Periodic Reporting for period 1 - CritJourn (Journalism, media critique and online publics)
Periodo di rendicontazione: 2020-07-15 al 2022-07-14
The action “Journalism, Media Critique and Online Publics” examines how journalism is critiqued in today’s online culture. Interdisciplinary in scope, it is guided by the “overarching scientific/research aim” of developing “new concepts for understanding how journalism is critiqued, and how journalists negotiate and experience media critique, by different online publics”.
The research is socially important because of the widespread recognition (in both academic literature and popular discourse) that the relationship between journalism and the public is increasingly fractured. Traditional media organizations no longer monopolize the space of public opinion like they once did in the past. The space of “the public” has become an increasingly fragmented space, made up of diverse publics and ideological constituencies that use the affordances of digital culture to critique media and journalism. The project was particularly interested in exploring how the mainstreaming of far-right political discourses has normalized a deeply suspicious view of “mainstream media” that became very visible during different moments of the COVID crisis.
The project had two theoretical objectives and two empirical objectives. The first theoretical objective was to engage with a diverse interdisciplinary literature on the topic of critique, with the objective of illuminating the affinities between media critique and other forms of critique. The second theoretical objective was to put the researcher’s (and supervisor’s) established interests in radical democratic theory/discourse theory into conversation with the focus on critique/media critique. The first empirical objective was to carry out a mixture of qualitative and quantitative analysis of how media institutions are critiqued on Twitter. The second was to conduct interviews with journalists to see how they experienced and negotiated critique in today’s digital media culture.
The research is socially important because of the widespread recognition (in both academic literature and popular discourse) that the relationship between journalism and the public is increasingly fractured. Traditional media organizations no longer monopolize the space of public opinion like they once did in the past. The space of “the public” has become an increasingly fragmented space, made up of diverse publics and ideological constituencies that use the affordances of digital culture to critique media and journalism. The project was particularly interested in exploring how the mainstreaming of far-right political discourses has normalized a deeply suspicious view of “mainstream media” that became very visible during different moments of the COVID crisis.
The project had two theoretical objectives and two empirical objectives. The first theoretical objective was to engage with a diverse interdisciplinary literature on the topic of critique, with the objective of illuminating the affinities between media critique and other forms of critique. The second theoretical objective was to put the researcher’s (and supervisor’s) established interests in radical democratic theory/discourse theory into conversation with the focus on critique/media critique. The first empirical objective was to carry out a mixture of qualitative and quantitative analysis of how media institutions are critiqued on Twitter. The second was to conduct interviews with journalists to see how they experienced and negotiated critique in today’s digital media culture.
The project was organized as 7 work packages (a mixture of substantive research, training, management, dissemination and communication activities) that are referred to here as a whole.
The main scientific achievement of the project illuminated the nature of media and journalistic critique today, including on Twitter, but also highlighted its interplay with ideological, political and cultural critique of other institutions. These achievements were theoretical in focus and explored the place of media critique in the politics of the so-called “culture wars”. The core scientific rationale focused on 8 key written outputs: 2 (in progress) single-authored books; 1 (in progress) open-access edited special issue; and 5 full-length peer-reviewed journal articles (1 published, and 4 under review at the time of writing). These were supplemented by 8 conference papers, 7 seminar/workshop/panel talks, 1 additional peer-reviewed journal article co-authored with a Master’s student and the supervisor, 1 (forthcoming) paper in a conference proceedings special issue, 1 review essay, and 2 publications for popular media outlets.
Of the 8 key outputs, the first book develops an argument about “critique, media and reactionary politics” that expands arguments first made in three conference papers presented in 2021. The book has attracted publisher interest and is being written to appeal to a general non-specialist readership. The second book is a book about journalistic identity and digital culture that centres on 24 interviews (12 male, and 12 female) done with journalists in Belgium and Ireland. Of the 5 peer-reviewed journal articles, 3 are theoretical in focus, while the other 2 analyze Twitter discourse. The special issue is based on a conference that the fellow organized in May 2022 (see below) and will include an introductory essay that he co-authored.
The project included multiple training objectives, mainly in the form of “training as research”, and a two-way transfer of knowledge with research groups at the host institution (University of Antwerp). Highlights included the fellow’s (a) lead organization of a one-day hybrid pre-conference on the topic of critique at the 2022 annual conference of the International Communication Association in Paris (see accompanying flyer) and (b) his organization of an online seminar series at the host institution that featured presentations by top international researchers.
.
The main scientific achievement of the project illuminated the nature of media and journalistic critique today, including on Twitter, but also highlighted its interplay with ideological, political and cultural critique of other institutions. These achievements were theoretical in focus and explored the place of media critique in the politics of the so-called “culture wars”. The core scientific rationale focused on 8 key written outputs: 2 (in progress) single-authored books; 1 (in progress) open-access edited special issue; and 5 full-length peer-reviewed journal articles (1 published, and 4 under review at the time of writing). These were supplemented by 8 conference papers, 7 seminar/workshop/panel talks, 1 additional peer-reviewed journal article co-authored with a Master’s student and the supervisor, 1 (forthcoming) paper in a conference proceedings special issue, 1 review essay, and 2 publications for popular media outlets.
