New Media, Old News

Journalism and Democracy in the Digital Age

Natalie Fenton

• Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd
• Year: 2009
• Print ISBN: 9781847875747, 9781847875730
• eBook ISBN: 9781446244180
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Media Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

Have new communications technologies revitalised the public sphere, or become the commercial tool for an increasingly un-public, undemocratic news media? Are changing journalistic practices damaging the nature of news, or are new media allowing journalists to do more journalism and to engage the public more effectively?

With massive changes in the media environment and its technologies, interrogating the nature of news journalism is one of the most urgent tasks we face in defining the public interest today. The implications are serious, not just for the future of the news, but also for the practice of democracy.

In a thorough empirical investigation of journalistic practices in different news contexts, New Media, Old News explores how technological, economic and social changes have reconfigured news journalism, and the consequences of these transformations for a vibrant democracy in our digital age. The result is a piercing examination of why understanding news journalism matters now more than ever. It is essential reading for students and scholars of journalism and new media.

Part I

---

Introduction: New Media and Democracy

Drowning or Waving? New Media, Journalism and Democracy

Natalie Fenton

News is often claimed to be the life-blood of a democracy – news journalism as contributing vital resources for processes of information gathering, deliberation and action. The ethos and vocation of journalism is embedded in a relationship with democracy and its practice. It is also embedded in a history of commercial practice, regulatory control and technological innovation – it is the tensions between these aspects that underpin this book.

Journalism comes in many forms – from the entertainment-driven and celebrity-laden to the more serious and politically focused; it is many things to many people. Here, we are concerned to address news and current affairs journalism that purports to be for the public good and in the public interest, even if this is experienced as no more than an ideal ethical horizon both by those who produce it and those who consume it. In a world of communicative abundance this ethical horizon is still pertinent: there remains a sense that there are many things that news journalism ought to be doing – to monitor, to hold to account and to facilitate and maintain deliberation – that forms a line in the sand against which contemporary practice can be critiqued. It would be wrong, however, to see such an approach as peddling a ‘golden age’ thesis that harks back to a time that never was. We are more concerned with a time that is yet to come but is nonetheless worth aiming for. In a world of information overload and one-click communication, news matters (maybe more than it ever has) and interrogating the nature of news journalism is one of the most urgent challenges we face in defining the public interest in the contemporary media age.

News is also what journalists make it. How journalists make news depends on their working environment. Their working environment is shaped by economic, social, political and technological factors, all of which form a dense inter-meshing of commercial, ethical, regulatory and cultural components. If we are to understand the nature of news in contemporary societies then we must interrogate news in all of its contextual complexity. This book attempts to do just that: it is a book about journalism, news and new media in the digital age.¹ It explores how technological, economic and social changes have reconfigured news journalism and the consequences of these transformations for a vibrant democracy.

The discussion is rooted in empirical enquiry from one of the first large-scale studies in the UK into new media and journalism.² Using interviews, ethnography and qualitative content analysis to investigate news production processes in a representative sample of news media, the research combines macro-social critique with micro-organizational analysis to gain a complex, critical understanding of the nature of news and news journalism in the digital age. Our central concern in this endeavour is to subject to empirical scrutiny the ways in which new media, news and journalism contribute to democratic political practice and feed public interest. This book is not, therefore, an edited collection of loosely connected chapters. It has been written by the entire research team engaged in this investigation. Although each chapter considers a different dimension of the research, all are closely inter-related.

Many commentators have claimed that journalism is undergoing a fundamental transformation. One of the key reasons cited for this transformation is the changing nature of technology, which is claimed to impact directly upon the practice of journalism and access to the profession. The nature of this transformation is considered variably as a negative and a positive development. The judgments made are usually based upon the perceived contribution of news media to fully functioning modern democratic systems and hence upon journalism’s role in contributing to the public sphere (Habermas, 1989). In all approaches what is described, in one way or another, is the dismantling of the structures of news media as we know them. Certainly, on the face of it there has been a step change in the nature of news productivity. Ofcom (2007b: 34) reports that the

Daily Telegraph launched the first UK online national news operation – Electronic Telegraph – in 1994, followed three years later by the BBC’s news website. The last major UK national newspaper to launch its website was the Daily Mail, in 2004. Within the last decade, web-based operations have come to be viewed as essential for newspapers – national, regional and local – and for all major broadcasters and news agencies.

These debates raise critical questions that run throughout this book: Has new technology revitalized the public sphere or become a tool of commerce for an increasingly un-public, undemocratic news media? In what ways have economic and social change contributed to this process? Has technological, economic and social change reconfigured the job of the journalist and the production of news in terms of enquiry (including media-source interactions), observation, research, editing, and writing? Who are the journalists and how do they exert influence on one another? Does this influence support or challenge economic and/or regulatory constraints within the newsroom? In what way is technological, economic and social change influencing the prospects for and nature of online news and participatory journalism as well as increasing the role of citizen journalists and NGOs as news sources?

