Journalism, citizens and blogging

Debra Adams
PhD Candidate
Creative Industries Faculty
Queensland University of Technology
[email protected]

Abstract

Internet communication technologies (netCTs) have added a new dimension to

the production and consumption of news journalism around the world. They
have enabled the creation of new publishing spaces where diverse voices can
engage in conversations about matters affecting daily lives. netCTs present
citizens with many opportunities to produce as well as consume information.

This paper proposes research that will examine the ways in which the uses of
netCTs in the production of news create new possibilities for citizens to
engage with public life.

The research will compare traditional operational ideologies of journalism

with those of participatory models of online news. It seeks to discover the
extent to which participatory journalism has taken hold and the subsequent
impact on the role of the journalist, traditional media models and the citizen.
In particular, the research seeks to discover whether, and if so to what degree,
the practice of news blogging enhances traditional media productions. The
research will explore both supporting and opposing views of participatory
media.

Case studies of commercial, public and alternative media models will assess
the capacities of each to offer citizens a comprehensive and culturally flexible
brand of citizen journalism.

1
Introduction

There is concern within democratic societies that a growing number of

individuals are disconnecting from their role as citizens (Merritt and
McCombs 2004: 47, Turner, G., 2005: 135, Dyrenfurth, N., 2005). Much of
the blame for this disengagement has fallen upon the gatekeeping practices of
journalism (Schechter, D., 2005: 70). These practices are often held to be
counterproductive to journalism's primary purpose, which is to create an
inclusive and diverse space for conversation between members of society
about issues affecting their lives. Gatekeeping practices have the capacity to
create gaps and silences, giving voice only to those already holding power.
Some contend that they give media corporations, politicians and large lobby
groups the capacity to set the agenda on their terms and in their own best
interests (Schechter, D., 2005: 70).

Ideally, democratic societies are underpinned by an inclusive media. This is

reflected by equality of access, a diversity of viewpoints and multiple voices
connected together in a public conversation. The growing concern in many
democratic societies, including Australia, is that mainstream journalism has
become depoliticised in favour of profit driven business policies (McChesney,
2000: 1). This concern has stimulated ideas about the possibilities for Internet
communication technologies (netCTs) to create new ways to revive the public
conversation, and thus citizenship.

The phenomenon of audiences dropping away from traditional news sites such
as newspapers and current affairs programs (Turner, 2005: 135; Murdoch,
2005; Flew, 2006: 914-8) is largely understood by media managers as a sign
of the public’s disinterest in public affairs. Danny Schechter rejects this
assumption and argues that it is the media itself that is driving the public away
from public affairs (Schechter, 2005: 16). Like Robert McChesney, he argues
that mainstream news media fails to provide the public with enough reliable
information from a wide range of sources (McChesney, 2000: 1). Schechter
says the public are concerned that they aren’t getting the whole story from
mainstream media (Schechter, D., 2005: 70).

2
John Hartley sees the changes in media use as a cultural phenomenon
characterised by the evolving developments in communication technologies.
He describes the “interactive phase of modernity” (Hartley, 2005: 10) where
everyone has the opportunity to communicate with one or many (Hartley,
2005: 10) through what are described here as netCTs.

The modern mediasphere is now largely characterised by interactive

technologies. Mainstream media are no longer the only source of news media
available to citizens. The growing uptake of netCTs by ordinary people has
enabled them to become both users and producers of information about public
affairs and has clearly indicated that developments in technology, audience
needs and media uses are intricately entwined.

In response to these evolving trends, mainstream media have developed online

news sites where audiences are offered various levels of participatory access
to the news process. While the most popular online news sites are the
mainstream media sites (Papandrea, 2005: 4), netCTs have enabled the
creation of alternative online media sites which have added a new dimension
to the production and consumption of news journalism around the world. They
enable ordinary individuals to become producers, editors and publishers of
news content. Users now have the capacity to create multiple spaces for
diverse and interconnected public conversations.

These conversations often occur in weblogs, or blogs. Blogging is a

communicative practice that allows people to connect, converse and share
information in a digitally networked environment. The global reach of digital
networks such as blogs allows people to discuss with local and global
participants the issues and events affecting their lives.

While there are many different kinds of blogs, those currently drawing the
most scholarly interest are alternative news media blogs. Axel Bruns observes
the importance of news blogs to news reporting in areas such as instant
reporting from the scene of an event, filling gaps and silences in mainstream
news media, commentary and opinion and investigative news reporting

3
 (Bruns, A. and J. Jacobs, 2006: 3). The main difference between alternative
news blogs and mainstream news is that alternative news is largely produced
by non-journalists and not tied to corporate interests. This practice has raised
questions about whether or not the information contained at these sites is
actually journalism.

Proposed Research

This research will investigate how and why corporate, public and alternative
news media use blogs in their approach to citizen journalism. It will also
examine and compare traditional and modern perspectives of journalism. The
research will investigate a range of topics including citizen journalism,
alternative media, participatory journalism, news blogs, citizenship,
democracy, network theory, technology and the sociology of journalism and
citizenship.

