Caroline Fisher

The advocacy continuum: Towards a theory of advocacy in journalism

The goal of advocacy is commonly used to distinguish journalism from public relations practice. At the same time, there is a strong tradition of advocacy reporting in journalism that weakens this point of distinction. In an attempt to reconcile this apparent contradiction, this article draws on the concept of a continuum to explain extremes in journalism practice and ‘contingency theory’ in public relations, which posits a range of variables can influence the degree of advocacy adopted by public relations practitioners when dealing with an organization’s target publics. This article contends that the degree and type of advocacy present in journalism is also dependent on a range of macro, organizational, journalism production, source and personal factors. It argues that each work of journalism falls along a continuum of advocacy, ranging from subtle displays at one end to overt at the other, where some stories might be hard to distinguish from public relations.

The trouble with 'trust' in news media

ABSTRACT Questions surrounding trust in news media have preoccupied scholars for almost a century. Based on a review of interdisciplinary literature, this paper provides an overview of the evolution of conceptions of news trust over the past 80 years. In doing so, this paper highlights key problems with the question of trust in this context. First, despite the volume of research on this topic, there is no agreed definition or measure of ‘trust’ in news media. Second, there is a growing disconnect between the normative ideal of an informed citizenry and the complex range of influences on perceptions of news credibility in the digital era. Third, in an age of uncertainty about the veracity of online information, is ‘trust’ in news even desirable? In response to these issues, this paper asks whether research based on undefined general questions about public ‘trust’ in news media continues to be relevant.

The disclosure dilemma: Returning to journalism after political media advising

The principle of transparency in journalism, including disclosure of journalistic processes and reporters’ personal interests, has been enthusiastically embraced. However there has been little focus on the possible harm disclosure can have on a reporter’s reputation. This paper reports on a selection of findings from wider inductive, qualitative research into the transition from journalism to political media advising and back again. Semi-structured interviews with twenty-one journalists who had moved between the two roles revealed the interviewees faced a dilemma about disclosing their previous political work history because of concern about inviting a suspicion of partisanship from others. In response, the interviewees adopted five key strategies to disclosing their political employment: Being ‘up front’; ‘Flying below the radar’; ‘Keeping it a secret’; ‘Selective disclosure; and, ‘Overcompensation’. Based on these findings this paper argues that the seemingly simple principle of transparency can have complex ramifications which need to be considered when advocating disclosure of interests by journalists.

Managing Conflict of Interest: shifting between political PR and journalism

When a journalist returns to political reporting after working as a political media adviser it can trigger concern about conflict of interest based on a suspicion of partisanship. Despite this, there is little discussion in the journalism literature about how reporters should manage this type of conflict when it arises. This paper reports on a selection of findings from wider inductive, qualitative research into the career transition from journalism to political media advising and back again. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews conducted with 21 journalists who had moved between the two roles revealed that the media advisers took four main routes back to journalism in an attempt to manage the possible conflicts: “Escape”; Being “laundered”; Going “straight back in”; and “Cooling-off”. Based on these findings, this paper argues that a uniform approach to managing the transition from political advising to journalism could be useful in easing public concern about conflicts of interest.

Re-assessing the “Public's Right to Know”: The shift from journalism to political PR

The path between journalism and parliamentary media advising is well trodden. However, there has been little examination of the impact becoming a media adviser has on a reporters conception of journalism values and practice. This paper reports on a selection of findings from broader inductive qualitative research into the under-explored career transition from journalism to parliamentary media advising and back. Semi-structured interviews with 21 journalists who had moved between the two roles revealed the shift to political public relations (PR) led several of the journalists to reassess their commitment to the fundamental journalism principle of the “publics right to know”. Once working as parliamentary media advisers, the transcripts showed a growing sense of caution around the release information by the former journalists, in response to the confidential nature of politics, and being on the receiving end of unethical journalism practice. Central to this change was an erosion of trust in particular reporters due to perceptions of unethical practice. Based on these findings this paper argues it is important for both journalists and political media advisers to reflect on the way in which their own actions might be perceived by the other, and consider whether their practices are helping to facilitate or restrict the free flow of information to the public.

What Is Meant By ‘Trust’ In News Media?

Questions surrounding trust in news media have preoccupied scholars for almost a century. Based on a review of interdisciplinary literature, this paper maps the changing nature of news ‘trust’ over the past 80 years. In doing so, it highlights key issues. Firstly, there is no agreed definition of trust in news media. Secondly, there is a growing disconnection between the normative ideal of an informed citizen and the complex influences on perception of news credibility in the digital era. Thirdly, there is a tension between ideal of trust and the push for greater consumer scepticism in the age of ‘fake news’. In conclusion this chapter asks whether general questions about public ‘trust’ in news media continue to be relevant.

Malcolm Turnbull’s conversational career on Twitter: the case of the Australian Prime Minister and the NBN:

Politicians’ use of Twitter during election periods has been extensively researched. There has been less scholarly focus on the way politicians’ use of Twitter changes depending on their political circumstances. This article reports on an analysis of Malcolm Turnbull’s Twitter account from October 2008 to July 2016 examining his ‘engagement’ in terms of ‘conversations’ with political journalists, specialist technology writers and other Twitter users. It found Turnbull ‘conversed’ with the general public more than elites and revealed heated exchanges with specialist technology writers about the National Broadband Network (NBN) and more genial ‘banter’ with political journalists. It also showed a peak in ‘conversations’ when he was Shadow Minister for Communications and a sharp decline once he became Minister for Communications and then Prime Minister. This article points to the need for further long-duration research to better understand the impact of changing political contexts on politicians’ use of social media.

“True Believer,” “Legal Advocate,” or “Committed Expert” Parliamentary Media Advising and Practitioner Conceptions of Partisanship

The parliamentary media adviser is commonly portrayed as a partisan “spin-doctor,” with little distinction made between the inherent partisan nature of the role and the personal partisanship of the practitioner. Semistructured qualitative interviews with 21 journalists who became parliamentary media advisers highlight the difference between the two and offer practitioner perceptions of the advantages and disadvantages of partisanship in that role. At one extreme is the “true believer”; at the other is the “legal advocate,” with the “committed expert” in between. In doing so, this article challenges the simple, dominant conception of the partisan “spin-doctor.”

Digital news report: Australia 2015

This report gives a clear picture of how the Australian news consumer compares to eleven other countries surveyed in 2015: Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Spain, UK, USA and urban Brazil. The Digital News Report: Australia is part of a global survey by the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford. Further in-depth analysis of Australian digital news consumption has been conducted and published by the News & Media Research Centre at the University of Canberra.