Universities as Innovation Hubs for American Journalism
Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Communication Studies, Public Policy, and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University. Nisbet studies the role of communication and advocacy in policymaking and public affairs, focusing on debates over over climate change, energy, and sustainability. Among awards and recognition, Nisbet has been a Visiting Shorenstein Fellow on Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, a Health Policy Investigator at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and a Google Science Communication Fellow. In 2011, the editors at the journal Nature recommended Nisbet's research as “essential reading for anyone with a passing interest in the climate change debate,” and the New Republic highlighted his work as a “fascinating dissection of the shortcomings of climate activism."
--Guest post by Jan Lauren Boyles, American University doctoral student.
Eloquent eulogies have wistfully mourned the Ghosts of Journalism Past – the muckrakers, the ink-stained wretches and the shoe-leather reporters. The funerary narratives have spooked aspiring practitioners of Journalism Present, particularly cub reporters in American journalism schools.
Undergraduate students brave enough to choose journalism as a major are constantly besieged by the gloom and doom prospects for their future employment. Yes, massive downsizing efforts have decimated traditional newsrooms. And yes, the industry itself is a rudderless ship – adrift in a sea of content overload, crowdsourced material and confounding business models.
But journalism is not dead. At this vital time in the lifespan of news, journalism schools should re-orient themselves, infusing innovation into the industry itself through research translation.
In my last Big Think post, I argued that journalism schools struggled to locate their appropriate station in the academy because of an ambiguous disciplinary lineage tied to divergent fields like sociology, political science and psychology – among others. Today journalism schools can forge a distinctive identity through rich, real-world research to gain legitimacy and respect on campus. Furthermore, such study can help journalism redefine its image and reconsider its future.
In “The Reconstruction of American Journalism,” authors Leonard Downie and Michael Schudson advocate such an approach. The duo champion j-schools as “laboratories for digital innovation.” Using an academic lens to address journalistic woes “can enhance the teaching and research missions of universities.” That recommendation was echoed in the Knight Commission’s 2009 report, “Informing Communities: Sustaining Democracy in the Digital Age.” The scholars similarly state, “Institutions of higher learning should likewise regard promoting community information flow as central to their mission.”
Such research translation could include:
Scholarship investment could yield a positive externality to the communities served: quality local news. In many cases, journalism schools are now filing a vacuum vacated by legacy media. The FCC’s 2011 report, “The Information Needs of Communities: The Changing Media in a Broadband Age,” contains a chapter on how journalism schools can assist in local news creation. As Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism’s Dean Nicholas Lemann shared with the FCC’s working group, “With the typical metro news editor looking at a half-empty newsroom, the question isn’t whether to cover local issues with journalism students or veteran reporters, it’s whether to cover local issues with journalism students or not at all,” Lemann says.
Achieving success will not be simple, as journalism school administrators will initially need to seek internal support to launch such costly, broad-based initiatives. Released earlier this year, the Carnegie-Knight Report on the Future of Journalism Education (a project headquartered at Harvard’s Shorenstein Center) emphasized that j-school deans must curry favor from the highest institutional levels – efforts that include knocking on the university president’s door. Additional institutional supports, such as redefining tenure guidelines so that research creativity will be rewarded through promotion, must also be assessed. And external support – funding from foundations, charitable trusts and private donors – remains another crucial component to the program’s success or failure.
Despite the arduous road, some institutions have already accepted the challenge. At New York University, Prof. Jay Rosen’s course launched a hyperlocal in the East Village. “Deciding how to launch the site, how it should operate, and how to make it effective in the East Village community are ideal tasks for students,” Rosen told the FCC panel. Through the work, students are “immersed in the innovation puzzle in journalism.”
At American University, veteran journalist and professor Chuck Lewis launched the Investigative Reporters Workshop which produces originally reported investigative stories in collaboration with PBS Frontline, MSNBC and other news outlets. Through this process, IRW researches and experiments with new models for creating and delivering investigative projects. The collaboration among faculty, students and professionals also features iLab, an initiative that identifies and evaluates new business models for investigative reporting.
Solving the puzzle will keep journalism alive and well, albeit a ghost of its former self.
--Guest post by Jan Lauren Boyles, a doctoral student at American University’s School of Communication. She currently serves as project manager at AU’s Center for Social Media. Before joining American, Boyles served for five years as a faculty member and Director of Advising at West Virginia University’s P.I. Reed School of Journalism. She is also a former newspaper reporter for the Charleston Daily Mail.
The ability to speak clearly, succinctly, and powerfully is easier than you think
The ability to communicate effectively can make or break a person's assessment of your intelligence, competence, and authenticity.
Antimicrobial resistance is growing worldwide, rendering many "work horse" medicines ineffective. Without intervention, drug-resistant pathogens could lead to millions of deaths by 2050. Thankfully, companies like Pfizer are taking action.
- Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens are one of the largest threats to global health today.
- As we get older, our immune systems age, increasing our risk of life threatening infections. Without reliable antibiotics, life expectancy could decline for the first time in modern history.
- If antibiotics become ineffective, common infections could result in hospitalization or even death. Life-saving interventions like cancer treatments and organ transplantation would become more difficult, more often resulting in death. Routine procedures would become hard to perform.
- Without intervention, resistant pathogens could result in 10 million annual deaths by 2050.
- By taking a multi-faceted approach—inclusive of adherence to good stewardship, surveillance and responsible manufacturing practices, as well as an emphasis on prevention and treatment—companies like Pfizer are fighting to help curb the spread.
The climate change we're witnessing is more dramatic than we might think.
A lazy buzz phrase – 'Is this the new normal?' – has been doing the rounds as extreme climate events have been piling up over the past year. To which the riposte should be: it's worse than that – we're on the road to even more frequent, more extreme events than we saw this year.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.