The topic of study was selected because literature shows there is much
concern about the decline of active citizenship. Further there are unanswered
questions about the way commercial, public and alternative media sites
interact, influence and complement one another. Case studies of three different
online media models will be undertaken to explain how and why each model
uses news blogs in their approach to citizen journalism. The cases are:
1. News Limited: NEWS.com.au
2. British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC): BBC Blog Network
3. OhmyNews International1

Further, a social network analysis will identify the original sources of

information and map the extent to which the information infiltrates or is
derived from each of the three media models. The research seeks to track and
show how information is gathered, produced, shared and used. It seeks to
identify producers and consumers. A social network analysis will be a

1
OhmyNews International is a tentative case. The research will develop a clear definition of the term
alternative and in doing so will take into account the objectives of the media model in addition to the
news production practices.

4
significant element of the research because it will show the patterns of
political, economic and social relationships created through news blogs.

Preliminary Literature Review

This research is concerned with the way citizen journalism is supported by

Internet communication technologies (netCTs). This review examines the
literature of some of the key authors across a range of topics, with the foci of
investigation including the relationship between citizenship and journalism,
theories of democracy, media and journalism, network theory, representations,
news blogging, Internet communication technologies, alternative media and
the sociology of journalism and citizenship.

Previous work in the field

There have been a number of previous studies regarding online media (see for
example Atton, C., 2003, Bruns, A., 2005, Cordell, M. and S. De Silva, 2002,
Curran, J. and N. Couldry, 2003a, Deuze, M., 2005, Downing, J. D. H., 2003,
Flew, T. and G. Young, 2004, Meikle, G., 2002, Platon, S. and M. Deuze,
2003, Salter, L., 2006, Turner, G., 2005). Some of the alternative media sites
that have been the subject of case studies over the past five years include:
MediaChannel, Plastic, Kuro5hin, IndyMedia, Active, The Paper, Open
Democracy, Online Opinion, OhmyNews, Crikey and New Matilda. While
each of these studies will be used to benchmark the three media models, this
study will differ from previous studies since it will combine and utilize a range
of different theoretical perspectives including social, political, economic and
technological, to examine how three different media models affect citizenship
through the enabling of collaborative news journalism using news blogs.

Theories of Journalism

There is a range of commonly held views about the role of journalism, such
as: to offer a richly complex description of people, identity, lifestyles,
characters, communities and histories (Mercer, C., 1992: 28); to keep citizens
informed and engaged with society’s institutions (Stockwell, S., 1999: 39,
Carter, H., 2003: 8); to ensure the public conversation is significant,

5
interesting, inclusive and carries diverse viewpoints (Kovach, B. and T.
Rosenstiel, 2001, Lichtenberg, J., 1990: 105, (McChesney, 2004: 1, Stockwell,
S., 1999: 42); to provide comprehensive and proportional news coverage
(Kovach, B. and T. Rosenstiel, 2001); to connect and collaborate with
community (Flew, T., 2006, Pauly, J. J., 2003: 23); to serve the public and
remain loyal to citizens (Bertrand, C. J., 2003: vii, Kovach, B. and T.
Rosenstiel, 2001: 12); to facilitate debate ( Kovach, B. and T. Rosenstiel,
2001: 12, Lichtenberg, J., 1990: 105, Stockwell, S., 1999: 41); to ensure that
citizens are informed about all aspects and complexities of the democratic
process (Adam, G. S., 2001: 316, Patmore, G. A. et al., 2004: 10, Stockwell,
S., 1999:37,); to form social consciousness (Adam, G. S., 2001: 316); to tell
the truth (Kovach, B. and T. Rosenstiel, 2001: 12); to maintain independence
and monitor power (Kovach, B. and T. Rosenstiel, 2001: 12, McChesney,
2004: 1); and to provide the public with a political education (McChesney,
2004: 1).

Mark Deuze says these characteristics of journalism carry across all “media
types, genres and formats” and are common to all democratic societies
(Deuze, M., 2005: 445). He categorises the “ideal-typical values” of
journalism into five distinct areas: public service, objectivity, autonomy,
immediacy and ethics, and describes them as journalism’s “occupational
ideology” (Deuze, M., 2005: 442). Deuze argues that it’s not appropriate to
consider journalism in traditional frameworks such as the aforementioned. He
argues that the core values of journalism are not set in stone but instead are
fluid. This means that it is possible for the operational and practical
frameworks of journalism to move with the times. This idea is exemplified in
the discussion of Margot Kingston’s Webdiary later in this paper.

Deuze is one of many authors who points out that there are problems
associated with the idea of objectivity as a key element of modern journalism.
Regardless of the known issues with the principle of objectivity, it is
consistently used in traditional models of journalism to define and legitimise
journalism’s professional status and the dominant position of mainstream
media organisations (Deuze, M., 2005: 448, Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001,

6
Schudson, 2001, Zelizer B, 1992). The research will examine the presence and
relevance of this principle to existing and emerging forms of online news
production.

