Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

As US news organizations have faced twin crises in funding and authority in recent years, innovation has become a key concept and ideal driving many interventions aimed at saving journalism. Often, ahistorically and uncritically deployed notions of innovation elide questions of digital journalism’s democratic aspirations in favor of market-oriented solutions. To critically examine the discourse around innovation, this article interrogates documents produced by think tanks and non-profit institutes researching the future of journalism: the Knight Foundation, the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University, Harvard’s Nieman Foundation, and the Shorenstein Center at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, among others. A post-industrial vision for journalism emerges with an overriding and celebratory focus on innovation. We argue that this discourse marginalizes normative concerns about journalism’s democratic purpose and rests on an entrepreneurial logic that seeks to dictate digital journalism’s broader public virtues.

Keywords

Critical discourse analysis critical journalism studies future of news innovation journalism think tanks political economy of news

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abrahamson

(1991) Managerial fads and fashions: The diffusion and rejection of innovations. Academy of Management Review 16(3): 586–612.

Anderson

(2016) Assembling publics, assembling routines, assembling values: Journalistic self-conception and the crisis in journalism. In: Alexander

Breese

Luengo

(eds) The Crisis of Journalism Reconsidered. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 153–169.

Anderson

Bell

Shirky

(2013) Post-industrial Journalism: Adapting to the Present. New York: Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia University Journalism School. Available at: http://towcenter.org/research/post-industrial-journalism-adapting-to-the-present-2/

Auletta

(2011) You’ve got news. The New Yorker, 24 January. Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/01/24/youve-got-news

Bell

(2016) The tech/editorial culture clash. Columbia Journalism Review. Available at: http://www.cjr.org/analysis/tech_editorial_facebook.php

Benson

(2016) Are foundations the solution to the American journalistic crisis? Media ownership project working paper. Available at: http://rodneybenson.org/wp-content/uploads/Benson-Are-Foundations-the-Solution_-March-20161.pdf

Benton

(2014) The leaked New York Times innovation report is one of the key documents of this media age. Nieman Lab, 15 May. Available at: http://www.niemanlab.org/2014/05/the-leaked-new-york-times-innovation-report-is-one-of-the-key-documents-of-this-media-age/ (accessed 20 May 2014).

Blume

(1974) Toward a Political Sociology of Science. New York: Free Press.

Bogart

(1991) Preserving the Press: How Daily Newspapers Mobilized to Keep Their Readers. New York: Columbia University Press.

10.

Carey

(1983) Technology and ideology: The case of the telegraph. Prospects 8: 303–325.

11.

Carlson

(2015a) Introduction: The many boundaries of journalism. In: Carlson

Lewis

(eds) Boundaries of Journalism: Professionalism, Practices and Participation. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–18.

12.

Carlson

(2015b) Metajournalistic discourse and the meanings of journalism: Definitional control, boundary work, and legitimation. Communication Theory. Epub ahead of print 4 November. DOI: 10.1111/comt.12088.

13.

Carlson

Usher

(2016) News startups as agents of innovation. Digital Journalism 4(5): 563–581.

14.

Christensen

Skok

Allworth

(2012) Breaking news: Mastering the art of disruptive innovation in journalism. Nieman Reports 66(3): 5–20.

15.

Clark

Aufderheide

(2009) Public Media 2.0: Dynamic, Engaged Publics. Washington, DC: American University School of Communication, Center for Social Media. Available at: http://archive.cmsimpact.org/sites/default/files/documents/pages/publicmedia2.0.pdf

16.

Cochran

(2010) Rethinking Public Media: More Local, More Inclusive, More Interactive. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute. Available at: http://www.knightfoundation.org/articles/rethinking-public-media-more-local-more-inclusive-more-interactive

17.

Cohen

(2015) Entrepreneurial journalism and the precarious state of media work. South Atlantic Quarterly 114(3): 513–533.

18.

Creech

Mendelson

(2015) Imagining the journalist of the future: Technological visions of journalism education and newswork. The Communication Review 18(2): 142–165.

19.

Curran

(2010a) Technology foretold. In: Fenton

(ed.) New Media, Old News: Journalism and Democracy in the Digital Age. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 19–34.

20.

Curran

(2010b) The future of journalism. Journalism Studies 11(4): 464–476.

21.

Czitrom

(1983) Media and the American Mind: From Morse to McLuhan. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.

22.

Dahlberg

Phelan

(2011) Introduction. In: Dahlberg

Phelan

(eds) Discourse Theory and Critical Media Politics. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–40.

23.

Downie

L Jr

Schudson

(2009) The Reconstruction of American Journalism. New York: Columbia Journalism Review, Columbia University School of Journalism. Available at: http://www.cjr.org/reconstruction/the_reconstruction_of_american.php?page=all

24.

