This study explores how journalists in highspeed newsrooms gather information, how gathering activities are temporally structured and how reliability manifests itself in information-gathering activities.
DOCUMENT
This study explores how TikTok Live’s fusion of immediacy, interactivity, and monetization creates a powerful infrastructure for political communication, one increasingly exploited for extremist mobilisation and disinformation. Focusing on far-right actors in Germany, it combines technical monitoring, content analysis, and policy review to examine how extremist networks exploit the platform’s live-streaming affordances to spread propaganda, monetize hate, and evade moderation, often in ways that outpace both TikTok’s self-regulation and external oversight under the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA).
MULTIFILE
Liveblogs are very popular with the public and journalists alike. The problem, though, is their credibility, given the uncertainty of the covered events and the immediacy of their production. Little is known about how journalists routinize the unexpected—to paraphrase Tuchman—when journalists report about an event that is still unfolding. This paper is about makers of liveblogs, livebloggers, so to speak, and the routines and conventions they follow. To better understand the relationship between those who do the “liveblogging” and how the “liveblogging” is done, we interviewed a selection of nine experienced livebloggers who cover breaking news, sports, and politics for the three most-visited news platforms in the Netherlands. Based on our results, we concluded that journalists working at different platforms follow similar routines and conventions for claiming, acquiring, and justifying knowledge. Journalists covering news in liveblogs must have expert knowledge, as well as technical and organizational skills. Liveblogging—in contrast to regular, online reporting—is best summarized as a social process instead of an autonomous production. These findings are important for three reasons: first, to understand how journalists cope with uncertainty covering events under immediate circumstances using liveblogs; second, to understand the workings of this popular format; and third, to contribute to literature about journalistic genres, discourse communities and, more specifically, generic requirements of liveblogs for effects of credibility to take place.
MULTIFILE
For their upcoming podcast series where researchers in the ARIAS network talk about their projects, Morgane Billuart and Katie Clarke asked me to introduce Making Public and the urgent publishing concept and to explain why publishing research is needed. This is the transcript.
MULTIFILE
This article demonstrates ‘the stemfie’ to be an interesting current example of the enactment of liveness within media practices. The photo taken of oneself while (or just after) voting and consequently shared with others via online social networks, connects us to an event that is important to us as it unfolds, enacting the two core features of liveness: immediacy and affinity.
DOCUMENT
Live blogs are a popular format for covering crises, breaking news, politics, or sports events. Despite their popularity among journalists and the public, the format has also been subject to scholarly debate regarding the conflict between immediacy versus credibility, resulting in a high degree of uncertainty for producers and consumers. Journalists cope with this paradox by performing discourse: imposing valid and persuasive representations of the social world. One way to do so is by the use and representation of sources. In this paper, we uncover the performative discourse of live blogs through possible patterns of sourcing and discursive strategies among a range of live blogs and the way journalists cope with the mix of speed and uncertainty. Based on a quantitative content analysis of nine Dutch live blogs, we conclude that journalists follow the same conventions and routines as regular (online) articles. Despite the possibilities for polyvocality (more and different voices in live blogs) due to the accessibility by social media, journalists choose predominantly formal sources and report their speech predominantly in a direct way.
LINK
As a result of the COVID-19 measures, many people experienced social isolation and a lack of meaningful contact, especially vulnerable elderly people. For a specific group of musicians specialized in person-centred artistically-led participatory practices in healthcare settings, this sparked the exploration of migrating their live practice online, by making use of video-calling technology. From a ‘lifelong learning’ perspective—which considers musicians as being capable of responding to societal change by creating new, meaningful artistic practices—such a sudden migration from offline to online, under the exceptional circumstances at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, created an instant challenge for the musicians to demonstrate their flexibility and adaptability. On the other hand, the limits caused by the conditions and immediacy of this response, combined with a feeling of diminished humanness in virtual interaction, seemed to jeopardize the person-centred values that the work of this group is built upon.This article explores this issue by expanding on the musicians’ flexibility towards personcentredness and their attempts to safeguard these values when they suddenly switch from a ‘physical’ to ‘virtual’ space.
DOCUMENT
In this article, the main question is whether and, if so, to what extent online journalism raises new moral issues and, if any, what kind of answers are preferable. Or do questions merely appear new, since they are really old ones in an electronic wrapping, old wine in new bottles? And how does journalism deal with the moral aspects of online journalism? The phenomenon of the Internet emerged in our society a few years ago. Since then, a large number of Dutch people have gone online, and the World Wide Web is now an integral part of our range of means of communication. Dutch journalism is online too, although certainly not in the lead. More and more journalists use the Internet as a source, especially for background information. Newspapers have their web sites, where the online version of the printed paper can be read. And that is it for the time being. There are no more far-reaching developments at present, certainly not on a large scale. Real online journalism is rather scarce in the Netherlands. The debate concerning the moral aspects of online journalism is mainly being conducted in the United States. First of all, by way of introduction, I will present an outline of online journalism. The first instance is the online version of the newspaper. Here, only to a certain degree new issues come up for discussion, since the reputation of reliability and accuracy of the papers, in spite of all criticism, also applies to their online versions. Besides, especially in the United States and increasingly in European countries as well, there is the so-called dotcom journalism, the e-zines, the online news sites without any relationship with printed newspapers. This may be the reason why these sites do not have a strong commitment to moral standards, at least as they have developed in the journalistic culture of the newspapers. After having outlined the moral issues arising in online journalism, the question will be addressed whether and, if so, to what extent it is meaningful and desirable to develop instruments of self-regulation for this new phenomenon of journalism.
DOCUMENT
It has been established that normative social influence can be used effec-tively in persuasive technology. However, it is unknown whether the application of more social pressure makes it more effective. To test this hypothesis, a quantitative experiment was conducted on the online social network Facebook. Although evidence to support the hypothesis was found, it cannot be concluded from this experiment that more intense persuasion is more effective, when utilizing normative social influence in persuasive technology.
DOCUMENT
Aiming to re-conceptualize liveness in the social media era, this paper explores the temporality of liveness within the lived experience and media practices of cultural events. Through qualitative analysis of extensive interview material, diaries and media content from three very different Dutch case studies - Oerol Festival 2017, Serious Request 2017, and Pride Amsterdam 2018 – it will shed light on the participants’ experience of ‘time’ within the spatio-temporal proximity of these mediated ‘live’ events.As liveness is mediated attendance to events, the experience of the moment - the ‘now’ of the event - is always accompanied with the awareness of a variety of other moments in time: the moment that your friend watches your Facebook live stream; the algorithmic time that makes your post pop up on Instagram; the moment that you see the photo while back at work and remember the fun you had. As we are skillful media users and knowledgeable participants in event-spheres (Volkmer & Deffner, 2010), the experience of a live moment therein is blended with the idea of re-living it at a later time. Nowness and memory are intertwined as we create mediated memories that enact both future and past, the community and the self (Van Dijck, 2004). In this paper I argue that the prominence of live digital technologies within our deeply mediatized (Couldry & Hepp, 2017) society has made navigating event-spheres a very complex and layered temporal experience, a struggle between living and re-living moments that appear to us as current due to an interplay of immediacy and affinity.
DOCUMENT