Barbie Zelizer argues that the profession of journalism uses ideas of

objectivity and balance to conceal the constructed nature of their work
(Zelizer, 1997: 403). She points out that the notion of “constructing reality”
(Zelizer, 1997: 403) is rarely ever recognised as a defining principle of
journalism. This assertion highlights the need for studies about journalism to
include an understanding of why representations matter.

Representations

Representations have a significant affect on the way people consider and

understand issues in the media. Merritt and McCombs describe media
coverage as creating pictures in people's minds. Journalists, they argue, have
the capacity to tweak some things more than others to create the picture they
want (Merritt and McCombs 2004: 45). However, entrenched public
knowledge about issues doesn’t occur on the basis of one single report;
representations are understood through discursive formations. Merritt and
McCombs argue that it is the pattern of the entire news coverage over time
that tells the public what journalists think is important and this, they say, is
"the epitomé of political power" (Merritt and McCombs 2004: 45). Similarly,
Curran and Couldry contend that one of the main forces of power in society is
the media's representational power (Curran, J. and N. Couldry, 2003b: 4). Of
particular concern to this work is how the nature of news changes as elements
of culture and technology evolve. The capacity of netCTs to enable instant
reporting from anyone anywhere in the world poses a challenge to the
traditional representations of people and events in mainstream media and
therefore to the nature of news. Stereotypes, gender, political and racial
representations can be contested in the new participatory mediasphere.

This research will consider the assertion that journalism constantly changes
with emerging socio-cultural perspectives and changing media technologies

7
(Deuze, M., 2005: 442). Drawing upon theories of journalism, citizenship and
democracy, the research will examine the operational ideologies of journalism
in three news media models in terms of the fluidity of their operations and
practices and their approaches to citizen journalism in relation to the
developments in netCTs.

It also seeks to discover the extent to which representations are inclusive of all
citizens. Flew argues “expressions of society’s morals and values should be
recognisable sites of negotiation where all people are encouraged to take the
opportunity to participate in their development” (Flew, T., 2006: 914-8). The
research will assess the ways each media model approaches these ideas in
terms of the levels of participation offered to their audiences and the degrees
to which these offerings mobilise citizens’ engagement with political policies
and processes.

Theories of Citizenship

As noted earlier, there is concern within democratic societies that a growing

number of individuals are disconnecting from their role as citizens
(Dyrenfurth, N., 2005). This review will outline the key issues underlying this
phenomenon. The defining principles of citizenship are numerous and diverse
but ultimately they describe a relationship between individuals and the state.
Given the interrelated connection between media, technology and citizenship,
the research will examine how the practice of journalism shapes cultural
citizenship.

Through the media, citizenship operates as a "device of inclusion and

exclusion" (Dyrenfurth, N., 2005: 88). Access to media technologies,
information, diverse viewpoints and representations affect the capacities of
individuals’ to act out their rights and responsibilities as political, social and
economic community members ( McChesney, 2000: 1, Murdock, G. and P.
Golding, 1989).

8
 Eide and Knight describe citizenship as being characterised by openness,
participation, rights and duties and as "a system of practices that articulates
civil and political society, a means for achieving democratic accountability
and engagement" (Eide, M. and G. Knight, 1999: 536).

Herbert Gans describes citizenship in terms of its connection to democracy

and the news media. He describes citizens' democracy as that which highlights
the importance of citizens' participation in the political decision making
process. He proposes that the news media should make a greater effort to
mobilise citizens to take a more active role in the politics of their society.
While stressing the importance of a large citizen membership (Gans, H. J.,
2003: 117), Gans is uncomfortable with a number of issues which he sees as
undermining active citizenship. He is concerned that the media doesn’t
provide enough consultation between elected representatives and citizens. He
contends that the political decision making process should be an ongoing
conversation instead of being limited to election campaigns. He also argues
that in the interest of democracy the rights of citizens need to be protected
from the dominance of large corporations (Gans, H. J., 2003: 124). And
finally, he identifies an urgent need for new models of news production: "new
institutions that are grounded in a greater degree of political equality" (Gans,
H. J., 2003: 113).

This research will assess the degree to which the utilisation of netCTs by each
of the three media model cases increases access and diversity of viewpoints,
encourages active and ongoing participation in social and political
conversations and the consequent democratic decision making process.

Theoretical Approaches to Media and Citizenship

Terry Flew identifies three key approaches to media and citizenship: liberal
media theory, critical media theory and “DIY citizenship”2 (Flew, T., 2006:
914-8). Liberal media theory positions journalism as the fourth estate. Here,
the media is seen as the guardian of citizens’ rights and freedoms and where,

2
Term first used by John Hartley in Uses of Television (chapters 10 & 11)

9
ideally, journalism is free of government control and corporate dominance
(Flew, T., 2006: 914-8).

This theory breaks down in societies where there is a concentration of media

ownership. Flew argues that the “concentration of ownership and control,
class-based and other social inequalities, commodification and the
intertwining of economic and political power” (Flew, T., 2006: 914-8) reduces
access to the “communication market place” (Flew, T., 2006: 914-8). The
problem is that the business interests of corporations often clash with the
ideals of the fourth estate. Julianne Schulz contends that while commercial
imperatives often take precedence over journalistic principles (Schultz, J.,
1998: 233), journalists continue to embrace the ideal of the fourth Estate and
remain optimistic in the face of such challenges (Schultz, J., 1998). Similarly,
when Andrew Graham compares the capacity of the market to oblige the
public’s democratic rights to that of the media, he concludes that the media
does hold a sense of obligation and cares about people’s social experience
whereas the market doesn’t (Graham, 2001: 1).