Faber

McCarthy

(2005) Introduction. In: Faber

McCarthy

(eds) Foundations for Social Change: Critical Perspectives on Philanthropy and Social Movements. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 3–32.

25.

Fairclough

(1995) Critical Discourse Analysis. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley.

26.

Fancher

(2010) Of the Press: Models for Transforming American Journalism. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute. Available at: https://www.aspeninstitute.org/publications/press-models-transforming-american-journalism/

27.

Fancher

(2011) Re-Imagining Journalism: Local News for a Networked World. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute. Available at: http://www.knightfoundation.org/reports/re-imagining-journalism-local-news-networked-world

28.

Franklin

(2014) The future of journalism. Journalism Practice 8(5): 469–487.

29.

Giddens

(1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.

30.

Gobble

(2015) The case against disruptive innovation. Research-Technology Management 58(1): 59–63.

31.

Grueskin

Seaves

Graves

(2011) The Story So Far: What We Know about the Business of Digital Journalism. New York: Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia University Journalism School. Available at: http://towcenter.org/the-story-so-far-what-we-know-about-the-business-of-digital-journalism/

32.

Hallin

(1994) We Keep America on Top of the World: Television Journalism and the Public Sphere. New York: Routledge.

33.

Harvey

(2007) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.

34.

Harwood

(2011) Assessing Community Information Needs: A Practical Guide. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute. Available at: https://www.aspeninstitute.org/publications/assessing-community-information-needs-practical-guide/

35.

Heflin

(2015) The Internet is not the antidote: A cultural-historical analysis of journalism’s crisis of credibility and the Internet as remedy. Journalism History 41(3): 165–175.

36.

Hess

(2016) Shifting foundations: Journalism and the power of the common good. Journalism. DOI: 10.1177/1464884915627149.

37.

Hindman

(2009) The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

38.

Hindman

(2015) Stickier News: What Newspapers Don’t Know about Web Traffic Has Hurt Them Badly – But There Is a Better Way. Cambridge, MA: Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University Kennedy School of Government. Available at: http://shorensteincenter.org/stickier-news-matthew-hindman/

39.

Howard

(2014) The art and science of data-driven journalism. Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia University. Available at: http://towcenter.org/the-art-and-science-of-data-driven-journalism/

40.

Huey

Nisenholtz

Sagan

(2013) Riptide: What Really Happened to the News Business. Cambridge, MA: Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University Kennedy School of Government. Available at: http://shorensteincenter.org/d81-riptide/

41.

Jackaway

(1995) Media at War: Radio’s Challenge to Newspapers 1924–1939. Westport, CT: Praeger.

42.

Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy (2009) Informing Communities: Sustaining Democracy in a Digital Age. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute. Available at: https://assets.aspeninstitute.org/content/uploads/files/content/docs/pubs/Informing_Communities_Sustaining_Democracy_in_the_Digital_Age.pdf

43.

Knight Foundation (2012) Knight News Challenge: A Look at What We’ve Learned. Miami, FL: The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Available at: http://www.knightfoundation.org/features/knclessons/

44.

Knight Foundation (2013) Finding a Foothold: How Nonprofit News Ventures Seek Sustainability. Miami, FL: The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Available at: http://www.knightfoundation.org/features/nonprofitnews/

45.

Knight Foundation (2015) Gaining Ground: How Nonprofit News Ventures Seek Sustainability. Miami, FL: The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Available at: http://www.knightfoundation.org/features/nonprofitnews-2015/

46.

Latour

(1999) Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

47.

Latour

(2004) Politics of Nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

48.

Lepore

(2014) What the gospel of innovation gets wrong. The New Yorker, 23 June. Available at: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/23/the-disruption-machine

49.

Levi-Faur

(2005) ‘Agents of knowledge’ and the convergence on a ‘New World Order’: A review article. Journal of European Public Policy 12(5): 954–965.

50.

Lewis

(2012) From journalism to information: The transformation of the Knight Foundation and news innovation. Mass Communication and Society 15(3): 309–334.

51.

Lott

(1970) The press-radio war of the 1930s. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 14(3): 275–286.

52.

Lynch

(2015) Above & beyond: Looking at the Future of Journalism Education. Miami, FL: The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. Available at: http://www.knightfoundation.org/media/uploads/publication_pdfs/KF-Above-and-Beyond-Report.pdf

53.

McChesney

(2004) The Problem of the Media: U.S. Communication Politics in the Twenty-First Century. New York: Monthly Review Press.

54.

McChesney

Nichols

(2010) The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution that Will Begin the World Again. Philadelphia, PA: Nation Books.

55.

McIntyre

Chintakananda

(2014) Competing in network markets: Can the winner take all? Business Horizons 57(1): 117–125.

56.

Markides

(2006) Disruptive innovation: In need of better theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management 23(1): 19–25.

57.

Marzolf

(1991) Civilizing Voices: American Press Criticism, 1880–1950. New York: Longman.

