In a 2,000 word essay discuss how you would undertake a research project on one of the topics studied in this module. Your essay should identify a research question and discuss the range of research methodologies and evaluate the most appropriate method for your report.
***Picture courtesy of: http://www.google.ie/imgres?q=research+project&hl=en&gbv=2&tbm=isch&tbnid=p2JORVsIk_0g0M:&imgrefurl=http://www.ehow.com/how_8273095_develop-proposal-undergraduate-research-project.html&docid=0NcJ2tVQ10PaHM&w=225&h=220&ei=ZcmATu3rDIfs-gaF44WSDQ&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=653&vpy=347&dur=9906&hovh=176&hovw=180&tx=114&ty=96&page=6&tbnh=169&tbnw=165&start=110&ndsp=23&ved=1t:429,r:7,s:110&biw=1280&bih=929***
This qualitative study will examine how citizen and mainstream journalists research and generate news items from within a newsroom setting. It will also help to determine whether members of the public and professional journalists have the ability to differentiate between content produced by citizen or ‘ordinary’ people and that of ‘expert’ journalists. In doing so, factors considered to characterize citizen and mainstream journalists, and most importantly their work(s), may come to the forefront. The presence of comment, lack of sources, and a limited understanding of legal and moral issues have so often been used to define citizen journalism, and negate why mainstream journalism must triumph over what is largely seen and referred to in current literature as a counterproductive and invalid representation of true and pure journalism. This traditionalist view is echoed by Hudson and Rowlands (2007, p. 5), who suggest that “the technology of story-telling should not be confused with the art of story-telling”. This research project will explore how citizen journalists and their mainstream counterparts formulate news reports (the processes involved), and identify some of the strengths and weaknesses of an ever-expanding citizen journalism arena, as identified by members of the public and professional journalists themselves-thus allowing beneficial observations for training practices and so forth to be made.
Using a variation of the “news writing exercise”, as outlined by Philo 1990 (cited in Devereux, 2007, p. 127), this study will compare and contrast how citizen and mainstream journalists research, source, edit, and write news reports based on a series of photographs from international media organizations. Data were collected from group interviews and focus groups, as well as through non-participant observation of the exercise itself. Six groups were used in the news production exercise (three groups of four, which included; members of the public and non-professional journalists-groups A, B, and C, collectively known as the citizen journalist sample), and another three group sample-D, E, and F, collectively known as the mainstream journalist sample (made up of working journalists from local radio, TV, and print (newspaper and magazine) organizations/outlets). After completing this exercise, the groups were asked a set of questions about the news reports they researched and produced; their primary/main sources of information, the presence of comment and/or fact, why they chose to challenge/retain the dominant discourse(s), different angles on the same story, and so forth. This study took place at the University of Limerick, Ireland. This location was chosen because it contains a fully furnished newsroom (telephones, computers, and recording equipment), and because of ease of access to target samples, members of the public and working journalists.
This essay will briefly introduce citizen journalism commentary, previous studies and so forth (reflecting current literature). It will then address the research aims of this project, detailing in particular the research questions and a range of qualitative methods that have been used/that could have been used. Reasons why they were/were not used will also be provided. The accompanying research presentation will discuss the main steps involved in following a research process as featured/headlined herein; choosing a research topic, reviewing current literature on your chosen research topic, determining your research question(s) and choosing a research strategy.
Introduction
Hudson and Rowlands (2007, p. 545) define citizen journalists as “members of the public who send in pictures from their mobile phones or video recorders of a news event they’ve witnessed, or who contribute news content to internet sites”. However, this narrow definition does not take into account one of the most contentious issues in citizen journalism studies-access to sources and materials (archives, press releases, phone calls updating journalists on events, and so on). Also, it does not explain the rise in popularity of citizen journalism websites such as OhmyNews and The Bakersfield Voice, that are run in a professional manner like those operated by mainstream journalists (Briggs 2010, p. 88).
Reich (2008, p. 740) carried out a study of Israeli citizen and mainstream websites to identify barriers that hinder the progress of citizen journalists. The results of his study suggest that the main obstacle to citizen journalists is limited access to senior sources. He argues that “since citizen news outlets are fledging, unconventional organizations, possessing limited exposure, revenue, and public prestige, potential news sources are not inclined to perceive them as a forum in which they would like to appear” (Reich 2008, p. 741). This has greater implications for citizen journalists, as it means they must rely more and more on junior (often more inadequate or ordinary) sources. In turn, this opens the door for a wave of criticism from professional journalists who see the chance to put forward their own views and interests.
By undermining citizen journalists, mainstream reporters are able to publicise the differences between ‘us’ and ‘them’ (van Dijk 1995, p. 29), that is, the differences between professional journalists and amateur rookies, those working for the public as opposed to those working for themselves, those who are trained and have qualifications, and those who are chancing their arms. This research project will not give weight to these views, although it would make for good commentary.