This research will use focussed in-depth interviews (Minichiello, V., 1990: 89)
to gauge, through the reflections of the producers of news, the relationship
between editors, journalists, media models and citizens. Informants will be
asked open ended questions about the modern nature of their practices in terms
of theories of the fourth estate.

Critical media theory is concerned with the role of the media in the public
sphere and the degree to which media is bound up with political, economic
and corporate institutions. Compared to the liberal media perspective, critical
media theory takes a more positive approach to the relationship between
citizens and the state by focussing on the public sphere as a site of public
inclusion. Here, the state has the capacity to encourage public participation,
diversity and pluralism through the funding of community based media and/or
media regulation (Flew, T., 2006: 914-8).

10
Hartley proposes the idea that journalism “develops an understanding of
modern forms of political citizenship” (Flew, T., 2006: 914-8). He contends
that DIY media achieves “cross-demographic” communication which connects
diverse and disparate populations and thus forms communities (Hartley, J.,
1996: 57). Hartley observes a change in the way people use media to
communicate; developments in communication technologies enable ordinary
people to become both producers and consumers in multi-channel media
environments. He contends “‘user-led innovation’ will reinvent journalism”
(Hartley, 2005: 21) and will bring it closer to the “aspirational ideal of right
for everyone” (Hartley, 2005: 21).

The case study of three different online media models will examine the trends
in news production and how they affect the relationship between individuals
and the state. It will review the inclusive and exclusionary practices of each of
the three media models in terms of diversity in viewpoints, openness,
capacities for individuals to participate in the news production process and in
the public conversation, the mobilisation of citizens to take an active role in
the organisation of the political sphere and how each model gives individuals
the power to achieve democratic accountability. It will also seek to discover
the extent to which the practice of journalism has evolved with technology and
the democratic society.

Democracy and News Media

Nick Couldry notes the long running crisis in political theory regarding
democracy. He says preconditions for democratic life include the recognition
by every person of everyone’s rights to speak and be heard (Couldry, N.,
2002: 28). Like Flew, Couldry is concerned that not everyone has that
opportunity. Questions about who controls whose voices in the media have
prompted Couldry’s call for universal access to Internet communication
technologies. Equality of access, he argues, would enhance and broaden
“democratic public life” (Couldry, N., 2002: 29).

11
Jesper Strömbäck argues that the literature about media, journalism and
democracy is largely unclear about the kind of democratic standard that should
be applied to media critiques. He says the media are often accused of political
cynicism without an explanation of how their practices are harmful to
democracy (Strömbäck, J., 2005: 337). He argues that democracy is
multidimensional and so it isn’t valid to say that media and journalism either
undermine or contribute to democracy without specifying the type of
democracy in question. He says different models of democracy have different
implications on journalism (Strömbäck, J., 2005: 337). Procedural democracy
positions journalism as society’s watchdog (Strömbäck, J., 2005: 341).
Competitive democracy sees journalism focus on the political actors, their
platforms and their political performance (Strömbäck, J., 2005: 341) while
Participatory democracy sees journalism mobilising citizens to participate in
public life and encouraging individuals to seek solutions to social issues
through social interaction. (Strömbäck, J., 2005: 341). Deliberative democracy
sees journalism foster “rationality, impartiality, intellectual honesty and
equality” (Strömbäck, J., 2005: 341) through interactive networks.

This research will review theories of democracy and their implications on

citizen journalism. It will review the extent to which Strömbäck’s models, and
others, are reflected in each of the three media models.

The Media Consumption and the Future of Public Connection research project
confirmed that the democratic process is affected by media consumption
(Couldry, N. et al., 2006: 34). The report shows that while there are multiple
ways for media to engage citizens with politics (Couldry, N., S. Livingstone
and T. Markham, 2006: 4), the news media registered significantly as a useful
source of political explanations (Couldry, N., S. Livingstone and T. Markham,
2006: 4).

Earlier work by Curran and Couldry identified particular ways of thinking

about media. The first, drawn from the work of Manuel Castells, is as a site
where competing powers battle for media coverage (Curran, J. and N.
Couldry, 2003b: 5). The second is that it is an illusion that the media only

12
mediate. These authors contend that mainstream media is one of the main
forces in society that reinforce the ideologies of the powerful and is therefore
one of the power forces that needs to be watched (Curran, J. and N. Couldry,
2003b: 4). With that in mind, Couldry’s recent work points to “the continuing
importance of traditional media in sustaining public connection” (Couldry, N.,
S. Livingstone and T. Markham, 2006: 34) and given their findings that “it is
unclear whether the internet will generate habits of news consumption as
stable as those associated with traditional media” (Couldry, N., S. Livingstone
and T. Markham, 2006: 34), they recommend that “traditional media be given
as much attention as new media in efforts to reverse political disengagement”
(Couldry, N., S. Livingstone and T. Markham, 2006: 35). While uncertainty
prevails over the future uptake of the Internet as a source of news, and given
previous assertions by Curran and Couldry that significant challenges to media
power have been mobilised by Internet communication technologies (Curran,
J. and N. Couldry, 2003b: 5), their report emphasises the importance of the
continued promotion of “news-oriented internet use” (Couldry, N., S.
Livingstone and T. Markham, 2006: 36) in an effort to establish the Internet as
a stable site for the consumption of public information (Couldry, N., S.
Livingstone and T. Markham, 2006: 36).

