The ever-increasing uses for social media and mobile technologies are bringing new opportunities for innovation and participation across societies, while challenging and disrupting the status quo. Characteristics of the digital age include the proliferation of user-driven innovation and the blurring of boundaries and roles, whether between the producers and users of news and other products or services, or between sectors. The @IndigenousX Twitter account, which has a different Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander person tweeting each week, is an example of user-driven innovation and of how Indigenous voices are emerging strongly in the rapidly evolving digital landscape. Its founder, Luke Pearson, a teacher and Aboriginal education consultant, wanted to share the platform he had established on Twitter for storytelling to an engaged audience. The account can thus be seen as a form of citizen, participatory, community or alternative journalism. This article provides a preliminary analysis of @IndigenousX, and suggests that this account and the diversity of Indigenous voices in the digital environment offer opportunities for wide-ranging research endeavours. Initiatives like @IndigenousX are also a reminder that journalism has much to learn from innovation outside the conventional realm of journalistic practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArtwickC.G.2013, ‘Reporters on Twitter: Product or Service’, Digital Journalism, no. 1, pp. 212–18.
2.
BorgerM.2013, ‘Constructing Participatory Journalism as a Scholarly Object’, Digital Journalism, vol. 1, pp. 117–34.
3.
BurrowsE.2010, ‘Tools of Resistance: The Roles of Two Indigenous Newspapers in Building an Indigenous Public Sphere’, Australian Journalism Review, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 33–46.
4.
DeuzeM.2005, ‘What is Journalism? Professional Identity and Ideology of Journalists’, Journalism, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 442–64.
5.
FranklinB.2013, ‘Editorial’, Digital Journalism, no. 1, pp. 1–5.
6.
HamiltonJ.W.2003, ‘Remaking Media Participation in Early Modern England’, Journalism, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 293–313.
7.
HarringtonS.2012, ‘Australian Journalism Studies After “Journalism”: Breaking Down the Disciplinary Boundaries (for Good)’, Media International Australia, no. 144, pp. 156–62.
8.
HermidaA.2010, ‘Twittering the News’, Journalism Practice, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 297–308.
9.
HugheyM.W.DanielsJ.2013, ‘Racist Comments at Online News Sites: A Methodological Dilemma for Discourse Analysis’, Media, Culture & Society, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 332–47.
10.
JakubowiczK.2009, A New Notion of Media?, background report prepared for 1st Council of Europe Conference of Ministers Responsible for Media and New Communication Services. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, www.coe.int/t/dghl/standardsetting/media/doc/New_Notion_Media_en.pdf.
11.
JohnstonM.2011, ‘Noongar Identity and Community Media’, Media International Australia, no. 140, pp. 61–70.
12.
LittleJ.2010, ‘Journalism, Creative Non-fiction and Australia's Black History: The Tall Man and Cross-cultural Source Relationships’, Australian Journalism Review, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 47–58.
13.
McNairB.2012, ‘Wikileaks, Journalism and the Consequences of Chaos’, Media International Australia, no. 144, pp. 77–86.
14.
MasonB.2012, ‘“The Girl in Cell 4”: Securing Social Inclusion Through a Journalist–Source Collaboration’, Media International Australia, no. 142, pp. 167–76.
McCallumK.HollandK.2010, ‘Indigenous and Multicultural Discourses in Australian News Media Reporting [online]’, Australian Journalism Review, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 5–18.
17.
McCallumK.WallerL.MeadowsM.2012, ‘Raising the Volume: Indigenous Voices in News Media and Policy’, Media International Australia, no. 142, pp. 101–11.
18.
MeadowsM.2013, ‘Putting the Citizen Back into Journalism’, Journalism, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 43–60.
19.
MeadowsM.FordeS.EwartJ.FoxwellK.2007, Community Media Matters: An Audience Study of the Australian Community Broadcasting Sector, Griffith University, Brisbane.
NewmanL.BiedrzyckiK.BaumF.2012, ‘Digital Technology Use Among Disadvantaged Australians: Implications for Equitable Consumer Participation in Digitally Mediated Communication and Information Exchange with Health Services’, Australian Health Review, vol. 36, pp. 125–29.
22.
NielsenR.K.2013, ‘Mundane Internet Tools, the Risk of Exclusion, and Reflexive Movements: Occupy Wall Street and Political Uses of Digital Networked Technologies’, The Sociological Quarterly, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 173–77.
PenmanR.TurnbullS.2012, ‘Socially Inclusive Processes: New Opportunities with New Media?’, Media International Australia, no. 146, pp. 74–86.
28.
PhillipsG.2012, ‘Review of Forde, Susan, Challenging the News: The Journalism of Alternative and Community Media’, Media International Australia, no. 143, pp. 172–73.
29.
PoellT.BorraE.2012: ‘Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr as Platforms of Alternative Journalism: The Social Media Account of the 2010 Toronto G20 Protests’, Journalism, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 695–713.
30.
RankineJ.McCreanorT.2004, ‘Colonial Coverage: Media Reporting of a Bicultural Health Research Partnership’, Journalism, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 5–29.
31.
RyanJ.2010, A History of the Internet and the Digital Future, Reaktion Books, London.
32.
StewartH.MeadowsM.BowmanL.van VuurenK.MulliganP.2010, ‘Indigenous Voice: A Work-integrated Learning Case Study in Journalism Education’, Australian Journalism Review, vol. 32, no. 5, pp. 59–72.
SweetM.ChapmanS.MoynihanR.GreenJ.2009, ‘CHAMP: A Novel Collaboration Between Public Health and the Media’, Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 190, no. 4, pp. 206–7.
