- 1. Public participation in TV newsExpectations and practices of
audience inclusion at the TagesschauNele Heise, Julius
ReimerHans-Bredow-Institute for Media ResearchCourse: Journalism
and its audience (Loosen/Pater) IJK @ University of Hamburg January
08, 2013
2. Outline1. Audience participation as inclusion: the
#jpub20-project2. Case study Tagesschau: methodology and findings3.
Conclusion 3. Studying the relation of journalism and audience
Audience is constitutive for journalism practically and normatively
Under mass-media conditions the audience has played a rather
subordinaterole in everyday newsroom routines Under social-media
conditions, audience activities become more visible forjournalists
(e.g. UGC, user feedback), thus contributing to
shifting/blurringboundaries (1) (1) e.g. Bruns 2005, 2008; Robinson
2010; Lewis 2012 4. Studying the relation of journalism and
audience Audience is constitutive for journalism practically and
normatively Under mass-media conditions the audience has played a
rather subordinaterole in everyday newsroom routines Under
social-media conditions, audience activities become more visible
forjournalists (e.g. UGC, user feedback), thus contributing to
shifting/blurringboundaries (1) But: How to assess the relationship
between journalism and audience? Approach of jpub20-Project:
conceptualizing relationship as inclusion (2) Six case studies of
different newsrooms (TV/Online and Print/Online) in Germany
Combination of methods: indepth interviews, standardized online
surveys content analyses Aim: analyze inclusion performances and
expectations towards audience inclusion amongjournalists as well as
audience members (1) e.g. Bruns 2005, 2008; Robinson 2010; Lewis
2012 (2) Loosen/Schmidt 2012 5. Audience inclusion in
journalismJournalismAudienceInclusion Performance Inclusion
PerformanceFeatures of audience participationParticipatory
practicesWork processes/routines Degree of community
orientationJournalistic products/outputInclusion
ExpectationsInclusion ExpectationsJournalistic role perception
Motivations for participationImages of the audience Assessment of
audienceStrategic rationalescontributions Source: Loosen/Schmidt
2012: 874 6. Audience inclusion in journalismJournalism
AudienceInclusion PerformanceInclusion PerformanceFeatures of
audience participation Participatory practicesWork
processes/routines Inclusion LevelDegree of community
orientationJournalistic products/outputInclusion Expectations
Inclusion ExpectationsJournalistic role perceptionMotivations for
participationImages of the audience Inclusion DistanceAssessment of
audienceStrategic rationales contributionsSource: Loosen/Schmidt
2012: 874 7. Introducing the Tagesschau On air since 1953; produced
by ARDAktuell (Public Service Broadcast) Up to 23 newscasts a day
Most popular evening newscast in Germany(on avg. 10 Mio viewers;
33% market share) 1996: website tagesschau.de starts 8.
Participatory (online) features at the Tagesschautagesschau.de 9.
Participatory (online) features at the Tagesschautagesschau.de Meta
10. Participatory (online) features at the Tagesschautagesschau.de
MetaBlog 11. Participatory (online) features at the
Tagesschautagesschau.de MetaBlog Facebook 12. Participatory
(online) features at the Tagesschautagesschau.de Meta Twitter Blog
YouTube Facebook Google+ 13. Case study TagesschauIn-depth
interviews Standardized online survey Content AnalysesJournalists
n=10n=63 Participatory features of theChief editors TV / Online out
of 130 people in editorial website & Social Media2x Managing
Editor TV staff (TV und Online)accounts2x Managing Editor Online2x
Social Media Editor Integration of audience & UGC2x Multi Media
Assistant in eight 8pm-newscast[Community manager] 350 comments on
theAudiencen=6 n=4.686 platforms Meta, Facebook and(varying degrees
of engagement) Random sample of the Tagesschau-Blogtagesschau.de
users (every500th-visitor) 14. Findings (I):Journalistic functions
and role conceptions 15. What journalists want to (and what they
should) do Journalists Users What are your personal goals in your
profession? / Tagesschau journalists should(n=60-63)
(n=4.570-4.636) (MJ-Mu) present my/their own opinion(s) to the
audience/to the public 1.822.94-1.12 get into conversation about
current events2.363.15-0.79 provide people with opportunity to
publish their own content1.692.45-0.76 concentrate on news that is
interesting to an audience as wide as possible3.642.890.75 give
audience opportunity to express opinion on topics of public
interest 2.553.16-0.61 inform the audience as fast as possible
4.724.240.48 criticize problems and grievances 3.874.32-0.45