58.

Nadler

(2016) Making the News Popular: Mobilizing U.S. News Audiences. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

59.

Nguyen

(2012) The digital divide versus the ‘digital delay’: Implications from a forecasting model of online news adoption and use. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics 8(2–3): 251–268.

60.

Noe

Parker

(2005) Winner take all: Competition, strategy, and the structure of returns in the Internet economy. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 14(1): 141–164.

61.

Padgett

Powell

(2012) The Emergence of Organizations and Markets. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

62.

Pavlik

(2013) Innovation and the future of journalism. Digital Journalism 1(2): 181–193.

63.

Pickard

(2015a) America’s Battle for Media Democracy: The Triumph of Corporate Libertarianism and the Future of Media Reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.

64.

Pickard

(2015b) The return of the nervous liberals: Market fundamentalism, policy failure, and recurring journalism crises. The Communication Review 18(2): 82–97.

65.

Pickard

Stearns

Aaron

(2009) Saving the News: Toward a National Journalism Strategy. Washington, DC: Free Press. Available at: http://www.freepress.net/sites/default/files/fp-legacy/saving_the_news.pdf

66.

Prior

(2007) Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections. New York: Cambridge University Press.

67.

Rogers

(2010) Diffusion of Innovations, 4th edn. New York: Simon & Schuster.

68.

Sampere

Pablo

Bienenstock

et al . (2016) Debating disruptive innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review 57(3): 26–30.

69.

Schmidt

(2008) Discursive institutionalism: The explanatory power of ideas and discourse. Annual Review of Political Science 11(2): 303–326.

70.

Schradie

(2011) The digital production gap: The digital divide and Web 2.0 collide. Poetics 39(2): 145–168.

71.

Schudson

(1978) Discovering the News: A Social History of American Newspapers. New York: Basic Books.

72.

Scott

Jabbar

(2014) The hub and spokes: Foundations, intermediary organizations, incentivist reforms, and the politics of research evidence. Educational Policy 28(2): 233–257.

73.

Shirky

(2011) Newspapers and thinking the unthinkable. In: McChesney

Pickard

(eds) Will the Last Reporter Please Turn Out the Lights? The Collapse of Journalism and What Can Be Done to Fix It. New York: The New Press, pp. 38–44.

74.

Sinclair

(1920) The Brass Check: A Study of American Journalism. Pasadena, CA: The author.

75.

Solomon

McChesney

(1993) Ruthless Criticism: New Perspectives in U.S. Communication History. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

76.

Stencel

Adair

Kamalakanthan

(2014) The Goat Must Be Fed: Why Digital Tools Are Missing in Most Newsrooms. Durham, NC: DeWitt Wallace Center for Media and Democracy, Duke University. Available at: http://www.goatmustbefed.com/ (accessed 4 June 2014).

77.

Stencel

Perry

(2016) Superpowers: The Digital Skills Media Leaders Say Newsrooms Need Going Forward. New York: Tow-Knight Center for Entrepreneurial Journalism, City University of New York. Available at: http://towknight.org/research/superpowers/

78.

Szeman

(2015) Entrepreneurship as the new common sense. South Atlantic Quarterly 114(3): 471–490.

79.

The New York Times (2014) Innovation. Available at: http://mashable.com/2014/05/16/full-new-york-times-innovation-report/

80.

Tran

(2013) Does exposure to online media matter? The knowledge gap and the mediating role of news use. International Journal of Communication 7(1): 831–852.

81.

Turow

(2012) The Daily You: How the New Advertising Industry Is Defining Your Identity and Your Worth. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

82.

Turow

Draper

(2014) Industry conceptions of audience in digital space: A research agenda. Cultural Studies 28(4): 643–656.

83.

Underwood

(1995) When MBAs Rule the Newsroom: How the Marketers and Managers are Reshaping Today’s Media. New York: Columbia University Press.

84.

Vos

(2016) Journalistic fields. In: Witschge

Anderson

Domingo

et al (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Digital Journalism. London: SAGE, pp. 383–396.

85.

Weiss

Domingo

(2010) Innovation processes in online newsrooms as actor-networks and communities of practice. New Media & Society 12(7): 1156–1171.

86.

Wenzel

Gerson

Moreno

(2016) Engaging Communities through Solutions Journalism. New York: Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia University Journalism School. Available at: https://www.gitbook.com/book/towcenter/solutions-journalism/details

87.

Wihbey

(2014) The Challenges of Democratizing News and Information. Cambridge, MA: Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University Kennedy School of Government. Available at: http://shorensteincenter.org/d85-wihbey/

88.

Zelizer

(2015) Terms of choice: Uncertainty, journalism, and crisis. Journal of Communication 65(4): 888–908.

Post-industrial fog: Reconsidering innovation in visions of journalism’s future

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References