The power of the Internet, according to Flew, is its ability to generate a wider
range of “knowledge capacities” (Flew, T., 2005: 6) and alternative ways to
access information. Cass Sunstein also emphasises the importance of the free
flow of information to generate a wide range of knowledge. However, he does
express some concern about the potential for group polarisation at sites such as
the Internet. While he embraces ideas of diverse voices and vast sources of
information afforded by the Internet, he warns that the capacity for this
technology to allow people to personalise the information they receive could
well be a danger to democracy (Sunstein, 2004: 58). He worries that people
could choose to close themselves off from diverse or opposing viewpoints,
only to consume like minded information which could potentially see the
development of extreme viewpoints and a very unhealthy democracy
(Sunstein, 2004: 59). In an environment such as this, he says, there is an
absence of dissent. Without dissent there is less information being shared,

13
therefore it becomes much more difficult for group members to make
decisions. In a situation such as this, the decisions are made by those with the
most authority and influence and it becomes increasingly difficult for group
members to publicly disagree. Therefore, for some (or many), conformity
becomes “a sensible course of action” (Sunstein, 2003: 6). What these people
know is never spoken about and the consequence is that the public
conversation is deprived of useful information.

Sunstein’s theory will be applied to each of the three media models. The key
applications of netCTs are "social software, open source software
development, collaborative publishing and peer-to-peer networking" (Flew, T.,
2005: 4). The use of these applications to create “blogs, wikis, open news
sites, and community-based open source journalism” (Flew, T., 2005: 4) has
the capacity to change the social behaviour of citizens in a way that impacts
directly upon democracy. Of great interest is exactly how these applications
affect social behaviours. This research seeks to find out.

The case studies of three media models, including both traditional and new
media, will review the efforts by each to establish the Internet as a reliable and
credible source of news. Working from the assumption that the reach of social
networks enabled by netCTs has the capacity to influence public policy, this
research seeks to show the extent to which this assumption is correct.

Alternative Media

Lee Salter compares the ideological underpinnings of mainstream and

alternative media sites. He says mainstream media sites are underpinned by
“liberal-democratic understandings of politics” which position journalists as
passive communicators of political information to publics. Thus mainstream is
more representative of the state whereas alternative news sites are
representative of ordinary people. Alternative news sites reject the hierarchical
structure of mainstream media and endeavour to express the interests of
marginalised groups. These sites do not have attachments to commercial
interests and allow anyone to participate on any level. Mainstream media, on

14
the other hand, “serve to sustain the hegemonic position of a particular socio-
political order” (Salter, L., 2006).

Salter contends that radical media and participatory journalism have evolved
from a range of political and social movements and while there is much
excitement about the possibilities for alternative media to revitalise citizens’
interest in the political sphere, Salter warns of the limitations attached to the
Internet. The Internet is largely hailed as a site of freedom based upon
assertions that it is “ungoverned, non-hierarchical, decentralised and anarchic”
(Salter, L., 2006). Salter demonstrates how “US corporations dominate the
technologies and the content around the world”, therefore proving that the
assertions of unfettered freedom are “untrue” (Salter, L., 2006).

Curran and Couldry observe that there hasn't been a lot of research in the field
of media studies on alternative sources of news. They contend studies have
been more concerned with mass media power. The authors frame alternative
media in terms of social responsibility and define it as "media production that
challenges at least implicitly actual concentrations of media power, whatever
form those concentrations may take in different locations" (Curran, J. and N.
Couldry, 2003b: 7). Their scope of media production extends beyond
traditional mediums such as print and broadcast to include mobile phones,
digital radio and the Internet. They argue that these mediums are
interconnected networks that contest power (Curran, J. and N. Couldry, 2003b:
8). Their interest in these mediums lies in the social, psychological, and
political uses rather than the technical developments underpinning them
(Curran, J. and N. Couldry, 2003b: 8). The scope of this research limits the
sites of investigation to news journalism websites and news blogs.

Agenda Setting, Gatekeeping and Gatewatching

Of paramount concern to the preceding authors has been the agenda setting
capacities of mainstream media. Couldry argues that existing media traditions
limit the preconditions for public life (Couldry, N., 2002: 28).

15
Where gatekeeping practices are seen to limit and censor the voices and
information that can be accessed in mainstream media, Axel Bruns’
“gatewatching” (Bruns, A., 2005: 2) theory supports collaborative and open
news production (Bruns, A., 2005: 311) enabling “produsers”3 to identify and
highlight “important material as it becomes available” (Bruns, A., 2005: 17).
Using Internet communication technologies, particularly applications such as
blogging software, produsers add analysis, commentary and opinion (Bruns,
A, 2005: 198). This research will identify and analyse the gatekeeping and
gatewatching practices in each of the prescribed media models.