The growth of social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, and the presence of online blogs means that information is being disseminated (potentially) to millions of readers or viewers around the globe. Some have embraced this advance, others remain sceptical. The aim of this research project is to analyse how citizen and mainstream journalists generate news reports given the same resources. This study will also examine whether ordinary citizens and professional journalists can differentiate between the two samples (citizen and professional journalists). Central to this will be what each sample uses to characterize the above groups. Will they look for grammar mistakes, instances of bias, use of sources, will they be proved wrong? The results of this study will help citizen journalists and their mainstream colleagues to build on their strengths and eradicate their weaknesses through training programmes. Analysis may show whether these two groups are capable of working in tandem. These issues will now be reflected in the research questions that follow.
Research Questions
RQ1: What are the main processes that citizen and professional journalists go through in order to research, source, edit and write news reports within the same working environment?
Reich (2008, p. 748) found that “the relations between citizen reporters and their sources are far less established than those of their colleagues in the mainstream press”. As a result, this impacts on the ability of citizen reporters to interact with high rank sources (often gained over a long period of time through trust and mutual respect), and also means that they must build relationships from scratch with their sources (Ibid.). This study will attempt to shed light on:
· the sources used by citizen and mainstream (professional) journalists, whether they are primary, secondary, or a mixture of both. Given the same resources (access) to telephones, the Internet, recording equipment, email, documents, and so forth-will citizen journalists attempt to contact senior sources? Will they make greater use of information on the Internet (archives and press releases), and how will they verify fact from fiction?
· the similarities and differences between news reports from samples A, B, and C (citizen journalists) and D, E, and F (professional journalists). Why they chose to write the news report in a certain style, the language/sources used, did they bring forward their own views, and was this present in their coverage?
RQ2: Can members of the public (potential citizen journalists themselves) and professional journalists differentiate between news reports produced by citizen and mainstream journalists, and, if so, what aspects of news reporting do they rely on to explain these perceived differences?
Tapsall and Varley (2001, p. 4) argue that members of the public must understand the societal role played by journalists in order to distinguish between news content that is well or poorly produced. This study will attempt to identify the strengths and weaknesses of citizen and mainstream journalism, as told (evidenced) through the eyes of its viewers and producers. Set out and discussed below are a range of qualitative research methods this study could have opted for. The pros and/or cons of these methods will now be briefly analysed, before an evaluation of the methods chosen will be made. This section will also include references to current research literature, thus reflecting the commentary (literature review) component of the research process.
Methodology
Quantitative research: “the purpose of research is to discover answers to questions through the application of scientific procedures. These procedures have been developed in order to increase the likelihood that the information gathered will be relevant to the question asked and will be reliable and unbiased” (Selltiz et al. 1965, cited in Davies, 2007, p. 9).
On the other hand, qualitative research aims “to reflect upon the feelings and experiences relative to the research question, to explore the nature of the relationship between person and situation, and to take account of the effect of the research analyst’s own background and role” (Davies 2007, p. 26).
To reiterate, the aims of this study were to reflect/shed light on the main processes that citizen and professional journalists go through in order to research, source, edit and write news reports within the same working environment. This study needed to take the experiences of citizen journalists, members of the public, and professional journalists (purposive samples) into account to document any findings in a fair and transparent manner. Attention had to be drawn to/and reflect the different backgrounds of participants (to mirror the notion that citizen journalists can and do come from all walks of life and cultures, and the makeup of mainstream journalism itself). This study required responses from members of the public and professional journalists, to see if they could differentiate between content produced by citizen and mainstream journalists, and also, what they used/looked for to guide their decision-making process. Therefore, the exploratory emphasis of qualitative research/data (Davies 2007, p. 35) formed the basis of this research project. Davies (2007, p. 139) also argues that the nature of qualitative research is less arduous than that of quantitative research: “there is a seductive appeal about being able to ‘get involved’ in face-to-face encounters as quickly as possible”. Successfully implementing qualitative research methods allows “to some extent the interviewee can direct the flow of conversation, so avoiding the risk that the researcher’s own background sets the agenda in an autocratic way” (Ibid., p. 140). This means that expansive observations and greater analysis of the subject area can be made in an objective manner, and without the interference of the interviewer/observer, thus ensuring the research is well accredited.
A range (selection) of qualitative research methods that could have been used/that were used in this research project, and justification for their inclusion/exclusion.
