Getting past the future: journalism ethics, innovation, and a call for ‘flexible first’

Journalists have long used ethical principles to define who they are as well as how they should behave. Ethics become a boundary marker to distinguish journalists from non-journalists, and familiar practices from unknown ones. As a result, journalists initially tend to frame a new approach as posing a terrible challenge to normative principles – that is, as something that must be resisted on moral grounds. Such resistance can easily become an impediment to thinking productively about how best to respond to innovation. This essay proposes that journalists should instead confront change by asking how they can adapt to – and adapt along with – the new thing, while at the same time preserving their core values

Teaching innovation and entrepreneurship:Journalism students as change agents?

Digitalization has been a strong driver of change in the journalism industry over the past 25 years. News organizations producing newspapers, broadcasts, magazines or digital products have faced a steep learning curve, trying to anticipate technological challenges and opportunities, as well as to adapt to the changes in news use resulting from the digital turn. The combination of journalistic work with commercial tasks is seen as jeopardizing the quality of reporting and the public interest imperatives of journalism. A common sentiment among our respondents, captured by another interviewee, is that journalism does not “really need to change”. While student survey respondents were quite open to the importance of business principles in journalism, agreeing that they should be knowledgeable about these and also could be involved in matters related to generating revenues, they did not consider themselves future entrepreneurs

Moving Family Dispute Resolution from the Court System to the Community

Over the past three decades, there has been a significant shift in the way the legal system approaches and resolves family disputes. Mediation, collaboration, and other non-adversarial processes have replaced a traditional, law-oriented adversarial regime. Until recently, however, reformers have focused largely on the court system as the setting for innovations in family dispute resolution. But our research suggests that courts may not be the best places for families to resolve disputes, particularly disputes involving children. Moreover, attempting to turn family courts into multi-door dispute resolution centers may detract from their essential role as adjudicators of last resort and forums for the creation and enforcement of important social norms. In this Essay, and in our recent book, Divorced From Reality: Rethinking Family Dispute Resolution, we suggest that family law reformers should rethink their continuing reliance on courts and consider moving some of the problem-solving processes and services that characterize today’s family justice system out of the courts and into the community

Sem medo do futuro: ética do jornalismo, inovação e um apelo à flexibilidade

Os jornalistas desde sempre usaram os princípios éticos tanto para definir o que são como para indicar como devem actuar. A ética tornou-se um marco fronteiriço para distinguir jornalistas de não-jornalistas, e práticas familiares de práticas desconhecidas. Em resultado disso, os jornalistas tendem, num primeiro momento, a encarar qualquer nova abordagem ao campo da informação como uma ameaça aos princípios normativos por que se regem – ou seja, algo a que se deve resistir com base em razões morais. Tal resistência transforma-se facilmente num impedimento para pensar de modo produtivo sobre os modos como se pode responder positivamente à inovação. Este ensaio propõe que os jornalistas encarem a mudança perguntando como podem adaptar-se às novas realidades, ao mesmo tempo que preservam os seus valores essenciais

Implications of Technological Change for Journalists' Tasks and Skills

The authors explore how technology has altered the work processes and activities in news organizations. They show how story ideageneration, research, sourcing, processing, packaging, and repurposinghave changed and created needs for news skills and capabilities

Facebook and disintermediation in three UK general elections

Through interviews with top-level British political journalists and communications strategists, this paper explores use of Facebook as a campaign tool in the UK General Elections of 2015, 2017, and 2019. Findings demonstrate increasing sophistication in political actors’ use of Facebook as a disintermediation device, bypassing the media to speak directly to voters. However, both sets of interviewees also expressed concern about effects of removing political gatekeepers on verification of information and accountability of information providers

Party platform: disintermediated campaigning on Facebook in three UK general elections

This paper explores the use of Facebook as a campaign tool in the UK General Elections of 2015, 2017, and 2019. Through a content analysis of the Facebook accounts of British political parties and their leaders, plus interviews with key political journalists and communications specialists, it demonstrates increasing sophistication in political actors’ use of Facebook as a disintermediation device, bypassing the media to speak directly to voters. This study aims to document the evolution of political communication on Facebook along with its impact on the nation’s political journalism. Drawing on content analysis of political Facebook accounts plus semi-structured interviews, it documents the changing strategies employed to reach and engage voters through social media and their implications for journalists’ gatekeeping role. All data have been collected and analysed. Preliminary findings indicate increasing sophistication in political actors’ use of Facebook as a disintermediation device, with campaigners effectively side-lining journalists to engage and motivate voters directly. Campaigners’ overall strategy was to use social media to encourage engagement that would generate message spillover, from those actively engaged in politics to those less interested. Political campaigners saw a value in bypassing journalists to speak directly to supporters and, by extension, other potential voters – essentially seeking to replace journalistic gatekeepers with social media influencers. Journalists, for their part, worried about the potential for unverified information to flow unchecked. The lack of substantive policy discussion on social media was also troubling, and both groups of interviewees raised concerns about journalists being more focused on gossip than investigation. Ongoing social media developments and the skyrocketing use of AI will undoubtedly shape the next UK election. Parties seem certain to continue escalating their disintermediation strategies. How journalists respond will be of considerable importance and a topic ripe for additional scholarly exploration