Blogs

The Internet, computers and computer software have added a new dimension
to the production and consumption of news journalism around the world.
Bruns describes news blogging as an inclusive, interactive and comprehensive
media practice. News blogs are networked as a way of providing a more
diverse, collaborative and comprehensive coverage of news (Bruns, A., and J.
Jacobs, 2006). As a source of news, the news blog has gained momentum on
the back of decreasing interest in mainstream news formats such as
newspapers and current affairs programs (Turner, G., 2005: 140).

Following an Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) report that showed

Australian audiences were turning away from hard news and current affairs,
Graeme Turner, like Gans, has called for new news formats that better suit
public needs (Turner, G., 2005: 135). Turner argues that mainstream media are
"the most important influence on news and current affairs on the web"
(Turner, G., 2005: 139). This research seeks to discover the extent to which
mainstream news media utilises Internet communication technologies, such as
blogging applications, in the production of news.

2
Bruns defines produsers as “users of news Websites who engage with such sites
interchangeably in consumptive and productive modes (and often in both at virtually the same
time)” (Bruns, A, 2005: 23).

16
Blogging as Journalism

Bruns says there are many connections between journalism and blogging.
While some producers of mainstream media argue that blogging can’t be
considered to be journalism because "there is no editor" (Bruns, A., 2005:
210), Bruns argues that bloggers contributing "informed and well-researched
commentary on the news must be considered journalism" as much as the "op-
ed contributions... in print and broadcast news" (Bruns, A., 2005: 212).

Rebecca Blood prefers to describe news blogging as “participatory media”

rather than journalism (Blood, R., 2003: 62). She argues that a journalist’s
research extends beyond simply finding and providing a link to information
and stresses the importance of the interview which, she observes, is non-
existent in blogging (Blood, R., 2003: 62). Turner also stresses the importance
of the interview to journalism but observes that even in traditional media sites
the impact of the interview has been undermined by corporately controlled
media practices. He argues that interviews are rarely conducted based on
independent information and interviewees usually have prepared answers to
scripted questions (Turner, G., 2005: 116).

Turner describes blogging as being “focussed on commentary...usually from

the position of advocacy, rather than upon the attempt to generate new
information or access to alternative news sources" (Turner, G., 2005: 137). He
notes the Gulf War as an exceptional period where weblogs made a significant
impact on the way people thought about the issues and events and, indeed, the
mainstream media’s coverage of the conflict. Bruns, too, connects the rise of
blogs to political and other significant events (Bruns, A., 2005). This research
will document and analyse significant events in terms of their coverage by
mainstream and alternative news sites.

The research will consider differing approaches to audiences and will gauge
the depth of information, the angles covered, the assumed reading level of the
target audience, the interaction between audience members and between
journalists and audience members, and peer-to-peer (p2p) collaboration. It will

17
also gauge the way publications position the audience and, importantly, the
original sources of information.

A 2006 Pew Internet Project (PIP) blogger survey found an increased interest
in the practice of blogging. The report estimated that around 12 million
American adults kept blogs while 57 million read them. Not surprisingly, the
survey found that most bloggers didn’t think that their work was journalism
particularly those who wrote about their life experiences. 34% of bloggers
thought they were practicing journalism. Of those, 35 % said they verified
facts often, while 28% said they never practiced verification; 15% said they
directly quoted other people/media often, while 41 % said they never used
direct quotes. Only 12% of bloggers who believed they practiced journalism
abided by copyright restrictions while 50% never got copyright permission;
35% linked to original source material while 27% never used original sources;
11% posted corrections and 38% never posted corrections (Lenhart, A. and S.
Fox., 2006: 19). It also brings into question how the traditional practices of
journalism such as verification, original sourcing, direct attribution and legal
and ethical guidelines, are addressed by bloggers.

Margot Kingston drafted her own code of ethics and conduct guidelines for
her Webdiary news blog at the Sydney Morning Herald. These complemented
the codes for traditional journalism. The Webdiary blog hosted public
discussions about news issues and events. In an effort to create an open
conversation, Kingston said she published all views, including those in
opposition to her own, responded to all “non-frivolous” (Kingston, M., 2003:
171) queries, made corrections as they were brought to her attention by users
of the site, published users material in “good faith, without bias” (Kingston,
M., 2003: 171), and all the while remained conscious of her ethical obligation
as a journalist (Kingston, M., 2005: 164). Kingston said it wasn’t her intention
that Webdiary would break news and she allowed contributors to write under a
nom de plume (Kingston, M., 2003: 166). The operations and practices of
Webdiary are an example of the way that traditional journalism practices can
be modified and modernised.

18
This research will take into account the practices and operations of Webdiary
as a benchmark for comparison when collecting and analysing the data from
each case study.