The chapters that follow present insights from across a range of perspectives employed to interrogate these questions. From an historical perspective – through a critique of past (mis)conceptions of the power of technology to transform perceived inadequacies in public culture and democracy; an economic perspective – through an investigation into the market dynamics, pressures and technological responses of the news industry; a regulatory perspective – through a consideration of the opportunities for and threats to the practice of ethical journalism; a sociopolitical perspective that seeks to understand journalism and politics from within a critique of the cultures of new capitalism; an organizational perspective – through analysis of journalistic practice in different news production contexts; a socio-cultural perspective that examines how old news sources are adapting to the new news environment and how new news sources are emerging and the consequent impact this may have on news content – we explore the nature and context of new media and journalism and its contribution to democratic practice.

In adopting a holistic, multi-dimensional approach we have sought to challenge traditional divides in media and communication studies that tend to prioritize either structure (mostly from within political economy) or agency (largely situated in cultural studies) (Fenton, 2007), to reach a position that understands the place of both and seeks to uncover the dynamics of power therein. Although the political economy and cultural studies have often been seen as entirely contrasting with irreconcilable differences (Garnham, 1995; Grossberg, 1995) this research reveals that in practice such distinctions are less clear-cut and there is much to be gained from embracing a dialogic inter-disciplinarity. To understand new media and the news requires a consideration of the role of structural factors such as commerce and finance along with the cultural complexities of journalism and, with it, journalistic subjectivities.

It should be clear from this introduction that we do not attribute the nature of change to technology alone but rather the convergence of many forces that may be contingent upon local circumstance at any one time. In his study of American online newspapers, Boczkowski (2004) stresses that ‘new media emerge by merging existing socio-material infrastructures with novel technical capabilities [...] this evolution is influenced by a combination of historical conditions, local contingencies and process dynamics’ (2004:12). In other words online newspapers merge print’s old ways with the web’s new potentials in an ongoing process in which different local conditions may lead to different outcomes. In this manner, we foreground technical novelty rather than technological determinism and place the research within a media landscape structured by a contemporary history of globalization, deregulation and marketization.

Our approach is particularly mindful of the fact that there has always been ‘new’ technology in one form or another and it has usually been accompanied by eulogizing on its democratic potential, its ability to become a tool of the people wresting power from the elite structures of society (explored here in Chapter 2). These debates echo the celebrations of plurality, accessibility and participation. Likewise, journalism and journalists have faced a long history of criticism. The (supposed) decline of journalistic integrity and the professional standards of journalism have been attributed variously to journalists’ egomania, their being parasitic, exploitative of human tragedy and generally squalid and untrustworthy. Hargreaves (2003: 12), a former journalist, writes:

Journalism stands accused of sacrificing accuracy for speed, purposeful investigation for cheap intrusion and reliability for entertainment. ‘Dumbed down’ news media are charged with privileging sensation over significance and celebrity over achievement.

It is no surprise that new media has offered a fresh means of anxiety and an extension of these concerns but the hopes and fears of new media are not new. Importantly, we acknowledge from the outset that these concerns do not arise because of the technology per se or indeed because of the diminishing ethical behaviour of journalists. Rather, they are part of a more complex socio-economic, political and cultural history.

Since the mid 1990s a number of studies have explored the implications of the internet for journalistic practice (for example, Reddick and King, 1997; Miller, 1998; Singer, 1998; Deuze, 1999; Garrison, 2000, 2001, 2003; Rivas-Rodriguez, 2003; Gillmor, 2004). They have looked at the nature of news content, the way journalists do their job, the structure of the newsroom and the shifting relationships between journalists, news organizations and their publics (Pavlik, 2001). In their quest to make sense of the impact of new media on the news they have considered the interactive nature of the internet; the complexity of its content in volume and variety as well as its accessibility and its convergence across previously distinct media. The majority of these studies report that the internet brings new ways of collecting and reporting information into the newsrooms. This new journalism is open to novices, lacks editorial control, can stem from anywhere (not just the newsroom), involves new writing techniques, functions in a network with fragmented audiences, is delivered at great speed, and is open and iterative. In this manner the technology of the internet is said to have reinvigorated democracy.

In stark contrast, others (see below) denounce the impact of new media on the news environment largely from a position of criticism of neoliberalism more generally. Often these are the same voices as those that take a dim view of the present concentration of ownership and dominance of commercial imperatives. Whatever their take, all studies coalesce at some point around three paired, central characteristics of the internet in news production: speed and space; multiplicity and polycentrality; interactivity and participation – which taken together, are argued to have created a new brand of journalism (Deuze, 1999). It is these debates that have informed this study and it is to these that we now turn.

