技术与信息验证的相关性:挪威新闻在全国选举期间的见解

IF 2.2 2区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Reidun J. Samuelsen, Bente Kalsnes, Steen Steensen
{"title":"技术与信息验证的相关性:挪威新闻在全国选举期间的见解","authors":"Reidun J. Samuelsen, Bente Kalsnes, Steen Steensen","doi":"10.1080/17512786.2023.2280676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Growing concerns about disinformation have led to the development of new digital tools and systems designed for journalists’ verification and fact-checking needs. Despite these technological developments, research has demonstrated that emerging technologies are not utilised as often and are not as highly valued as industry narratives suggest. There are indications that the typical journalist values traditional skills such as writing and interviewing higher than digital technology skills and that many journalists do not consider the new tools to be very useful in their everyday work. This article takes on a sociotechnical approach to study the interplay between journalists, technology, organisational and professional routines. Specifically, we examine journalists’ use of verification technologies to detect disinformation during an election period. Our findings show a discrepancy between the alleged potential of new technologies and the everyday practices of newswork and fact-checking – also in the digitally advanced Norwegian media industry. We found tensions between established routines and cultures in the newsroom and the push for the renewal of journalistic methods which can be sorted under two headings: strategy vs. practice and proximity vs. distance to the beat and sources.","PeriodicalId":47909,"journal":{"name":"Journalism Practice","volume":"135 39","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Relevance of Technology to Information Verification: Insights from Norwegian Journalism During a National Election\",\"authors\":\"Reidun J. Samuelsen, Bente Kalsnes, Steen Steensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17512786.2023.2280676\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Growing concerns about disinformation have led to the development of new digital tools and systems designed for journalists’ verification and fact-checking needs. Despite these technological developments, research has demonstrated that emerging technologies are not utilised as often and are not as highly valued as industry narratives suggest. There are indications that the typical journalist values traditional skills such as writing and interviewing higher than digital technology skills and that many journalists do not consider the new tools to be very useful in their everyday work. This article takes on a sociotechnical approach to study the interplay between journalists, technology, organisational and professional routines. Specifically, we examine journalists’ use of verification technologies to detect disinformation during an election period. Our findings show a discrepancy between the alleged potential of new technologies and the everyday practices of newswork and fact-checking – also in the digitally advanced Norwegian media industry. We found tensions between established routines and cultures in the newsroom and the push for the renewal of journalistic methods which can be sorted under two headings: strategy vs. practice and proximity vs. distance to the beat and sources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journalism Practice\",\"volume\":\"135 39\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journalism Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2023.2280676\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2023.2280676","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对虚假信息日益增长的担忧促使人们开发了新的数字工具和系统,以满足记者的核实和事实核查需求。尽管有这些技术发展,但研究表明,新兴技术并没有像行业描述的那样经常被利用,也没有得到那么高的重视。有迹象表明,与数字技术技能相比,典型的记者更看重写作和采访等传统技能,许多记者并不认为这些新工具在日常工作中非常有用。本文采用社会技术方法来研究记者、技术、组织和专业惯例之间的相互作用。具体来说,我们检查记者使用验证技术来检测虚假信息在选举期间。我们的研究结果显示,所谓的新技术潜力与新闻工作和事实核查的日常实践之间存在差异——在数字先进的挪威媒体行业也是如此。我们发现,在新闻编辑室中,既有惯例和文化之间存在紧张关系,新闻方法更新的推动力可以分为两个标题:策略与实践,距离与节拍和来源的距离与距离。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Relevance of Technology to Information Verification: Insights from Norwegian Journalism During a National Election
Growing concerns about disinformation have led to the development of new digital tools and systems designed for journalists’ verification and fact-checking needs. Despite these technological developments, research has demonstrated that emerging technologies are not utilised as often and are not as highly valued as industry narratives suggest. There are indications that the typical journalist values traditional skills such as writing and interviewing higher than digital technology skills and that many journalists do not consider the new tools to be very useful in their everyday work. This article takes on a sociotechnical approach to study the interplay between journalists, technology, organisational and professional routines. Specifically, we examine journalists’ use of verification technologies to detect disinformation during an election period. Our findings show a discrepancy between the alleged potential of new technologies and the everyday practices of newswork and fact-checking – also in the digitally advanced Norwegian media industry. We found tensions between established routines and cultures in the newsroom and the push for the renewal of journalistic methods which can be sorted under two headings: strategy vs. practice and proximity vs. distance to the beat and sources.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journalism Practice
Journalism Practice COMMUNICATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: ournalism Practice provides opportunities for reflective, critical and research-based studies focused on the professional practice of journalism. The emphasis on journalism practice does not imply any false or intellectually disabling disconnect between theory and practice, but simply an assertion that Journalism Practice’s primary concern is to analyse and explore issues of practice and professional relevance. Journalism Practice is an intellectually rigorous journal with all contributions being refereed anonymously by acknowledged international experts in the field. An intellectually lively, but professionally experienced, Editorial Board with a wide-ranging experience of journalism practice advises and supports the Editor. Journalism Practice is devoted to: the study and analysis of significant issues arising from journalism as a field of professional practice; relevant developments in journalism training and education, as well as the construction of a reflective curriculum for journalism; analysis of journalism practice across the distinctive but converging media platforms of magazines, newspapers, online, radio and television; and the provision of a public space for practice-led, scholarly contributions from journalists as well as academics. Journalism Practice’s ambitious scope includes: the history of journalism practice; the professional practice of journalism; journalism training and education; journalism practice and new technology; journalism practice and ethics; and journalism practice and policy.
×
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