Making Change: Diffusion of Technological, Relational, and Cultural Innovation in the Newsroom

Diffusion of innovations theory typically has been applied to the spread of a particular technology or practice rather than the interplay of a cluster of innovations. This case study of a news company undergoing significant change seeks to offer a deeper understanding of multifaceted industry upheaval by considering the diffusion of three interdependent yet distinct changes. Findings suggest technological change faces the fewest hurdles, as journalists recognize the need to adapt their practices to newer capabilities. Changes to audience relationships face greater resistance, while responses to changes to the professional culture of journalism remain the most tepid

“Cross-editing”: Comparing News Output Through Journalists’ Re-working of Their Rivals’ Scripts

Newsdesk journalists make thousands of editorial decisions every day without recourse to style guides. They can do this because they have internalised the aims and values of their news organisations: they know what counts as a “good story” for their output. This paper describes a pioneering micro-level comparative method of studying journalistic values in which, unlike in other comparative studies, the journalists themselves perform the initial analysis. In essence, newsdesk editors from two news organisations swap scripts. They evaluate, edit and mark up their rivals’ texts as if they were being asked to use them in their own output. What would they alter, insert or leave out? Would they reject a story completely? This “cross-edit” and the editors’ additional observations represent unmediated analysis from inside the news editing process, allowing researchers to draw comparative conclusions grounded principally in discourse analysis. To pilot the method, a number of journalists from the BBC and China’s official English-language news provider, CCTV-News (now CGTN), cross-edited selected news scripts published by their rivals. The technique shed new light on news routines, lexical choices, omissions and unexpected consonances in news values. It was then refined to provide a framework for future, wider use

Evaluating the use of citizens' juries in food policy: a case study of food regulation

BACKGROUND Deliberative engagement techniques and citizens’ juries are touted as means of incorporating the public into policy decision-making, managing community expectations and increasing commitment to public health policy. This paper reports a study to examine the feasibility of citizens’ juries as a means of collecting data to inform public health policy related to food regulation through evaluation of the conduct of a citizens’ jury. METHODS A citizens’ jury was conducted with a representative sample of 17 South Australians to explore their willingness to consider the proposition that food and drink advertising and/or sponsorship should be banned at children’s sporting events. RESULTS The results showed that, in relation to the central proposition and evaluation data from the jury, opinion on the proposition remained comparatively stable. Most jurors indicated that they thought that food and drink sponsorship and/or advertising at children’s sporting events would have little or no effect on altering children’s diet and eating habits, with the proportion increasing during the jury process. Jurors were given evaluation sheets about the content of the jury and the process of the citizens’ jury to complete at the end of the session. The evaluation of the citizens’ jury process revealed positive perceptions. The majority of jurors agreed that their knowledge of the issues of food and drink sponsorship in children’s sport had increased as a result of participation in the citizens’ jury. The majority also viewed the decision-making process as fair and felt that their views were listened to. One important response in the evaluation was that all jurors indicated that, if given the opportunity, they would participate in another citizens’ jury. CONCLUSIONS The findings suggest that the citizens’ jury increased participant knowledge of the issue and facilitated reflective discussion of the proposition. Citizens’ juries are an effective means of gaining insight into public views of policy and the circumstances under which the public will consider food regulation; however a number of issues need to be considered to ensure the successful conduct of a citizens’ jury.Julie Henderson, Elizabeth House, John Coveney, Samantha Meyer, Rachel Ankeny, Paul Ward and Michael Calna

The role of events in ICT adoption: same-sex marriage and Twitter

ICT adoption is predominantly considered as a process conditioned by social structures, social situations of adopters, and attributes and features of technologies. What is often overlooked are the cultural forces that shape adoption experiences and processes. This paper focuses on events and event narratives as vehicles through which the efficacy of culture unfolds in technological change processes. Cultural sociology has shown how influential events can be for forming public opinions and facilitating collective action. This article considers the power of one event on a much smaller scale: the passage of same-sex marriage (SSM) law in New York in June 2011 was not only significant for marriage equality in the US but also for the operating logic of the news ecosystem in which the political decision was made ‒ the state house in Albany. For the journalists who covered this event on the ground, the SSM decision was the catalyst to fully embrace Twitter. Years later, the event still served as an exemplar for the potentials of Twitter and as a basis of legitimacy of associated tweeting practices reporters incorporated. This contribution is based on ethnographic research at the state house in Albany, analysis of tweets and legacy news coverage published during that period, and in-depth interviews with reporters