control politics, business and society2.903.28-0.38 share positive
ideals 2.693.05-0.36 build/maintain relationship with audience
2.432.75-0.32 encourage/moderate discussion among
audience2.693.00-0.31 provide useful information for the audience
and act as advisor / guidance 2.682.410.27 point to interesting
topics and further information 3.974.24-0.27 provide audience with
opportunity to maintain ties among themselves 1.571.84-0.27 explain
and convey complex issues 4.854.680.17 give the audience topics to
talk about3.353.230.12 provide entertainment and
relaxation2.022.11-0.09 inform as objectively and precisely as
possible 4.774.80-0.03 show new trends and highlight new ideas
3.393.380.015-point-Likert-scale with 1 = Do not agree at all to 5
= Do agree completely; 6 = Dont know / Cant say (excluded for
calculation of mean) 16. What journalists want to (and what they
should) do Journalists Users What are your personal goals in your
profession? / Tagesschau journalists should(n=60-63)
(n=4.570-4.636) (MJ-Mu) present my/their own opinion(s) to the
audience/to the public 1.822.94-1.12 get into conversation about
current events2.363.15-0.79 provide people with opportunity to
publish their own content1.692.45-0.76 concentrate on news that is
interesting to an audience as wide as possible3.642.890.75 give
audience opportunity to express opinion on topics of public
interest 2.553.16-0.61 inform the audience as fast as possible
4.724.240.48 criticize problems and grievances 3.874.32-0.45
control politics, business and society2.903.28-0.38 share positive
ideals 2.693.05-0.36 build/maintain relationship with audience
2.432.75-0.32 encourage/moderate discussion among
audience2.693.00-0.31 provide useful information for the audience
and act as advisor / guidance 2.682.410.27 point to interesting
topics and further information 3.974.24-0.27 provide audience with
opportunity to maintain ties among themselves 1.571.84-0.27 explain
and convey complex issues 4.854.680.17 give the audience topics to
talk about3.353.230.12 provide entertainment and
relaxation2.022.11-0.09 inform as objectively and precisely as
possible 4.774.80-0.03 show new trends and highlight new ideas
3.393.380.015-point-Likert-scale with 1 = Do not agree at all to 5
= Do agree completely; 6 = Dont know / Cant say (excluded for
calculation of mean) 17. What journalists want to (and what they
should) do Journalists Users What are your personal goals in your
profession? / Tagesschau journalists should(n=60-63)
(n=4.570-4.636) (MJ-Mu) present my/their own opinion(s) to the
audience/to the public 1.822.94-1.12 get into conversation about
current events2.363.15-0.79 provide people with opportunity to
publish their own content1.692.45-0.76 concentrate on news that is
interesting to an audience as wide as possible3.642.890.75 give
audience opportunity to express opinion on topics of public
interest 2.553.16-0.61 inform the audience as fast as possible
4.724.240.48 criticize problems and grievances 3.874.32-0.45
control politics, business and society2.903.28-0.38 share positive
ideals 2.693.05-0.36 build/maintain relationship with audience
2.432.75-0.32 encourage/moderate discussion among
audience2.693.00-0.31 provide useful information for the audience
and act as advisor / guidance 2.682.410.27 point to interesting
topics and further information 3.974.24-0.27 provide audience with
opportunity to maintain ties among themselves 1.571.84-0.27 explain
and convey complex issues 4.854.680.17 give the audience topics to
talk about3.353.230.12 provide entertainment and
relaxation2.022.11-0.09 inform as objectively and precisely as
possible 4.774.80-0.03 show new trends and highlight new ideas
3.393.380.015-point-Likert-scale with 1 = Do not agree at all to 5
= Do agree completely; 6 = Dont know / Cant say (excluded for
calculation of mean) 18. What journalists want to (and what they
should) do Journalists Users What are your personal goals in your
profession? / Tagesschau journalists should(n=60-63)
(n=4.570-4.636) (MJ-Mu) present my/their own opinion(s) to the
audience/to the public 1.822.94-1.12 get into conversation about
current events2.363.15-0.79 provide people with opportunity to
publish their own content1.692.45-0.76 concentrate on news that is
interesting to an audience as wide as possible3.642.890.75 give
audience opportunity to express opinion on topics of public
interest 2.553.16-0.61 inform the audience as fast as possible
4.724.240.48 criticize problems and grievances 3.874.32-0.45
control politics, business and society2.903.28-0.38 share positive
ideals 2.693.05-0.36 build/maintain relationship with audience
