An RMIT media student reflecting and blogging on her experiences at uni, on making and learning.

As I write this post, our final research report has just been published after a long thirteen weeks. Simply titled ‘Open Journalism’, we spent the last semester researching and compiling our findings on the state of journalism in Australia, and trying to define what constitutes ‘Open Journalism’ and whether or not this was a viable alternative to the current business model. It was a broad topic to say the least! After lots of discussion and lots of refinement, Katie, Stella, James and I have produced a project that we feel we can be proud of and will hopefully provide others with some insight this area of journalism. Now it’s time to have a final look back at how I’ve handled this process…

ROLE: Part of what made our project work so well, and what made for such a pleasant group environment (this was perhaps one of the best group work experiences I’ve had at RMIT), was that we worked in an incredibly collaborative fashion. Early on in the process, once it became clear that the four of us would be forming a group, we decided that setting a weekly meeting date and time would be incredibly beneficial. Every Monday since around week five we had a regular morning meeting. We would meet, talk about ideas we had had, things we had read and any problems that someone may have been facing. We didn’t have ‘roles’ specifically, but each of us took an interest in a different aspect of the topic. For example, Stella was focusing more on the trust issues that were an inherent problem in the journalistic environment in Australia, and Katie was focused on the role of the journalist. James and I both looked at various aspects of the business models. Each week, we’d set ourselves goals and try to meet them. I think this is most evidenced by this blog post, which I’d written during one of our group meetings, as we were deciding who should examine what. Working on a week-by-week basis made the research process much easier for us to bear, especially when working around various other classes and assignments. Communication was also kept up frequently via our Facebook group.

(HD : 82)

PROGRESS: Setting myself small, achievable goals week by week, and producing small amounts of content consistently throughout the semester, worked incredibly well for all of us. I have found that working this way proved extremely effective for me, and I think I was able to contribute to the group in a substantial matter. I’m able to confirm now that one of the biggest problems I face in terms of research assignments is that while I enjoy the reading, and following the branching paths that the research journey may take me on immensely, actually beginning to surmise that research, and beginning to write my own thoughts is an entirely different matter. This is why I started small, and built up the amount of writing I did over a period of weeks. It got easier as time went on.

I think I understand what in depth research entails far, far more than I did when we began. The amount of critical reading, analysis and the extent to which we followed through links and connections is unlike anything I’ve done before and something that caught me a little by surprise. The research tips that we learnt were definitely useful, even though they seemed rather basic at the time.

(HD : 80)

STRATEGIES:Part of what made that learning process easier (and all credit to James for suggesting the idea right at the beginning) was our research blog . Originally conceived as a place for us to comment on things we’d read and develop our ideas, as well as keeping up on what everyone else was writing and share our ideas and processes with the public sphere, it has in fact become the source of a lot of our content.  Rather than aim to write an essay (or two) at the end of the research project, we were able to write a small piece at a time. As was suggested, writing in a public sphere also meant that we thought more about what we were writing – I attempted to be as academic and professional as possible in my writing on the blog.

Another strategy we utilised was the use of a shared Dropbox folder. When we found an article or file that was of use to us, we uploaded it to the folder, which allowed our other group members to see what we were reading (and not accidentally download the same article twice). When it came to writing the bibliography for our website, this made referencing our assignment that much easier.

(HD: 85)

PROBLEMS: Overall, the problems that we faced were not that big in the scheme of things. Our main issue was in trying to narrow down our topic. There were so many different aspects that we could have looked at, and the original research question was so broad, that we had to do a lot of discussion to narrow it down. For me personally, I had problems trying to keep my research are relevant to the broader topic of Open Journalism. Simply discussing print circulation and issues of falling revenue was not going to cut it. Thankfully, that soon developed into looking at whether the Australian newspaper industry were actually moving towards a more open model model of journalism or not. As can be expected, this problem was resolved simply through simple communication with group members. I brought up my difficulty at a weekly group meeting, we talked through it and came up with the solution.

