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