2.432.75-0.32 encourage/moderate discussion among
audience2.693.00-0.31 provide useful information for the audience
and act as advisor / guidance 2.682.410.27 point to interesting
topics and further information 3.974.24-0.27 provide audience with
opportunity to maintain ties among themselves 1.571.84-0.27 explain
and convey complex issues 4.854.680.17 give the audience topics to
talk about3.353.230.12 provide entertainment and
relaxation2.022.11-0.09 inform as objectively and precisely as
possible 4.774.80-0.03 show new trends and highlight new ideas
3.393.380.015-point-Likert-scale with 1 = Do not agree at all to 5
= Do agree completely; 6 = Dont know / Cant say (excluded for
calculation of mean) Journalistic role conceptions and expectations
of the users towards journalisticfunctions of the Tagesschau are,
by and large, congruent 19. Findings (II):Participatory practices
20. Participatory features: use and frequency of use 19 % of the
respondents have sent letters, e-mails or faxes to the
Tagesschau(mainly to criticize reporting or to correct errors), but
very unregularlytagesschau.de FacebookGoogle+ All
respondentsFacebook users onlyGoogle+ users only(n= 4.543-4.686)
(n=334; 7.2 % of all resp.) (n=184; 4 % of all resp.) Commenting
news Meta: 26.0 % 34.4 % 15.2 % Blog: 4.7 % Rating news Meta: 12.9
% 50.0 % 17.9 % Recommending news Meta: 17.8 % 46.1 % 17.4 % On
average, participatory features are not used regularly, i.e.
several times a monthor less often; the respondents also prefer
types of participation with a lower effort(such as liking or
sharing articles) But: 49.3 % of all respondents have never been
active at all 21. Findings (III):Motivations for participation 22.
Users motivations for participation Rated by active users of
Audience Mail (n=38), Meta (n=390), Blog (n=45)and Facebook (n=41);
accordingly, the main reasons are: to propose a topic that is
important to me to state my opinion publicly to expand my knowledge
by interacting with journalists and other users to leave the
passive viewers role to correct errors (mainly Audience Mail)
because it is fun (mainly Facebook) Motivations to participate
slightly vary between the fourchannels, especially Audience Mail
(as a non-public format) and Facebook(an external platform) But:
the three motivations with the lowest agreement are similar, i.e.
therespondents consensually disagreed to participate out of boredom
to build a relationship with the editors to get to know interesting
people and to make new contacts 23. (Assumed) reasons for
participation JournalistsMetaAudience MailDifference
Motivation(n=63)(n=390) (n=38) (MWJ-MWu) vent anger/frustration,
blow off steam 3.942.242.191.70 / 1.75 expanding
knowledge2.493.943.39 -1.45 / -0.90 self-expression and
self-display 3.73 2.322.061.41 / 1.67 leave the passive viewers
role3.603.753.51-0.15 / 0.09 state opinions
publicly4.194.153.300.04 / 0.89 share knowledge and
experiences3.663.773.40- 0.11 / 0.26Journalists agree more strongly
to self-centered, affective motivations and underestimate the
relevance of knowledge expansionBoth sides are congruent regarding
the aspects of sharing knowledge and experiences with others as
well as stating opinions publicly5-point-Likert-scale with 1 =
Disagree completely to 5 = agree completely; 6 = Dont know / Cant
say (excluded for calculation of mean) 24. Findings (IV):Reasons
for not being active 25. Reasons for non-participationalmost half
of the user sample (49.3 %) has never been activeTop 5 reasons
(n=2.249)M SDbecause I dont want to register. 3.48 1.44because it
is too time-consuming / too much effort. 3.09 1.36because its no
fun.2.91 1.39because the quality of the discussion is too low. 2.81
1.35because the Tagesschau is not the right medium for audience
participation 2.75 1.445-point-Likert-scale with 1 = disagree
completely to 5 = agree completelydifferences between the
respondents refer to two influential variables Age Formal
Educationyounger than 38: low discussion quality; prefer otherNo
high school grad.: technical problems; legal channels for
participation uncertainty; lack of courage 38 and older: technical
problems; functions are too High school grad:. low discussion
quality complicated; fear of not being taken seriously 26. Findings
(V):Expectations towards participatory features 27. (Assumed)
importance of participatory functionsMJMUHow important are the
following aspects to your audience/to you? (MJ-Mu)(n=57-59)
(n=4.641-4.667)to be able to interact and/or make contact with
other viewers/users (and exchange opinions)3.29 2.340.95To have
editorial staff introduced to them/me2.14 3.03-0.89To be taken
