukalne, I. Skulte, Alnis Stakle","doi":"10.17645/mac.7205","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7205","url":null,"abstract":"Big and small states all function as comprehensive entities: they require state apparatuses, the ability to provide services for citizens, the capacity to protect themselves, and appropriate media systems to guarantee a deliberative communication space for democratic processes. Investigating media, in turn, is important since it informs us about risks and opportunities for media transformations. To examine the impact of smallness on monitoring and research capabilities in news media and journalism, we have compared four small European countries with contrasting historical backgrounds and different types of media systems: Austria, Croatia, Estonia, and Latvia. While earlier research has mainly focused on Western European countries, the current study broadens the perspective to Central and Eastern European countries. The analysis shows that smallness can influence research capabilities in different ways, with advantages and disadvantages for media and journalism research. Fewer national resources can foster internationalisation, with the side effect of less attention to country-specific problems. In the situation of growing specialisation in media and journalism research, small countries may be less capable of providing sufficient infrastructure for knowledge exchange. The article builds on research performed within the framework of the H2020 project Mediadelcom.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139227939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Many local newsrooms across the globe have been forced to re-assess (and re-assert) their value and function during a period of intense digital disruption. “Innovate or die” has become an accepted mantra as governments, policymakers, and academics focus on shifting, for example, traditional newspapers into the digital era to maintain their perceived relevance. This article argues the need to understand and learn from the experiences of traditional commercial local news providers who have been encouraged to consider innovative solutions for their businesses. The article adopts a pooled case comparison approach, drawing on data from two separate studies examining media innovation in Norway and Australia. We outline three specific themes that appear to shape localized innovation practices: there is ambivalence or challenge to innovation discourse; introduced innovations are done so incrementally and re-contextualised to adapt to a local setting; and there is an authentic approach to innovation that prioritizes change aligning with local journalism’s social and community values.
{"title":"“It’s New to Us”: Exploring Authentic Innovation in Local News Settings","authors":"Ragnhild Kr. Olsen, Kristy Hess","doi":"10.17645/mac.7444","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.7444","url":null,"abstract":"Many local newsrooms across the globe have been forced to re-assess (and re-assert) their value and function during a period of intense digital disruption. “Innovate or die” has become an accepted mantra as governments, policymakers, and academics focus on shifting, for example, traditional newspapers into the digital era to maintain their perceived relevance. This article argues the need to understand and learn from the experiences of traditional commercial local news providers who have been encouraged to consider innovative solutions for their businesses. The article adopts a pooled case comparison approach, drawing on data from two separate studies examining media innovation in Norway and Australia. We outline three specific themes that appear to shape localized innovation practices: there is ambivalence or challenge to innovation discourse; introduced innovations are done so incrementally and re-contextualised to adapt to a local setting; and there is an authentic approach to innovation that prioritizes change aligning with local journalism’s social and community values.","PeriodicalId":18348,"journal":{"name":"Media and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139232398","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：