Freedom of information: Q&A with Professor Michael Schudson

Professor Michael Schudson is a Professor at the Columbia Journalism School, and has authored seven books concerning the history and sociology of the American news media, advertising, popular culture, Watergate and cultural memory. Following a recent public lecture at LSE titled ‘Expectations of openness in an age of secrecy’, Catherine Speller of the Media Policy Project interviews Professor Schudson about some of the broad cultural issues around freedom of information

The Reconstruction of American Journalism

Explores the history and changing landscape of American journalism as well as the need to preserve independent, original, and credible print news reporting. Considers the roles of the Internet, collaborations among newspapers, and foundation support

Algorithms, Automation, and News

This special issue examines the growing importance of algorithms and automation in the gathering, composition, and distribution of news. It connects a long line of research on journalism and computation with scholarly and professional terrain yet to be explored. Taken as a whole, these articles share some of the noble ambitions of the pioneering publications on ‘reporting algorithms’, such as a desire to see computing help journalists in their watchdog role by holding power to account. However, they also go further, firstly by addressing the fuller range of technologies that computational journalism now consists of: from chatbots and recommender systems, to artificial intelligence and atomised journalism. Secondly, they advance the literature by demonstrating the increased variety of uses for these technologies, including engaging underserved audiences, selling subscriptions, and recombining and re-using content. Thirdly, they problematize computational journalism by, for example, pointing out some of the challenges inherent in applying AI to investigative journalism and in trying to preserve public service values. Fourthly, they offer suggestions for future research and practice, including by presenting a framework for developing democratic news recommenders and another that may help us think about computational journalism in a more integrated, structured manner

Introduction: Troubling Transparency

Transparency is a value in the ascendance. Across the globe, the past several decades have witnessed a spectacular explosion of legislative reforms and judicial decisions calling for greater disclosure about the workings of public institutions. Freedom of information laws have proliferated, claims of a constitutional or supra-constitutional right to know have become commonplace, and an international transparency lobby has emerged as a civil society powerhouse. Open government is seen today in many quarters as a foundation of, if not synonymous with, good government. At the same time, a growing number of scholars, advocates, and regulators have begun to raise hard questions about the costs and limits of the transparency movement. Some of these commentators accept the movement\u27s standard premises and prescriptions but worry that open government measures are not actually delivering the openness they promise due to inadequate legislative funding, bureaucratic resistance, or cramped judicial interpretations. Others wonder whether traditional open records and open meetings laws are well suited to twenty-first-century transparency challenges, or whether these laws need to be reimagined for the digital age. A third group of commentators has thrown a harsh light on transparency\u27s political and administrative effects, emphasizing its potential to facilitate neoliberal agendas or to undermine deliberation, deal-making, and institutional capacity. These different strains of skepticism are coalescing and have largely been confined to discrete discourses so far. They have not arrested transparency\u27s ascent in the NGO community or in popular culture. But they have developed to the point where we might say that government transparency, as a democratic ideal, is contested not only in practice but also in theory

The Passive Journalist: How sources dominate the local news

This study explores which sources are “making” local news and whether these sources are simply indicating the type of news that appears, or are shaping newspaper coverage. It provides an empirical record of the extent to which sources are able to dominate news coverage from which future trends in local journalism can be measured. The type and number of sources used in 2979 sampled news stories in four West Yorkshire papers, representing the three main proprietors of local newspapers in the United Kingdom, were recorded for one month and revealed the relatively narrow range of routine sources; 76 per cent of articles cited only a single source. The analysis indicates that journalists are relying less on their readers for news, and that stories of little consequence are being elevated to significant positions, or are filling news pages at the expense of more important stories. Additionally, the reliance on a single source means that alternative views and perspectives relevant to the readership are being overlooked. Journalists are becoming more passive, mere processors of one-sided information or bland copy dictated by sources. These trends indicate poor journalistic standards and may be exacerbating declining local newspaper sales

저널리즘의 과거는 저널리즘의 미래를 아는 데 도움이 되는가?