(HD : 85)

CONNECTIONS/INTERSECTIONS: For me, this course has been invaluable in allowing me to develop and test my skills as a researcher. In the short term, this will be of great help to me next semester when I undertake Research in Contextual Studies, but I also learnt that, as long as you are researching a topic that holds your interest, the research process itself can be very fun and engaging process. I also had the opportunity to improve my networking skills, and this came from seeking out contacts to interview for primary research. I had to force myself to take the initiative, rather than relying on my group members to do a job that I have previously found a little intimidating (and still do, in a way). Although this was a collaborative project, we had to be able to work independently of each other at times, and that meant taking on duties and roles that weren’t necessarily in our comfort zone. For me, this meant approaching strangers. I have been rewarded with a tad more confidence in my ability to deal with similar situations in the future, which I’m certain will occur.

(HD: 85)

As for my overall mark for this research project, I’m giving myself an HD (85).

…until it’s time for the all-important presentation day! I’m feeling pretty good about it (thanks mostly due to my super group!) On Friday I was able to get my interview with Lisa Cornish, a Data Journalist with News Queensland. Data Journalism is one aspect of the idea of ‘Open Journalism’ that we’re researching, and she had some good things to say about it, and about journalism in Australia in general.

Also – we’ve refined our idea of what Open Journalism is even further, and it was an incredibly exciting moment! We’re looking at it now as a philosophy – it’s a continuing process, a dialogue, and it’s about ‘bridging the gap’ between the more traditional journalists, and the bloggers/citizen journalists. In the past, a news article was a fixed, static piece of writing, but now, because of the move to an online environment, it’s never ‘finished’.

More than probably we’ll be using a self-hosted word press blog. This will in a way reflect the model we’re talking about – open and interactive, allowing comments. We also have the option of static pages in word press.

Introduction – abstract – the first thing they see when they go to our site will be the intro. If we have time, we could make a prezi.

Research – Tab:  Our blog/links to things we’ve read.  We could work the blog in as part of the site.

• Background
• Academic
• Bibliography/Reference list

Interviews (at least four – filmed/recorded if we can)

Definitions

Findings (overall)

• Trust
• Business
• Australian landscape
• Role of journalist

Conclusion/Proposal – singular page.

Start working on ‘findings’ this week. It all falls back to trust, we have found.

Group meeting notes:

Katie – Changing role of the journalist. Kate recently wrote a fantastic blog post giving a brief, but succinct and t0-the-point definition of Open Journalism . It definitely got me motivated to start posting, and provides an excellent starting point for our project at the very least. Katie’s been thinking of a lot of people she could talk to back home in Canada (a phone or skype interview) to help her, and James has suggested names too. One of the things we’ve been talking about is Open Journalism as an ecosystem – a system of organisation and curation (James and Katie for the win).

Me – Australian Newspapers and formats – are they changing the old models or not? How do these models exist at the moment? I can’t seem to find anything about publications changing  their format, rather they’re trying to move the old models online. This says something within itself. As we discovered, a lack of information can also be informative.

James – Financial viability of an open model – does it even need to make money?

Transparency/Tust Issues – Stella. Stell has been reading about how the ‘construction of innocence is inherently dangerous’ as James puts it. There is bias, but that bias is invisible, which is kinda sinister. She’s been reading a lot of Jay Rosen.

James also brought up the idea of networked journalism – part of a network, obviously!

I think one of the greatest benefits of the research group I am a part of, is that we all seem to be enthusiastic, or at least highly interested, in defining and researching the concept of Open Journalism. It took us a little while to arrive at the topic, but once the idea was there, we pretty much ran with it. I know I’m excited about it! For me, personally, I am broadly interested in the changing relationship between, or rather the blurring of the lines between a media producer and a media consumer. This is relevant in the field of journalism, especially so in the digital age that has been flourishing for many years. I’m interested in how newspapers are adapting to the online world, how the interactions between a journalist and a reader are changing, and finding out exactly what Open Journalism is – I want to be able to give a clear answer to that, especially when there seems to be several variations of definitions out there.

One of the main questions that I’ll be looking at within the group is “How and why are mainstream news outlets in Australia attempting to incorporate aspects of open journalism?”  which gives me a good starting point, with a lot of broad aspects to cover. But I think here, I have come across my key difficulty when undertaking any research assignment – starting. Group discussions and the reading material that has been contributed to our shared drop box folder and Facebook page have all been excellent, but finding that extra bit of motivation to really sit down, summarise, annotate and critique a reading, then to begin writing is something that I have always found the hardest. And like I said, narrowing the research field into something manageable. Time management is also difficult when it comes to the scale of the task we’ve undertaken. All of us obviously have other essays and assignments to write. I feel like there is a crucial time to get major work done here, and I’m worried that it may slip by.

