MediaAcT

Action!
By TOBiAS eBerwein
how media research can have a lasting
impact on journalists and the public
How can media research have a lasting impact on the behaviour of journalists
and other social actors? Why is it that so many newsrooms have
no discernible interest in any kind of academic analyses, while for many
researchers their main motivation is in initiating a wide social debate on
the quality of the media, thus contributing to journalism’s advancement?
There have been countless discussions on the question of the relevance of
academic research – and media studies in particular (see Fengler, Eberwein
and Jorch, 2012). Despite many attempts to bridge the gap between journalism
and academia, at best, the relationship between them still seems to
be ambivalent in most European countries. As the comparative survey by
the multinational MediaAcT consortium demonstrates, media research
hardly receives any attention from journalists across Europe (and the Arab
world). When asked what impact journalistic practitioners give to the academic
analysis of journalism, as compared to other Instruments of Media
Accountability (MAIs), such as press councils, ombudspersons or media
criticism on the social web, a mere 19% of respondents claimed that it had
at least some influence on their behaviour. Only few other MAIs received
worse ratings (for more details see Fengler, Eberwein, Mazzoleni, Porlezza
and Russ-Mohl, forthcoming). Do most initiatives by media scholars to
launch a public debate on media performance and correcting journalistic
mistakes simply vanish into thin air?
Transgress the academic boundaries
In order to cope with this problem, the MediaAcT project devised a way
to change this: major research results that have been generated over the
project’s life, the past 31/2 years, are not only being published in the traditional
form of academic papers, but also in other media formats that
can help to address all stakeholder groups with an interest in a free and
pluralistic media landscape – most notably media practitioners and the
public. The collection of articles and essays in this journal may serve as
one example – summarising the project’s findings and presenting them
in an easily accessible form, not the conventional mode of academic writing.
To illustrate the benefit of well-functioning Media Accountability
Instruments, the project also identified many international best-practice
examples and these are presented in a guidebook for journalists and newsrooms
(see box below).
Let’s start! Online and offline training
Moreover the project participants developed two online platforms that are
intended to highlight the societal relevance of the discussion about media
accountability and transparency: one of them, a web-based training tool
for journalists, is integrated in the project’s homepage on the web (http://
www.mediaact.eu); the other, a dynamic website for bloggers and other
interested citizens, is accessible under http://www.mediaspeak.org.
For the journalist’s training tool, the MediaAcT consortium developed
a seminar series on media accountability. It consists of 14 separate sessions
on topics ranging from theoretical perspectives and insights into the concepts
of media self-regulation and co-regulation, to a practical introduc-
tion to the functionality of different MAIs, such as press councils, codes of
ethics, ombudspersons, media journalism and the particular potential of
web-based accountability processes. Each session is accompanied by a set
of Powerpoint slides, ready to use in a classroom setting. In addition, the
training tool also includes a variety of flash cards for key terms, suggested
reading assignments, a collection of case studies on characteristic ethical
dilemmas in journalistic practice and multimedia elements (e.g. video interviews
with international experts in the field). All materials draw on the
research from the MediaAcT project, communicating key findings from
its studies that directly relate to everyday work in the newsroom.
The MediaAcT citizens’ platform is dynamic and interactive. It collects
critical blog posts by media users about journalistic misbehaviour
and offers room for public discussion. The site also presents different codes
of conduct for media professionals and provides simple instructions about
how to make complaints if these codes are disobeyed. Moreover, it also
works as a forum to connect other decentralised citizen initiatives on media
criticism and accountability.
Both the citizen platform and the training tool are unconventional
ways of presenting the findings of an academic survey. Nonetheless, they
not only serve their audiences in professional journalism and civil society
– but also media researchers in their long struggle to bridge the gap between
themselves and their objects of study.
lInks
website of the MediaAcT project: http://www.mediaact.eu
MediaAcT’s online platform for journalists and citizens:
http://www.mediaspeak.org
fUrThEr rEAdIng
Bichler, klaus; harro-loit, halliki; karmasin, Matthias; kraus,
daniela; lauk, Epp; loit, Urmas; fengler, susanne; schneider-
Mombaur, laura (2012): Best practice guidebook: Media
Accountability and Transparency across Europe. Url: http://
www.mediaact.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/guidebook/
Best_practice_guidebook_new.pdf
fengler, susanne; Eberwein, Tobias; Jorch, Julia (eds.)
(2012): Theoretisch praktisch!? Anwendungsoptionen
und gesellschaftliche relevanz der kommunikations- und
Medienforschung. konstanz: Uvk.
fengler, susanne; Eberwein, Tobias; Mazzoleni, gianpietro;
porlezza; colin; russ-Mohl, stephan (eds.) (forthcoming):
Journalists and Media Accountability. An International study
of news people in the digital Age. new york etc.: peter lang.
Index | Editorial | Birds-eye view | Opening the toolbox
| Zoom-in on the newsroom | Media landscapes