seriously by journalists 4.42 3.610.82To get additional information
on sources of reporting3.39 4.16-0.77To publicly show their/my
attachment to the Tagesschau 2.57 1.870.71To discuss the topics of
news reporting3.76 3.280.48To be able to contact/discuss with
editorial staff directly2.91 3.37-0.46To make transparent which
stories are viewed /commented by many other people 3.052.60.45To be
able to comment/rate news reporting3.833.40.43To be able to suggest
topics for reporting 2.91 3.29-0.38To be able to forward /
recommend news 3.48 3.190.29To get information on editorial
routines/practices 2.95 3.18-0.23To have a platform for discussing
practices and quality of news reporting3.41 3.63-0.22To be able to
provide own material (text, pictures, videos) for news reporting
2.58 2.450.13To have editors be present and responsive (on social
media)3.62 3.520.10 Journalists overestimate the audiences desire
for contact and exchange among eachother, and to be taken seriously
by the journalists Journalists underestimate the audiences desire
for transparency (actors, sources) 28. Conclusion Our case study
Tagesschau has shown that with the introduction of new
participatory features also new journalistic tasks andfunctions
emerge e.g. Social Media Editors and Multi Media Assistants as
filters of audience material andfeedback as well as community
managers by and large, professional self image and assessment by
the audience arecongruent dominating (self) image of the fast and
neutral disseminator and explainer of news some incongruencies
regarding participatory aspects of the Tagesschau the active
audience engages in participatory practices with lower effort and
notvery regularly motivations for user participation are viewed
differently aspect of stating opinion publicly is acknowledged by
both but notable incongruence: journalists assume self-centered and
affective motivations forparticipation, while active audience
highlights knowledge exchange Non-active users and lurkers mainly
do not want to register or spend time forparticipation, but: they
also appreciate audience participation as entertaining andhelpful
in regard with knowledge expansion and opinion
formation/reassurance 29. Conclusion Audiences desire for
transparency is underestimated by the journalists regarding
journalistic routines, sources and additional information about
issues regarding actors: Who are the people behind the news?
regarding audience feedback: What happens with user contributions,
comments etc. insidethe editorial departments? Audience
participation fosters journalistic self reflection: What degree of
participation is consistent with the Tagesschau as a
journalisticproduct/brand, and with its journalistic self-image?
Are contributions of the few active audience members representative
for the whole audienceof the Tagesschau? What is it good for?
Higher visibility of the audience, (perceived) smaller distance
between audience andjournalists but still few direct and public
forms of interaction with the users Instead, new means of
participation are seen as additional tasks and sometimes as
aproblem which has to be managed Audience contributions are
appreciated as an additional source (UGC), comments on errorsin
reporting are perceived as helpful. But: What else is it good for?
30. Thank you!Nele Heise & Julius
ReimerHans-Bredow-InstitutWarburgstr. 8-10, 20354
Hamburg{n.heise;j.reimer}@hans-bredow-institut.dewww.hans-bredow-institut.de
jpub20.hans-bredow-institut.de@jpub20team 31. Bibliography Bruns,
A. (2005). Gatewatching. Collaborative Online News Production. New
York: Peter Lang. Bruns, A. (2008). Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life,
and beyond. From production to produsage. NewYork: Peter Lang.
Lewis, S. C. (2012). The tension between professional control and
open participation: Journalismand its boundaries. Information,
Communication & Society, 15(6), 836866. Loosen, W., &
Schmidt, J.-H. (2012). (Re-)Discovering the audience: The
relationship betweenjournalism and audience in networked digital
media. Information, Communication &Society, 15(6), 867887.
Robinson, S. (2010). Traditionalists vs. Convergers: Textual
Privilege, Boundary Work, and theJournalist-Audience Relationship
in the Commenting Policies of Online News Sites. Convergence:The
International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies,
16(1), 125143. Schmidt, J-H., Loosen, W., Heise, N., & Reimer,
J. (2012). Journalism and participatory practices Blurring or
reinforcement of boundaries between journalism and audiences? .
Pre-conferencePaper, Towards Neo-Journalism? Redefining, Extending
or Reconfiguring a Profession, 3./4.October 2012, Brussels