J.D. Lasica sees the appearance of blogs on mainstream news sites as an

indicator that corporate news organisations have recognised the vast
opportunities presented by weblog technology. Mainstream media, he says, is
increasingly drawing upon the blogosphere as a source of information and as a
way to gauge how people feel about particular public issues and events. Lasica
argues that since news stories have a longer life in the blogosphere people
have more time to digest and consider important issues. People also have a
greater opportunity than they did in the past to express their responses in a
public forum. By offering audiences opportunities to circulate, test, dissect,
analyse and revise their opinions from many different perspectives, news
organisations are effectively engaging the public as partners and stakeholders
in the news process. In this sense, they make themselves more accessible,
open and transparent. This not only fosters a sense of community but enhances
the credibility of the media organisation (Lasica, J., 2003).

Similarly, Bruns embraces news blogging as a way for ordinary people to

become active participants in the news process which, he says, has the
potential to “affect their overall place in the democratic process” (Bruns, A.
and J. Jacobs, 2006: 20).

Conclusion

This paper has discussed a range of perspectives on journalism, citizenship

and netCTs, particularly blogging. It has raised concerns about the
disengagement of citizens from the public conversation about social and
political matters. Journalism has, in part, been held responsible for this
phenomenon. Therefore, an important element of the research to date has been
to discover the diverse views about what journalism is, what it should be and
how it should be done. This will remain an ongoing task throughout the

19
research process. This paper has proposed a course of research that seeks to
indicate possibilities for Internet communication technologies to reshape
journalism for citizens.

In particular, it suggests that developments in technology and media uses are

intertwined, continually evolving and constantly reshaping the way audiences
use media communication. The work has touched on some of the social,
political and economic concerns associated with these developments. While
there is much excitement about the possibilities of modern communication
methods for openness and diversity, authors such as Salter and Sunstein have
pointed out the need to be aware of the associated pitfalls.

Finally, the paper proposes a research plan to investigate three models of

media: commercial, public and alternative. Using theories of journalism,
citizenship, democracy, media, technology, sociology and network theory, the
research will consider the effects of news blogs on journalism, journalists,
citizenship and democracy. Moreover, it seeks to develop an understanding of
the effects of participatory journalism on citizenship.

20
References

Adam, G. S. 2001. The Education of Journalists. Journalism: Theory and

Practice 2 (3): 315-339.

Atton, C. 2003. What is `Alternative' Journalism? Journalism, 4: 267-272.

Bertrand, C. J. 2003. An arsenal for democracy : media accountability

systems. Creskill, N.J. : Hampton Press.

Blood, R. 2003. Blogs and Journalism: Do They Connect?, Nieman reports,

Fall 2003 61-63.

Bruns, A. 2005. Gatewatching : collaborative online news production. New

York : Peter. Lang Publishing.

Bruns, A. and J. Jacobs eds. 2006. Uses of Blogs, New York: Peter Lang
Publishing.

Carter, H. 2003. Whose News Is It? In Media, profit, and politics: competing
priorities in an open society, eds. Harper, J. and T. Yantek. xii, : Kent,
Ohio : Kent State University Press.

Cordell, M. and S. De Silva. 2002. New mediations. Media International

Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, (103): 88-93.

Couldry, N. 2002. Mediation and alternative media, or relocating the centre of

media and communication studies. Media International Australia
incorporating Culture and Policy: 24-31.

Couldry, N., S. Livingstone and T. Markham. 2006. Media Consumption and

the Future of Public Connection. Research Report. London: London
School of Economics and Political Science.

Curran, J. and N. Couldry 2003a. Contesting media power: alternative media

in a networked world. Lanham, Md. : Rowman & Littlefield.

Curran, J. and N. Couldry 2003b. The Paradox of Media Power. In Contesting

media power : alternative media in a networked world, eds. Curran, J.
and N. Couldry. pp. 3-15. Lanham, Md. : Rowman & Littlefield.

Deuze, M. 2005. What is journalism?: Professional identity and ideology of

journalists reconsidered. Journalism, 6: 442-464.

Downing, J. D. H. 2003. Audiences and Readers of Alternative Media: The

Absent Lure of the Virtually Unknown. Media, Culture & Society, 25:
625-645.

21
Dyrenfurth, N. 2005. The language of Australian citizenship. Australian
Journal of Political Science, 40: 87-109.

Eide, M. and G. Knight. 1999. Public/Private Service: Service Journalism and

the Problems of Everyday Life. 14 (4): 525-548.

Flew, T. 2005. From e-Government to Online Deliberative Democracy.

Proceedings Oxford Internet Institute Summer Doctoral Program.
Beijing. 11 July, 2005.

Flew, T. 2006, ‘Media and Citizenship: Historical and Contemporary

Debates’, in A.-V. Anttiroiko and M. Malika (eds.), Encyclopedia of
Digital Government, Idea Publishing, Hershey, PA. 914-918

Flew, T. and G. Young. 2004. 'If they come they will build it': Managing and
Building e-democracy from the Ground Up. Proceedings of the
Australian Electronic Governance Conference. Centre for Public Policy,
University of Melbourne, Melbourne Victoria, 14-15 April 2004, pp. 1-
22.