Reconstruction interviews and case studies could have been used in this study as primary modes of research. According to Reich (2005, 2006, forthcoming), reconstruction interviews have “proven to be an effective and reliable tool for systematically studying the actual performance of journalists, as it provides the researcher with access to even the most sensitive news processes”. However, while reconstruction interviews would give a unique insight into how citizen and mainstream journalists create news, it would also be a time consuming research method. It would take far too long to interview 24 individuals (citizen/mainstream journalists) who undertook our study through involvement in a variation of Philo’s 1990 (cited in Devereux, 2007, p. 127) “news game exercise” (explained below), and transcribe their opinions, views, and so forth-never mind the responses of members of the public and mainstream journalists to this process. Furthermore; this study is not measuring the performance of citizen and mainstream reporters, but rather identifying and analyzing the processes and procedures undertaken to research, source, edit, and write news reports. Nevertheless, interviews will play their part in this research study. Group interviews within focus groups will allow our purposive samples (citizen and mainstream journalists) the chance to demonstrate their knowledge of the news-making process and discuss why they wrote their news reports in a certain way, who they interviewed, sources used, and so on. This method will aid discussion among the sample groups (interviewees) while allowing the interviewer the option to explore important aspects of the research question (primary research/quoted sources used by citizen/mainstream journalists, structure of news reports (inverted pyramid), etc.
This method will also help to show what “members had taken from television and to trace actual influences on beliefs and attitudes” (Philo 1990, cited in Devereux, 2007, p. 127). This may be beneficial because it will demonstrate whether citizen journalists simply copied and/or replicated what they had read, heard or viewed prior to the exercise or whether they used established knowledge of the inverted pyramid/other knowledge/experience to inform their decision-making.
Case studies could have also been used in this project. They allow researchers the chance to “investigate contemporary real-life phenomenon through detailed contextual analysis of a limited number of events or conditions, and their relationships” (Zainal 2007, p. 2). Case studies could help to create a detailed picture of how citizen and mainstream journalists research, source, edit and write news reports. They would have allowed the researcher access to participants in their natural setting, going beyond the staged setting (limitation) of this study. However, as outlined by Zainal (2007, p. 2), this project would not be able to draw any reliable conclusions and/or findings from a single comparative study of a citizen and mainstream journalist. Although this method helps “to explain the complexities of real-life situations which may not be captured through experimental or survey research” (Ibid., p. 4), it too is seen as being rather time consuming and a forum for the expression and manipulation of biased views and evidence (Yin 1984, cited in Zainal 2007, p. 5). Hence, it will not be used as a research method in this project.
In conjunction with group interviews within focus groups, non-participant observation was also used as a research method. This involved the researcher remaining “outside the focus of the study…and record[ing] activities, verbal and non-verbal interactions and consequential happenings” (Davies 2007, p. 30). This is beneficial because the researcher can record and/or note important non-verbal cues (body language, signs, and so on) that otherwise could go unnoticed. Non-participant observation also ensures that researcher interference is kept to a minimum. However, in order to collect relevant data, video-recording will be used. Participants have been made aware of this, and they have every right to cease involvement at any stage.
Finally, the news game exercise will be employed as a research method in its own right. This exercise, as developed by Greg Philo and the Glasgow University Media Group in the early 1980’s, involves using a set of photographs as a writing stimulus and examining the content produced by relevant groups (samples), that is, the reasons why they wrote the news report in a certain style and so forth (Philo 1990, cited in Devereux, 2007, p. 127). One main advantage of using this exercise is that it can “operate either as a projective test (i.e. reproducing the beliefs of group members) or as a re-enactment test (i.e. representing what they believed the… account would be)” (Ibid.). This means that our study could be run on two fronts/different levels; individually and within groups. This would allow for a comparison of findings and results, outlining the role played by group dynamics/working individually within a journalism setting (editorial meetings, working with a partner, working alone, and so forth)-enhancing even further our understanding of the citizen journalism/mainstream journalism arenas.
Conclusion
This essay has discussed how a research project on citizen journalism would be undertaken. A research proposal was chosen, literature reviewed, research questions analyzed and a strategy decided upon. The pros and/or cons of various qualitative research methods were then identified and discussed. A range of resources were used to research this essay and to give weight to opinions expressed herein.
Reference list
Briggs, M. (2010) Journalism next: a practical guide to digital reporting and publishing. Washington: CQ Press.
Davies, M. B. (2007) Doing a successful research project: using qualitative or quantitative methods. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Devereux, E. (2007) Media studies: key issues and debates. London: Sage Publications.
Hudson, G. and Rowlands, S. (2007) The broadcast journalism handbook. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Reich, Z. (2008) How citizens create news stories: the ‘‘news access’’ problem reversed. Journalism Studies, Vol. 9(5), pp. 739-758.
Tapsall, S. and Varley, C. (2001) What is a Journalist? in Tapsall, S. and Varley, C. (eds.) Journalism: theory in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3-21.
Van Dijk, T. (1995) Discourse analysis as ideology analysis in Schaffer, C. and Wenden, A. L. (eds.) Language and peace. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing, pp. 17-33.
Zainal, Z. (2007) Case study as a research method. Jurnal Kemanusiaan, Vol. 9 (Jun), pp. 1-6.
No comments:
Post a Comment