The Last Decade: How Technology has Changed Journalism

A Ten-year retrospective: Canada and the United States in the age of digital journalism

Article by Ross Perigoe. Concordia University Canada

Summary/Comments by Jon Greig, University of North Texas Student

In his article, Ross Perigoe reviews the elements that have changed journalism in the last decade. Interestingly, he points out that what constitutes news has NOT changed. What has changed is the elements of how news is delivered to audiences.

Among these elements, Perigoe notes, are 1) the development of competing news 2) the availability of visuals from amateur journalists armed with videophones and camcorders 3) reliance on many different types of information platforms on the internet.

Among these changing elements has emerged the “backpack journalist”. Their ammunition is a camcorder, laptop computer, and a satellite phone. They are “free to travel the world, looking for stories to tell.” However, the material they create news organizations have no obligation to air.

Another element of change, obviously, is the internet. Perigoe points out how people are bombarded daily with blogs, Flickr, wikis, Facebook, podcasts, vidcasts, RSS, Twitter, iPhones, Skype, Digg, blog rolls, avatars, VoIP, YouTube, etc. Only a few of these present “pure” journalism.

Of the new on-line elements, Perigoe says the podcast is the most important, simply because it allows consumers to download and consume material whenever they want to. This points to one of the most significant developments over the last decade: “The Consumer assumes greater control of the subject matter to be consumed”

Perigoe points out how news corporations have purchased competing types of media, and experimented with developing synergies. However, though advertising sales forces have been successfully combined, news coverage has not. The reason for the lack of success is based on a false assumption that every labor-saving tool allows for greater leisure time and greater productivity from journalists. Perigoe says the false assumption led to false expectations that are a “recipe for nervous breakdowns” for journalists.

Perigoe also notes, in pointing to the Clinton/Monica Lewinsky scandal and Bush’s “War on Terror”, that in the last decade investigative journalism has practically disappeared. He also notes how technology has also impacted how journalists cover elections.

And finally, changing technologies have also changed the realm of journalism education. Perigoe lists a number of ways in which journalism education has been challenged:

1. Students prefer to consume their news from screens (computer screens, iPhone screens, etc.)

2. Students are not loyal to one source of format

3. Journalism departments struggle to keep up with both the technology and adaptability of students

4. Is it realistic to expect students to be competent to function as text, audio and visual producers?

5. Students “rip” music, “burn” CD’s, “sample” music, take as fact stories they hear as rumors on e-mail or blogs, but are not expected to “sample” available term papers and must have 2 corroborative sources to write stories for courses

Needless to say, the last decade has made for challenging times for the world of journalism.

Link to Perigoe Article

“‘Comment is Free, but Facts Are Sacred’: User-generated Content and Ethical Constructs at the Guardian”

Article by Singer and Ashman

Summary by Jon Greig

Singer & Ashman performed a case study with the journalists at the Guardian, a British newspaper and its affiliated website. Their concern was in how Guardian’s journalists incorporated and assessed user-generated content in their practice as well as how they handled personal and social ethics in the digital network.

Clearly, digital media has transformed the world of journalism in the last ten or so years and has consequently created a number of challenges for journalists. Ethical concerns have arisen as journalist more frequently interact with the public through digital and on-line mediums.

Case Study:
Journalists at the Guardian responded to in-depth interviews and questionnaires, responding with key words and phrases regarding what they considered “good” journalism. They also responded to questions regarding key ethical issues related to user-generated content. The following is a report of findings:

Key Traits of “Good” Journalism:

Accuracy – most often mentioned in connection to credibility, responsibility, and overall competence.

Honesty/Balance/Fairness – associated with credibility, responsibility, thoroughness, expertise, and notions of authority in connection with credibility and competence

Autonomy – respondents specified freedom from commercial, political, managerial, and government pressures, as well as free speech and the ability to develop as personal voice.

UGC Ethical Concerns:
Regarding key ethical issues of user-generated content, respondents did value the providing space for debate but expressed concern about the abuse of privilege.

Quote: “The platform gives credibility to people whose comments may be completely inaccurate, offensive, or without foundation in fact.”

However, respondents felt that UGC was linked to the values of universal free speech. People have the right to have their voice heard without intimidation.

Exploring Ethical Constructs:
Further ethical issues were explored in the case study under the headings of 2 research questions. They explored how journalists perceive and enact Authenticity & Credibility, Freedom and Autonomy, Responsibility & Accountability, and how they negotiate new relationships with users. I will briefly summarize the findings under each subheading of the research questions.

Authenticity & Credibility
The extent to which UGC challenges or undermines personal and institutional credibility at the Guardian was a major concern with respondents. The challenge lies in how to assess or improve the credibility of UGC. Many respondents value UGC discourse but were concerned about undermining the brand, especially as it relates to personal attacks and nasty comments.

The simple matter pointed out was the time it takes to respond to users who challenge facts, make personal attacks, or simply have disagreements of opinion. On the other hand, having opinions challenged encourages journalists to put extra effort into getting their facts right in the first place.

Freedom & Autonomy
Another concern that arose in the research was that UGC had the potential to erode profession autonomy. Journalists want to maintain their freedom to write and print what they like. They are concerned about “dumbing down” content and posting content simply to attract more on-line hits.

Responsibility & Accountability
Respondents felt a responsibility to uphold the values of the Guardian and editors felt a “duty of care” to their writers. Also expressed was an obligation to the reader, to provide quality content and discourse, as well as maintaining a civilized discourse.

One respondent said, “With citizen journalists, it’s all rights and no responsibilities.” The concern here is that discourse becomes uncivil because UGC users are anonymous and don’t have to take any real responsibility in what they write.

Negotiating New Relationships
A major theme from respondents was the complexity of negotiating new and closer forms of interaction with the audience. However, their comfort levels varied. One editor said, despite the drawbacks of UGC, “It’s made it a much more balanced site.” Others have been taken back by the rude, almost abusive, confrontational discourse.

A few suggestions were provided for negotiating new relationships:

1. Thanks users who correct errors

2. Engage users who raise interesting points

3. Ignore the obnoxious

Overall, UGC has spurred reconsideration of what the relationship between journalists and the public has been and might become.

Conclusion:
The evidence suggests that journalists are struggling with how to ethically accommodate opportunities for free dialogue presented by UGC while also safeguarding their credibility and sense of responsibility. The internet affords individuals much freedom for expression, but the responsibility in expressing that freedom lies solely with the user. Profound challenges for journalists in dealing with UGC continue to exist.

Quote: “…journalists face challenges in a network that they did not confront when the product they alone produced was one they alone controlled.”