Of the 8 key outputs, the first book develops an argument about “critique, media and reactionary politics” that expands arguments first made in three conference papers presented in 2021. The book has attracted publisher interest and is being written to appeal to a general non-specialist readership. The second book is a book about journalistic identity and digital culture that centres on 24 interviews (12 male, and 12 female) done with journalists in Belgium and Ireland. Of the 5 peer-reviewed journal articles, 3 are theoretical in focus, while the other 2 analyze Twitter discourse. The special issue is based on a conference that the fellow organized in May 2022 (see below) and will include an introductory essay that he co-authored.
The project included multiple training objectives, mainly in the form of “training as research”, and a two-way transfer of knowledge with research groups at the host institution (University of Antwerp). Highlights included the fellow’s (a) lead organization of a one-day hybrid pre-conference on the topic of critique at the 2022 annual conference of the International Communication Association in Paris (see accompanying flyer) and (b) his organization of an online seminar series at the host institution that featured presentations by top international researchers.
.
The progress beyond the state of the art can be summarised as four points.
(1) The project highlighted the challenges now faced by progressive traditions of media critique and criticism in a political landscape where far-right actors have appropriated the rhetoric of media critique for their own ideological ends. Similarly, it examined how a conventional liberal fourth estate narrative of journalism can be deployed for reactionary purposes.
(2) The project emphasised how the topic of media critique cannot be separated from the general topic of critique, especially in a reactionary political atmosphere where critiques of mainstream journalism and media (on Twitter and elsewhere) are routinely conflated with moralized critiques of other “culture war” targets.
(3) The project highlighted the importance of affirming a democratic vision of media critique, against the normalization of an authoritarian image of media critique that communicates deep antagonism, even hatred, of media and journalism. Rather than renouncing the notion of critique, and the richness of different traditions of media criticism, the project argues for forms of media critique that resist the rhetoric of extreme suspicion.
(4) The interviews carried out with journalists about their online experiences highlight diverse findings and narratives. Interview questions about online media critique were heard in radically different ways. Some journalists answered by noting their appreciation for moments when someone on Twitter points out a factual error in an article. Some voiced their frustration at being the periodic targets of annoying online trolls. While others recounted harrowing stories of online abuse that occasionally turned into harrowing offline encounters. These perspectives inform a book that examines the challenges faced by journalists in a digital media culture where traditional journalistic values are increasingly contested. The interviews are analysed from a qualitative perspective that brings journalists’ own voices and concerns to the fore and builds on the other conceptual and theoretical work done on the fellowship.
When all the expected research results have been publicly disseminated, the project will heighten awareness in both the academy and wider public about how the rhetoric of critique, including media critique, can take ideologically unpredictable, moralizing and depoliticizing forms. From an individual career perspective, the fellowship was an immensely productive and rewarding experience. It gave the fellow the time and space to develop insights that will be central to any new research projects commenced in the years ahead.
(1) The project highlighted the challenges now faced by progressive traditions of media critique and criticism in a political landscape where far-right actors have appropriated the rhetoric of media critique for their own ideological ends. Similarly, it examined how a conventional liberal fourth estate narrative of journalism can be deployed for reactionary purposes.
(2) The project emphasised how the topic of media critique cannot be separated from the general topic of critique, especially in a reactionary political atmosphere where critiques of mainstream journalism and media (on Twitter and elsewhere) are routinely conflated with moralized critiques of other “culture war” targets.
(3) The project highlighted the importance of affirming a democratic vision of media critique, against the normalization of an authoritarian image of media critique that communicates deep antagonism, even hatred, of media and journalism. Rather than renouncing the notion of critique, and the richness of different traditions of media criticism, the project argues for forms of media critique that resist the rhetoric of extreme suspicion.
(4) The interviews carried out with journalists about their online experiences highlight diverse findings and narratives. Interview questions about online media critique were heard in radically different ways. Some journalists answered by noting their appreciation for moments when someone on Twitter points out a factual error in an article. Some voiced their frustration at being the periodic targets of annoying online trolls. While others recounted harrowing stories of online abuse that occasionally turned into harrowing offline encounters. These perspectives inform a book that examines the challenges faced by journalists in a digital media culture where traditional journalistic values are increasingly contested. The interviews are analysed from a qualitative perspective that brings journalists’ own voices and concerns to the fore and builds on the other conceptual and theoretical work done on the fellowship.
When all the expected research results have been publicly disseminated, the project will heighten awareness in both the academy and wider public about how the rhetoric of critique, including media critique, can take ideologically unpredictable, moralizing and depoliticizing forms. From an individual career perspective, the fellowship was an immensely productive and rewarding experience. It gave the fellow the time and space to develop insights that will be central to any new research projects commenced in the years ahead.