So what’s my solution?

I have found during the course of my studies, that what works for me in terms of getting motivated and getting things done, is as simple as writing a list or schedule of what needs to be done, and when I should do them. If I tell myself that I’m going to start writing an assignment on such and such a date, at such and such a time (when I know that I’ll otherwise be watching a movie, or browsing the internet) then ninety percent of the time I will actually do it. Planning, setting goals and making an agenda I can work to (however simply I lay this agenda out) is something that I find extremely helpful. In the coming days (make that a Friday evening – if it’s written down, then I’ll do it, see?) I’ll set dates and times that I can set aside just for Media Industries (and for my other courses – can’t be forgetting those!)

As for what I’ve done already – reading. I’ve been reading articles that fellow group members have shared, their thoughts on them and some I’ve found myself. I’ve even contributed some to the drop box folder. Gathering a wealth of relevant articles and information will hopefully lead to more sources. I have been reflecting to some extent on the research journey itself on this blog where I try to post, not a lot, but rather more detailed posts (quality over quantity if I can) but sometimes it’s worth doing a quick post if I find something interesting/relevant and don’t have a lot of time. A lot of the posts that I have at the moment were when I was trying to figure out what I was interested in, and I even did a post on the ‘research journey‘ Our group has set up a shared blog where we shall be posting our own individual findings. This will make things a lot easier in terms of collating and combining our research, and as James noted, writing in a public space will make us think more about what we’re writing, and how we say it. It will force us, in a way, to write better.

In terms of where I’ve been looking for information? Library databases for a start, and they  have been pretty useful. I have a tendency to focus on academic articles, and I’ve been looking for some focusing on The Guardian newspaper if I can, but I’m thinking I will branch out to look for pieces about successful examples of open journalism in general, and I will be possibly examining some statistical analyses comparing where people get their news – how many still buy newspapers as opposed to looking online, and how many people will go for the big news sources, like The Herald Sun or The Age? If a more open model of journalism is the way things are going, how many people still persist with the traditional model etc. Those are some more things I want to know.

I’ve said it already, but one of the reasons I’m looking into this topic is because of it’s relevance. It goes without saying that this report/essay we produce at the end will hopefully be of particular interest to those in the field of journalism itself – students and (maybe) even academics alike. I can’t believe (and anyway, evidence shows) that it is possible for journalism to continue in the same way that it has for the last few decades. There have already been shifts with the advent of the digital age, and hopefully this can provide insight into further changes that will take place. It could also intersect, and here I’m returning to my original and most basic interest, with studies or research into the changing media producer/consumer dynamic. ‘Media Industries’ covers an incredibly broad spectrum, and journalism is a part of that.

RMIT Library Website – Subject guides/Media & communication/Media/

• News sources/Factiva etc

Catalogue advanced search – what we have access to at RMIT

Quick search is good for Journal Titles (to see if we have access)

Databases – find by subject.

Search it –  searches across the databases (need library barcode to login)

Factiva (love it!)

Kinda leading on a little from the media regulation talks we were having, we have now decided to look at the concept of Open Journalism  - what is it exactly, how it is being utilised in Australia compared to traditional media and what kind of future it has. A successful case study to look at would be the Guardian, who have used it to great effect. As for local examples we can examine, there are sites such as Crikey and New Matilda, both of whom provide good opportunities for primary resources.

Personally, when I think of ‘open journalism’ I think back to the changing relationship between producer and consumer. The way the local news media operates right now is still very traditional, and one directional – not to mention a lot of the news media ownership is very concentrated. People have been turning to alternate sources, so why don’t the big news companies embrace the open journalism model?

EXPERIENCES – COLLABORATING WITH THE CROWD (MARK ELLIOTT – founder/director of @Collabforge. Strategic use of social media)

• collabforge – collaboration strategy. Works with State Government mostly.
• http://collabforge.com/
• Mark Elliott was interested in exploring the idea of whether you could make collaboration on the internet happen on purpose , rather than letting it happen organically (ie. wikipedia)

• Social media – user generated, two way conversation, or rather, multi-path(a frame work), an ongoing relationship (identity associated with content).
• Governments struggle with the ongoing relationship/conversation aspect.
• You can cultivate your very own audience
• GOVERNMENT 2.0 – governments using web 2.0?
• Helping clients get into social media (I wonder, is this the problem newspapers are having?