서울대학교 언론정보연구소는 2016년 6월 15일 마이클 셧슨(Michael Schudson) 미국 컬럼비아대학 저널리즘스쿨 교수를 초청해 공개 특별세미나 The Arrival of the Artificial Intelligence Era and the Future of Journalism을 개최했다. 셧슨 교수 는 이날 기조연설을 진행하였는데, 본 연구소는 국내 독자들을 위해 이 기조연설 녹취록 원문과 번역문을 함께 공개하기로 했다. 연설자의 원래 뜻을 전달하기 위해 가급적 직역하였으나, 일부 내용은 구어의 특성을 감안해 의역이 이루어졌다. 또 한 본문의 주석은 모두 역자가 붙인 것이다

The media and power in the United States

公開講演会application/pdfdepartmental bulletin pape

Reflecting on forty years of sociology, media studies, and journalism : An Interview with Todd Gitlin and Michael Schudson

Reflecting on more than four decades in dual scholarly careers that cut across the boundaries between communication, the sociology of culture, and journalism studies, Professor Todd Gitlin and Professor Michael Schudson discuss the growth, evolution, and strengths and weaknesses of the media studies field with Professor Jiang Chang. The three reflect on the origins of the research, the gap between the field of journalism studies and the field of sociology, the role played by journalism in the growing conflict between China and the United States, the relationship between media and political protest, and whether there ought be any cause for optimism regarding the state of democracy in the twenty-first century.Peer reviewe

A Revolução nas Notícias que ninguém nomeou

In 2020, both popular and academic discussions of journalism in the United States - and elsewhere in the world where journalism has been significantly influenced by the US model - have assumed that “objectivity” is the journalist’s guiding ideal. That assumption is not well founded. Along with Katherine Fink (2014) I have argued that in the US there was a dramatic transformation in news practice and news ideals beginning in the late 1960s and taking on an enduring place in journalism in the 1970s. Where in the 1950s and 1960s the “objectivity” model describes some 90% of front-page news stories in leading US newspapers, by the late 1970s it described only 40-50% of stories, the others better labeled “contextual” or “analytical” journalism. Others have made similar points about US journalism and still others have found comparable changes in various European journalisms.Why have journalists and historians of journalism not understood this? How can we better grasp this transformation of modern professionalism from Professionalism 1.0 to Professionalism 2.0 - a powerful revolution that preceded the digital revolution? This essay seeks to explore these questions.Em 2020, os debates correntes e académicos sobre o jornalismo nos Estados Unidos - e nos países em que foi significativamente influenciado pelo modelo norte-americano - assumiram que a “objetividade” é o ideal que orienta a atividade do jornalista. Mas essa assunção carece de fundamentação. No trabalho conjunto com Katherine Fink (2004), defendi que nos Estados Unidos ocorreu uma transformação dramática nas práticas e ideais jornalísticos, que teve início no final dos anos 60 e que se consolidou a partir da década de 1970. Se nos anos 50 e 60 o modelo da “objetividade” é aplicável a cerca de 90% das notícias de primeira página dos principais jornais norte-americanos, no final dos anos 70 adequa-se a apenas 40-50% das notícias, sendo que as restantes peças remetem para o chamado jornalismo “contextual” ou “analítico”. Outros autores chegam à mesma conclusão no que concerne ao jornalismo norte-americano e outros ainda encontram mudanças similares em vários países da Europa. Por que razão jornalistas e historiadores do jornalismo não identificaram esta mudança? De que forma podemos compreender melhor esta transformação no âmbito do profissionalismo moderno, de um Profissionalismo 1.0 para um Profissionalismo 2.0 - uma revolução poderosa que foi anterior à revolução digital? Este ensaio procura dar resposta a estas questões

O modelo americano de jornalismo: excepção ou exemplo?

The paper traces the evolution of American journalism, articulating it with the evolution of US society and cultural values. The author focusses on the historical development of American journalism from proximity to political power down to an increasing detachment due to the change of political culture in the twentieth century. The argument is that the current engaged and opposing model of American journalism cannot be simply implemented within a different cultural system. It stems from a unique history, it was shaped by a particular relationship with political institutions and their political culture, but can, nevertheless, serve as an ideal and inspiration for political journalism in other socio-cultural environments.O artigo discute os grandes ideais do jornalismo americano, articulando-os na dependência de formantes socioculturais particulares à realidade dos EUA. Traça a sua evolução desde a proximidade indiferenciada com o poder político, ao afastamento radical, chegando ao modelo actual, que se pauta por uma articulação cívica. Conclui-se que o modelo americano não pode ser implantado em nenhum outro sistema. Surgiu de uma história única e foi moldado por uma relação com instituições políticas distintas e uma cultura política única, podendo, contudo, servir como inspiração democrática ideal