J. David Wolfgang

Reader comments as press criticism: Implications for the journalistic field

This study examines the actions of readers as press critics and, therefore, as potentially powerful shapers of journalism’s cultural capital. An analysis of 2 years’ worth of online reader comments on the ombudsman columns of three national news organizations reveals readers’ support of – and even nostalgia for – mainstream journalism values such as objectivity, echoing earlier research suggesting the stability of the journalistic field in the face of challenges from new players such as bloggers. But commenters’ critiques of journalistic performance also employed social, and not only professional, values, representing a potential challenge to journalist autonomy.

Cleaning up the “Fetid Swamp”: Examining how journalists construct policies and practices for moderating comments

Online commenting has become a popular form of audience–journalist interaction. However, journalists have become frustrated with commenters who use forums to attack and make assertions. As journalists look for ways to reign in commenters, it becomes important to consider how journalists make decisions about moderation policies and practices. This study used gatekeeping theory to consider how one organization approached moderation and related issues of content management. The researcher conducted a one-month ethnography of a large news organization and their online forums and discovered that journalists set high expectations of commenters, but willingly accept low-quality content. Journalists appear to struggle with how to institute policies that promote high-quality discourse without engaging in intense battles with the audience and having to devote more resources to moderation. Journalists focus on establishing balance between allowing the audience to have a conversation without allowing that conversation to disrupt the traditional practices of journalism.

Journalists’ Normative Constructions of Political Viewpoint Diversity

This in-depth interview-based study with US political journalists explores how they conceptualize the portrayal of political viewpoint diversity as a journalistic norm, particularly in light of changes to news and the news media ecology. The political journalists still discursively embrace the normative role of providing audiences with a range of political viewpoints, but express assumptions about democracy that seem to thwart their intentions. The implications for the journalistic field and field theory are considered.

Foul Ball: Audience-Held Stereotypes of Baseball Players

Abstract This study experimentally tested whether participants held and/or applied stereotypes of baseball players. Participants were asked to rate White, Black, and Latino baseball players based on stereotypes consistently identified in previous literature. Participants saw a photo of a player and an anonymous paragraph from a newspaper that highlighted a particular stereotype. They were then asked to rate the authors credibility. Black players were rated as higher in physical strength and natural ability, consistent with previous literature concerning how athletes were described. However, White and Latin players were not stereotyped. But participants rated White-consistent descriptions as credible and Latin-consistent descriptions as less credible. These results are interpreted through the prism of social identity theory.

Pursuing the Ideal

Many news organizations provide online readers with an opportunity to comment on public issues in the news through a news-mediated forum for discourse. These spaces are provided by news organizations as part of a mission to provide a public space for discourse, but are governed by a commenting policy that establishes the rules for discourse and behavior. These rules can help to meet the ideals of public discourse or stand in the way of productive public deliberation. This study examines the commenting policies of 21 news corporations in the United States to see how the policies facilitate or inhibit the creation of a space for ideal public discourse. A constant comparative analysis of the policies guided by the ideals of Habermas’ public sphere, as well as the expectations of civility norms, shows that news organizations establish rules to protect respectful and egalitarian spaces for the public, but fail to meet other critical needs of public discourse, including rationality, tolerance, reflexivity, and the pursuit of common understanding and solutions. The implications of these findings are further explored and possible objectives for news organizations are provided.

How commenters use online forums as spaces for journalism’s boundary work:

Journalists and online commenters compete for control over news forums. The negotiation of how forums are used, what norms are accepted, and how participants can work together are critical issues for building better forums. This study uses boundary work and a textual analysis of comments to consider how commenters understand best practices and the journalist’s role. Commenters express three hierarchical roles for journalists based on differing philosophies of journalist roles and audience autonomy.

The twitterization of journalism: User perceptions of news tweets

Using an experiment and probability sample of Chicago and Los Angeles adults (N = 1211), this study tested how tweet characteristics (tone, space) and participant age (younger, middle, older) affected attitudes about tweets from a local newspaper. Results indicate that non-opinionated tweets were perceived as more useful and credible than opinionated tweets, and local tweets resulted in more engagement than national tweets. Younger participants (19–36 years) reported more positive affect, usefulness, engagement, and credibility related to tweets than did middle/older age groups. Younger participants were generally more negative about opinionated national tweets and preferred opinionated local tweets compared with middle/older groups.

Taming the ‘trolls’: How journalists negotiate the boundaries of journalism and online comments:

The relationship between online commenters and journalists has been challenged as frustrated journalists pull back on commenting and introduce rules to make it more difficult to participate. As new rules and policies emerge, journalists engage in a public campaign to change how commenting and journalism are perceived. This study seeks to understand how journalists attempt to frame commenting and its role alongside journalism. Boundary work was used to consider how journalists use public statements about commenting to establish appropriate roles for both the journalist and the commenter. But these statements also represent philosophies about strategies, policies, and practices related to commenting. Journalists take three philosophical approaches to online comments based on whether they willingly welcome commenters, see the commenter as a threat, but recognize their role, or take action to keep the audience at a distance. Along with these three roles, strategies and professional responses to commenting are...

Commenters as political actors infringing on the field of journalism

Journalists see online commenters as outsiders who are a potential threat to the reputation and legitimacy of professional journalism. But should commenters be seen as potential new journalistic agents, or are they serving a political role? This study uses field theory to consider how online commenters at one large news organization engage in promoting ideology and how journalists respond. Commenters see themselves as the duty-bound defenders of political perspectives rarely seen in media. Journalists see this as a threat to their profession. The potential political role for the online commenter in journalism is discussed.

A Place to Protest

The national media converged on Baltimore, Charleston, and Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014 and 2015 to cover protests in response to police violence toward African American males. Although national and local media covered the events and the aftermath, alternative media sought to provide additional viewpoints and spur readers to respond. This study analyzed the practices, content, and public discourse connected to alternative weekly newspapers in Baltimore, Charleston, and St. Louis. The study examined whether the publications reflected ideal roles of alternative media, including representing different viewpoints, using non-traditional methods of content, and providing a space for the public to challenge systems of power and oppression. The authors also studied the online forums associated with all three publications, including each organization’s website and Facebook page, as potential spaces for alternative publics to emerge around a shared interest in collective action. The publications showed some characteristics of the ideal form of alternative media, but most lacked the diverse voices and critical calls to action needed to represent the normative standard. The discourse the news organizations spurred also fell short of the ideal. The forums lacked rational and critical engagement, and commenters largely failed to promote sincere attempts to engage in community conversation.