• There is no general theory of collaboration in the world, so there is no definitive answer/method.
• Future Melbourne – city planners collaborating with the public. Treat the website as any other kind of social space.

• Theme – Innovation

Also relevant. This final report was tabled on March 1st, 2012. The recommendations are summarised near the beginning of the report. According to the Executive Summary, it is the first review of Censorship and Classification since 1991. One of the problems identified with people was that the current framework ‘does not deal adequately with the challenges of media convergence and the volume of media content now available to Austrlaians’.  So this report takes into account that in this age of convergence of media technologies, more media is being accessed by the public through high-speed broadband networks.

“While a convergent media environment presents major new challenges, there continues to be a community expectation that certain media content will be accompanied by classification information based on decisions that reflect community standards”

Key points (and please do correct me if I’ve misunderstood):

• A new National Classification Scheme should be enacted, based on a new act (to be called the Classification of Media Content Act), which should define what types of media should be classified, who does the classifying, a single set of classification categories applicable to all media, and enforcement of the scheme amongst other things.
• A single body, ‘The Regulator‘, should be responsible for the regulation of media under the scheme.
• ‘Content providers’ (and these include commercial, non-commercial and online content providers) are obliged to apply these classifications and restrictions to any content they release to the public.
• Though ‘content provider’ includes ‘online content providers’ and platforms that control how content is generated, uploaded or displayed, it does not include intermediaries, such as host providers, service providers and internet access providers.
• Obligations in Prohibited content apply to content providers and internet intermediaries.
• Obligations to classify or restrict access to online content applies to any online content with an appropriate Australian link, including hosted in Australia, directed towards an Australian audience or controlled by an Australian content provider.
• Definitions of ‘Feature Film’ and ‘Television Programmes’ and ‘Computer Games’ in the Act should be platform neutral. The Act should proved the computers games are likely to be MA 15+ or higher, have a high Australian audience and are likely to be distributed on a commercial basis.
• A definition of ‘exempt content’ needs to be provided. It should capture traditional exempt content such as news and current affairs
• ‘Refused classification’ content should be called ‘Prohibited’.

There is also a great deal in there about what the powers of the ‘Regulator’ should be.

That point in bold is something that caught my attention – if traditional news media is exempt from classification, does this mean that online news media should also be exempt?

THE CONTEXT OF MEDIA CONVERGENCE

The report identifies the developments in this convergent media environment, including:

• increased access to high speed broadband in homes and businesses
• media products and services being digitised (iTunes, Youtube and other such platforms)
• convergence of media platforms and services for new and established media (I take this to mean media such as news reporting?)
• Globilisation
• The rise of user created content (shift between producers and consumers and the blurring of those lines)
• The greater diversity in media content and platforms leading to user choice and empowerment.
• The blurring of lines between public and private consumption.

PLATFORM NEUTRAL REGULATION is a term that comes up again and again.

This is something to unpack more and more in class and within the group.

The transcript and video can be found here on the ABC’s website. Malcolm Turnbull, former Liberal leader (and communications spokesperson now – something I just found out) speaking against the recommendation in the Finkelstein report that suggests the formation of a ‘government funded super regulator’ because it would suppress ‘freedom of speech’.

Direct quote: “We have a very lively media scene in Australia. We have some of our media – the broadcast licensed media of course has a degree of regulation – but the print media and of course the media on the internet, which is the most fast- fastest growing area of news media, is not regulated in the way broadcasters are and nor should they be. We don’t see the need for that.”

I feel like someone out there has read our minds – they knew we had decided to look at Media Regulation (particularly in regards to online journalism) and went to interview Turnbull about it.

I quite like what he says here: “We should trust competition and a diversity of voices – and in that diversity of voice is getting more diverse all the time – to have the competition of ideas and the freedom that that brings to ensure that people can make up their own minds.”

Diversity is such a lovely word, and something that I love to hear in relation to the media industry.