What do thought leaders make us think about journalism? A boundary-work analysis of newspaper commentary articles

Q2 Social Sciences
A. Duffy, Andrew Prahl, Clara Hui Min Lim
{"title":"What do thought leaders make us think about journalism? A boundary-work analysis of newspaper commentary articles","authors":"A. Duffy, Andrew Prahl, Clara Hui Min Lim","doi":"10.1177/07395329221112387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As “boundary objects,” thought-leader articles show some characteristics of journalism but are not considered journalism in its pure sense. Yet this peripheral format occupies a critical place in the media canon and thought-leader articles have value for news organization and audience alike. Given an ongoing demand for content and a declining tendency to pay for it, thought-leader articles have a secure place. But even as they help journalism to overcome one (economic) obstacle, they raise another in the form of questions about their content: Who has a voice? Who is held to account? What agendas are pursued? How are events and topics framed? What are the values of the writer? And who benefits from having a voice, pursuing an agendum and setting the frames of the discussion? When asked of regular reporting, these questions have helped define journalism’s boundaries; when asked of thought-leader articles, the answers similarly reveal what sits inside journalism’s field. This article investigates what thought-leader articles indicate about the boundaries of journalism, through their conformity or otherwise to traditional values and roles.","PeriodicalId":36011,"journal":{"name":"Newspaper Research Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Newspaper Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/07395329221112387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As “boundary objects,” thought-leader articles show some characteristics of journalism but are not considered journalism in its pure sense. Yet this peripheral format occupies a critical place in the media canon and thought-leader articles have value for news organization and audience alike. Given an ongoing demand for content and a declining tendency to pay for it, thought-leader articles have a secure place. But even as they help journalism to overcome one (economic) obstacle, they raise another in the form of questions about their content: Who has a voice? Who is held to account? What agendas are pursued? How are events and topics framed? What are the values of the writer? And who benefits from having a voice, pursuing an agendum and setting the frames of the discussion? When asked of regular reporting, these questions have helped define journalism’s boundaries; when asked of thought-leader articles, the answers similarly reveal what sits inside journalism’s field. This article investigates what thought-leader articles indicate about the boundaries of journalism, through their conformity or otherwise to traditional values and roles.
思想领袖让我们对新闻业有什么看法?报纸评论文章的边界分析
作为“边界对象”,思想领袖文章显示了新闻学的一些特征,但不被视为纯粹意义上的新闻学。然而,这种边缘形式在媒体经典中占据了关键地位,思想领袖的文章对新闻机构和观众都有价值。考虑到对内容的持续需求和付费趋势的下降,思想领袖文章有一个安全的位置。但是,即使他们帮助新闻业克服一个(经济)障碍,他们也会以对内容的质疑的形式提出另一个障碍:谁有发言权?谁要承担责任?追求什么议程?事件和主题是如何安排的?作家的价值观是什么?谁能从有发言权、寻求议程和设定讨论框架中受益?当被问及定期报道时,这些问题有助于界定新闻业的界限;当被问及思想领袖文章时,答案同样揭示了新闻领域的内部情况。这篇文章调查了思想领袖文章通过与传统价值观和角色的一致性或其他方式,对新闻界的界限表明了什么。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Newspaper Research Journal
Newspaper Research Journal Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信