Gans, H. J. 2003. Democracy and the news. New York ; Oxford : Oxford
University Press.

Graham, A. 2001. Quality not profit.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/author/Andrew_Graham.jsp (accessed
20/09/06)

Hartley, J. 1996. Popular reality : journalism, modernity, popular culture.

London, England ; St. Martin's Press.

Hartley, J. 2005. Journalism as a human right: a cultural approach to

journalism. In Journalism Research in an Era of Globalization, eds.
Löffelholz, M. and D. Weaver. London: Routledge.

Kingston, M. 2003. Diary of a Webdiarist: Ethics Goes Online, in Lumby, C.

and Probyn, E. Remote Control: New Media, New Ethics, Port
Melbourne, Vic. : Cambridge University Press.

Kingston, M. 2005. The Future of Fair Dinkum Journalism, in Mills, J.,

Barons to bloggers: confronting media power Carlton, Vic. : Miegunyah
Press in conjunction with The Alfred Deakin Innovation Lectures.

Kovach, B. and T. Rosenstiel 2001. The elements of journalism: what

newspeople should know and the public should expect. 1st ed. New York
: Crown Publishers.

Lasica, J. 2003. How blogging benefits media organizations.

http://www.jdlasica.com/index.html (accessed 03/06/2006)

22
Lenhart, A. and S. Fox. 2006. Bloggers: A portrait of the internet's new
storytellers. Research Project. US: Pew Internet & American Life
Project,
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP%20Bloggers%20Report%20July%
2019%202006.pdf, (accessed 21/07/2006).

Lichtenberg, J. 1990. Democracy and the mass media: a collection of essays.

Cambridge, New York : Cambridge University Press.

McChesney, R. W. 2004. The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication

Politics in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Monthly Review Press.
www.monthlyreview.org

McChesney, R. W. 2000. Journalism, democracy,...and class struggle. Monthly

Review, 52: 1.

Meikle, G. 2002. Future active: media activism and the internet. Annandale,
N.S.W. : Pluto Press; Routledge.

Mercer, C. 1992. Regular imaginings: the newspaper and the nation. In

Celebrating the nation: a critical study of Australia's bicentenary, ed.
Bennett, T., pp. 26-46. St. Leonards. N.S.W. : Allen & Unwin.

Merritt, D. and M. E. McCombs 2004. The two W's of journalism: why and
what of public affairs reporting. Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.

Minichiello, V. 1990. In-depth interviewing: researching people. South

Melbourne : Longman Cheshire.

Murdock, G. and P. Golding. 1989. Information Poverty and Political

Inequality: Citizenship in the Age of Privatized Communications.
Journal of Communication, 39: 180-195.

Murdoch, R. 2005. Speech by Rupert Murdoch to the American Society of

Newspaper Editors. American Society of Newspaper Editors,
http://www.newscorp.com/news/news_247.html (accessed 06/08/06)

Papandrea, F. 2005. Cross Media Reform: A Setback for Media Diversity.

Proceedings of the Communications Research and Strategy Forum.
University NSW. November 2005.

Patmore, G. A. and G. Jungwirth. 2004. The vocal citizen. Fitzroy, Vic. :

Arena in association with Australian Fabian Society.

Pauly, J. J. 2003. Recovering Journalism as a Democratic Art. In Media,

profit, and politics : competing priorities in an open society, eds., J.
Harper and T. Yantek. xii, Kent, Ohio : Kent State University Press.

23
Platon, S. and M. Deuze. 2003. Indymedia Journalism: A Radical Way of
Making, Selecting and Sharing News? Journalism, 4: 336-355.

Salter, L. 2006. Democracy & Online News: Indymedia and the Limits of
Participatory Media. Scan Journal, 3.

Schechter, D. 2005. The death of media and the fight to save democracy.
Hoboken, N.J. : Melville House.

Schudson, M. 2001. The objectiviy norm in American journalism. Journalism

Theory, Practice and Criticism, 2: 149-170.

Schultz, J. 1998. Reviving the fourth estate: democracy, accountability and the
media. Cambridge ; Melbourne : Cambridge University Press.

Stockwell, S. 1999. Beyond the fourth estate: democracy, deliberation and

journalism theory. Australian Journalism Review, 21(1), 37-49

Strömbäck, J. 2005. In Search of a Standard: four models of democracy and

their normative implications for journalism. Journalism Studies, 6: 331-
345.

Sunstein, C. R. 2004. Democracy and Filtering. Communications of the ACM,

47 (12): 57-61.

Sunstein, C. R. 2003. Why societies need dissent. Cambridge, Mass.; London :

Harvard University Press.

Turner, G. 2005. Ending the affair: the decline of television current affairs in
Australia. Sydney, N.S.W. : UNSW Press.

Zelizer, B. (1992). CNN, the Gulf War, and Journalistic Practice. News: A
Reader. Tumber. New York, Oxford University Press: 340-349.

Zelizer, B. (1997). Journalists as Interpretive Communities. Social meanings

of news: a text-reader. D. A. Berkowitz. Thousand Oaks, Calif., Sage
Publications. 401-419.

24