New Media and the News: Reinvigorated Democracy or Throttling Good Journalism?

Speed and Space

The argument begins simply enough: more space equals more news. The sheer space available online is said to open up new possibilities for news presentation that cannot be found in hard copy form. Through archiving facilities the ability to provide more depth of coverage is increased exponentially. Similarly the ability to update regularly is vastly enhanced. The space for multimedia formats also allows news to be presented in innovative and interesting ways (Gunter, 2003).

Space is also linked to geographical reach. Some theorists believe that the web is capable of linking communities of interest across the globe, thereby creating greater political participation. Reach is further enhanced by speed. The speed of the internet enables journalists to get to data without having to leave the newsroom (Quinn, 2002). Reports can be downloaded in seconds, public databases interrogated in a fraction of the time it would have previously taken. These changes signal potential improvements in the relevance and timeliness of news and journalism.

But there are also negative assessments where speed and space translate into ‘speed it up and spread it thin’. Researchers describe how established news organizations are encouraged by the speed of the internet to release and update stories before the usual checks for journalistic integrity have taken place (Gunter, 2003; Silvia, 2001); how the increasing emphasis on immediacy in news coverage is frequently satisfied by reporters working for news agencies (Ofcom, 2007) to the detriment of original reportage (Scott, 2005; Davies, 2008), turning journalists into ‘robohacks’ (Hargreaves, 2003) practising ‘churnalism’ (Davies, 2008), rather than reporters and editors.

An intensification of pressure in the newsroom to produce more articles in less time is claimed to have led to fewer journalists gathering information outside of the newsroom. In these accounts, often the entire production process is a desktop activity with journalists not only writing but also composing a complete presentation package onscreen. This form of multi-skilling has been argued to lead to a reduction in levels of professionalism associated with standards as individuals are expected to do everything from acquiring the pictures, to writing the copy and designing the page (Gunter, 2003). As newsrooms have become increasingly decentralized and flexible, employing staff with a different range of skills from those traditionally associated with journalism, so working conditions are also reported to have become more flexible and workforces more transient (Pavlik, 2001), bringing with them less journalistic autonomy as job security becomes paramount.

Multiplicity and Polycentrality

The space available also gives rise to the potential for a plurality of news providers that threatens the monopoly of provision from major transnational corporations, opening up news production to all citizens able to get access to a computer and the right software. The internet is claimed to provide a many-to-many model of information dissemination, putting the smaller and the smallest news providers on an equal footing with the transnational conglomerates (Rheingold, 1993). This in turn, unlocks the possibility for smaller online news providers providing spaces for minority views and news that do not make it into the dominant news media because of their apparent lack of appeal to a mass audience (Rivas-Rodriguez, 2003).

McNair (1999: 213) states that a proliferation of news platforms calls into question the notion of the public as a single, monolithic construct ‘defined and serviced by a metropolitan elite’, and encourages its replacement with a vision of ‘multiple publics, connected in key ways’. As a result, online journalism is claimed to offer audiences a view of the world that is more contextualized, textured, and multidimensional than traditional news media.

In this space it is more difficult for journalists to claim privilege and for anyone fully to control its flows. The internet provides a space where interested readers can check the validity of one news report against another and even access the news sources referred to. The nature of news gathering is exposed like never before, placing notions of journalistic objectivity and impartiality, the holy grail of professional journalism, under scrutiny. In online journalism these normative anchors become dislodged in favour of the acknowledgement of the impossibility of objectivity and an increased awareness of subjectivity. The multiplicity of views and voices from a diversity of cultures and viewpoints is claimed to keep the mainstream news ‘on its toes’ and render its construction more transparent. The omnipotent voice of the journalist is diluted and journalist-audience distinctions blurred (McCoy, 2001).

However, multiplicity does not always translate into diversity. Content analyses of online news have found that mainstream newspapers with online versions use a fraction of their print stories in the online edition (Singer, 1997); use mostly the same news stories with similar news judgments (Redden and Witschge, this volume) and operate under similar financial constraints. In other words it is more of the same only in a less extensive manner.

In an online world multiplicity does, however, add up to increased quantity. There are now more news platforms available to more citizens than ever before. Quantity, of course, has never been a predictor of quality. Finding information can be an ever more difficult task as people attempt to navigate their way through a morass of search engines and n...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Notes on Contributors
• Part I Introduction: New Media and Democracy
• Part II New Media and News In Context
• Part III New Media and News in Practice
• Part IV New Media, News Sources, New Journalism?
• Part V New Media, News Content and International Context
• References
• Index